Space Tourism a con job?

http://www.spacenews.com/commentarie...rism-hoax.html

"Today, a number of con men are selling tickets for spaceflights to
innocent people who are fairly rich and longing for adventure. Even
reputable newspapers do not question the basis on which these offers and
investments in facilities are made.
The space tourism vendors are selling impossible dreams of space flights
for $20,000 or even $200,000 a ticket.
Let us be clear: These tickets concern flights into Earth orbit — not
20-minute jumps to high altitude, which is something else, and not, as
some claim, a precursor to orbital spaceflight.
It is disheartening to see NASA, which knows better, participating in
these games."

This is about my take on it also.

On Nov 19, 8:29*pm, Pat Flannery wrote:
http://www.spacenews.com/commentarie...rism-hoax.html

"Today, a number of con men are selling tickets for spaceflights to
innocent people who are fairly rich and longing for adventure. Even
reputable newspapers do not question the basis on which these offers and
investments in facilities are made.
The space tourism vendors are selling impossible dreams of space flights
for $20,000 or even $200,000 a ticket.
Let us be clear: These tickets concern flights into Earth orbit — not
20-minute jumps to high altitude, which is something else, and not, as
some claim, a precursor to orbital spaceflight.
It is disheartening to see NASA, which knows better, participating in
these games."

This is about my take on it also.

Suborbital = joy ride
Orbital = A trip to see the globe
Interplanetary by chemical propulsion = whole body irradiation
Interplanetary by nuclear propulsion = a trip to see another globe
Interplanetary robotic mission = photos of a trip to see another globe

wrote in message
...


Suborbital = joy ride
Orbital = A trip to see the globe
Interplanetary by chemical propulsion = whole body irradiation
Interplanetary by nuclear propulsion = a trip to see another globe
Interplanetary robotic mission = photos of a trip to see another globe


There's a trend that makes financing the early orbital tourism flights
a problem I think. The early flights will be the most expensive.
Meaning the early flights will be chock full of the ....rich and famous
during the early /more dangerous/ flights.

The Titanic rises!

Imagine the headlines....Madonna and Spielberg!...Gates and Clinton!
all burned alive upon reentry! Whoopi and Oprah too! What kind
of effect will that scenario have on potential investors?

Only an idiot would invest in such a company until the
technology was proven. Say after twenty or fifty successful
flights.

Pat Flannery wrote:
http://www.spacenews.com/commentarie...rism-hoax.html

"Today, a number of con men are selling tickets for spaceflights to
innocent people who are fairly rich and longing for adventure. Even
reputable newspapers do not question the basis on which these offers and
investments in facilities are made.
The space tourism vendors are selling impossible dreams of space flights
for $20,000 or even $200,000 a ticket.
Let us be clear: These tickets concern flights into Earth orbit — not
20-minute jumps to high altitude, which is something else, and not, as
some claim, a precursor to orbital spaceflight.
It is disheartening to see NASA, which knows better, participating in
these games."

This is about my take on it also.

He may be overstating the case against SSTOs, but even Reaction Engines,
who are pushing their Skylon craft, estimate $40 million per launch with
around a 10 tonne payload. Could we cram in 200 people, to get the
ticket price down to $200,000? No, probably not, unless we forgo trivia
such as life support.

So his numbers certainly seem to stack up for the foreseeable future.

Still, if foolish rich people get separated from some of their money,
I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

Sylvia.

On Nov 21, 9:45*pm, Sylvia Else wrote:
Pat Flannery wrote:
http://www.spacenews.com/commentarie...rism-hoax.html

"Today, a number of con men are selling tickets for spaceflights to
innocent people who are fairly rich and longing for adventure. Even
reputable newspapers do not question the basis on which these offers and
investments in facilities are made.
The space tourism vendors are selling impossible dreams of space flights
for $20,000 or even $200,000 a ticket.
Let us be clear: These tickets concern flights into Earth orbit — not
20-minute jumps to high altitude, which is something else, and not, as
some claim, a precursor to orbital spaceflight.
It is disheartening to see NASA, which knows better, participating in
these games."

