Author Topic: Sea Launch files for Chapter 11 protection (Read 89387 times)

McDew · « **Reply #100 on:** 08/17/2009 09:12 pm »

The court hearings to compel SL to assume or reject the Launch Service Agreements has been postponed to 25 August.

SL has been fighting the motions to compel them to assume or reject the contracts. Strangely, SL has been validating XM’s concerns while at the same time goading XM to terminate the launch service agreement and seek a launch from their competitors.

From the SL objections to the XM motion to compel:

“Every customer who comes to contract with the Debtors knows that there is never any absolute assurance that the parties will be able to perform by a specific date under a launch contract that is entered into years in advance of the contemplated launch.”

“If the Court compels the Debtors to act now, seven weeks into these bankruptcy cases, and the Debtors do in fact assume the Launch Agreements, there is no greater assurance given to XM that the launches will actually occur on time or at all.”

“Unlike other businesses and even unlike government subsidized commercial launch providers, progress payments made to the Debtors by one customer are used to fund the operations surrounding the launch of another customer’s satellite.”

Wow… and yes , Sea Launch is unlike the other launch providers. No wonder SL is in deep dodo. Once again, the obvious truth comes out that if the money never gets to the subcontractors to order the hardware, then the vehicles never get built on time or at all, even if Sea Launch publicly blames it on production problems.

Did Sea Launch just admit that they have been running a Ponzi Scheme?

Also from the SL objections:

“If XM faces the imminent alleged “irreparable harm” it asserts in the Motion to Compel, and if XM feels that it must move immediately to arrange for alternate launch services because of this alleged harm, then one must question why XM does not immediately terminate the Launch Agreements for convenience and arrange for launch services with another provider.”

kq6ea · « **Reply #101 on:** 08/18/2009 12:54 am »

Yeah, I read those documents the day they showed up on the Epiq site, and it seemed strange to me, too.

rsnellenberger · « **Reply #102 on:** 08/18/2009 03:15 am »

Quote from: McDew on 08/17/2009 09:12 pm

Also from the SL objections:

“If XM faces the imminent alleged “irreparable harm” it asserts in the Motion to Compel, and if XM feels that it must move immediately to arrange for alternate launch services because of this alleged harm, then one must question why XM does not immediately terminate the Launch Agreements for convenience and arrange for launch services with another provider.”

Does this remind anyone else of the scene in "Blazing Saddles" where Cleavon Little kidnaps himself at gunpoint...

edkyle99 · « **Reply #103 on:** 08/18/2009 04:49 am »

Quote from: McDew on 08/17/2009 09:12 pm

Did Sea Launch just admit that they have been running a Ponzi Scheme?

If so, then every other manufacturer on Earth is doing the same.

No, not a Ponzi scheme. Rather, a very poorly worded legal document submitted on behalf of Sea Launch.

- Ed Kyle

anik · « **Reply #104 on:** 08/30/2009 06:50 pm »

http://www.space.com/spacenews/spacenews_summary.html#BM_1

"In a ruling published Aug. 25, the court said Intelsat could take the place of Sea Launch as the customer for three launches that Intelsat had contracted with Sea Launch but that rely on Moscow-based Space International Services (SIS)"

"Intelsat has three Land Launch contracts for which payment is still due. The first is a final payment for the June launch of the Measat 1R satellite, a launch that Intelsat had sold to Malaysia's Measat satellite operator.

The second contract is for the Intelsat IS-15 satellite, scheduled for launch late this year, with the third being for the IS-18 satellite to be orbited in late 2010 or early 2011"

Marisum · « **Reply #105 on:** 10/13/2009 04:27 pm »

Quote from: Seer on 06/26/2009 01:34 am

Quote from: veryrelaxed on 06/26/2009 01:20 am
Aren't Ariane 5's launches expensive as well? What are their debts/debt holders? If not for the 'inside sat business' (Alcatel?) or French gov and ESA subsidies it'd be hanging by a thread now as much as SL. I don't see anything economical or competitive in the Arianne technically or business-wise. Perhaps the 'double GSO sat launch' feature?

