Author Topic: SpaceX protest against French and European subsidies to Arianespace  (Read 10885 times)



Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4410
  • US
  • Liked: 3977
  • Likes Given: 2249
If you want to start a thread then you should actually type some content in the first post, not just post a link to some random news article (that doesn't even show up when I try to look at it.)

Offline RDMM2081

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 167
  • Liked: 101
  • Likes Given: 256
I'm sorry I don't have any comment specific to add to this thread either, but may I take a moment to echo gongora to say I am not impressed by this fascination with "first post syndrome", especially here.  There is so much fantastic content generated just by the other users around here, eventually someone is going to come up with an insight into the content others simply race to link.  That is why I keep coming back and hanging around here for the insights, not just as some clearing house for tweets and articles, I can do well enough finding those on my own, and the first thing I do after finding one, reading it (novel concept sometimes!) and thinking for a moment is head here to see what others think about the points about which I thought while reading it myself.

Sorry to rant, please delete if this is out of line.

Offline spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2618
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 482
  • Likes Given: 264
I read the second link.  What can the US do?  Lots of things are subsidized in Europe. 

Offline su27k

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1432
  • Liked: 1260
  • Likes Given: 113
From Google Translation:

Quote
"The European Union and French government subsidies artificially reduce the price of Arianespace launch services on the international market and allow their rockets to be unfairly competitive", warns SpaceX's commercial management in a letter sent in September. December to Edward Gresser, a senior official in the Department of Commerce, whose "Echoes" obtained a copy.

...

In its letter, the Californian company figures at 13.2 billion euros between 1998 and 2012. It also questions the public funding for the spaceport of Kourou in French Guiana, saying that this allows Arianespace not to include in its commercial offers the weight of infrastructures.

The company, which is causing the fall in prices in the space, therefore asks the US legislator to correct this unfair competition in the context of trade negotiations between the European Union and the United States. "An agreement is needed to ensure that Arianespace does not receive preferential treatment and that EU members do not discriminate against non-European suppliers , " asks SpaceX.

I think there's trade talk between EU and US at the moment, SpaceX just wants the launch subsidy issue to be on the agenda.

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4410
  • US
  • Liked: 3977
  • Likes Given: 2249

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8929
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 6130
  • Likes Given: 2075
They must be talking about these.

Yes. And the second document holds two very substantial flaws in SpaceX's line of reasoning:

Flaw nr. 1:
SpaceX is providing its comments in the light of a future USA - EU (European Union) free trade agreement. SpaceX's problem with Arianespace however concerns that Arianespace is being subsidized by ESA (European Space Agency). What SpaceX fails to identify here is that ESA is NOT the EU space agency. ESA is a completely independent inter-governmental agency over which neither the USA, nor the EU, has any say. ESA is NO part of the upcoming USA - EU free trade agreement. So, SpaceX completely missed the ball here by complaining to the wrong inter-governmental agency (EU in stead of ESA).

Flaw nr. 2:
I'll provide this quote from the second document:
Quote
2. Competition Policy: The European Union’s space launch market should ensure U.S. companies have fair market access to launch contracts for European governments and companies.
The emphasis is mine. What SpaceX fails to identify is that under current US regulations and laws European launch service providers have NO access to launch contracts for US government launches. So, why exactly should US launch providers (such as SpaceX) have access to launch contracts from European governments? Because that would, in fact, CREATE an unlevel playing field.
Another missed ball by SpaceX here by demanding to have a specific right while the opposing party is not allowed to have a similar right.


The first document holds a third major flaw in SpaceX's line of reasoning:
 
Flaw nr.3:
SpaceX assumes that all investments made, by ESA and France (CNES), in launcher development, launch infrastructure development, test facilities, etc. can be seen as subsidies for Arianespace. That is flat out incorrect. Arianespace has to pay rent to ESA, and CNES, to use the above mentioned facilities. ESA and CNES own them, but Arianespace has to pay a significant fee to be able to use those facilities.
Same for the launchers: they are developed by ESA, with ESA money. But every time Arianespace launches one of them, they have to reimburse ESA for it. And here you have exactly why Arianespace was never able to make any significant profits, despite having a (sometimes well over) 50% market share.



