Author Topic: Thread Specifically For Rational SpaceX Outlook  (Read 89010 times)

Offline R7

  • Propulsophile
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2725
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 992
  • Likes Given: 668
Re: Thread Specifically For Rational SpaceX Outlook
« Reply #180 on: 02/17/2013 10:51 am »
You think that this is the playground for "Jim is right on NSF", and you want to lock down this thread and your playground from others who actually wanted to discuss a "Rational SpaceX Outlook". If you feel this way, then just hit the report to moderator button, so you can keep your playground to yourself.

Incorrect assumption. The QG post was just so funny that couldn't resist. My nickname is new but I've followed this site from the start so I know Jim got facts >99% of the time right.

Don't take the picture personally. I like your posts, they are a good read and insightful, even if I don't agree with all your assumptions and numbers.

The "SpaceX has no board members" statement is curious, I'm sure he will soon explain what he meant by that.
AD·ASTRA·ASTRORVM·GRATIA

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Thread Specifically For Rational SpaceX Outlook
« Reply #181 on: 02/17/2013 12:22 pm »

I have talked to people at SpaceX about NASA CRS progress payments covering their cash flow gaps before the successful COTS 2/3 flight, and they told me that this was not in fact true. SpaceX may have received some NASA CRS progress payments, but I was told that the bulk of those CRS payments were being withheld,

You talked to the wrong people.  As of May 2011 (almost two years ago), Spacex already received $181 million in CRS progress payments. The first CRS flight was itself worth 132 million.  I can come up with more that 300 million from CRS.

So point is wrong, CRS payments are the "gap filler" and not investors.
« Last Edit: 02/17/2013 12:52 pm by Jim »

Offline padrat

  • Payload Packer and Dragon tamer...
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1409
  • Where Dragons roam....
  • Liked: 861
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Thread Specifically For Rational SpaceX Outlook
« Reply #182 on: 02/17/2013 12:34 pm »
How the heck did this thread morph into a discussion about Spacex's financial business?  I'm thinking most of that needs to be split into a different thread for that purpose so the rest of us that don't really give a damn about it don't have to wade through it......
If the neighbors think you're the rebel of the neighborhood, embrace it and be the rebel. It keeps them wondering what you'll do next...

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Thread Specifically For Rational SpaceX Outlook
« Reply #183 on: 02/17/2013 12:35 pm »

The "SpaceX has no board members" statement is curious, I'm sure he will soon explain what he meant by that.

Not a traditional board.  Musk has all the power.
« Last Edit: 02/17/2013 12:41 pm by Jim »

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Thread Specifically For Rational SpaceX Outlook
« Reply #184 on: 02/17/2013 12:51 pm »

My posts are long, because I am actually trying to answer other posters questions with back-up numbers and information. It is annoying when people make short (and sometimes insulting) posts that are not backed up by facts or reality.

It is clear that Jim is completely and factually wrong on some major issues


Actually, look in the mirror.  It has been you.

This is the one of the most egregious.

"Musk is not reporting the private loans that he and others have made to SpaceX, and these private loans could be over $300 million"

You continue to make statements based your incorrect view on the subject matter, like the above and others such as Sean O'Keefe and EADS NA having a role in the ESA Orion SM.   


Offline Afrocle

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 196
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Thread Specifically For Rational SpaceX Outlook
« Reply #185 on: 02/17/2013 02:12 pm »

I have talked to people at SpaceX about NASA CRS progress payments covering their cash flow gaps before the successful COTS 2/3 flight, and they told me that this was not in fact true. SpaceX may have received some NASA CRS progress payments, but I was told that the bulk of those CRS payments were being withheld,

You talked to the wrong people.  As of May 2011 (almost two years ago), Spacex already received $181 million in CRS progress payments. The first CRS flight was itself worth 132 million.

So point is wrong, CRS payments are the "gap filler" and not investors.

SpaceX has invested $500 million in private money according to testimony that Elon Musk made before Congress in October 2011 according to this Wall Street Journal article.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204505304577000233829790996.html
I think that I said in my earlier post that my estimate of SpaceX total investment was ~ $500 million with $200 million in private equity (including Musk's $100 million) and $300 million in private debt.

My point still holds if SpaceX only received $181 million of the $1.6 Billion due to it within its NASA CRS contract. This would be 11% of the contract value received through May 2011 for a contract announced December 2008, which would be equivalent to the 10% payment that commercial launch providers receive up front from customers on the day that the customer signs a binding launch contract. This is the point that I made in my post to HMXHMX, and I thought that SpaceX might have received more than the $181 million or 11% of the CRS contract value that you mention.

I talked to SpaceX people in Spring 2012 before their COTS 2/3 flight in May 2012. When you look at public statements about SpaceX finances, you can see that they were probably in a very tight cash position in Spring 2012 right before their successful NASA COTS 2/3 flight even though they had announced $500 million in private finance through 2011.