There the market leader by far and they're increasing production. Most of their orders come from outside France, and the launch subsidies are about $200 million. Far less than Atlas or Delta.

Part of the problem, if u take away the subsidies, Ariane/EELV etc. commercial become a lot more viable. It is hard to compete again government money.

Marisum · « **Reply #106 on:** 10/13/2009 04:42 pm »

Quote from: mmeijeri on 07/09/2009 03:29 pm

Quote from: pippin on 07/09/2009 03:11 pm
What's confusing about that?

You are right that here are obvious similarities and I'd say the ULA construction is also a bit involved, though not as much as with Arianespace. EADS itself is a very complicated and highly political beast. In the US the individual states do not have their own space agencies. NASA does have the various Centers, but all the money comes from federal funds if I'm not mistaken. There is no Florida space agency sharing part of the costs of operating CCAFS with NASA (nor are they offering the Russians a launch site ). Looking at it from a distance it looks as if the American structures are a lot less Byzantine than the European ones.

Actually, Florida does have its own space agency - which financed the EELV launch pads

SIM city · « **Reply #107 on:** 10/27/2009 04:30 pm »

It appears the self-hosted Sea Launch website www.sea-launch.com is down. The Boeing-hosted site remains.
http://www.boeing.com/special/sea-launch/

edkyle99 · « **Reply #108 on:** 10/31/2009 06:04 am »

Boeing has filed "a demand for arbitration" ... "to force Sea Launch’s Russian and Ukrainian owners to repay $147 million in loan guarantees Boeing made to the struggling firm."

http://www.spacenews.com/launch/091030-boeing-losses-sea-launch-bankruptcy.html

In addition, Boeing loaned more than $500 million more to Sea Launch before it filed for bankruptcy. The company is trying to reclaim some of its loss, but ...

The report also mentions another loss Boeing is taking - $386 million for four presumably Delta 4 launch underprice/overruns for which it provided guarantees to ULA.

Why does Elon Musk want to get into the business, again?

- Ed Kyle

yinzer · « **Reply #109 on:** 10/31/2009 06:10 am »

Quote from: edkyle99 on 10/31/2009 06:04 am

Why does Elon Musk want to get into the business, again?

Because rockets are awesome, because he thinks that he's smarter than everyone else in the field and wants to prove it, and because he wants to fly himself to Mars.

alexSA · « **Reply #110 on:** 10/31/2009 08:01 am »

Quote from: yinzer on 10/31/2009 06:10 am

Quote from: edkyle99 on 10/31/2009 06:04 am
Why does Elon Musk want to get into the business, again?

Because rockets are awesome, because he thinks that he's smarter than everyone else in the field and wants to prove it, and because he wants to fly himself to Mars.

well, only one of those reasons makes any sense...

Analyst · « **Reply #111 on:** 10/31/2009 10:16 am »

Which one?

Analyst

khallow · « **Reply #112 on:** 10/31/2009 03:24 pm »

Quote from: Analyst on 10/31/2009 10:16 am

Which one?

I agree with Analyst here. All three are valid reasons that "make sense". Keep in mind also that even bizarre reasons usually make sense to the holder of the reason even if an outsider can't figure it out.

iamlucky13 · « **Reply #113 on:** 10/31/2009 04:41 pm »

Quote from: edkyle99 on 10/31/2009 06:04 am

Why does Elon Musk want to get into the business, again?

Because he can.

With that much money, taking a huge financial risk to do something genuinely interesting and challenging is a compelling option. Sure beats spending it on drugs and hookers like most people seem inclined to do.

Does anyone know how many launches are on Sea Launch's current manifest? I only see Intel-Sat 15 via Land Launch on their website.

mlorrey · « **Reply #114 on:** 10/31/2009 04:45 pm »

Quote from: edkyle99 on 10/31/2009 06:04 am

Boeing has filed "a demand for arbitration" ... "to force Sea Launch’s Russian and Ukrainian owners to repay $147 million in loan guarantees Boeing made to the struggling firm."

http://www.spacenews.com/launch/091030-boeing-losses-sea-launch-bankruptcy.html

In addition, Boeing loaned more than $500 million more to Sea Launch before it filed for bankruptcy. The company is trying to reclaim some of its loss, but ...