This is about my take on it also.

He may be overstating the case against SSTOs, but even Reaction Engines,
who are pushing their Skylon craft, estimate $40 million per launch with
around a 10 tonne payload. Could we cram in 200 people, to get the
ticket price down to $200,000? No, probably not, unless we forgo trivia
such as life support.

So his numbers certainly seem to stack up for the foreseeable future.

Still, if foolish rich people get separated from some of their money,
I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

Sylvia.

Most of that private loot wasn't earned, so it's actually our public
loot that's getting wasted in order to entertain these rich and
powerful folks that are more tax exempt than the Pope.

~ BG

On Nov 22, 12:45*am, Sylvia Else wrote:
Pat Flannery wrote:
http://www.spacenews.com/commentarie...rism-hoax.html

"Today, a number of con men are selling tickets for spaceflights to
innocent people who are fairly rich and longing for adventure. Even
reputable newspapers do not question the basis on which these offers and
investments in facilities are made.
The space tourism vendors are selling impossible dreams of space flights
for $20,000 or even $200,000 a ticket.
Let us be clear: These tickets concern flights into Earth orbit — not
20-minute jumps to high altitude, which is something else, and not, as
some claim, a precursor to orbital spaceflight.
It is disheartening to see NASA, which knows better, participating in
these games."

This is about my take on it also.

He may be overstating the case against SSTOs, but even Reaction Engines,
who are pushing their Skylon craft, estimate $40 million per launch with
around a 10 tonne payload. Could we cram in 200 people, to get the
ticket price down to $200,000? No, probably not, unless we forgo trivia
such as life support.

So his numbers certainly seem to stack up for the foreseeable future.

Still, if foolish rich people get separated from some of their money,
I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

Sylvia.

There is a list of space tourists. So, space tourism is certainly NOT
a con-job. Its a reality

List of flown space tourists

Dennis Tito American 2001 9 days (Apr 28 –
May 6)
Mark Shuttleworth South African / British 2002 11 days (Apr 25 –
May 5)
Gregory Olsen American 2005 11 days (Oct 1 – Oct
11)
Anousheh Ansari Iranian / American 2006 12 days (Sept 18 – Sept
29)
Charles Simonyi Hungarian / American 2007 15 days (Apr 7 – Apr 21)

2009 14 days (Mar 26 – Apr 8)
Richard Garriott American / British 2008 12 days (Oct 12 – Oct
23)
Guy Laliberté Canadian 2009 12 days (Sept 30 –
Oct 11)

There are 10 million millionaires in the world, and over 40,000 people
worth over $30 million. Collectively they control over $40 trillion
in liquid assets. This represents a huge potential market. Also, the
ultra-rich invest their money in 'passion investments' which include
'experential travel' which includes space flight.

That's why I intend to develop a MEMs based lunar launcher to deliver
moon trips to high net worth individuals;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhZb7XDaYts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NlZmUUWvJw

Even though I'm not yet included on this list;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ight_companies

The point is, people spending tens of millions of dollars are not
dummies financially, and so don't need a helluva lot of government
protection. Do we really need laws to protect the 40,000 ultra-high-
net-worth individuals in the world? Why is it an issue? It isn't.
Not really.

They way my plan works is that an individual places $85 million in
escrow, $15 million is non-refundable. When training is delivered and
the first flight articles are completed, another $40 million is non-
refundable, and finally the last $20 million when the moon flight is
ready to take place, then 30 days after delivery of the flight, the
funds are released from escrow. Individuals have use of their money,
and earnings from their money, while they await the flight.

