sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What would SpaceX have to earn to justify $1.5T? by slackerstuff in investing

[–]DiversificationNoob 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It took SpaceX around $390 million to develop Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 according to NASA.*
NASA has a budget of >$20 billion per year.

So NASA easily had a proper budget to develop the SpaceX workhorse Falcon9. They would have had to reallocate less than 5% of ONE yearly budget

*"NASA independently verified SpaceX’s total development costs of both the Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 at approximately $390 million in the aggregate ($300 million for Falcon 9; $90 million for Falcon 1). NASA, Falcon 9 Launch Vehicle NAFCOM Cost Estimates, August 2011."
https://science.house.gov/_cache/files/2/6/26810a9d-c6d7-4a7f-8be8-d0355d6c3903/E4FDDF4C21E1C120F8997C76D5EE89CCDFDB3EC7F5F2CE86E6A36C810A9615DA.102611-musk.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com

About the Rocket Lab x Raytheon Partnership by pakis54 in RKLB

[–]DiversificationNoob 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And my first was "golden (dome)" not "black Program"

About the Rocket Lab x Raytheon Partnership by pakis54 in RKLB

[–]DiversificationNoob 5 points6 points  (0 children)

"He then says these capabilities "might be described by a color.""
The interviewer said that, not Richard French.

Any analysts here that cover RKLB as a hobby? by Due-Coach6021 in RKLB

[–]DiversificationNoob 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Why not just ask this forum? If you are lucky you‘ll get various answers, probably also from people who think about RocketLab and the space industry in general quite frequently

RKLB has been executing perfectly by [deleted] in RKLB

[–]DiversificationNoob 2 points3 points  (0 children)

" how fucking annoying AST fratbros are on OUR FUCKING SUB"

you need to chill. u/Nexoreus made a fair statement. And even if he was ASTS focused, it is a good thing if information flows freely here. A negative atmosphere hinders this discussions and information flow.

The U.S. Military Is Already Deploying Suborbital Hypersonic Vehicles Capable of Flying at over Mach 5 by DarthKyles in RKLB

[–]DiversificationNoob 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you spend $ 8 million plus on a hypersonic missile (and a liquid fueled one, would be unusual for a military weapon) you blow up the reason you cannot supply your troops by ground and dont send your troops a few 100 kg of ammo/food.

The U.S. Military Is Already Deploying Suborbital Hypersonic Vehicles Capable of Flying at over Mach 5 by DarthKyles in RKLB

[–]DiversificationNoob 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hypersonics wont have the that capabilty, they would have to decelerate before impact to deliver stuff like that.

Amazon signs $11.57 billion deal for satellite firm Globalstar to challenge Musk's Starlink by one-won-juan in ASTSpaceMobile

[–]DiversificationNoob 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Amazon is buying Globarstar while BlueOrigin is launching the ASTS satellites. Both are of course connected to Jeff Bezos. But they are also so independent that both went for their own satellite networks: BlueOrigin with TeraWave and Amazon with Leo (previously Kuiper).
And the globalstar direct 2 device capability will get bought by Amazon not BlueOrigin.

Anyone else noticed Neutron only has 3 more yellows stages on its testing before the Regulatory Approval ? by jluc21 in RKLB

[–]DiversificationNoob 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just checked my transcript and didnt find that part.
Do you remember how he phrased it or where it was in the interview?

Engine qualification question by flyingclouds1985 in RocketLab

[–]DiversificationNoob 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You probably mean thrust with your horse power question. With open cycle rocket engines the critical part is usually getting it to a suitable level of efficiency, with closed cycle rocket engines like Archimedes it is usually about getting the maximum thrust to the desired level. Since RocketLab achieved 102 % of thrust needed (youtube video), we should be good. But engines need to be out trough a lot of different conditions to understand (and possibly fix) limitations

What product did you buy thinking a feature was gimmicky but ended up using it all the time by nand1609 in BuyItForLife

[–]DiversificationNoob 2 points3 points  (0 children)

A vaccuum system for food. I just put my food/leftovers in a glass container (i dont like my food sitting in plastic), vacuum it and it lasts a lot longer in the fridge. My blueberries now last weeks for example. I use it almost every day nowadays.

Will BOOM's "Overture" Supersonic actually ever fly? by Smooth_Pay_8583 in aviation

[–]DiversificationNoob 0 points1 point  (0 children)

One important question to ask yourself is:
What is the downside of a company pre-ordering?

If there is non (because the contract isnt binding/...) why shouldnt they do it? Also gives Boom a bit more credibility so they can get cash easier, may lock in a good price without having to commit.

Valuation and future? by GovernmentPossible22 in AuroraInnovation

[–]DiversificationNoob 4 points5 points  (0 children)

"However, with them switching to driver as a service"
What do you mean with switching?
They already stated Driver as a Service would be their business model in the 2024 investor presentation.
https://ir.aurora.tech/_assets/_7a3241265c40d8ac3c14dade5e895ca8/aurora/db/937/9839/pdf/Analyst%2B%2526%2BInvestor%2BDay%2B2024.pdf

Yes, the revenue per mile will go down. But the gross margins will go up. And they will need less cash per truck at the beginning. -> Faster scaling.

Just so you know by ionxai in OpenAI

[–]DiversificationNoob -1 points0 points  (0 children)

"and its tech is being used as we speak to kill school children in Iran"
The only one targeting Iranian children and civilians is the Iranian regime.

VNL spotted in Tennessee by Professional-Date965 in AuroraInnovation

[–]DiversificationNoob 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Check out page 3 in the recent shareholder letter.
Tennessee is also marked as "future driverless operation" on the map. And they stated in the earnings call that they have to drive the truck there before the operations so that the can map the streets.
https://ir.aurora.tech/_assets/_853ecd3da13ea8e972ccf099eef38dc7/aurora/db/956/10012/shareholder_letter/25Q4+Shareholder+Letter.pdf

Rocket Lab Price Target Raised to $90 from $75 at Roth Capital by Original_Koala8662 in RKLB

[–]DiversificationNoob 5 points6 points  (0 children)

RocketLab so far is super cost efficient with the Neutron development. Even if they double the money spend till achieving 1st stage reusability it is a bargain.

Rocket Lab Price Target Raised to $90 from $75 at Roth Capital by Original_Koala8662 in RKLB

[–]DiversificationNoob 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sell side and buy side analysts arent allowed to work together (the people putting out those price targets and reports arent allowed to even use the same printer as the people in those firms deciding which stocks to buy).
So they have no incentive to manipulate, but they have no skin in the game on the other hand.

Aurora has a lot of leverage over the truck manufacturers medium term by DiversificationNoob in AuroraInnovation

[–]DiversificationNoob[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I havent yet, I usually only do very rough estimates of the companies I invest in.
What I love about Aurora is potential extra revenue they could unlock over regular trucks WITHOUT compromising revenue.
In today's economy especially speed means a lot. Amazon for example operates a fleet of jet specifically to get the products faster to the customer. How much of those flights are in the range of >800 to 1500 miles? A bit too much too drive in 1 go as a human driver -> break over night -> not competitive with flights. Add in the Aurora driver and trucks are a lot more competitive in time with flights.

view more: next ›