Rocket Lab General Discussion Thread

[yoram]

Which makes me very curious, why Sir Peter Beck would want someone with such manufacturing expertise to helm the company operations? It is not like they are doing mass productions. I do understood that Sir Peter Beck has manufacturing experience in precision parts back in those days, but I can't really see the connection. Not like the company is building some lunar rovers in massive scale.

Maybe they're planning to get into sat building for mega constellations?
Either for themselves or some customer. Although it would seem difficult to see what investor into another mega constellation wouldn't go for vertical integration to keep costs under control. If it was for themselves it might be tough to get the required money. Neither scenario seems that likely.
 
Or alternatively Klein is getting old and wants to down size the stress at work somewhat and was looking for a smaller gig.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/rocketlab/status/1835775299663081899

We’re saying thank you and farewell to Rocket Lab Board member, Mike Griffin, as he completes his tenure after four years serving the company. We’re grateful for his experience and leadership helping to guide Rocket Lab’s growth from a private start-up to a global industry leader in launch and space systems. We wish him all the best as he retires from the Rocket Lab’s Board.

[M.E.T.]

Am I reading this right? They now want to do Mars Sample Return for $2B in 2028?

https://twitter.com/mottbox_/status/1840279910578897055

[zubenelgenubi]

$RKLB The contract Rocket Lab won on the 28th to provide rapid studies for the mars sample return (MSR) program could result in a $2 BILLION contract.

“Rocket Lab will reduce cost and
schedule for MSR through a simplified mission, targeting a total to NASA of less than $2B.”

NASA’s original budget was $10billion.

https://nspires.nasaprs.com/external/viewrepositorydocument/cmdocumentid=1007866/solicitationId=%7BBB8B4EA2-C11B-259D-65E7-E0ADFA57CE11%7D/viewSolicitationDocument=1/RASMSR24%20Abstracts_revised%208-27-24.pdf
[Sep 29]

Further updates and discussion in this splinter thread: Rocket Lab Mars Sample Return Mission Proposal

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/rocketlab/status/1844489587416236146

📺 Tomorrow @BloombergTV’s @technology Space special will be kicking off live from Rocket Lab HQ!

Tune in at 8:00 am PT / 10:00 am CT!

[TrevorMonty]

https://twitter.com/rocketlab/status/1844489587416236146

Tomorrow @BloombergTV’s @technology Space special will be kicking off live from Rocket Lab HQ!

Tune in at 8:00 am PT / 10:00 am CT!

Bloomberg is just using RL factory as studio for show.
Nothing of note from RL in this interview but worth watching for the other companies they interviewed if you've never heard of them before.

[sanman]

Beck has another appearance coming up on "Markets With Madison"

https://twitter.com/maddireidy/status/1845563615342190734

[M.E.T.]

Interesting how Beck is increasingly positioning RKLB as the anti-SpaceX.

We’re gonna “break up the monopoly”.

“We are coming for Starlink”.

“We see what SpaceX has done and are here to take some of that pie”.

This is big talk for a company with a Falcon 1 equivalent operational vehicle. And it’s their right to make grandiose statements, but then don’t criticise SpaceX when they take notice of you and make moves to crush you.

[JEF_300]

This is big talk for a company with a Falcon 1 equivalent operational vehicle. And it’s their right to make grandiose statements, but then don’t criticise SpaceX when they take notice of you and make moves to crush you.

Nonsense. Firstly, because I don't think SpaceX would ever actually make move to crush competition. And secondly, because if SpaceX did that, they'd actually be forcibly maintaining their (at least near) monopoly, which is called anti-competitive behavior, and would almost certainly result in some serious government action against them.

[DanClemmensen]

This is big talk for a company with a Falcon 1 equivalent operational vehicle. And it’s their right to make grandiose statements, but then don’t criticise SpaceX when they take notice of you and make moves to crush you.

Nonsense. Firstly, because I don't think SpaceX would ever actually make move to crush competition. And secondly, because if SpaceX did that, they'd actually be forcibly maintaining their (at least near) monopoly, which is called anti-competitive behavior, and would almost certainly result in some serious government action against them.

It's much crueler to Beck to ignore RL than it is to react to him.

[sanman]

This is big talk for a company with a Falcon 1 equivalent operational vehicle. And it’s their right to make grandiose statements, but then don’t criticise SpaceX when they take notice of you and make moves to crush you.

Beck may simply be garnering investor sentiment from those who don't trust Musk. The current political climate gives Beck that opportunity, and he may just be trying to shore up investor support.

[M.E.T.]

This is big talk for a company with a Falcon 1 equivalent operational vehicle. And it’s their right to make grandiose statements, but then don’t criticise SpaceX when they take notice of you and make moves to crush you.

Beck may simply be garnering investor sentiment from those who don't trust Musk. The current political climate gives Beck that opportunity, and he may just be trying to shore up investor support.

Oh Beck is absolutely making a play for the anti-Elon political factions. It is just becoming more overt than before.

Trying to capitalise on “non-economic”  reasons to choose a SpaceX competitor. Pandering openly to the “anyone but SpaceX” crowd.

Let’s see how that play works out for him.

[trimeta]

It should probably be mentioned, here's the actual quote for the section regarding Starlink:

Madison: You've spoken to me twice now, you've mentioned it again today and we spoke about this last time as well, that Neutron breaks up that monopoly that a competitor has. I'm assuming you're talking about SpaceX? You've mentioned Starlink there. Are you not only going to go after SpaceX's launch business, but are you also going to go after Starlink directly?

