Author Topic: Introducing Firefly Space Systems (Read 346476 times)

russianhalo117 · « **Reply #560 on:** 10/03/2016 07:12 pm »

Quote from: Beittil on 10/03/2016 12:00 pm

Whoopsie...

http://spacenews.com/firefly-space-systems-furloughs-staff-after-investor-backs-out/

Quote
WASHINGTON — Firefly Space Systems, a Texas company developing a small launch vehicle, has furloughed its entire staff after an investor backed out, forcing the firm to consider alternative vehicle concepts or even a sale of the company.

In a brief statement posted to its Twitter account Sept. 29, Firefly Space Systems said a recent “setback in funding” forced the company to “take necessary action to maintain cash-flow equilibrium and position our company for future success.” Firefly did not elaborate on its situation other than tweeting a photo of company employees Sept. 30 with the caption, “Owners and management are so honored to have such a dedicated and committed team.”

What stood out for me is this quote (emp. mine):
Quote
Markusic declined to identify the investor, other than to say the investor was based in Europe. “Brexit had something to do with it,” he said, referring to the decision by voters in a June referendum in the United Kingdom to exit the European Union. “All the messaging that we got was that it wasn’t us. They were going to go in a different strategic direction.”

Yeah sure, 'it wasn't us'... I am 100% that this investor is not at all worried about the lawsuit and all you know... ow wait...

And right after there latest full duration hot fire test.

Jet Black · « **Reply #561 on:** 10/04/2016 11:08 am »

Quote from: TrevorMonty on 10/01/2016 06:45 pm

The aerospike engine may fly but at another company. If Firefly closes shop the staff and knowledge they've gained will end up in other LV companies.

There would be an issue if that IP is based on stolen VG IP though. I suspect this could be damaging to quite a few careers.

ringsider · « **Reply #562 on:** 10/04/2016 12:45 pm »

Quote from: Jet Black on 10/04/2016 11:08 am

Quote from: TrevorMonty on 10/01/2016 06:45 pm
The aerospike engine may fly but at another company. If Firefly closes shop the staff and knowledge they've gained will end up in other LV companies.

There would be an issue if that IP is based on stolen VG IP though. I suspect this could be damaging to quite a few careers.

At this point I think Firefly are kidding themselves if they think the IP issue is not a factor. Now imagine if Virgin thinks Paul Allen / Vulcan is going to pick it up for Stratolauncher, creating a serious competitor... why would they allow or want that? That is even worse for VG. VG will probably slow down their litigation to drag it out and just ensure it gets strangled to death or into irrelevancy. Even if Tom Markusic leaves, the techncial base of the company itself has a reputation problem now. How do you sell that?

ringsider · « **Reply #563 on:** 10/04/2016 12:56 pm »

Wow - they have been air launch since April, and the contract value more than halved... frankly I am stunned. I thought the technical changes were extreme - methane->RP-1, auto press->helium press, but moving from VL to air launch? That is just another level...

$-2.4m    9/27/16    Funding Only Action

VCLS IS A FIRM-FIXED PRICE CONTRACT FOR A DEDICATED LAUNCH SERVICE FOR U-CLASS SATELLITES WITH NASA HAVING SOLE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE PAYLOAD ON THE LAUNCH VEHICLE. NASA LAUNCH SERVICES PROGRAM (LSP) SUPPORTS THE CUBESAT LAUNCH INITIATIVE (CSLI) BY PROVIDING LAUNCH OPPORTUNITIES FOR CUBESATS THAT ARE CURRENTLY ON THE MANIFEST BACK LOG. THE PURPOSE OF MOD 02 IS TO DEOBLIGATE FUNDING IN THE NET AMOUNT OF $2,487,125. THE PURPOSE OF MOD 01 IS TO CHANGE THE CONFIGURATION FROM A LAND LAUNCH TO AN AIR LAUNCH AND TO REVISE THE MISSION SUCCESS CRITERIA.
Close
--    4/29/16    Supplemental Agreement For Work Within Scope

VCLS IS A FIRM-FIXED PRICE CONTRACT FOR A DEDICATED LAUNCH SERVICE FOR U-CLASS SATELLITES WITH NASA HAVING SOLE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE PAYLOAD ON THE LAUNCH VEHICLE. NASA LAUNCH SERVICES PROGRAM (LSP) SUPPORTS THE CUBESAT LAUNCH INITIATIVE (CSLI) BY PROVIDING LAUNCH OPPORTUNITIES FOR CUBESATS THAT ARE CURRENTLY ON THE MANIFEST BACK LOG. THE PURPOSE OF MOD 01 IS TO CHANGE THE CONFIGURATION FROM A LAND LAUNCH TO AN AIR LAUNCH AND TO REVISE THE MISSION SUCCESS CRITERIA.

