4 ms·

Could you please describe the other satellite launch services whose prices are competitive with SpaceX?

deleted 5mo ago
[deleted]
brainwad 5mo ago
The whole of the space part of SpaceX is like 10% of the claimed business according to their S-1. And most of that is Starlink, not launches for third parties.
- tgsovlerkhgsel 5mo ago
  But building a Starlink competitor is essentially impossible without also building a space company, and the main competitor doing that just turned their only launchpad into a crater and is out of the game for a year or so.
  - brainwad 5mo ago
    Yes but 90% of the value is supposed to come from xAI, where you decidedly don't need to be a space company to compete. The space part of SpaceX literally doesn't matter, it's an AI company according to its financials. If you need to care about the space parts, the company is overvalued by an order of magnitude or more.
    - tgsovlerkhgsel 5mo ago
      To be overvalued by an order of magnitude, it'd have to have a fair valuation of under $180 B. At ~5 billion per year in profit, Starlink alone would justify a 100 B valuation at a P/E ratio of 20 (i.e. assuming a non-growth company). If you account for the fact that this is very much a growth company, the valuation of the space part alone is well above these $180B. And they do happen to have the launch and AI businesses on top of it, which (as usual for growth companies) may not be obscenely profitable but aren't worthless. If 90% of the value is from the AI business, it's grossly undervalued.
Lplololopo 5mo ago
We will see China comming up soon i would argue. But otherwise yeah SpaceX one that one for now. Only issue with this: We don't have enough payload for SpaceX to expand that much more.
Imustaskforhelp 5mo ago
If you are asking for government and research needs rather than commercial then ISRO (Indian space research organization) beats SpaceX That being said, ISRO focuses more on research and scientific world as compared to the commercial world but they were the least expensive option out there before SpaceX and the only differential which causes the pricing is actually re-usability aspect of SpaceX rockets/launchers and ISRO is actively working towards that too. And another thing as brainwad said here but Space part of SpaceX is just 10% of the claimed business according to their S-1
- trollbridge 5mo ago
  So, in other words, launch is not actually a commodotised thing yet and there's nobody else out there that can actually beat SpaceX on price.
  - Imustaskforhelp 5mo ago
    If you want to invest into a company that barely does space at 10% and is 90% a datacenter Reits essentially at a P/E ratio of 90 whereas others have around 10 so you are gonna overpay for 10 times or a magnitude more Then sure, yes you are correct. https://martinalderson.com/posts/xais-new-rental-business/ https://martinalderson.com/posts/xais-new-rental-business/: seems to be a post on the frontpage of HN at the moment on what I am currently saying.
loeg 5mo ago
SpaceX's launch business is great, but does not justify the majority of the valuation.

deleted 5mo ago

[deleted]

The whole of the space part of SpaceX is like 10% of the claimed business according to their S-1. And most of that is Starlink, not launches for third parties.

tgsovlerkhgsel 5mo ago
But building a Starlink competitor is essentially impossible without also building a space company, and the main competitor doing that just turned their only launchpad into a crater and is out of the game for a year or so.
- brainwad 5mo ago
  Yes but 90% of the value is supposed to come from xAI, where you decidedly don't need to be a space company to compete. The space part of SpaceX literally doesn't matter, it's an AI company according to its financials. If you need to care about the space parts, the company is overvalued by an order of magnitude or more.
  - tgsovlerkhgsel 5mo ago
    To be overvalued by an order of magnitude, it'd have to have a fair valuation of under $180 B. At ~5 billion per year in profit, Starlink alone would justify a 100 B valuation at a P/E ratio of 20 (i.e. assuming a non-growth company). If you account for the fact that this is very much a growth company, the valuation of the space part alone is well above these $180B. And they do happen to have the launch and AI businesses on top of it, which (as usual for growth companies) may not be obscenely profitable but aren't worthless. If 90% of the value is from the AI business, it's grossly undervalued.

Lplololopo 5mo ago

We will see China comming up soon i would argue. But otherwise yeah SpaceX one that one for now. Only issue with this: We don't have enough payload for SpaceX to expand that much more.

Imustaskforhelp 5mo ago

If you are asking for government and research needs rather than commercial then ISRO (Indian space research organization) beats SpaceX That being said, ISRO focuses more on research and scientific world as compared to the commercial world but they were the least expensive option out there before SpaceX and the only differential which causes the pricing is actually re-usability aspect of SpaceX rockets/launchers and ISRO is actively working towards that too. And another thing as brainwad said here but Space part of SpaceX is just 10% of the claimed business according to their S-1

trollbridge 5mo ago
So, in other words, launch is not actually a commodotised thing yet and there's nobody else out there that can actually beat SpaceX on price.
- Imustaskforhelp 5mo ago
  If you want to invest into a company that barely does space at 10% and is 90% a datacenter Reits essentially at a P/E ratio of 90 whereas others have around 10 so you are gonna overpay for 10 times or a magnitude more Then sure, yes you are correct. https://martinalderson.com/posts/xais-new-rental-business/ https://martinalderson.com/posts/xais-new-rental-business/: seems to be a post on the frontpage of HN at the moment on what I am currently saying.

loeg 5mo ago

SpaceX's launch business is great, but does not justify the majority of the valuation.