Since costs scale with mass of stage being built, we start with the
smaller upper stages and work our way down. So, even ONE customer is
sufficient to begin the program I have in mind. It follows the same
approach proposed by another rocket pioneer;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBi69V8oNuw

William Mook wrote:
On Nov 22, 12:45 am, Sylvia Else wrote:
Pat Flannery wrote:
http://www.spacenews.com/commentarie...rism-hoax.html
"Today, a number of con men are selling tickets for spaceflights to
innocent people who are fairly rich and longing for adventure. Even
reputable newspapers do not question the basis on which these offers and
investments in facilities are made.
The space tourism vendors are selling impossible dreams of space flights
for $20,000 or even $200,000 a ticket.
Let us be clear: These tickets concern flights into Earth orbit — not
20-minute jumps to high altitude, which is something else, and not, as
some claim, a precursor to orbital spaceflight.
It is disheartening to see NASA, which knows better, participating in
these games."
This is about my take on it also.
He may be overstating the case against SSTOs, but even Reaction Engines,
who are pushing their Skylon craft, estimate $40 million per launch with
around a 10 tonne payload. Could we cram in 200 people, to get the
ticket price down to $200,000? No, probably not, unless we forgo trivia
such as life support.

So his numbers certainly seem to stack up for the foreseeable future.

Still, if foolish rich people get separated from some of their money,
I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

Sylvia.

There is a list of space tourists. So, space tourism is certainly NOT
a con-job. Its a reality

List of flown space tourists

Dennis Tito American 2001 9 days (Apr 28 –
May 6)
Mark Shuttleworth South African / British 2002 11 days (Apr 25 –
May 5)
Gregory Olsen American 2005 11 days (Oct 1 – Oct
11)
Anousheh Ansari Iranian / American 2006 12 days (Sept 18 – Sept
29)
Charles Simonyi Hungarian / American 2007 15 days (Apr 7 – Apr 21)

2009 14 days (Mar 26 – Apr 8)
Richard Garriott American / British 2008 12 days (Oct 12 – Oct
23)
Guy Laliberté Canadian 2009 12 days (Sept 30 –
Oct 11)

There are 10 million millionaires in the world, and over 40,000 people
worth over $30 million. Collectively they control over $40 trillion
in liquid assets. This represents a huge potential market. Also, the
ultra-rich invest their money in 'passion investments' which include
'experential travel' which includes space flight.

That's why I intend to develop a MEMs based lunar launcher to deliver
moon trips to high net worth individuals;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhZb7XDaYts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NlZmUUWvJw

Even though I'm not yet included on this list;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ight_companies

The point is, people spending tens of millions of dollars are not
dummies financially,

And they weren't the focus of the article either. Did you read it?

and so don't need a helluva lot of government
protection. Do we really need laws to protect the 40,000 ultra-high-
net-worth individuals in the world? Why is it an issue? It isn't.
Not really.

They way my plan works is that an individual places $85 million in
escrow, $15 million is non-refundable. When training is delivered and
the first flight articles are completed, another $40 million is non-
refundable, and finally the last $20 million when the moon flight is
ready to take place, then 30 days after delivery of the flight, the
funds are released from escrow. Individuals have use of their money,
and earnings from their money, while they await the flight.

Since costs scale with mass of stage being built, we start with the
smaller upper stages and work our way down. So, even ONE customer is
sufficient to begin the program I have in mind. It follows the same
approach proposed by another rocket pioneer;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBi69V8oNuw


How does any of that address the fact that those currently selling
tickets for $200,000 are not going to be able to deliver in the
foreseeable future?

Sylvia.

On Dec 6, 6:07*pm, Sylvia Else wrote:
William Mook wrote:
On Nov 22, 12:45 am, Sylvia Else wrote:
Pat Flannery wrote:
http://www.spacenews.com/commentarie...rism-hoax.html
"Today, a number of con men are selling tickets for spaceflights to
innocent people who are fairly rich and longing for adventure. Even
reputable newspapers do not question the basis on which these offers and
investments in facilities are made.
The space tourism vendors are selling impossible dreams of space flights
for $20,000 or even $200,000 a ticket.
Let us be clear: These tickets concern flights into Earth orbit not
20-minute jumps to high altitude, which is something else, and not, as
some claim, a precursor to orbital spaceflight.
It is disheartening to see NASA, which knows better, participating in
these games."
This is about my take on it also.
He may be overstating the case against SSTOs, but even Reaction Engines,
who are pushing their Skylon craft, estimate $40 million per launch with
around a 10 tonne payload. Could we cram in 200 people, to get the
ticket price down to $200,000? No, probably not, unless we forgo trivia
such as life support.

