SpaceX

[Alex_II]

LRV_75 пишет:
С кем Вы предпочтете вести бизнес - с компанией, для которой ваши задачи являются внизу их приоритетов (вверху у них поиск инвесторов для начала финансирования создания ITS) или с компанией для которой ваша задача является на одном уровне приоритетов?

А это совершенно похрену всем - их интересует цена и возможное время запуска, а не ITS... Если цена и дата запуска их устраивают - то занимайся Маск как высшим приоритетом хоть постройкой варп-двигателя - всем будет pohui... А вот если не устраивает - то даже будь у Маска приоритет облизывания заказчиков высшим - все равно разбегутся. Если найдут КУДА... Ну не на Протон же... Хотя там кажется китайцы какой-то международный коммерческий сервис типа ILS мутят - могут выйти достойные конкуренты (со временем)...

[LRV_75]

Alex_II пишет:
А про Луну - вообще смешно- каким хером наше обсуждение относится к приоритетам Трампа?

За темой не следите.
Как только команда Трампа начала говорить что то о Луне, тут же в теме ITS Валерий начал приспосабливать ITS под Луну 
А то, что команда Трампа заговорит о смене приоритетов с Марса на Луну я говорил в ноябре 2016 

ps: Да, а мудака, ты каждый день видишь в зеркале

[Alex_II]

LRV_75 пишет:
Как только команда Трампа начала говорить что то о Луне, тут же в теме ITS Валерий начал приспосабливать ITS под Луну

Мальчик, ты СОВСЕМ дурак? При каком хере тут Валерий? Ты на нем ебанулся, как Not на Маске? Не он заговорил об ITS для Луны...

LRV_75 пишет:
ps: Да, а мудака, ты каждый день видишь в зеркале

Никак не получится - у меня же зеркало, а не монитор, я тебя в нем увидеть не могу - тебя сюда и петлей на шее не затащишь...

[LRV_75]

Alex_II пишет:

LRV_75 пишет:
Как только команда Трампа начала говорить что то о Луне, тут же в теме ITS Валерий начал приспосабливать ITS под Луну    

Мальчик, ты СОВСЕМ дурак? При каком хере тут Валерий? Ты на нем ебанулся, как Not на Маске? Не он заговорил об ITS для Луны...

Он это подхватил на волне смены парадигмы с Марса на Луну http://novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/forum/messages/forum10/topic14683/message1605593/#message1605593
И понеслась     

Это не означает, что ITS не может использоваться для освоения Луны. Вероятно, будет некая модификация корабля, и, возможно, чтобы компенсировать невозможность заправиться на окололунной орбите, некоторые "танкеры" будут доработаны для использования в качестве первой ступени при перелёте к Луне, но, в основном, это всё та же ITS.

Валерий Жилинский пишет: 

Алексей Кириенко пишет: 
Ну вы и увлеклись !... Не пора ли новую тему "Лунная альтернатива Mars Colonial Transporter " создавать?

Это, скорее, не "Лунная альтернатива", а лунные перспективы ITS. 

     Ох, юмора


Потом кто то в теме ITS начал говорить про Марс и Валерий обвинил его в оффтопес заявлениями - ПРИЧЕМ ТУТ МАРС???          
В общем, это свойственно больным, которые слишком заигрываются игрой в Наполеона   

[Grus]

LRV_75 пишет:
ps: Да, а мудака, ты каждый день видишь в зеркале

А может вы все-таки перестанете здесь бессмысленно пачкать?

[Alex_II]

Grus пишет:
А может вы все-таки перестанете здесь бессмысленно пачкать?

Ему видимо просто больше погадить негде... Канализация у него дома забита что ли?

[Alex_II]

LRV_75 пишет:
В общем, это свойственно больным, которые слишком заигрываются игрой в Наполеона  

Ты о себе? Как самокритично...

[LRV_75]

Grus пишет:

LRV_75 пишет:
ps: Да, а мудака, ты каждый день видишь в зеркале

А может вы все-таки перестанете здесь бессмысленно пачкать

Как я понял Вы сообщения избирательно читаете

[LRV_75]

Alex_II пишет:

Grus пишет:
А может вы все-таки перестанете здесь бессмысленно пачкать?

Ему видимо просто больше погадить негде... Канализация у него дома забита что ли?

Алекс_2, начните с себя. Или в вашем вагончике канализации нет в принципе?

Alex_II пишет: 
Сам себя не похвалишь - никто тебя (мудака) не похвалит? Возможности он оценил, мля...

[Alex_II]

LRV_75 пишет:
Или в вашем вагончике канализации нет в принципе?

Разумеется нет... Так что всё как в деревне...
Но гадишь на форуме почему-то ты... Хотя надо полагать обитаешь в городской квартире...

