View Single Post
  #4  
Old July 17th 18, 05:07 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,018
Default Soyuz fueling

JF Mezei wrote on Mon, 16 Jul 2018
23:03:08 -0400:

On 2018-07-16 18:42, Fred J. McCall wrote:

Cite? It's irrelevant, but I'm curious how you arrive at that
conclusion.


Until the merger transaction is signed, the 2 companies remain separate
and there are a number of legal reasons, including anti-trust (until
approved, the merger cannot proceed, and the 2 companies must be able to
continue to operate as separate entities should merger be rejected).


Not what you said at all, which is why you 'cleverly' omit your
original statement. You need to learn the difference between
'announcing intent to merge' and 'announcing a merger'.


So while the merger may have been announed a long time ago, NASA would
have continued to use "Orbital ATK" in its publications because that is
the company which ran the Antares/Cygnus service that was contracted
with NASA.


Again, you need to learn the difference between 'announcing intent to
merge' and 'announcing a merger'.


The transaction closed on June 6 2018, despite being announced in
September 2017.


Bzzzt!! Thanks for playing.

snip nonsense


--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn