...Lesson for Nasa! US Airmail and Aviation

Rand Simberg wrote:

Derek Lyons wrote:

So....what is the market/cargo for space?

That is, of course, the heart of the problem. Where there is a market
- comsats of various kinds - there is substantial investment and
interest; where there isn't one, or where at the very least no one has
thought of one, there's no investment and no interest (in the financial
world).

And there has been about a billion dollars of investment in private
space vehicles recently.

So?

So, significant money disagrees with Mr. Oldover (not surprising, since
most sensible people do).

Significant money disagreed with those who thought the dot com era
might become the dot bomb era. (And your reply, as quoted below,
indicates that Mr Oldover is in fact correct, the money didn't come
from the financial world - it came from the goverment.)

And I find it fascinating how you define 'sensible people' as 'people
who agree with your world view'.

Furthermore, much of the investment in private space is represented by
a few individuals - not the broader financial world.

Much of that money is state government money.

Oh? What private vehicles did which states invest in?

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

Rand Simberg wrote:
wrote:

If space can provide
something else cheaper and better than you can get it on Earth, that
will attract investment too. What it might be I can't imagine, but
where you need to focus energy on is imagining it.

That says much more about the paucity of your imagination than about the
nature or reality of space markets.

Lacking anything valid to say, you just hurl insults. That kind of
speaks for itself.

Significant money disagreed with those who thought the dot com era
might become the dot bomb era.

I'm on record as opposing investment in dot coms too - I in fact
forbade my broker from going near them. From the beginning I said that
IMHO the web is a publicity tool, an indexing tool, and a catalogue
service, and not much else. So far that has proven true. Even
successful companies like eBay and Google are cataloguing and indexing
services and nothing else.

Derek Lyons wrote:

And there has been about a billion dollars of investment in private
space vehicles recently.

So?

So, significant money disagrees with Mr. Oldover (not surprising, since
most sensible people do).


Significant money disagreed with those who thought the dot com era
might become the dot bomb era. (And your reply, as quoted below,
indicates that Mr Oldover is in fact correct, the money didn't come
from the financial world - it came from the goverment.)

It came from both.

And I find it fascinating how you define 'sensible people' as 'people
who agree with your world view'.

That is not how I define 'sensible people. I find it fascinating that
you think that it is. Ordover has a long history of being a
non-sensible person.


Furthermore, much of the investment in private space is represented by
a few individuals - not the broader financial world.

Much of that money is state government money.


Oh? What private vehicles did which states invest in?

I misstated it. I meant private space industry more generally, not just
vehicles. I was referring to spaceports.

wrote:

If space can provide
something else cheaper and better than you can get it on Earth, that
will attract investment too. What it might be I can't imagine, but
where you need to focus energy on is imagining it.

That says much more about the paucity of your imagination than about the
nature or reality of space markets.

Lacking anything valid to say, you just hurl insults.

No, while I occasionally insult when I think it appropriate, I rarely
"just" do so. And in this case, I simply describe reality, logically
derived from your own statement.

wrote:

And there has been about a billion dollars of investment in private
space vehicles recently.


So?

So, significant money disagrees with Mr. Oldover (not surprising, since
most sensible people do).


That money is from billionaire hobbyists, not investors.

It is from both. It is also from state governments. Though, as Derek
Lyons noted, I should have said private space industry, not just vehicles.

That money is from billionaire hobbyists, not investors.

It is from both. It is also from state governments. Though, as Derek
Lyons noted, I should have said private space industry, not just vehicles.

So let's talk vehicles, since I've never said there isn't investment in
space industry - comsats are responsible for a lot of investment - just
that I haven't seen any significant investment in space vehciles
outside of government "boutique" projects and billionaire hobbyists.
My friends in the financial industry say there is basically none.

If you're claiming there is, please provide the source of your evidence
so it can be evaluated.

Just as a side note, multiple billions were poured down the Enron
drain, and that's just one example. You can't judge the viability of
something on the basis of how much investment it attracts, which is
what the poster above was talking about when he brought up dotcoms.
The amount of money "invested" in gambling by patrons of Las Vegas
casinos despite posted odds against them kind of proves that.

wrote in message
ups.com...
I'm on record as opposing investment in dot coms too - I in fact
forbade my broker from going near them. From the beginning I said that
IMHO the web is a publicity tool, an indexing tool, and a catalogue
service, and not much else. So far that has proven true. Even
successful companies like eBay and Google are cataloguing and indexing
services and nothing else.

I think that "cataloguing and indexing services and nothing else" is an
extremely narrow view of how money is being made on the Internet. Many
people like myself have completely replaced ordering from catalogs with
ordering from the web.

While many people do sell and buy things on eBay, the web is also to be the
easiest way to book vacations, search for houses, and buy specialty items
that may not be available locally. These sorts of activities deprive middle
men like travel agents and real estate agents of income.

But I doubt these sources of direct income from the Internet account for
most of the money being "made on the Internet". I suspect that most of the
income being made from the Internet is indirect.

Many companies use the Internet to enable "24 hour development", which
really means, move US jobs to India and China. These companies may not
directly profit from sales on the Internet, but they do profit from
outsourcing jobs overseas. Just about any job that involves working with a
computer all day can be moved overseas. I ought to know since the company I
work for has been moving jobs overseas for years. We just opened a brand
new building in India, while the Cincinnati office I work at has shrunk from
two buildings down to one, and we've got a lot of empty offices and cubicles
in this building.

I'd guess the money made from the Internet enabled outsourcing of jobs to
countries outside the US is more than the money being made by "cataloguing
and indexing services", which would include Internet sales and companies
like Google that make money from online ads. Unfortunately, it's really
hard to say how much outsourcing of jobs overseas is enabled by the
Internet. US companies tend to be tight lipped about how much money they're
really spending on outsourcing overseas due to the public backlash over
things like call centers and customer support centers in India.

Jeff
--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor
safety"
- B. Franklin, Bartlett's Familiar Quotations (1919)

In article ,
Derek Lyons wrote:
Much of that money is state government money.

Oh? What private vehicles did which states invest in?

For starters, much of Rocketplane's funding came from a state tax credit.
(In Oklahoma, such credits are transferable, meaning that they are salable
assets with substantial cash value.)
--
spsystems.net is temporarily off the air; | Henry Spencer
mail to henry at zoo.utoronto.ca instead. |

Derek Lyons ) wrote:
: Rand Simberg wrote:

: wrote:
: v
:
: A market! A cargo! The US Airmail.
:
: So....what is the market/cargo for space?
:
:
: That is, of course, the heart of the problem. Where there is a market
: - comsats of various kinds - there is substantial investment and
: interest; where there isn't one, or where at the very least no one has
: thought of one, there's no investment and no interest (in the financial
: world).
:
: And there has been about a billion dollars of investment in private
: space vehicles recently.

: So? There was a massive amount of capital invested in railroads too
: back in day. (Much of it lost.) There was also massive amounts of
: capital invested in the dot-bombs, (and much of it too was lost).

: Furthermore, much of the investment in private space is represented by
: a few individuals - not the broader financial world.

: (But then, such facts and complications don't fit neatly into a
: typical Randian one-liner sound bite.)

Yes, Rand does use the KISS theory doesn't he? With the emphasis on
'stupid'. hahaha

Eric

: D.
: --
: Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

: -Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
: Oct 5th, 2004 JDL