[Salo]

http://www.nsr.com/news-resources/the-bottom-line/not-so-fast-spacex/?utm_source=Satellite+and+all+NSR+News&utm_campaign=b5e58eaea3-LP.BL.SX_1.22.2017&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_ff2c5c9f7f-b5e58eaea3-186129061

Not So Fast SpaceX!
 Jan 22nd, 2017 by Lluc Palerm-Serra   More fr om this Analyst | Profile
 
 Facebook Tweet LinkedIn Email
             
In the prelude of the recent SpaceX successful launch for Iridium, The Wall Street Journal released a story analyzing SpaceX's financials and internal growth projections. While the historical figures presented seem reasonable, the article included several shocking statements fr om SpaceX, most notably the forecast of more than $30 Billion annual revenues by 2025 for the nascent satellite internet constellation project. Are these assumptions realistic? One must not forget that public communications are part of a company's strategy. What then are the implications for the Satellite Industry?
 How Much is $30 Billion in Revenue?
It is sometimes difficult to assess a number without any appropriate reference, so let's start by surrounding this projection with some context. While it is not clear at all what is included in those projections (end-user terminals, satellite raw capacity, end-to-end service...), we could start by comparing them to the industry's capacity revenues. NSR's Global Satellite Capacity Supply and Demand, 13th Edition report assesses satellite capacity revenues to have been $13.8 Billion in 2015, and forecast them to reach  $19.7 B by 2025. One must consider, however, that a great proportion of these revenues come from video-centric applications, which does not seem to be the target for SpaceX constellations. Even considering end-user terminals and service revenues, SpaceX's projections for its own revenues are higher than previous forecasts for the entire Data-centric applications market.
                                                                                                                         
Opening the focus a bit more, at the end of the day the SatCom Industry is just a part of the greater telecommunications industry. How do SpaceX's projections compare to the size of the greater telecom industry? If the revenue projections were met, SpaceX would enter the Top 20 list of largest telecom operators after just a few years of operations.
 

Assuming the constellation is launched in the 2019-20 timeframe (let's keep the discussion simple and assume all technical challenges are solved), the SpaceX satellite internet business would become the fastest enterprise ever to cross the $1 B benchmark after entering commercial operations (WSJ article assumes ~$3 B revs in 2020). To date, the company that broke the $1 B revs barrier the earliest is Groupon, followed by a number of dotcom companies, all of them requiring more than 2 years to get there. While SpaceX can already start working on selling capacity, the scalability of the business model is much more arduous than most dotcom businesses.
 

What Would It Take to Get There?
Now that we have in context the magnitude of the challenge to reach the forecasted level of revenues, it is time to consider what the steps might be to get there. WSJ's article notes that SpaceX expects to attract over 40 M subscribers by 2025. The largest satellite Internet network today is operated by HughesNet, which has slightly above 1M subs after nearly a decade of operation. Combining ViaSat's Exede and HughesNet, the year with the highest number of new subscribers was in the 300-350,000 range, which hints at how difficult it is to build the distribution channels for this kind of service. Of course, cheap, self-installation terminals and a global operation infrastructure could accelerate service take-up, but it appears very difficult to reach the 40M installed base in just 5 years. Compounding all of the above, one must not forget regulatory barriers as SpaceX would need to pursue landing rights in each and every country it wants to operate.
While the addressable market for unconnected and under-connected households is still massive—NSR's VSAT and Broadband Satellite Markets, 15th Edition report estimates 471M households could potentially be connected—the majority of those are in low-income countries wh ere it is challenging to close the business case, and wh ere ARPU levels will be very small. Would a subsidy model work in those locations? Taking as a reference internet.org's experience, after 3 years of operations it has 40M free Internet users. Facebook, (which, by the way, remains under the $30 B annual revenue benchmark) generates around $12 per active user per year. What fraction of this revenue can be diverted to subsidize connectivity? Can this model be sustainable for SpaceX and the party willing to subsidize the connectivity? What scale would be required to generate the expected level of revenue for SpaceX?
Other satellite communications verticals certainly provide meaningful opportunities, but to achieve such volumes, the bulk of the market needs to come from consumer-oriented products (being through direct connectivity or through aggregation points). Verticals like aero connectivity will grow very fast, but even in this scenario the contribution to the total expectations will be small. In Aeronautical SatCom Markets, 4th Edition, NSR forecasts total satellite capacity revenues (for the whole industry) under $1 Billion by 2025 and approaching airframes addressable market saturation. Similar trends could be seen for maritime, with capacity revenues also under $1 Billion by 2025 (MSM4). Other new applications like High-Frequency Trading might also emerge with new capabilities of LEO constellations, but it seems difficult to see those being the main source of revenues.
 The Business Case
If we assume that most of the constellation demand will come from land areas (e.g. total aero and maritime addressable markets are relatively low compared with the revenue projections), that means that ~3/4 of the time, the satellites would be idle/over water. SpaceX announced capacity of between 17 and 23 Gbps per satellite, so taking an average of 20 Gbps, multiplying by number of satellites, and considering that they are utilized just 25% of the time, we could estimate effective available land-based capacity. Dividing the $30 B revenues by this effective available capacity, one gets average capacity pricing in the range of ~110 USD/Mbps/Month. NSR is aware of contracts for consumer broadband in Europe and Middle East being signed today at under $200 USD/Mbps/Month. These prices will presumably continue to decline, so will the difference in pricing between architectures be so big to justify such elasticity in capacity requirements and revenues?
 Bottom Line
The best way to predict the future is building it, and NSR will only be pleased to see the satellite industry growing to the levels forecasted by SpaceX, as it would be beneficial for everyone. While it is true that forecasting revenues for such innovative ventures has a significant level of uncertainty, NSR nonetheless believes the $30 billion revenue projection is too optimistic no matter what assumptions are made and could stoke unrealistic expectations undermining the industry's credibility.
One must also consider that SpaceX are masters of strategic communications and have repeatedly made extravagant announcements to push analysts, the financial community, the industry and employees in its favor. It is its CEO managing style, the day after he announced a totally unrealistic schedule and sales target for Tesla's Model 3, auto analysts universally moved their own estimates up satisfying what probably was the original goal, shifting the paradigm. SpaceX has said very clearly that it plans a step deployment of the constellation starting commercial operations with a "modest" 800 satellite constellation (compared with the 4,420 of the full deployment), which hints at the venture having different growth scenarios with more reasonable assumptions. When analyzing SpaceX projections, being an investor, a competitor or an industry watcher, one must keep its independence and not fall in this expectations trap. Otherwise, industry's credibility would be at risk.

