Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Saturday January 22 2022, @02:23PM   Printer-friendly
from the no-longer-"Virgin" dept.

Rocket Report: Virgin Galactic's stock crash:

Financial trade publications are starting to raise serious questions about the valuation of Virgin Galactic, which became publicly traded in 2019 via a special-purpose acquisition company [SPAC]. The latest issue involves the company's plans to raise up to $425 million of convertible debt, which essentially allows Virgin Galactic to receive a lower interest rate on debt in exchange for a fixed price on stock shares. The Financial Times explains more here. Apparently, the terms of this deal (the financial wizardry of which is beyond the capacities of a simple space writer) were adverse for existing shareholders.

Publications have also started to take note of the stark disconnect between Virgin Galactic's projections at the time it went SPAC in 2019 and where it is today. For example, Virgin Galactic forecast $398 million in revenues in calendar year 2022, whereas analysts now expect it to bring in $7.9 million. "Let's just hope their aerospace engineering is a touch more precise than their financial engineering. For their customers' sake," the Financial Times says snarkily. Virgin Galactic's stock has fallen from a high of $59.41 in February 2021 to less than $10 today.

Virgin Orbit's [note: not Virgin Galactic] LauncherOne rocket lofted seven small satellites for three different customers on January 13, Space.com reports. This marks the third straight successful mission for the California-based company. LauncherOne flew for the first time in May 2020 on a test flight that carried no satellites. That launch failed after a fuel line in the rocket's first-stage engine ruptured.

Since then, Virgin Orbit's next three flights have all gone orbital. For a company just starting to launch rockets, one launch every six months is an impressive cadence. This month's flight really helps to establish LauncherOne's status as a reasonably timely and reliable small-satellite rocket.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Saturday January 22 2022, @10:29PM (1 child)

    by bzipitidoo (4388) on Saturday January 22 2022, @10:29PM (#1214869) Journal

    Yeah, technically, if there is good reason to have employed an out-of-network anesthesiologist, health insurance is supposed to pay that. Practically fraudulent to drag the patient into that dispute. But then, the surgeons were not supposed to bring in out-of-network anesthesiologists, and very likely didn't need to.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by Spamalope on Monday January 24 2022, @05:57AM

    by Spamalope (5233) on Monday January 24 2022, @05:57AM (#1215207) Homepage

    And a detail neither tells the patient: The 'in network agreement' for the Doctor and Hospital prohibits bringing in undisclosed 3rd parties. So the anesthesiologist is a result of a violated contract. Twist I experienced: anesthesiologist claims to be in network; insurance reports in network; after procedure 'well, they're in network but not for your plan'. Price difference? $250 co-pay to $25,000 bill via 100x magic pricing.