Don't get me wrong: I love SpaceX for what is it doing to revolutionize access to space. But these "views" (complaints IMO) offered by SpaceX are pathetic for their completely incorrect representation of facts.
« Last Edit: 02/22/2019 08:22 am by woods170 »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10192
  • UK
  • Liked: 2023
  • Likes Given: 208
I'm sorry I don't have any comment specific to add to this thread either, but may I take a moment to echo gongora to say I am not impressed by this fascination with "first post syndrome", especially here.  There is so much fantastic content generated just by the other users around here, eventually someone is going to come up with an insight into the content others simply race to link.  That is why I keep coming back and hanging around here for the insights, not just as some clearing house for tweets and articles, I can do well enough finding those on my own, and the first thing I do after finding one, reading it (novel concept sometimes!) and thinking for a moment is head here to see what others think about the points about which I thought while reading it myself.

Sorry to rant, please delete if this is out of line.

Well if I wanted to rant I could complain about people who engage in what I regard as vigilante modding by telling others what they should or shouldn’t post. Especially when they assume that everyone’s interactions with this forum are the same as their own, or that everyone has the same proficiency in English.

If you want to start a thread then you should actually type some content in the first post, not just post a link to some random news article (that doesn't even show up when I try to look at it.)

Link works fine for me in Safari and translates ok in chrome.
« Last Edit: 02/22/2019 12:24 pm by Star One »

Online envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5319
  • Liked: 3159
  • Likes Given: 1589
...But these "views" (complaints IMO) offered by SpaceX are pathetic for their completely incorrect representation of facts.

In other words, SpaceX is stooping to Ariane's level.

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11498
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 8549
  • Likes Given: 6970
I'm sorry I don't have any comment specific to add to this thread either, but may I take a moment to echo gongora to say I am not impressed by this fascination with "first post syndrome", especially here.  There is so much fantastic content generated just by the other users around here, eventually someone is going to come up with an insight into the content others simply race to link.  That is why I keep coming back and hanging around here for the insights, not just as some clearing house for tweets and articles, I can do well enough finding those on my own, and the first thing I do after finding one, reading it (novel concept sometimes!) and thinking for a moment is head here to see what others think about the points about which I thought while reading it myself.

Sorry to rant, please delete if this is out of line.

Well if I wanted to rant I could complain about people who engage in what I regard as vigilante modding by telling others what they should or shouldn’t post. Especially when they assume that everyone’s interactions with this forum are the same as their own, or that everyone has the same proficiency in English.

If you want to start a thread then you should actually type some content in the first post, not just post a link to some random news article (that doesn't even show up when I try to look at it.)

Link works fine for me in Safari and translates ok in chrome.
(mod)
It is helpful to give some context or a quick summary when doing a first post. A bare link is not the most helpful way to start. Pointing out that we could run Google Translate ourselves? Not helpful, really. We all could do just that but what a waste of time.

It is helpful to self moderate. Within reason. We don't need bossy "king of the forum" posts but gentle guidance to newer folks (the OP doesn't have a lot of posts with likes so may not be as experienced with recent posting style as some) is a good thing.

"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline TrevorMonty

They must be talking about these.

Yes. And the second document holds two very substantial flaws in SpaceX's line of reasoning:

Flaw nr. 1:
SpaceX is providing its comments in the light of a future USA - EU (European Union) free trade agreement. SpaceX's problem with Arianespace however concerns that Arianespace is being subsidized by ESA (European Space Agency). What SpaceX fails to identify here is that ESA is NOT the EU space agency. ESA is a completely independent inter-governmental agency over which neither the USA, nor the EU, has any say. ESA is NO part of the upcoming USA - EU free trade agreement. So, SpaceX completely missed the ball here by complaining to the wrong inter-governmental agency (EU in stead of ESA).

Flaw nr. 2:
I'll provide this quote from the second document:
Quote
2. Competition Policy: The European Union’s space launch market should ensure U.S. companies have fair market access to launch contracts for European governments and companies.
The emphasis is mine. What SpaceX fails to identify is that under current US regulations and laws European launch service providers have NO access to launch contracts for US government launches. So, why exactly should US launch providers (such as SpaceX) have access to launch contracts from European governments? Because that would, in fact, CREATE an unlevel playing field.
Another missed ball by SpaceX here by demanding to have a specific right while the opposing party is not allowed to have a similar right.