The report also mentions another loss Boeing is taking - $386 million for four presumably Delta 4 launch underprice/overruns for which it provided guarantees to ULA.

Why does Elon Musk want to get into the business, again?

Hey now, Jim assured us that Boeing doesn't treat space launches as loss leaders for their satellite sales business, so how can this be?

rsnellenberger · « **Reply #115 on:** 10/31/2009 04:50 pm »

Quote from: edkyle99 on 10/31/2009 06:04 am

Boeing has filed "a demand for arbitration" ... "to force Sea Launch’s Russian and Ukrainian owners to repay $147 million in loan guarantees Boeing made to the struggling firm."

http://www.spacenews.com/launch/091030-boeing-losses-sea-launch-bankruptcy.html

In addition, Boeing loaned more than $500 million more to Sea Launch before it filed for bankruptcy. The company is trying to reclaim some of its loss, but ...

The report also mentions another loss Boeing is taking - $386 million for four presumably Delta 4 launch underprice/overruns for which it provided guarantees to ULA.

Why does Elon Musk want to get into the business, again?

- Ed Kyle

Because he sees obvious ways to avoid making $1 billion worth of bad decisions -- particularly because he's playing with his own money and uninclined to follow these types of "lose money over here to make money over there" philosophies?

yg1968 · « **Reply #116 on:** 10/31/2009 07:54 pm »

Quote from: mlorrey on 10/31/2009 04:45 pm

Quote from: edkyle99 on 10/31/2009 06:04 am
Boeing has filed "a demand for arbitration" ... "to force Sea Launch’s Russian and Ukrainian owners to repay $147 million in loan guarantees Boeing made to the struggling firm."

http://www.spacenews.com/launch/091030-boeing-losses-sea-launch-bankruptcy.html

In addition, Boeing loaned more than $500 million more to Sea Launch before it filed for bankruptcy. The company is trying to reclaim some of its loss, but ...

The report also mentions another loss Boeing is taking - $386 million for four presumably Delta 4 launch underprice/overruns for which it provided guarantees to ULA.

Why does Elon Musk want to get into the business, again?

Hey now, Jim assured us that Boeing doesn't treat space launches as loss leaders for their satellite sales business, so how can this be?

Jim says that these contracts predates ULA.

Jim · « **Reply #117 on:** 10/31/2009 10:20 pm »

Quote from: mlorrey on 10/31/2009 04:45 pm

Hey now, Jim assured us that Boeing doesn't treat space launches as loss leaders for their satellite sales business, so how can this be?

The satellite business is separate from the space launch business. They are contracted separately. Most of the Boeing commercial spacecraft, the few that there are, do not fly on Boeing launch vehicles.

Due to mergers, Boeing and LM were forced to put up firewalls between their launch and spacecraft divisions

McDew · « **Reply #118 on:** 10/31/2009 10:52 pm »

Quote from: edkyle99 on 10/31/2009 06:04 am

In addition, Boeing loaned more than $500 million more to Sea Launch before it filed for bankruptcy. The company is trying to reclaim some of its loss, but ...

The report also mentions another loss Boeing is taking - $386 million for four presumably Delta 4 launch underprice/overruns for which it provided guarantees to ULA.

Boeing is continuing the slow roll on the financial write offs for all their old launch vehicle businesses. More to come on Sea Launch, Delta IV and Delta II. Boeing owns the inventory for all the unsold Delta II vehicles.

kq6ea · « **Reply #119 on:** 11/01/2009 05:30 pm »

Quote from: SIM city on 10/27/2009 04:30 pm

It appears the self-hosted Sea Launch website www.sea-launch.com is down. The Boeing-hosted site remains.
http://www.boeing.com/special/sea-launch/

They were switching telcom providers, and the site had to be moved.
It's back up now.