Not related but I’m not sure I would have held to my $RKLB shares without you Dave, being alone in the dark is difficult and when I was badly bag holding you were the only one out there. Thanks man
I really like their inflatable habitats. The article I read suggests the deal isn't set in stone. If they do manage the purchase, we'll have to wait and see if their management is up to the task of making it work for them.
I think it shows how undervalued RKLB is, and private equity hold onto crazy 'valuations'. OPM. But finding out Jeff Bezos is loaded for space bear and he didn't shoot at ULA doesn't thrill me...
@@daveginvesting In my opinion the private markets overvalued several companies over the last couple of years with acquisitions like Maxar and investments in Sierra Space, but I think they've become more conservative this year which is part of the reason why ULA hasn't found a buyer yet- it's been on the market for quite a long time now. On the other hand I think the public markets are doing a reasonable job valuing Rocket Lab - even though high interest rates had been dragging the valuation down, as they achieve more de-risking milestones on Neutron, and continued to grow Space Systems, the market has rewarded us shareholders. It's never a nice steady straight line up when you invest in pre-profit companies.
Commercial space is dynamic ever changing technology is hard to predict. But ULA and Firefly is up for sale, both have expensive price tags. I think Relativity and Stoke are up next for sale or merging with a satellite component maker. As interest rates fall, Blue Origins starts flying, and reusing, Star ship comes online realization will happen with these launchers they can't stand alone. Personally I would like to see Stoke and Redwire get together, both have similar views on in space manufacturing.
This a great deal in the veign of such great deals like the AOL-Time Warner Merger, 😉. The kind of deal that makes a lot of financial sense in a spreadsheet, but operationally very difficult to execute and recognize ROI from. It still leaves a massive hole in their portfolio, namely rocket engines. Ursa Major maybe looks appetizing 🤤.
Thanks Dave another great video, competition is heating up, RKLB needs to stay on the edge and not fall behind. Also saw some interesting developments on ASTRA they are not dead yet, and interesting news on SPIRE forcing their stock to dip, wonder how that could play into the mix...
@@daveginvesting they released a picture with some tanks by their launchpad, could be Chris just posturing, but also could be that there is a snake in the grass looking for redemption
NASA should give Sierra a contract to be the alternate for manned missions to the ISS and future space stations, replacing Boeing Starliner with Dream Chaser.
USAF should give Sierra a contract for part of the ICBM refresh that is over budget and probably going to get split between several contractors to bring costs down.
It's possible Rocket Lab wanted some infrastructure, but I don't see Vulcan Centaur being competitive in a reusable world, maybe Sierra plans to convert it who knows after all Falcon 9 wasn't intended to be reusable when initially developed. Regardless, I'd put them many many years behind, Vulcans cost is far too high right now for them to be competitive with launch or even trying to get up a constellation.
That definitely came out of left field...! But also glad RL didn't get it. ULA feels like a blotted "old" space company but this will be interesting to watch play out.
Old school rocket company with a long history of success and government contracts. They are well positioned for future military contracts in particular which are currently planned for hundreds of billions in spending in both reusable and disposable rockets.
@@HypaWave1701 She got a job at Rocket Lab, which means she now operates int their company interests, not in Space Force or NASA interests any more. That is her choice. People move between private and public jobs all the time. It doesn't say anything about the relative merit of any individual companies.
They don't go bankrupt, they jump to the next big idea and keep their investors on the hook as a "pre-revenue" company with promises for the future and allows them to continue for a few more years. IMO Sierra has a very bad track record in terms of execution and financial responsibility, I honestly think they will meet their end by 2030.
Vulcan is a solid low risk design. Even with the cost inefficiency of disposable stages it still has contracts outstanding to keep them busy for years.
This is not a merger. It is a sale. As far as I can see, ULA does not have management independent of Lockheedor Boeing. Sell a purchase by Sierra Space would be a purchase of assets, IP, an expertise but the management would be 100% Sierra Space. No I don't really know much about the subject but that is just my shoot from the hip, amateur analysis That aside I'm surprised it is not presented here as a competitir to SpaceX. Which after all has launched, operating CCS, can build satellites and already has a satellite swarm the dwarfs anything anyone else will be able to afford to do anytime soon.
Sure, they are a competitor to SpaceX as well in terms of NSSL and ISS cargo re-supply. I don't really see them pushing SpaceX much on the constellation front though.