[Чебурашка]

Mаск вчера в 3-ий раз позавтракал с Trump-ом. Что бы это значило?

 на 01:43

[LRV_75]

Чебурашка пишет:
Mаск вчера в 3-ий раз отобедал с Trump. Что бы это значило?

Обсуждают реальность высадки астронавтов на Марс во время второго срока президентства Трампа ))

[Чебурашка]

Может Маска директором НАСА назначат

[LRV_75]

Чебурашка пишет:
Может Маска директором НАСА назначат  

Только при условии, что Маск весь свой бизнес передаст по управление сына  Валерия ))

[Salo]

https://www.buzzfeed.com/hamzashaban/spacex-uber-reach-new-heights-in-lobbying-spending?utm_term=.hhv260LYb#.crXq2DoV4

SpaceX, Uber Reach New Heights In Lobbying Spending       
But Google reigns over the tech industry.                                    
posted on Jan. 24, 2017, at 7:27 p.m.
 
 Hamza Shaban
 Kena Betancur / AFP / Getty Images   
 
With Martian ambitions but earthly pragmatism, SpaceX spent nearly $2 million on lobbying in 2016, a new high for the gravity-defying upstart. The company met with Congress, the Defense Department, and NASA, among other federal agencies, to discuss issues central to its business like commercial space transportation and NASA funding.
SpaceX founder Elon Musk was recently tapped by President Trump to serve as an economic adviser, along with Uber CEO Travis Kalanick. Musk met with Trump on Monday along with a cadre of industry chieftains that included Dell CEO Michael Dell and the head of Ford, Mark Fields. During the two-hour meeting, Trump asked the business leaders for ideas to grow the US economy and to list the obstacles preventing them from hiring more workers and expanding their operations, according to White House press secretary Sean Spicer.
In 2016, Uber spent nearly $1.4 million lobbying Congress, traffic safety regulators, and US trade officials, nearly tripling its expenditures from the year before, according to federal lobbying disclosures due Monday. The company dwarfed what it spent in 2015, which totaled $470,000.
Not only did Uber cross the $1 million mark for the first time, but it continues to tower over ride-hail rival Lyft as far as lobbying money is concerned. Lyft spent $250,000 on federal lobbying last year, a significant increase from its 2015 total, at $30,000, but still a way's off from Uber.
AT&T, whose proposed merger with Time Warner was quickly denounced by Trump on the campaign trail, has also spent big in 2016. The media and communications titan racked up $16.4 in lobbying last year, topping its 2015 total by $1.5 million. In the months after the $85.4 billion mega-deal was announced, AT&T spent $3.7 million lobbying the House and the Senate on a wide range of issues including surveillance, arbitration in consumer contracts, and cybersecurity.
While the AT&T–Time Warner deal undergoes a lengthy Justice Department review, the merger may ultimately serve as a major test of Trump's campaign promises. In October, Trump condemned the merger, describing the deal as an undue concentration of media power. Since then, antitrust and media experts have been left pondering whether Trump's initial statements would lead to a White House skeptical of mergers and inclined to shield consumer, or if Trump would simply revert to the traditionally Republican stance of deregulation.
Earlier this month, Trump appeared to soften his position on the merger, even as he admitted to a lack of knowledge of the deal. "I have been on the record in the past of saying it's too big and we have to keep competition," he told Axios. "So, but other than that, I haven't, you know, I haven't seen any of the facts, yet. I'm sure that will be presented to me and to the people within government."
