Author Topic: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 13)  (Read 400487 times)

Offline LastStarFighter

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 234
  • Europa
  • Liked: 77
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 13)
« Reply #220 on: 03/16/2016 04:42 am »
I'm guessing he meant $250m a year not per launch. If I remember correctly internal emails from Elon/SpaceX became public for some book and there was a statement about needing to fly/sell 8 F9 and 4 (FH or F9 Dragon) missions to make 10% profit.

8 x $62.5m              = $500m
4 x $133m               = $532m
Total w/ 10% profit   = $1032m
Total Break even       = $929m

I think the most years they've averaged less than about 7 launches a year so...

4 x $62.5m        = $250m
3 x $133m         = $399m
Total                  = $649m

The difference is $280m or about a quarter billion. Just my guess though.


Offline Kabloona

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4847
  • Velocitas Eradico
  • Fortress of Solitude
  • Liked: 3432
  • Likes Given: 741
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 13)
« Reply #221 on: 03/16/2016 04:49 am »
I'm guessing he meant $250m a year not per launch.

Don't try to rationalize his delusions. He clearly says he thinks they lose maybe a quarter billion dollars "every time they launch."

Remember, he's from a company whose Atlas V launches cost in the $200-$300M range, so from that perspective, an F9 launch priced at only $60M has gotta be losing big $$. Like, a quarter billion.
« Last Edit: 03/16/2016 05:16 am by Kabloona »

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39284
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25279
  • Likes Given: 12125
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 13)
« Reply #222 on: 03/16/2016 04:49 am »
I hate it when people say a company which is undergoing expansion is "losing $250 million per" launch, etc. Such quotes give the opposite impression of reality, for they imply that SpaceX would actually save money by not launching, which is clearly false (except perhaps for a few of the old Falcon 1 type payloads).

If SpaceX burns through, say, $1.24 billion per year and only does 4 launches and charges $60 million per launch (with a rocket that has $40 million in marginal costs, included in that $1.24 billion), then technically they would be losing money at a rate of $250 million per launch, but every additional launch improves their financial picture. If you took that ULA guy verbatim, you'd think SpaceX would save money by not launching, which is false. SpaceX probably needs to launch about 10 times per year plus have several Dragon missions to maintain the company, though they'd have to cut development staff.

Additionally, I've heard people insinuate hardcore that even cargo Dragon is a pure subsidy in the context of launch, which is absurd. Launching a Dragon mission takes SIGNIFICANT resources, and is a product just like launch.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline S.Paulissen

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 443
  • Boston
  • Liked: 334
  • Likes Given: 511
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 13)
« Reply #223 on: 03/16/2016 04:51 am »
There's another way to look at "loss". Businesses often estimate what they'd charge for a comparable service/product, and then cite the difference as a loss.

This would at least take him down from 'completely insane' to 'oh that seems high still'.  In a way it kind of makes sense to speak in terms that still within your own capability.  In order for for YOU to match their service you'd be losing about 250m per launch.

The interesting thing about this is that it makes the corollary statement that they would charge on the order of 310m for a equivalent launch...which is a staggering amount of money. Ironically, this under cuts statements that Gass make in front of congress that their prices are not that high because EELV launch capability payments don't count towards prices for launch as put forth by spaceX.

Now I want to know if he was just spitballing numbers or accidentally letting on their costs/prices.
"An expert is a person who has found out by his own painful experience all the mistakes that one can make in a very narrow field." -Niels Bohr
Poster previously known as Exclavion going by his real name now.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39284
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25279
  • Likes Given: 12125
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 13)
« Reply #224 on: 03/16/2016 04:55 am »
There's another way to look at "loss". Businesses often estimate what they'd charge for a comparable service/product, and then cite the difference as a loss.

This would at least take him down from 'completely insane' to 'oh that seems high still'.  In a way it kind of makes sense to speak in terms that still within your own capability.  In order for for YOU to match their service you'd be losing about 250m per launch.

The interesting thing about this is that it makes the corollary statement that they would charge on the order of 310m for a equivalent launch...which is a staggering amount of money. Ironically, this under cuts statements that Gass make in front of congress that their prices are not that high because EELV launch capability payments don't count towards prices for launch as put forth by spaceX.

Now I want to know if he was just spitballing numbers or accidentally letting on their costs/prices.
It's probably about right if you naively take, say, 2014's annual costs (including expansion, and next-gen R&D) and divide by the number of launches. It's a completely dishonest way to evaluate costs for a company that is clearly in growth mode, expanding capacity by building two new launch pads, multiple new test stands, a new engine, new satellite capability, crewed vehicle capability, reuse tests, ramping up factory production and launch rate, have a new heavy-lift launch vehicle getting metal bent, etc, etc...
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline the_other_Doug

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3010
  • Minneapolis, MN
  • Liked: 2191
  • Likes Given: 4620
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 13)
« Reply #225 on: 03/16/2016 01:05 pm »
The single most ironic statement quoted is that "Elon Musk is a master of propaganda," when this entire "briefing" is nothing more than corporate propaganda at it worst.