$4.4m    9/30/15    Not Listed

VCLS IS A FIRM-FIXED PRICE CONTRACT FOR A DEDICATED LAUNCH SERVICE FOR U-CLASS SATELLITES WITH NASA HAVING SOLE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE PAYLOAD ON THE LAUNCH VEHICLE. NASA LAUNCH SERVICES PROGRAM (LSP) SUPPORTS THE CUBESAT LAUNCH INITIATIVE (CSLI) BY PROVIDING LAUNCH OPPORTUNITIES FOR CUBESATS THAT ARE CURRENTLY ON THE MANIFEST BACK LOG.

Skyrocket · « **Reply #564 on:** 10/04/2016 09:45 pm »

Quote from: ringsider on 10/04/2016 12:56 pm

Wow - they have been air launch since April, and the contract value more than halved... frankly I am stunned. I thought the technical changes were extreme - methane->RP-1, auto press->helium press, but moving from VL to air launch? That is just another level...

Great find. Interestingly, the payload user guide on their webpage dated from 18 May 2016 does not yet mention air launch.

ringsider · « **Reply #565 on:** 10/05/2016 06:45 pm »

This story in Sat News says a US backer also pulled out:-

"...the firm's major European investor decided to remove their financing support from Firefly's efforts in late September, which then resulted in a major US financier to also depart the company's efforts."

http://www.satnews.com/story.php?number=1437325766

Lars-J · « **Reply #566 on:** 10/24/2016 05:54 pm »

What's the current status of Firefly? It has been three weeks now since the last news...

savuporo · « **Reply #567 on:** 10/26/2016 12:05 am »

Quote from: Lars-J on 10/24/2016 05:54 pm

What's the current status of Firefly? It has been three weeks now since the last news...

It's not good
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2016/10/25/virgin-galactic-sues-firefly-officers-alleged-misappropriation-trade-secrets/

This thread should be renamed now. From 'introducing' to 'we hardly knew you' or something.

ringsider · « **Reply #568 on:** 10/26/2016 12:16 am »

Quote from: savuporo on 10/26/2016 12:05 am

Quote from: Lars-J on 10/24/2016 05:54 pm
What's the current status of Firefly? It has been three weeks now since the last news...

It's not good
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2016/10/25/virgin-galactic-sues-firefly-officers-alleged-misappropriation-trade-secrets/

This thread should be renamed now. From 'introducing' to 'we hardly knew you' or something.

So Virgin is playing for the entire company now... That is a clear grab for the shares not controlled by Markusic. This is just a godawful mess. I think the investor who bolted dodged a bullet. Would you invest in this?

TrevorMonty · « **Reply #569 on:** 10/26/2016 05:07 am »

All staff have been laid off so it is goodbye Firefly. Hopefully VG will take over the facilities and some of staff.

savuporo · « **Reply #570 on:** 10/26/2016 06:58 am »

The awful part is that with disasters like this, it's that much harder to get another team and company funded. Nothing like IP and legal fights to keep investment dollars away from the industry

ringsider · « **Reply #571 on:** 10/26/2016 07:37 am »

Another report:

https://www.crowelltradesecretstrends.com/2016/10/space-race-starts-anew-as-virgin-galactic-files-trade-secrets-claims-against-rival/

Galactic now alleges that Markusic’s business partners knew that Markusic was providing them with Galactic’s protected trade secrets, and nonetheless used and continue to use that information to build and market their products. If proven true, Galactic asserts that Markusic’s business partners may be personally liable for misappropriating trade secrets.

I said a few replies ago that Virgin would now try to slow things down on the legal front, and here we are.

Quote from: ringsider on 10/04/2016 12:45 pm

VG will probably slow down their litigation to drag it out and just ensure it gets strangled to death or into irrelevancy.

I will download the filings later and have a look. Usually they contain lots of detail but I imagine it's very similar to the other complaints. Virgin usually offers written evidence from emails, documents exchanged between the three founders to support allegations - the older suits are full of them.

Once again it just proves you should not go into such fights against a billionaire. I remember an episode of High Stakes Poker where David Benyamine bet basically his entire net worth against Cirque du Soleil founder Guy Laliberte, who makes that amount of money in a day. The look on Benyamine's face when he got called is how I imagine the founders feel right now:-

ChrisWilson68 · « **Reply #572 on:** 10/27/2016 05:33 am »

The biggest victims here are the employees. They had no way to know of Markusic's behavior (or alleged behavior). It's one thing to join a company and try and fail in the free market. This is something else. I always thought Firefly's chances of making it were slim, but the employees deserved the chance to try, and to succeed or fail in fair competition.

savuporo · « **Reply #573 on:** 10/27/2016 06:13 am »

Quote from: ChrisWilson68 on 10/27/2016 05:33 am

The biggest victims here are the employees. ..