Sierra, doesn't have a finished anything, they are good at ideas and spending money, but they don't have a finished product that anyone is going to pay them to launch, on a rocket that, oh yeah, isn't finished. Who the heck even knows if the dam thing is manufactureable. We know it's not reusable. There is no way it will ever compete with SpaceX or Rocket Lab. JMO, this would be the certain end of any hope Sierra to ever get anything in space.
@@hawkdsl don't get me wrong, I would love to see Sierra succeed. Dreamchaser and the life modules are great technologies. I just don't know if they understand to be viable they have to build something and sell it. Rocket Lab and and spacex both are successful, they make money, and therefore viable investments. I don't think ULA has a viable rocket, that can compete in the marketplace. That's why they want to sell it. It's not going to make money. I know it was going to be sierras path to launch, but in the long run it's just not viable even if they could make it work.
Dream Chaser cargo variant is built and undergoing testing for a launch that was planned for this summer but pushed back some months for final tweaks and testing. They don’t want to repeat Boeing’s mistakes.
Vulcan is well positioned for a potential reusable variant at some point in the future. The ULA facilities and expertise are some of the best in the world. The hardest part of reusable development has already been done by competitors and it is much cheaper to be a follower than a first mover.
![[안방1열 풀캠4K] 베이비몬스터 'DRIP' (BABYMONSTER FullCam)│@SBS Inkigayo 241110](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/AQ4RIghEvUs/mqdefault.jpg)
Not related but I’m not sure I would have held to my $RKLB shares without you Dave, being alone in the dark is difficult and when I was badly bag holding you were the only one out there. Thanks man
I really like their inflatable habitats. The article I read suggests the deal isn't set in stone. If they do manage the purchase, we'll have to wait and see if their management is up to the task of making it work for them.
I think it shows how undervalued RKLB is, and private equity hold onto crazy 'valuations'. OPM. But finding out Jeff Bezos is loaded for space bear and he didn't shoot at ULA doesn't thrill me...
Definitely the private markets have treated space companies better than the public ones lately...
@@daveginvesting In my opinion the private markets overvalued several companies over the last couple of years with acquisitions like Maxar and investments in Sierra Space, but I think they've become more conservative this year which is part of the reason why ULA hasn't found a buyer yet- it's been on the market for quite a long time now.
On the other hand I think the public markets are doing a reasonable job valuing Rocket Lab - even though high interest rates had been dragging the valuation down, as they achieve more de-risking milestones on Neutron, and continued to grow Space Systems, the market has rewarded us shareholders. It's never a nice steady straight line up when you invest in pre-profit companies.
Commercial space is dynamic ever changing technology is hard to predict. But ULA and Firefly is up for sale, both have expensive price tags. I think Relativity and Stoke are up next for sale or merging with a satellite component maker. As interest rates fall, Blue Origins starts flying, and reusing, Star ship comes online realization will happen with these launchers they can't stand alone. Personally I would like to see Stoke and Redwire get together, both have similar views on in space manufacturing.
This a great deal in the veign of such great deals like the AOL-Time Warner Merger, 😉. The kind of deal that makes a lot of financial sense in a spreadsheet, but operationally very difficult to execute and recognize ROI from. It still leaves a massive hole in their portfolio, namely rocket engines. Ursa Major maybe looks appetizing 🤤.
Thanks Dave another great video, competition is heating up, RKLB needs to stay on the edge and not fall behind. Also saw some interesting developments on ASTRA they are not dead yet, and interesting news on SPIRE forcing their stock to dip, wonder how that could play into the mix...
I haven't heard anything on Astra since they were taken private! What's happening there.
@@daveginvesting they released a picture with some tanks by their launchpad, could be Chris just posturing, but also could be that there is a snake in the grass looking for redemption
Problem with ULA is that their rockets blow up minutes after every launch, and no plan to be reusable
Huh? I think your thinking of some other company.
Since when do Atlas rockets blow up?
Wot?
Momentus still has one more launch set for late 2024.
NASA should give Sierra a contract to be the alternate for manned missions to the ISS and future space stations, replacing Boeing Starliner with Dream Chaser.
USAF should give Sierra a contract for part of the ICBM refresh that is over budget and probably going to get split between several contractors to bring costs down.