Note how the assumptions suddenly switch when Mr. Tobey speaks of ULA as opposed to speaking of SpaceX:

- SpaceX must be losing a quarter of a billion a launch and is low-balling their launch costs, while it's entirely reasonable to pay nearly a quarter of a billion per Atlas or Delta launch for ULA's "proven track record and flexibility."

- SpaceX has a non-viable re-use paradigm because they haven't proven they can re-use their stages yet, while ULA must be recognized as the masters of re-use based on the ACES stage, which is still paper technology.

- We already have ACES fuel depot technology (adroitly sidestepping the reality that ACES and its purported fuel depot capability is nothing but PowerPoint presentations at the moment), how could you possibly think that SpaceX re-using dirty, sooty stages sometime in the distant future can compete with that?

- SpaceX is subsidized by NASA and the DoD, and has bought unfair representation in Congress, while ULA would never, ever consider using government funding to fund development of new vehicles or low-ball their own bids (though they can't provide accounting to prove they don't do this), and is lucky to have their own completely impartial staunch supporter in the Senate... while Vulcan and ACES development sit idling, waiting for a big new government contract from which they can siphon off a large portion of monies to fund them.

Et cetera, et cetera...

This is a near-perfect example of Big Lie corporate propaganda, where you take each of your own weaknesses and project them onto your competitor; where you denigrate the other guy on failing to achieve things they are actually achieving, while pushing your own paper pipe dreams as actual achievements against them.

Sigh.
« Last Edit: 03/16/2016 01:37 pm by the_other_Doug »
-Doug  (With my shield, not yet upon it)

Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 13)
« Reply #226 on: 03/16/2016 01:19 pm »
The video have been removed. Someone at /r/SpaceX made a transcript, i skimmed through it and it seems correct.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MTGfXjnFPKbd59uP0GaCiq0A6TO8FlbK9CrPtZO6LVs/edit

Edit: Here is a reupload https://www.dropbox.com/s/plq6t4hogvqej5k/ULA%20Seminar.m4a?dl=0
« Last Edit: 03/16/2016 01:32 pm by Hirox »

Online abaddon

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3082
  • Liked: 3945
  • Likes Given: 5377
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 13)
« Reply #227 on: 03/16/2016 01:27 pm »
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that this is not really how ULA views SpaceX.  If they're really that delusional, they're screwed.

Offline the_other_Doug

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3010
  • Minneapolis, MN
  • Liked: 2191
  • Likes Given: 4620
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 13)
« Reply #228 on: 03/16/2016 01:43 pm »
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that this is not really how ULA views SpaceX.  If they're really that delusional, they're screwed.

Well, to be fair, it seems to have been internal flag-waving type of propaganda, meant to raise the spirits of the troops.  It's not the kind of thing they could trot out as a set of public positions, I don't believe -- just look at how savagely each point has been taken apart here in this forum.

Still, though, if that's what they want their troops to believe, you're right -- it does seem a delusional piece of ground upon which to try and build one's dreams.
-Doug  (With my shield, not yet upon it)

Offline Space Ghost 1962

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2780
  • Whatcha gonna do when the Ghost zaps you?
  • Liked: 2925
  • Likes Given: 2247
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 13)
« Reply #229 on: 03/16/2016 02:33 pm »
Is Mr. Tobey ULA's "Donald Trump", at a private rally? ;) Be careful ...


Online Galactic Penguin SST

Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 13)
« Reply #231 on: 03/16/2016 02:54 pm »
In other news, The Tory has responded: :-X

btw. Tory has now weighted in:

https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/710125441529487360
Quote
.@jsutton101 These ill-advised statements do not reflect ULA’s views or our relationship with our valuable suppliers. We welcome competition

Sounds like someone just was thrown under the bus.


P.S. Maybe it might be best to consolidate all future posts about this talk to the thread in the ULA section?
Astronomy & spaceflight geek penguin. In a relationship w/ Space Shuttle Discovery.

Offline chrisking0997

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 355
  • NASA Langley
  • Liked: 127
  • Likes Given: 317
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 13)
« Reply #232 on: 03/16/2016 03:20 pm »
maybe he meant ULA loses $250m every time SpaceX launches?  ;)
Tried to tell you, we did.  Listen, you did not.  Now, screwed we all are.

