SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
The head of Russia's space agency on Saturday accused Elon Musk's SpaceX of predatory pricing for space launches, which is pushing Russia to cut its own prices. "Instead of honest competition on the market for space launches, they are lobbying for sanctions against us and use price dumping with impunity," Roscosmos chief Dmitry Rogozin wrote on Twitter.
Rogozin, who is often outspoken on Twitter and previously engaged in online banter with Elon Musk, on Friday raised the issue during a meeting with President Vladimir Putin.
He said the Roscosmos space agency "is working to lower prices by more than 30 percent on launch services to increase our share on the international markets." "This is our answer to dumping by American companies financed by the US budget," he said. The market price of a SpaceX launch is $60 million, but NASA pays up to four times that amount, he said.
Musk responded to the criticism Saturday by saying on Twitter: "SpaceX rockets are 80% reusable, theirs are 0%. This is the actual problem."
(Score: 4, Insightful) by legont on Monday April 13 2020, @04:36PM (29 children)
The point still stands - the only reason Musk is ahead as a business is the illegal help of the US government. WTO can't be asked for help either, because the US refuses to appoint judges. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=2ahUKEwjG4vab6uXoAhUyh-AKHQW8BikQFjACegQIDBAG&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dw.com%2Fen%2Fwto-judge-blockage-could-prove-the-beginning-of-the-end%2Fa-51613082&usg=AOvVaw1lUPmcuu_4oQYCSeyOHbz_ [google.com]
It's all out cold war everywhere and Russia is a relatively small participant. Brace for all out Chinese attack. It's already in progress.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Monday April 13 2020, @04:50PM (12 children)
OK, maybe you're right. But - please, point out the space-going concern that is NOT subsidized by government. Surely, you don't think that Roscosmos doesn't get any subsidies? Israel, India, China, Russia, United Kingdom, Iran - just run down the list of all nations that have put anything into orbit, and point out the one that wasn't subsidized. You can't do it.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by legont on Monday April 13 2020, @05:11PM (11 children)
I believe that everything capitalists was initially subsidized and free market is a horse shit designed to slow down less developed competitors.
Free markets, like freedom and education, is a luxury that only very rich can afford. New players have to use unfair practices. Places that want "to become great again" are on the same boat as banana republics and Trump, as well as Musk, very much understand it and play dirty all the time intentionally.
I am actually all for this. I just don't like moral edge that some folks like so much. Why? because it blinds one and makes him do bad financial decisions. Propaganda is for slaves.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by takyon on Monday April 13 2020, @05:55PM (4 children)
The Russian space program would have collapsed if America hadn't invited Russia to join the ISS.
The Chill of U.S.-Russia Relations Creeps Into Space [theatlantic.com]
ISS gave their engineers something to do other than build weapons for North Korea or whoever could flash the cash.
It would have collapsed more recently if we hadn't kept buying overpriced Soyuz seats.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Monday April 13 2020, @06:24PM (3 children)
So what the Russians are really pissed about is that we are propping Musk's space ambitions up instead of propping up Russia's.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Monday April 13 2020, @07:19PM
They are pissed that they have agile competition and that a lucrative money maker is about to dry up.
It's not just SpaceX. They will also have to contend with China and India, at a minimum.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Human_Spaceflight_Programme [wikipedia.org]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Disagree) by barbara hudson on Tuesday April 14 2020, @02:29AM (1 child)
Russia is less and less relevant, so not as much need to prop them up economically with seat purchases on Soyuz, and not as much need to keep up a pretence of international cooperation.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 14 2020, @09:03PM
See subject & a NICE DOSE of PUBLIC HUMILIATION for your own local FREAK barbara hudson folks: I "apologized" to you TRANNY twisto https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?cid=937346&sid=35327 [soylentnews.org] ? FUCK NO, not ever: That's NOT me but I DESTROYED YOU PUBLICLY on every level including proving you barb stalk me on THIS SITE https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=33430&page=1&cid=889582#commentwrap [soylentnews.org] with more proof QUOTED FROM YOU DIRECTLY barbara (tom) hudson proving are a technical incompetent brain-damaged transsexual fool BULLSHIT ARTIST FUCKUP worthless creep that also failed on tech vs. me.
My post LITERALLY also shows links to stopping hundreds of threats of MANY KINDS via hosts (since 99% of malicious threats online use hostnames - block them as I do in hosts (less overhead vs. ANYTHING else by FAR & pure kernelmode TCP/IP stack efficient no less)?
Can't TOUCH you nor you it. No threat possible.
