Virgin Galactic, Branson's space venture

[mikegarrison]

Amazon lost money for what, 15 years? And now how profitable are they?

This "simple math" is probably *too* simple. I'm not saying I expect them to be making money next quarter or anything, and they may never make money, but developing a flight vehicle is very expensive. That doesn't mean you keep spending money at that rate after it has been developed.

[tater]

51 minutes ago, mikegarrison said:

Amazon lost money for what, 15 years? And now how profitable are they?

This "simple math" is probably *too* simple. I'm not saying I expect them to be making money next quarter or anything, and they may never make money, but developing a flight vehicle is very expensive. That doesn't mean you keep spending money at that rate after it has been developed.

Absolutely true, but the use case here is the consumer base of people who can spend almost a half a million bucks on a 12 min ride. Seems unlikely they can book 730 seats a year—to break even—in market can also choose BO. Then do it for years.

At the end of the 15 years of loss, Amazon had a rather huge market in front of them… not sure that’s true of space tourism at the suborbital for $$$$$$$$$$ level

Edited February 23, 2022 by tater

[tater]

If it could turn into a mass market, then yeah, all bets are off.

[tater]

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20211022005196/en/Global-Sub-Orbital-Space-Tourism-Market-Analysis-and-Research-Report-2021-2031---ResearchAndMarkets.com

Quote

The global sub-orbital space tourism market is estimated to reach $396.6 million in 2031, at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 24.46% during the forecast period 2021-2031.

Assuming this is correct, and Virgin still burns only $80M/quarter (which is with 1 spaceship, and 1 in dev, vs supposedly 6+ later), then Virgin would need to secure ~80% of the market to break even.

[tater]

 

[tater]

 

[mikegarrison]

27 minutes ago, tater said:

 

I'm pretty sure I mentioned this before, but they are clearly making use of the hard point built on every 747 wing that was originally intended as a way to ferry around a 5th engine.

[tater]

2 hours ago, mikegarrison said:

I'm pretty sure I mentioned this before, but they are clearly making use of the hard point built on every 747 wing that was originally intended as a way to ferry around a 5th engine.

Learn something new every day:

Cool.

[tater]

 

[tater]

 

13 hours:

 

[tater]

Forgot to check stream... apparently scrubbed tonight.

[tater]

 

[tater]

Music is on, takeoff in ~20 m

 

Drop is about an hour after takeoff. Yeesh. 1:20 of coverage? Hard pass.

[tater]

Worked, apparently.

[tater]

 

 

[StrandedonEarth]

Sounding like VMS Eve is showing her age…

I wonder if a mothership capable of flying higher could eke out enough performance gain to actually get SS3 to 100km….

Not that they said anything about a higher release point, just spitballing…

[tater]

 

[tater]

 

[tater]

NET Jan 9

[Beccab]

First ever orbital launch from Europe! I'm still astonished that over 75 years after Sputnik it still hasn't happened yet

[tater]

2 hours:

https://youtu.be/5Co18HcyqHk

(embeds on NSF, says it won't here)

 

 

 

[tater]

Taking off right now.

[tater]

Not dropping for like 50 minutes. Yawn

[GuessingEveryDay]

How long have they had the interpreters there? Currently one of my favorite companies as they are the only ones with interpreters for the deaf.

[tater]

2 minutes ago, GuessingEveryDay said:

How long have they had the interpreters there? Currently one of my favorite companies as they are the only ones with interpreters for the deaf.

Wow, you could answer a question I thought of when I noticed that: Is having an interpreter actually easier to follow than closed captions?

I watch plenty of shows in other languages with subtitles, and while it sometimes distracts from the visuals, I'd assume—as someone who doesn't sign—that watching a person might take even more focus... but of course I am clueless, and have no experience.