I kind of mildly disagree - its bigger than that, in that it also affects their future employment opportunities. It's the entire space industry being hit. If a company goes bust because their business didn't work out, jobs are lost but most ( not all, of course ) of the core skill-sets get transferred to another employer in some reasonable timeframe, because someone else has a better execution plan.
In the given case, the immediate near term potential for industry to grow, i.e. existing companies to find financing and new team to get funded will be much more limited, and hence employment opportunities will also be further limited.

In other words, that's not creative destruction, it's destructive destruction.

Davidthefat · « **Reply #574 on:** 10/27/2016 05:50 pm »

Got a Glassdoor notification that they posted a new Senior Propulsion Engineer position today: https://www.glassdoor.com/job-listing/sr-propulsion-engineer-firefly-space-systems-JV_IC1139765_KO0,22_KE23,44.htm?jl=1997048458

May be they are still trying to keep the company going right now regardless of the lawsuits and budget cuts?

Interesting revelation is that they are working on a staged combustion engine now... Seems to be moving further and further away from their original goal. Scope creep much? Now it seems like a totally reactionary course of action, presumably, to get as far away from whatever Virgin can accuse of being their IP. Given Markusic was also a propulsion engineer on the early Raptor (while it was still a LOX/LH engine), it's not too far fetched for them to pursue the staged combustion engine. But is that a good move business wise?

edit 2: I guess it is an old posting.

ChrisWilson68 · « **Reply #575 on:** 10/27/2016 06:11 pm »

Quote from: Davidthefat on 10/27/2016 05:50 pm

Got a Glassdoor notification that they posted a new Senior Propulsion Engineer position today: https://www.glassdoor.com/job-listing/sr-propulsion-engineer-firefly-space-systems-JV_IC1139765_KO0,22_KE23,44.htm?jl=1997048458

May be they are still trying to keep the company going right now regardless of the lawsuits and budget cuts?

Interesting revelation is that they are working on a staged combustion engine now... Seems to be moving further and further away from their original goal. Scope creep much? Now it seems like a totally reactionary course of action, presumably, to get as far away from whatever Virgin can accuse of being their IP. Given Markusic was also a propulsion engineer on the early Raptor (while it was still a LOX/LH engine), it's not too far fetched for them to pursue the staged combustion engine. But is that a good move business wise?

Given that they furloughed a team of more than 100, wouldn't you think they'd start by hiring back some of those people before advertising for entirely new engineers? I think this Glassdoor notification must be some automated thing for a position they already had listed before the disaster hit. Companies often have systems for automatically re-posting positions to make them look like they are new openings, to attract attention.

Kryten · « **Reply #576 on:** 10/27/2016 08:30 pm »

The job listing is identical to the 'Sr. Propulsion Engineer' listing at the careers section on Firefly's site. Wayback machine shows that this listing has existed, with the same wording about SC engines, since at least December 2014.

ChrisWilson68 · « **Reply #577 on:** 10/28/2016 09:18 pm »

It's been a month now and there's no sign of any movement to reconstitute the team.

It's hard to see any path forward for Firefly at this point. The former employees need to eat and pay rent, so by now most will have other jobs lined up. So they would need to largely start from scratch to build a team. And if they couldn't get funding when they had a team in place, it's just going to be that much harder now. Not only would it be harder to move forward now versus two months ago, but now they also have failure associated with them. Investors are much more wary of a company that has already failed once.

The best they could hope for now would be some kind of Kistler-like scenario, where another organization buys the assets of a failed company and tries to re-start the design. We all saw how well that worked out for Kistler.

Beittil · « **Reply #578 on:** 10/31/2016 08:41 am »

Why would anybody want to burn their fingers on buying the assets of a company that has been effectively killed due to IP lawsuits and the resulting withdrawal of financial backing because of it?

Somebody here already predicted that VG would slow down the legal process now long enough to effectively strangle Firefly to dead. As you noted, it has been a month now and the (former) employees need to move on!

Even if Firefly does manage to get through this and attract some funding, who is to say that the staff will want to return with all the risks of VG upping their legal game again, shutting it down once more.

It is such a shame to see this happening, but this is all to blame of Markusic's actions. I have come to believe that we are looking at a dead and soon to be burried new space startup here, which is a shame really... because they were really promising.

ringsider · « **Reply #579 on:** 10/31/2016 09:03 am »

Well if you are an investor the minimum you want to see is the IP issue definitively settled, otherwise what are you actually buying except some tables and computers? It's fine that the Firefly team see their side of the case, but there is someone making a formal claim on the other side, so whatever they say it needs to be formally settled.

The problem is that to get a settlement with VG will almost certainly mean they lose the company - what else would they be happy with? That's probably why the Firefly guys keep fighting the case.

But that only works if they have cash to survive the fight and that looks questionable at least with recent events. And even then, with recent rulings, they are still rolling the dice: if the odds of winning are better than 50/50 I would be amazed. Plus there is the cost - the litigation to date has probably cost a couple of million for each side, and Virgin is already applying to have costs awarded.

It really is a difficult situation and gets worse by the day.