(...& that's ONLY a 1 year sample & I'd done THOUSANDS more at slashdot years before that and yes 99% use hostnames so hosts work against them harming you).
So much for your usual lies barbara (tom TRANZOID monstrosity aberration you are) and useless online troll chatterbox you has never done better work and I fairly challenged you to show you did.
You have not. You're all talk & ERRONEOUS talk (per the links above proving it you bullshit artist WANNABE do nothing LAZY bitch).
NOW: You RESORTING TO IMPERSONATING ME on your end only PROVES I really got to you barb/tom hudson tranny.
So much so you are reduced to showing us your true scum bag self in fact.
Oh & I thought YOU were going to SUE me? LMAO! You DID threaten that, so where is it?? BUTTHURT not enough grounds to go after me on? Nope. You humiliated yourself there too stupid.
... & for what would you SUE me for, eh?
FACTS ABOUT YOU ADMITTING STALKING/HARASSING ME???
FACTS OF YOUR MANY multiple TECHNICAL FAILS on hosts, pascal vs. C/C++ I torched you on, that humiliated you & showed you are ALL BULLSHIT & not to be paid attention to bullshitter????
LOL!
* YOU WILL ALWAYS FAIL vs. me just as you FAILED @ being a MAN & since you couldn't GET ANY PUSSY you (lmao) DECIDED in your DRUG ADDLED BRAIN to SLICE OFF YOUR COCK & build your OWN pussy (only way you'd "get some", ever).... OMG!
APK
P.S.=> Hey FREAK - so now you like to IMPERSONATE me too? I'm going to PUBLICLY EMBARRASS YOUR ASS SO BAD on this site you will have to SLINK AROUND IN SHAME publicly but then, "your kind" (massive MASSIVE total losers in life) are USED to that, aren't you? You don't LIKE IT but I LOVE doing it, exposing you as the TRASH you are fucker... apk
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @06:06PM
That is an interesting position to take.
Did you know that the world's largest company by market value, and also the large company owned by the world's richest man, were both started by individuals in their garages and subsidized by absolutely nothing except the personal (middle class) wealth of their founders? And the company that provided Elon Musk with the wealth he used to form Tesla and SpaceX (ok, buy, in the case of Tesla) also was formed in such a way?
There are a lot of really obvious counterexamples to your bizarre and completely false belief.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Monday April 13 2020, @07:22PM (3 children)
That is clearly not true. Attic Greece was poverty stricken when it faced the Persians. And one Persian comment on Greece was "Who are these people who have special places where they go to cheat each other?".
Now you could make arguments concering scale, and regulation, but those are generally considered impediments to "the free market" by those who call the selves believers in the Free Market.
P.S.: Even Attica had *SOME* regulations on it's market. There never has been, and probably cannot exist, a totally free market. The questions are always about what regulations are reasonable. E.g., "Is it legal to misrepresent what you are selling?"
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by legont on Monday April 13 2020, @10:44PM (2 children)
I highly recommend this book https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Plan_of_the_English_Commerce [wikipedia.org] on the subject.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 2, Funny) by khallow on Tuesday April 14 2020, @12:14PM (1 child)
(Score: 3, Insightful) by legont on Wednesday April 15 2020, @02:01AM
One might want to know how England became the leader because China is about to do exactly the same. In fact China is probably doing it already.
Hint: England inserted trade knife into Amsterdam while the old masters were busy fighting Spain. It did Dutch for good. Specifically, they Brits stopped all the trading in the most difficult moment and strangled them.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @07:41PM
So why was it that when the US ended the Shuttle program, that the launch rate the Russians were charging NASA to get to the ISS increased 372 percent? Now that SpaceX can provide that for less money, the Russians have to slash their rate. I'm not sure what you are complaining about.
If it makes you feel any better, the United Launch Alliance is feeling the squeeze by SpaceX as well.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday April 13 2020, @05:34PM (8 children)
Like what? Sorry, just because SpaceX does business with NASA and the Department of Defense, doesn't make that illegal help.
(Score: 2) by edIII on Monday April 13 2020, @07:42PM (7 children)
My reaction too. Illegal according to which law in which country?
In any case, Musk pointed out the 800lb gorilla in the room quite succinctly, "SpaceX rockets are 80% reusable, theirs are 0%. This is the actual problem."
I guess price dumping is akin to loss leading, which is kinda shitty to me. In that it is certainly a way for people with deep pockets to manipulate a market. However, this is just Musk having lowered his operating costs through advanced technology.