With or without Trump's blessing, AT&T must win the approval of the Justice Department to proceed, but it is unclear who will lead the agency's antitrust division. Whoever is chosen to fill that role, like the attorney general, requires Senate confirmation. Trump's pick for the nation's chief lawyer and law enforcement officer, Sen. Jeff Sessions, has not yet been approved by the Senate.
In the last quarter of 2016, only four corporations in the US spent more money lobbying than AT&T.
Google once again led the tech industry in Beltway cash, spending over $3.5 million in the final months of the Obama era. Google was the sixth-biggest spender of any corporation, behind only AT&T and a handful of industry giants that included Boeing and Comcast. In 2016 Google spent $15.4 million lobbying on issues like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (nixed by Trump on Monday), immigration, email privacy, and encryption.
Amazon and Microsoft came next. With lobbying expenditures of more than $2.6 million, Amazon ranked 13th overall and second only to Google in tech. The Treasury Department and the Federal Aviation Administration were among the agencies that Amazon lobbied in the fourth quarter of 2016. Amazon's issues included corporate taxation, drone privacy, and cloud computing. Microsoft ranked third in the tech industry and 16th overall, forking over $2.4 million.
Oracle followed, spending $2 million and ranking 27th overall. Hewlett Packard was close behind at $1.8 million and in the 31st position.
Facebook's lobbying spend was down for both the fourth quarter (compared to 2015) and for the entire year of 2016. Facebook spent $1.7 million in the last quarter of 2016 compared to $2.1 million in 2015. And the social network tallied $8.7 million for all of 2016, while it spent just under $10 million in 2015. Facebook lobbied the White House, Congress, and federal agencies on high-tech worker visas, terrorism, and government surveillance, in addition to other concerns.
Apple's spending for the quarter and the year roughly tracks its 2015 figures: about $1.4 million for the fourth quarter and $4.7 million for the year. Apple's disclosures listed energy efficiency standards, encryption, and the regulation of mobile medical apps as issues the company lobbied. The iPhone maker held meetings with the office of the president, Congress, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Commerce Department, among other federal agencies.

[LRV_75]

Elon MuskПодлинная учетная запись‏@elonmusk

Please read immigration order. Lmk specific amendments. Will seek advisory council consensus & present to President.

[Чебурашка]

А после 16-часового рабочего дня сотрудники SpaceX, чтобы не расслабляться, копают  

https://www.gazeta.ru/tech/news/2017/01/31/n_9629477.shtml

Глава SpaceX и Tesla Илон Маск запустил работы по строительству подземного тоннеля в Лос-Анджелесе возле офиса одной из его компаний. Об этом пишет Wired.
На прошедших выходных в рамках эксперимента возле SpaceX рабочие вырыли тоннель шириной 30 футов и длиной 50 футов. Глубина траншеи составила 15 футов.
Пока что неизвестно, куда именно будет вести тоннель — к офису Tesla или в аэропорт.

[Not]

Чебурашка пишет:
А после 16-часового рабочего дня сотрудники SpaceX, чтобы не расслабляться, копают    

 https://www.gazeta.ru/tech/news/2017/01/31/n_9629477.shtml

Глава SpaceX и Tesla Илон Маск запустил работы по строительству подземного тоннеля в Лос-Анджелесе возле офиса одной из его компаний. Об этом пишет Wired.
На прошедших выходных в рамках эксперимента возле SpaceX рабочие вырыли тоннель шириной 30 футов и длиной 50 футов. Глубина траншеи составила 15 футов.
Пока что неизвестно, куда именно будет вести тоннель — к офису Tesla или в аэропорт.

В рамках эксперимента Маск выкопал яму 10 на 15 метров и назвал ее туннелем.  

[Чебурашка]

Not пишет:
В рамках эксперимента Маск выкопал яму 10 на 15 метров и назвал ее туннелем.

Шахтный вариант Фалькона прямо возле офиса?