So his numbers certainly seem to stack up for the foreseeable future.

Still, if foolish rich people get separated from some of their money,
I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

Sylvia.

There is a list of space tourists. *So, space tourism is certainly NOT
a con-job. *Its a reality

List of flown space tourists

Dennis Tito * * * *American * * * * * * * * * * * *2001 * *9 days (Apr 28
May 6)
Mark Shuttleworth *South African / British * * * * 2002 * *11 days (Apr 25
May 5)
Gregory Olsen * * *American * * * * * * * * * * * *2005 * *11 days (Oct 1 Oct
11)
Anousheh Ansari * *Iranian / American * * *2006 * *12 days (Sept 18 Sept
29)
Charles Simonyi * *Hungarian / American * *2007 * *15 days (Apr 7 Apr 21)

2009 * * * 14 days (Mar 26 Apr 8)
Richard Garriott * American / British * * *2008 * *12 days (Oct 12 Oct
23)
Guy Lalibert * *Canadian * * * * * * * * * * * *2009 * *12 days (Sept 30
Oct 11)

There are 10 million millionaires in the world, and over 40,000 people
worth over $30 million. *Collectively they control over $40 trillion
in liquid assets. *This represents a huge potential market. *Also, the
ultra-rich invest their money in 'passion investments' which include
'experential travel' which includes space flight.

That's why I intend to develop a MEMs based lunar launcher to deliver
moon trips to high net worth individuals;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhZb7XDaYts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NlZmUUWvJw

Even though I'm not yet included on this list;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ight_companies

The point is, people spending tens of millions of dollars are not
dummies financially,

And they weren't the focus of the article either. Did you read it?





and so don't need a helluva lot of government
protection. *Do we really need laws to protect the 40,000 ultra-high-
net-worth individuals in the world? *Why is it an issue? *It isn't.
Not really.

They way my plan works is that an individual places $85 million in
escrow, $15 million is non-refundable. *When training is delivered and
the first flight articles are completed, another $40 million is non-
refundable, and finally the last $20 million when the moon flight is
ready to take place, then *30 days after delivery of the flight, the
funds are released from escrow. *Individuals have use of their money,
and earnings from their money, while they await the flight.

Since costs scale with mass of stage being built, we start with the
smaller upper stages and work our way down. *So, even ONE customer is
sufficient to begin the program I have in mind. *It follows the same
approach proposed by another rocket pioneer;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBi69V8oNuw

How does any of that address the fact that those currently selling
tickets for $200,000 are not going to be able to deliver in the
foreseeable future?

Sylvia.

Well, the SEC and Congress recognizes that certain individuals are
financially sophisticated. The $200,000 price point seems to be
picked with that idea in mind.

Here is what the SEC and Congress has to say;

The definitions accredit some investors based on their income, net
worth, and assets. Natural persons qualify as accredited investors if
they meet certain income or net worth tests. Accredited investors, for
instance, include natural persons with individual incomes in excess of
$200,000 (or joint spousal incomes of $300,000) for the two most
recent years, if they reasonably expect to earn at least the same
amount in the current year. Natural persons with individual (or joint,
with a spouse) net worths over $1 million also are considered to be
accredited investors.

Other investors are accredited if they have more than $5 million of
assets. These generally include state or ERISA employee benefit plans,
charitable organizations or business entities if they were not formed
for the specific purpose of investing in the securities offered, and
trusts if they were not formed for the specific purpose of acquiring
the securities offered and their purchase is directed by a
sophisticated person.

The current accredited investor definition also includes investors
that are financially sophisticated by their nature. These include
various institutional investors and employee benefit plans where
sophisticated fiduciaries make investment decisions. Directors,
executive officers, and general partners of securities issuers also
are accredited, due to their relationship with the issuer, and any
entity where all of its equity owners are accredited investors.

I prefer to use a price point where I sell fewer tickets to ultra-high-
net-worth individuals. The five who will enable a return to the moon
along the commercial lines I've described are definitely accredited
and sophisticated by any measure.

