Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

DBDude t1_jadsn35 wrote

Looks like Starlink revenue may slightly surpass launch revenue, but that Starlink program also has a massive cost, as it'll take up about twice as many launches as SpaceX is getting paid for, plus the cost of the satellites.

10

Adeldor t1_jaewmj7 wrote

A few months ago I had a go at calculating the annual costs of the currently operating satellites. It doesn't factor in launch pad and other non-recurring and standing costs, but it does give an idea. I repeat it below:


  • Currently ~3000 satellites at ~$250k each, and each lasting 5 years
  • One Falcon 9 launches ~50 satellites, at a marginal launch cost of $15,000,000 (used booster + fairings)

So, total launch cost is:

  • $250,000 * 50 + $15,000,000 = $27,500,000, or $550,000 per satellite
  • The satellites last 5 years, so the per year cost is $110,000 per satellite

Thus, for all 3000 satellites, the current annual cost to build and launch is ~$330,000,000.

Of course, they're adding satellites, version 2 is coming out, Starship will reduce marginal launch costs by maybe an order of magnitude, ground operations and development costs are not included here, blah blah blah. Nevertheless, this might give a glimpse of the expense side.

13

Bewaretheicespiders t1_jae0xx8 wrote

Shotwell said they expect Starlink to become profitable this year. The Spacex launch cost for Starlink must be significantly less than what they charge for a flight to external clients, since they dont have the cost of dealing with the client, and taking their profit margin into account.

10

SharpShockDimonds t1_jaeamq7 wrote

I really hope it's never taken public. It would all go downhill.

9

zeeblecroid t1_jaeg4t9 wrote

Yeah, "IPO" and "company built around long-term plans" are mutually exclusive, especially nowadays.

12

SharpShockDimonds t1_jaep4hn wrote

It's sad and scary that things not having any public input are the more trustworthy organizations

1

zeeblecroid t1_jaes608 wrote

I wouldn't say "more trustworthy" as much as "less likely to be burned to the ground by equity firms and other next-quarter-only types."

9

SharpShockDimonds t1_jaesmj6 wrote

So more trustworthy. Being more likely to be burned to the ground by private equity sounds about as untrustworthy as you can get.

0

Bewaretheicespiders t1_jadri7k wrote

> we expect that a IPO scenario is likely over the next 18-24 months.

Is it the right market timing for an IPO though?

8

TimJoyce t1_jaf1c4k wrote

Companies seem to be betting on IPO window opening agaim late this year. If I’m not mistaken Reddit is aiming to IPO.

6