In this article, Gwynne Shotwell seems to say in early 2012 that SpaceX may have been profitable in 2011 eventhough it had no launches that year.
http://satellite.tmcnet.com/topics/satellite/articles/2012/03/16/277502-spacex-celebrates-10-years-business-next-three-critical.htm
Shotwell says that SpaceX had spent ~ $1 Billion over 10 years through 2011 so that could be $258 million for NASA COTS (as stated by the GAO before Congress in 2011), $181 million for NASA CRS (as stated by Jim at NSF), $24 million for 4 paid Falcon 1 flights, $130 million in F9 signing payments (i.e. 10% of the $1.3 Billion in non-NASA-CRS and non-NASA-COTS backlog announced by Musk at the end of 2011), $100 million for Musk's equity investment, and $100 million in other equity investments for a total of ~ $793 million covering the $1 Billion in cash going out for a cash flow short fall of ~ $207 million that would need to be covered by a private loan.

This would be ~ $407 million in private SpaceX investment needed to cover cash outflows through 2011, so it would make sense for Musk to announce to Congress in October 2011 that he had $500 million in private investment within SpaceX. Musk and SpaceX were probably on the edge at the end of 2011 if this is close to what his cash condition was at the end of 2011.

In 2012, SpaceX could have received $118 million in NASA COTS "augmentation" payments and $20 million in COTS payments from the original COTS agreement, $100 million in signing payments from new F9 contracts (i.e. backlog increased from $3 Billion at end of 2011 to $4 billion at end of 2012 so I assume 10% of that new $1 Billion), $120 million from NASA CRS flight #1 (i.e. $133 million average per flight subtracting the 11% already paid to SpaceX), $60 million in milestone payments for NASA CRS #2 in 2013, and $60 million in F9 milestone payments for the MDA and SES F9 flights in 2013 for a total of $478 million in possible cash inflows in 2012 to match ~ $500 million in cash outflows coming from over 2,000 employees and construction of new launch facilities in 2012.

If SpaceX in fact had closer to $600 million in cash outflows in 2012 (which is possible considering that people are reporting now that they have closer to 3,000 employees versus 2,000 employees), then the left over equity and debt from the $500 million in private investments mentioned by Musk at the end of 2011 might not have been enough to make it through 2012, and Musk might have had to make another private financing transaction.

Thank you for finding the $181 million in progress payments from NASA CRS (even though I can't find that number anywhere). I thought that SpaceX might have received more than that from CRS, but it looks like they could still have had enough cash to survive 2011 and 2012 with this lower amount. I was talking to the right people at SpaceX and it looks like they gave me good information about NASA CRS and their cash flows in early 2012.

My prior position that SpaceX probably had $200 million in private equity investments and $300 million in private laons still holds, and the Wall Street Journal article that says that SpaceX had $500 million in private investments at the end of 2011 supports my prior posts that others claimed had no back up. SpaceX has a Rational Outlook, and they are supported by a lot of private money already that understands their outlook.

Offline Afrocle

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 196
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Thread Specifically For Rational SpaceX Outlook
« Reply #186 on: 02/17/2013 02:21 pm »

My posts are long, because I am actually trying to answer other posters questions with back-up numbers and information. It is annoying when people make short (and sometimes insulting) posts that are not backed up by facts or reality.

It is clear that Jim is completely and factually wrong on some major issues


Actually, look in the mirror.  It has been you.

This is the one of the most egregious.

"Musk is not reporting the private loans that he and others have made to SpaceX, and these private loans could be over $300 million"

You continue to make statements based your incorrect view on the subject matter, like the above and others such as Sean O'Keefe and EADS NA having a role in the ESA Orion SM.   



You are very wrong again Jim. What alternate reality are you trying to create concerning SpaceX?

The Wall Street Journal reported that Elon Musk stated before Congress in late 2011 that SpaceX had received $500 million in private investments.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204505304577000233829790996.html

If you read my post you will see that I estimated ~ $200 milllion in private equity investments and $300 million in private debt, and I backed this up with analysis and public statements concerning SpaceX finances.

You need to back up your statements about SpaceX not having board members or SpaceX not having this level of private finance with something that is real to have some credibility here.

Offline Chris Bergin

Re: Thread Specifically For Rational SpaceX Outlook
« Reply #187 on: 02/17/2013 02:23 pm »
How the heck did this thread morph into a discussion about Spacex's financial business?  I'm thinking most of that needs to be split into a different thread for that purpose so the rest of us that don't really give a damn about it don't have to wade through it......

Because one poster seems to want to create a whole bunch of posts on it.

Going around in circles, however - and we're a space flight site, not a financial site. Taking into account I've never seen so many report to mod e-mails for a single thread, I'm locking it.
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1