On Dec 6, 5:39*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:

:
:They way my plan works is that an individual places $85 million in
:escrow, $15 million is non-refundable.
:

So what you're really after is people with money who are stupid enough
to give you $15 million each for nothing at all.

Good luck with that, but I'm not holding my breath...

--
You are
What you do
When it counts.

A promise to do things with milestones is more than nothing. A non-
refundable deposit becomes refundable for cause. Obviously, I will in
good faith carry out the plans I have described in great detail. Far
more than nothing.

On Dec 7, 2:11*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:

:On Dec 6, 5:39 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: William Mook wrote:
:
: :
: :They way my plan works is that an individual places $85 million in
: :escrow, $15 million is non-refundable.
: :
:
: So what you're really after is people with money who are stupid enough
: to give you $15 million each for nothing at all.
:
: Good luck with that, but I'm not holding my breath...
:
:
:A promise to do things with milestones is more than nothing. *
:

But the first $15 million happens before any of these 'milestones'.

No it doesn't. That's why how the escrow contract is written is very
important. Money is placed in escrow. The owner of the money still
has access to it for investment purposes. So, any money it earns
still flows to the buyer of the tickets. This is an important
detail. Another detail, is that $15 million becomes irrevocably
available to the seller when the contracted for services are
delivered. Irrevocability means that the seller can borrow a portion
of the available funds. With cash on deposit at a Swiss bank, that
portion can be rather large. Now irrevocability is an interesting
concept. It means that the funds will flow to the seller once
milestones are met. It also means that they won't for cause. Another
interesting aspect is that once banks are involved, they have
fiduciary oversight, which is beneficial to both parties. This same
situation applies in any large project. The ticket buyer has entered
into what amounts to an off-take contract for the services offered.
They have presented a plan to the buyer, and the buyer has put money
up and given terms under which it will be available. With these
commitments, investment banks are interested in giving the seller of
the services loans to realize those services. Once service is rendered
funds are released, and the investment bank participates in the
profits with the seller. If no services are rendered, but an honest
effort to deliver the services was made, irrevocable amounts are
released based on performance, with the banks taking any other losses,
and very likely ownership of all works in process flowing to the banks
who then liquidate them to recover those losses. If no services were
rendered and no honest efforts were made, it is very likely that the
bank would detect that after the first tranche, (about 5% of the total
project amount) and halt the project and enter legal action against
the seller to recover any unspent funds and assets purchased illegally
with funds.

Of course, we'll make an honest effort, and very likely succeed in our
efforts given the vendors we have organized and the approach we're
using.

:
:A non-refundable deposit becomes refundable for cause. *
:

Then it's not non-refundable, is it?

No, it is. Think irrevocable letters of credit stuff like that.
Look, me wanting to build a shopping center is one thing. Me wanting
to build a shopping center on a specific parcel of land for which I
have traffic volumes and competitive positions with other malls is
another. Me having detailed architectural drawings of a shopping mall
on the previously mentioned parcel of land is another. Me having
detailed architectural drawings approved by local council for
construction is another. Me having qualified vendors quoting detailed
price and delivery for building a specific shopping mall on a specific
piece of land for which I have all the approvals in place is another
level. Then, having all of this and a major store, like WalMart, sign
a twenty-year rental agreement is another. And having all of this
with WalMart putting twenty-years of rents in escrow irrevocably
commited as milestones are met, released irrevocably each mont the
building is open - is yet another.

Obviously the last step is what they call 'bankable' in the trade.
Anyone with $85 million to spend on experential travle understands
this, and will readily work with a seller who understands how to get
the project financed as well.


:
:Obviously, I will in
:good faith carry out the plans I have described in great detail. *Far
:more than nothing.
:

'Obviously'?

Yes. Obviously.

*I don't find that 'obvious' at all

That's because you are an unsophisticated fool when it comes to money.

and I think you're
going to have a great deal of trouble finding folks who have that much
money who are silly enough to give it to you.

Not at all - since I'm not asking anyone to give me anything. I am
only asking for those who want the service to enter into an
appropriate off-take contract that allows me to arrange financing for
the project.

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

That includes you bosco.