Online abaddon

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3082
  • Liked: 3945
  • Likes Given: 5377
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 13)
« Reply #233 on: 03/16/2016 03:25 pm »
Where's the popcorn?  From the spacenews.com article:
Quote
“Compare it to having two fiancées, two possible brides,” Tobey said of ULA’s approach to the two. “Blue Origin is a super-rich girl, and then there is this poor girl over here, Aerojet Rocketdyne. But we have to continue to go to planned rehearsal dinners, buy cakes and all the rest with both.
:o

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6344
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4216
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 13)
« Reply #234 on: 03/16/2016 04:04 pm »
So many feet and only one mouth. We need a popcorn emoticon.
« Last Edit: 03/16/2016 04:05 pm by docmordrid »
DM

Offline Space Ghost 1962

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2780
  • Whatcha gonna do when the Ghost zaps you?
  • Liked: 2925
  • Likes Given: 2247
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 13)
« Reply #235 on: 03/16/2016 04:24 pm »
Where's the popcorn?  From the spacenews.com article:
Quote
“Compare it to having two fiancées, two possible brides,” Tobey said of ULA’s approach to the two. “Blue Origin is a super-rich girl, and then there is this poor girl over here, Aerojet Rocketdyne. But we have to continue to go to planned rehearsal dinners, buy cakes and all the rest with both.
:o
Poor girl on the biggest welfare check in history .. LOL!

As to the rich girl - "... and Malibu Barbie has a new hat!" ... or is that a BE-4 ;)

This guy has all at once made ULA a laughingstock! He's done more damage in one setting, then Musk in all congressional hearings ... still can't believe someone so out of control, from such a "button-down" place ...

Is he trying to turn everything about ULA into a party thread?

Offline rickyramjet

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 114
  • Killeen, TX
  • Liked: 106
  • Likes Given: 79
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 13)
« Reply #236 on: 03/16/2016 05:08 pm »
So many feet and only one mouth. We need a popcorn emoticon.

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15461
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8665
  • Likes Given: 1369
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 13)
« Reply #237 on: 03/16/2016 05:09 pm »
I just read through this, and found myself nodding my head in agreement most of the time.  The "quarter-billion" per launch loss estimate was clearly hyperbole, but I don't think that anyone really believes SpaceX is making a profit on $60 million per launch.  Perhaps the speaker was thinking of what it might cost to launch Falcon Heavy versus the price that SpaceX has listed for a launch.

Interesting to hear that Blue blew up an engine in testing.  It sounded like it may have been a BE-3 power head a while back.

I also was interested in how the speaker thought that the first stage landing was amazing, but that the entire idea of recovery is "dumb" given the lost payload capability and the costs of refurbishment. 

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 03/16/2016 05:16 pm by edkyle99 »

Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 13)
« Reply #238 on: 03/16/2016 05:18 pm »
I just read through this, and found myself nodding my head in agreement most of the time.  The "quarter-billion" per launch loss estimate was clearly hyperbole, but I don't think that anyone really believes SpaceX is making a profit on $60 million per launch.  Perhaps the speaker was thinking of what it might cost to launch Falcon Heavy versus the price that SpaceX has listed for a launch.

Interesting to hear that Blue blew up an engine in testing.  It sounded like it may have been a BE-3 power head a while back.

I also was interested in how the speaker thought that the first stage landing was amazing, but that the entire idea of recovery is "dumb" given the lost payload and the costs of refurbishment. 

 - Ed Kyle

Nobody believes SpaceX is making a $60 million profit on their launches, materials and working hours have costs. I've always thought that they make no profit on their ordinary launches, cost to produce and launch is $60million and selling price is 60$. I think the only launches they make anything on is government (NASA and soon DOD).

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15461
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8665
  • Likes Given: 1369
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 13)
« Reply #239 on: 03/16/2016 05:21 pm »
I just read through this, and found myself nodding my head in agreement most of the time.  The "quarter-billion" per launch loss estimate was clearly hyperbole, but I don't think that anyone really believes SpaceX is making a profit on $60 million per launch.  Perhaps the speaker was thinking of what it might cost to launch Falcon Heavy versus the price that SpaceX has listed for a launch.

Interesting to hear that Blue blew up an engine in testing.  It sounded like it may have been a BE-3 power head a while back.

I also was interested in how the speaker thought that the first stage landing was amazing, but that the entire idea of recovery is "dumb" given the lost payload and the costs of refurbishment. 

 - Ed Kyle

Nobody believes SpaceX is making a $60 million profit on their launches, materials and working hours have costs. I've always thought that they make no profit on their ordinary launches, cost to produce and launch is $60million and selling price is 60$. I think the only launches they make anything on is government (NASA and soon DOD).
I'm saying I don't think people believe SpaceX is making a profit when it sells Falcon 9 for (roughly) $60 million per launch.

 - Ed Kyle

Tags:
 

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