It's possible Rocket Lab wanted some infrastructure, but I don't see Vulcan Centaur being competitive in a reusable world, maybe Sierra plans to convert it who knows after all Falcon 9 wasn't intended to be reusable when initially developed. Regardless, I'd put them many many years behind, Vulcans cost is far too high right now for them to be competitive with launch or even trying to get up a constellation.
Personally I hope the deal goes through as it will distract ULA and Sierra Space long enough for Rocket Lab to make it across the finish line first.
Rocket lab is already doing very well. What finish line?
There is enough growth in the space industry sector to support multiple rocket companies.
All industries have a similar pattern where they devolve into oligopolies of 1-3 players. So will Rocket Lab be one of them. That is the finish line.
@@creatifire got ya, and good point.
That definitely came out of left field...! But also glad RL didn't get it. ULA feels like a blotted "old" space company but this will be interesting to watch play out.
I tend to agree, it's an odd asset.
I have read that ULA wanted to do reuse and other things but the parents stopped them. Being sold will free them.
Old school rocket company with a long history of success and government contracts. They are well positioned for future military contracts in particular which are currently planned for hundreds of billions in spending in both reusable and disposable rockets.
@@stupidburp Lt. Gen Nina Armagno, Independent Director would disagree with you.
@@HypaWave1701 She got a job at Rocket Lab, which means she now operates int their company interests, not in Space Force or NASA interests any more. That is her choice. People move between private and public jobs all the time. It doesn't say anything about the relative merit of any individual companies.
Hello, Mr. G!
Hello!
Hey Dave 😊😊
I'm not sure what value Sierra gets out of this.
They don't go bankrupt, they jump to the next big idea and keep their investors on the hook as a "pre-revenue" company with promises for the future and allows them to continue for a few more years. IMO Sierra has a very bad track record in terms of execution and financial responsibility, I honestly think they will meet their end by 2030.
@@Krasinski1 I love the Dreamchaser. I don't think much of Vulcan.
Vulcan is a solid low risk design. Even with the cost inefficiency of disposable stages it still has contracts outstanding to keep them busy for years.
@@stupidburp I'm not saying it isn't a competent design. I am saying it's not competitive with Neutron.
I thought Lockhead martian buy the lot... A back door take over a few hours after ULA got the 500 million contract satellite thing...
You are thinking of Terran Orbital.
Imo 2b valuation for ULA Is still too much
This is not a merger. It is a sale. As far as I can see, ULA does not have management independent of Lockheedor Boeing. Sell a purchase by Sierra Space would be a purchase of assets, IP, an expertise but the management would be 100% Sierra Space.
No I don't really know much about the subject but that is just my shoot from the hip, amateur analysis
That aside I'm surprised it is not presented here as a competitir to SpaceX. Which after all has launched, operating CCS, can build satellites and already has a satellite swarm the dwarfs anything anyone else will be able to afford to do anytime soon.
Sure, they are a competitor to SpaceX as well in terms of NSSL and ISS cargo re-supply. I don't really see them pushing SpaceX much on the constellation front though.
Sierra, doesn't have a finished anything, they are good at ideas and spending money, but they don't have a finished product that anyone is going to pay them to launch, on a rocket that, oh yeah, isn't finished. Who the heck even knows if the dam thing is manufactureable. We know it's not reusable. There is no way it will ever compete with SpaceX or Rocket Lab. JMO, this would be the certain end of any hope Sierra to ever get anything in space.
Sierra doesn't build rockets, so "it" being unfinished is kind of a given. The dream chaser is reusable. And it's about to have it's first flight.
@@hawkdsl don't get me wrong, I would love to see Sierra succeed. Dreamchaser and the life modules are great technologies. I just don't know if they understand to be viable they have to build something and sell it. Rocket Lab and and spacex both are successful, they make money, and therefore viable investments. I don't think ULA has a viable rocket, that can compete in the marketplace. That's why they want to sell it. It's not going to make money. I know it was going to be sierras path to launch, but in the long run it's just not viable even if they could make it work.
Dream Chaser cargo variant is built and undergoing testing for a launch that was planned for this summer but pushed back some months for final tweaks and testing. They don’t want to repeat Boeing’s mistakes.
Vulcan is well positioned for a potential reusable variant at some point in the future. The ULA facilities and expertise are some of the best in the world. The hardest part of reusable development has already been done by competitors and it is much cheaper to be a follower than a first mover.