Don't like the guy, but he's correct. Musk is beating them with advanced technology that allows them to get to space cheaper. Nothing underhanded about that.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @08:49PM
probably some gay ass international law.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by legont on Monday April 13 2020, @10:46PM (5 children)
I would think it is illegal under WTO rules that the US currently sabotage. https://www.dw.com/en/wto-judge-blockage-could-prove-the-beginning-of-the-end/a-51613082 [dw.com]
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday April 14 2020, @01:29AM (4 children)
(Score: 2) by legont on Tuesday April 14 2020, @02:58AM (2 children)
The US government can buy thing from private sector, but in general it can not prefer American over the foreign within WTO agreement.
For example, the US can not discriminate, let alone sanction, Chinese 5G. The only reason it can now is that US blocks appointment of WTO judges effectively sabotaging the world trade agreements - all of them at once,
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday April 14 2020, @03:53AM
"In general." National security is one such exception (which covers a lot of aerospace business and China 5G too).
Let us also note that there is no launch service from Russia which presently can compete with SpaceX without substantial subsidies. It's not just the 80% reusability. SpaceX has a supply chain and manufacturing technology advantage.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 14 2020, @08:51AM
Yes, they can. And yes, they do, all the time.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/31/us/politics/coronavirus-defense-production-act.html [nytimes.com]
Unless you are completely ignorant, US has favoured their own suppliers vast majority of the time. What you say about WTO, is completely bullshit. But ignorance is high these days and I fear we will be killing ourselves over something that we could have just bought few months ago. All thanks to nationalistic bullshit and *ignorant populations*. Happened before and so it probably will happen again.
(Score: 2) by legont on Tuesday April 14 2020, @03:02AM
Note that I do not place any moral judgement. I actually believe the US does the right thing. What I am saying is that the US violates and disregards the whole world trade system as it should at this point simply because we have to crash China all the laws be damned.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @05:51PM (5 children)
You're just wrong.
SpaceX has indeed had a decent amount of government contact work. Detractors point to the first commercial resupply contract awarded early on, which pushed them to quickly advance to Falcon 9 and when they didn't have a very good track record. You didn't even bother to reference that, instead posting a crappy Google redirect to a different story.
The thing is, NASA wanted commercial resupply. Moving to commercial means you need to have redundancies because of the type of stuff we're seeing now with Starliner. Except Boeing couldn't get the program going fast enough, while at the same time the cost for launching a Soyuz magically went sky high thanks to the Russians knowing we didn't have any man rated launch capability.
So SpaceX put forth a bid to send up cargo. Their bid was fantastical from the traditional spaceflight standpoint, in terms of speed, cost, and the fact that basically none of the necessary hardware existed. But they said they could do it when nobody else could, and NASA said okay we'll be willing to basically treat this like venture capital because the whole development budget SpaceX demanded wasn't really all that expensive compared to continued use of Soyuz. ULA and entrenched players laughed at it.
SpaceX delivered. That's what you do with government grants or contracts. This wasn't in any way illegal.
Now all the entrenched players are crying because SpaceX also figured out how to land and reuse their vehicles, which lets them completely outcompete the field until they do the same. And that same vehicle is rapidly building one of the longest and best service records in the history of spaceflight, so competitors can't really claim they have the edge on quality to justify their added expenses.
Again, not at all illegal. SpaceX experiments and pushed the envelope in ways the rest couldn't be bothered.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Monday April 13 2020, @07:28PM (4 children)
And, of course, it's a bit hypocritical for a government that calls itself communist to complain about government subsidy. (I'm not sure Russia still calls itself communist though. That feeling may just a a hangover from back in the day.)
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by legont on Monday April 13 2020, @10:49PM (3 children)
Russia today is way more capitalist than the US.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday April 14 2020, @04:22AM (2 children)
Like state-owned Roscosmos versus purely private, SpaceX?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 14 2020, @09:01AM (1 child)
Are you serious? Comparing Roscosmos to SpaceX is like comparing NASA to SpaceX. And as far as I know, NASA is not exactly private and it probably should not be private.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday April 14 2020, @12:08PM
But neither should it be competing with private business for the commercial launch market. And frankly, the same goes for Roscosmos. They should have spun off their control a couple decades ago.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Monday April 13 2020, @08:16PM
It had help in the sense that NASA granted SpaceX a significant development contract and took a chance on the newcomer, but I wouldn't call that illegal. Actually getting the 1st stage to safely return in reusable condition is a great accomplishment and clearly has bearing on the cost of a launch.
It turns out, the chance NASA took is paying off now, it hoped to get cheaper launches and now it has them.