I have access through private equity to invest in Blue Origin.

each $10,000 purchase comes with an $1150 "fees" additional cost.

so to me the stock would have to so far overperform on initial IPO day to overcome those fees.

would this be a decent investment or seemingly ******ed?

Blue Origin is so late to the game it's hard to see them growing that easily. Their failures with New Glenn would have me concerned (hell, I already hate them for that as an ASTS investor).

SpaceX will be the monopoly large cap space play for a long time.

EnronAg said:

---

LMCane said:

---

I have access through private equity to invest in Blue Origin.

each $10,000 purchase comes with an $1150 "fees" additional cost.

so to me the stock would have to so far overperform on initial IPO day to overcome those fees.

would this be a decent investment or seemingly ******ed?

---

who pays these ridiculous fees?!? 11.5% seems criminal

---

I missed that. That's crazy.

Seems crazy. But PE is commonly 2% management fee and 20% of the profit. Known as carried interest.

Maybe the 11.5% is a reflection of hypothetical fees after several years of owning it?

Not sure but if it's 11.5% upfront fee just to buy it that seems a little steep. Most funds we've looked at have a start up cost around 6% just to cover the legal work and audit fees annually etc.

It's not cheap to buy private companies. Certainly a different expectation than public index funds.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Depends on what valuation you're getting for that $10k. Buying in at a valuation of $1 billion is a lot different than $100 billion and where the stock could maybe IPO. The fee and percentage might be a rounding error depending on what valuation you're given for share price.

Also depends on how much it may be diluted by the time it does finally IPO. SpaceX started hitting orbit 10 years ago and just went public. BO has made one successful orbital flight and just blew up their launch pad, so the IPO might be awhile.

---

Yeah this thread is pointless without the valuation being mentioned. The fact that OP didn't include it makes me very wary about this opportunity and/or OP's knowledge as an investor.

Multiple posters have posed this in a form or another...
What is BO market? What is their path forward? How far are they, do we measure this in years or decades, behind SpaceX?

I think that beyond the moon there is a significantly greater than 0% chance that SpaceX walks away from 3rd party launch.

Look for example at Falcon 9. You can write a check for $70,000,000 and get a dedicated Falcon 9 launch. From that SpaceX nets $4,000,000 + savings from booster re-use.
Rather if SpaceX launches 27 Starlink V2 into orbit, they have a useful orbital life of 5 years. Using numbers I've seen elsewhere if you divide annual Starlink revenue by the number of satellites in orbit it's ~$1.5 million per satellite. With a cost ( I think) of roughy $800,000 per unit that's revenue of $6.7 million per satellite over 5 years. $180 million over 5 years.

Why would you launch someone's else's cargo or a crew into space for $4 million if you can use that launch slot for you own cargo and net $180 million over 5 years?

Yes Falcon will be phased out over the next 2-3 years most likely. They'll honor legacy agreements, and surely some will transition to Starship. Now whether or not they man-rate that stack is another matter. Will they accept new contracts for outside customers though?

Or does Blue, or ULA, or <insert name here> buy the Falcon program off SpaceX and run it in the medium lift market?

Quote:

---

Why would you launch someone's else's cargo or a crew into space for $4 million if you can use that launch slot for you own cargo and net $180 million over 5 years?

---

If you are looking for how SpaceX can get completely broken apart as a monopoly, especially once the democrats regain power, this is exactly how you would get that.

There are whole industries pointing the legal antitrust gun at them (the entire communications industry, for example) if they stop transports just to gain competitive advantage in that space. And realize, I am not a SpaceX hater, and I think Elon is great....but the above is the reality.

The day they say "oops, sorry, we don't have time or patience to launch for anyone else anymore" is the beginning of the end for that company having monopolistic launch capabilities, unless the other launch providers have already caught up with them and handle that business more efficiently - which is extremely doubtful.

There is too much money on the other side of that bet for it to be a viable option for SpaceX at present.



-To make this clearly thread related, I don't think Blue Origin is going to get up and running quick enough for this to be a viable option for SpaceX for at least several years.

Blue Origin will play the 'monopoly spoiler' role. Musk might even invest like Gates did in Apple when it Apple was failing.

Then can't SpaceX simply say we'll sell you a launch... At the cost of our internal future revenue that launch would generate.

How can you legally compel a company to perform a task. You can no more compel a company to sell a good or service than you can compel under force of law a pianist to paint a masterpiece.

Telcom had a chance to get on board with Starlink and direct to cell. AT&T and Verizon both tried to sue to stop their use of the bandwidth. T-Mobile jumped on board as the launch partner for direct to cell.

one MEEN Ag said:

---

Blue Origin will play the 'monopoly spoiler' role. Musk might even invest like Gates did in Apple when it Apple was failing.

---

I'd take the other side of that bet.

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

Then can't SpaceX simply say we'll sell you a launch... At the cost of our internal future revenue that launch would generate.

How can you legally compel a company to perform a task. You can no more compel a company to sell a good or service than you can compel under force of law a pianist to paint a masterpiece.

Telcom had a chance to get on board with Starlink and direct to cell. AT&T and Verizon both tried to sue to stop their use of the bandwidth. T-Mobile jumped on board as the launch partner for direct to cell.

---

Read up a little on the history of antitrust law during tech revolutions. The government can compel a business to do whatever it wants under antitrust laws.

And SpaceX never wanted to partner with telecom. They want to end them. Which is why the telecom companies hitched their wagon to AST SpaceMobile, including TMobile after they realized what SpaceX actually intends to do. And that is also why the government won't just allow SpaceX to stop providing launch services until there is either competition established for mobile satellite comms by AST or there are widely available launch options for critical tech that the government is waiting on (like AST).

Blue Origin was supposed to be helping launch AST into service by now until they Fd their launch pad up in Florida. Government isn't going to allow there to be only 1 satellite internet provider for mobile who gains their advantage by willfully stopping launch services for that sole competitor. I would bet my life savings on that.

flashplayer said:

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

Then can't SpaceX simply say we'll sell you a launch... At the cost of our internal future revenue that launch would generate.

How can you legally compel a company to perform a task. You can no more compel a company to sell a good or service than you can compel under force of law a pianist to paint a masterpiece.

Telcom had a chance to get on board with Starlink and direct to cell. AT&T and Verizon both tried to sue to stop their use of the bandwidth. T-Mobile jumped on board as the launch partner for direct to cell.

---

Read up a little on the history of antitrust law during tech revolutions. The government can compel a business to do whatever it wants under antitrust laws.

And SpaceX never wanted to partner with telecom. They want to end them. Which is why the telecom companies hitched their wagon to AST SpaceMobile, including TMobile after they realized what SpaceX actually intends to do. And that is also why the government won't just allow SpaceX to stop providing launch services until there is either competition established for mobile satellite comms by AST or there are widely available launch options for critical tech that the government is waiting on (like AST).

Blue Origin was supposed to be helping launch AST into service by now until they Fd their launch pad up in Florida. Government isn't going to allow there to be only 1 satellite internet provider for mobile who gains their advantage by willfully stopping launch services for that sole competitor. I would bet my life savings on that.

---

Totally agree. Additionally, wait until we have a Dem majority in Congress and the WH. Elon will suddenly find it very a very challenging environment for him. They hate him and wont make things easy for him.