Beck: Well look, we don't talk about what application we're going after, because it's just too early. Y'know, it's kind of irrelevant. I'm a very methodical person, I like to finish one thing before I start the next, and there's no point about really digging into applications until Neutron's flying, it's just irrelevant. But look, you have a whole spectrum of things you do in space, and the broadband space vertical is one shaft of light in a giant spectrum. So I think there's a lot of opportunities to go after there.

So it's probably inaccurate to characterize this as “We are coming for Starlink" as though Beck intends to directly compete with Starlink in the broadband space vertical -- if anything, he seems to be explicitly denying it. He uses Starlink as an example of the power of running an "end-to-end space company," which is to say owning the launch vehicle, satellite production, and on-orbit business under one roof, but that's not the same as saying "we want to operate our own direct-to-consumer (or even direct-to-cell) satellite broadband megaconstellation."

Also, I would argue that there's a difference between one company saying "We're going to take 5% of another company's business" and that second company saying "You're doing what? In that case, we'll take 100% of your business." I guess it's an example of the Chicago Way, and if crushing competitors to maintain untouchable monopolies is perfectly legal, then it's only rational for companies which can do so to employ that way.

[TrevorMonty]

Interesting how Beck is increasingly positioning RKLB as the anti-SpaceX.

We’re gonna “break up the monopoly”.

“We are coming for Starlink”.

“We see what SpaceX has done and are here to take some of that pie”.

This is big talk for a company with a Falcon 1 equivalent operational vehicle. And it’s their right to make grandiose statements, but then don’t criticise SpaceX when they take notice of you and make moves to crush you.

Who is WE in the statements. If these are quotes as they seem to be presented please supply source (time stamp if audio).
If these are yourvoptions then you need to state that.

[sanman]

Oh Beck is absolutely making a play for the anti-Elon political factions. It is just becoming more overt than before.

Trying to capitalise on “non-economic”  reasons to choose a SpaceX competitor. Pandering openly to the “anyone but SpaceX” crowd.

Let’s see how that play works out for him.

Well, that's not necessarily "non-economic" -- it's what hedging is all about. Looking beyond the best bet, in case that bet doesn't work out. Diversification mitigates risk. Beck is simply saying "Here I am! Here's another rocket company, and we too have a track record, which we aspire to make into an even greater one."

A Tale of 2 Rocket Companies. It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.

Tech is the great battleground for vindication. Just like the Cold War Space Race.
In a 2-Party Race, each side wants some good tech heroes in their corner.
If Musk is Tony Stark, then Beck can be Peter Parker.
Plus, people like to root for an underdog.

Hey, as long as they have money, Beck can put it to good use.

[M.E.T.]

Interesting how Beck is increasingly positioning RKLB as the anti-SpaceX.

We’re gonna “break up the monopoly”.

“We are coming for Starlink”.

“We see what SpaceX has done and are here to take some of that pie”.

This is big talk for a company with a Falcon 1 equivalent operational vehicle. And it’s their right to make grandiose statements, but then don’t criticise SpaceX when they take notice of you and make moves to crush you.

Who is WE in the statements. If these are quotes as they seem to be presented please supply source (time stamp if audio).
If these are yourvoptions then you need to state that.

Ok, I’m paraphrasing, to be fair. But Beck’s messaging is quite clear.

Which is that only one business case works - it’s the SpaceX one, and it’s currently a monopoly. And their value proposition is to break that monopoly.

[trimeta]

Interesting how Beck is increasingly positioning RKLB as the anti-SpaceX.

We’re gonna “break up the monopoly”.

“We are coming for Starlink”.

“We see what SpaceX has done and are here to take some of that pie”.

This is big talk for a company with a Falcon 1 equivalent operational vehicle. And it’s their right to make grandiose statements, but then don’t criticise SpaceX when they take notice of you and make moves to crush you.

Who is WE in the statements. If these are quotes as they seem to be presented please supply source (time stamp if audio).
If these are yourvoptions then you need to state that.

Ok, I’m paraphrasing, to be fair. But Beck’s messaging is quite clear.

Which is that only one business case works - it’s the SpaceX one, and it’s currently a monopoly. And their value proposition is to break that monopoly.

I think that although "only one business case works, it's the SpaceX one" and "[SpaceX] is currently a monopoly, and we're going to break that monopoly" are both things Beck is saying, they're referring to slightly different things. Specifically, I think Beck is only concerned about SpaceX having a monopoly on launch, not having a monopoly on broadband satellite internet megaconstellations. I can't imagine that Beck thinks he's got the capital to develop and field something of the scale to actually deliver internet to users worldwide. It's the launch monopoly in particular he wants to break up.

The business case side is basically saying "There's no way to run a successful launch company if launch is the only thing you do. Launch is a low-margin business, the real money is in payloads, in particular operating them yourself and getting all that revenue. But being exclusively a payload company puts you at the mercy of launch companies, so maintaining that low-margin launch business unlocks the full potential of the payload business." Which is to say, taking the lesson from what SpaceX achieved with Starlink.

[TrevorMonty]

RL have yet to say what inspace application they will pursue. Most like data and if so a niche market requiring dozens to few 100 sats.

Think careful about your posts and if this is right thread. There are ones specfically for RL vs Spacex.

[DanClemmensen]

RL have yet to say what inspace application they will pursue. Most like data and if so a niche market requiring dozens to few 100 sats.

It's even possible that Starlink will enable a lot of these via "Plug 'n Plaser". If I can eliminate the RF downlink on the satellite and the ground stations that support it and replace them with a little in-space laser, my satellite is a lot cheaper, smaller, lighter, and can remain in communications continuously. Of course the satellite designer might be better off starting with a SpaceX-supplied bus, but maybe not.

[sanman]