The first document holds a third major flaw in SpaceX's line of reasoning:
 
Flaw nr.3:
SpaceX assumes that all investments made, by ESA and France (CNES), in launcher development, launch infrastructure development, test facilities, etc. can be seen as subsidies for Arianespace. That is flat out incorrect. Arianespace has to pay rent to ESA, and CNES, to use the above mentioned facilities. ESA and CNES own them, but Arianespace has to pay a significant fee to be able to use those facilities.
Same for the launchers: they are developed by ESA, with ESA money. But every time Arianespace launches one of them, they have to reimburse ESA for it. And here you have exactly why Arianespace was never able to make any significant profits, despite having a (sometimes well over) 50% market share.



Don't get me wrong: I love SpaceX for what is it doing to revolutionize access to space. But these "views" (complaints IMO) offered by SpaceX are pathetic for their completely incorrect representation of facts.
So $Bs in development money SpaceX has received from NASA and Airforce doesn't count as subsidy.
If their LVs development money had been totally private, their launch costs would be lot higher.

Offline spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2618
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 482
  • Likes Given: 264
This is something I never considered that SpaceX is doing.  I do know that hog farmers in the US have complained about Denmark subsidizing their pork industry.  DAK canned hams are imported from Denmark.  Airbus was heavily subsidized to develop the A-380 to compete with Boeing's 747.  Boeing developed their aircraft without any government subsidy.   

SpaceX has contracts with our government.  They did get some money for development of the Raptor engine from the Air Force.  European countries do subsidize a lot of their industries to compete on the global market. 

Shouldn't this be placed in the Space Policy Forum?

« Last Edit: 02/22/2019 03:04 pm by spacenut »

Offline KDH

  • Member
  • Posts: 9
  • UK
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 0
Hmmm, not sure about Boeing developed their aircraft without any government subsidy.   Airbus and Boeing are both as bad as each other.

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2010/september/tradoc_146484.pdf
http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2010/september/tradoc_146485.pdf
https://globalnews.ca/news/3773916/bombardier-boeing-subsidies/
https://globalnews.ca/news/3773916/bombardier-boeing-subsidies/

Probably off topic anyway, sorry but could not let what spacenut go without a response as so completely incorrect

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8929
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 6130
  • Likes Given: 2075
...But these "views" (complaints IMO) offered by SpaceX are pathetic for their completely incorrect representation of facts.

In other words, SpaceX is stooping to Ariane's level.

Yes, and that is why it is pathetic IMO. I had expected better from SpaceX.
« Last Edit: 02/22/2019 04:20 pm by woods170 »

Offline RoboGoofers

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
  • NJ
  • Liked: 288
  • Likes Given: 291
Same for the launchers: they are developed by ESA, with ESA money. But every time Arianespace launches one of them, they have to reimburse ESA for it.
What do you mean by it. Arianespace pays ESA something like a license fee for the Ariane design?

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10192
  • UK
  • Liked: 2023
  • Likes Given: 208
...But these "views" (complaints IMO) offered by SpaceX are pathetic for their completely incorrect representation of facts.

In other words, SpaceX is stooping to Ariane's level.

Yes, and that is why it is pathetic IMO. I had expected better from SpaceX.

I am always confused when people say this, and I can only think that it comes from people putting large companies on pedestals for some reason. For myself I don’t expect them to behave any better or worse than any other large company in the sector. To me they are just another space ‘prime’.
« Last Edit: 02/22/2019 05:59 pm by Star One »

Offline programmerdan

End of the day, SpaceX needs new launch contracts to stay in business, just like every other launch company. If they fail to use every tool at their disposal to ensure they can at least bid on / attempt to gain new launch contracts, they will only succeed in falling behind companies that do.

Expecting something else from them is, perhaps, ill considered.

Online envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5319
  • Liked: 3159
  • Likes Given: 1589
...But these "views" (complaints IMO) offered by SpaceX are pathetic for their completely incorrect representation of facts.

In other words, SpaceX is stooping to Ariane's level.

Yes, and that is why it is pathetic IMO. I had expected better from SpaceX.

Considering Musk's twitter exchanges with Bezos and Roscosmos, I'm not sure why you would think he would let Ariane's repeated whining about SpaceX being subsidized go unanswered. He's not really one to take the high road or ignore the competition.

Offline matthewkantar

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1028
  • Liked: 791
  • Likes Given: 847
It feels like SpaceX is trolling.

Tags: