Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by philnotfil, Sep 3, 2014.
Hclp another great play this last year
Private company getting a lot of taxpayer dollars though. Without the gubmnt contracts he would have been bankrupt long ago. Nothing against him getting the contracts but they saved his bacon
Yep. I have some of all 3 and hclp is trailing the pack so much that I moved most of the emes money to hclp recently Abcaf is a new mine that just got permits in Alberta. Will take some time but patient $ will be well rewarded there. Jmho
Tplm reports monday. Going to post some blowout numbers by my calcs
interesting article on how sales of electric cars is declining
Sounds like a dumb law.
But at the same time...
The only dealers in real competition with Tesla right now are high end dealers. There are not many people that can afford a Tesla. On top of that I think it is debatable on whether most of those than can even afford to drop that kind of coin would choose a Tesla over a loaded Corvette, Porche, etc etc etc...
The dealers should embrace the competition!
Well, yeah. That was the whole point: to have private industry provide space transport for the government for less (still on the government's dime). So it's not really bacon saving I terms of SpaceX. Now, Tesla....
As I said up thread: how is space profitable?
The low hanging fruit for Tesla's growth is China while relying on the S.
Slowing sales are not unexpected. When/if manufacturers can make usable EVs like the Model S at a working man's price tag (Model 3), then you'll see real growth.
It might never be, but I like the idea of musk trying and certainly don't mind the idea of govt providing some serious funds. Would still be cheaper than if they were doing all themselves. A bunch of that heavy lifting has already been done via govt/universities. If Musk can figure out to make it profitable good for him, and in the mean time, I hope they really make some advancements.
This is a weird argument. They're providing a service like any other number of businesses. That the government is one of the few who requires the service and can afford it doesn't make SpaceX a charity case.
In reality it could be SpaceX who is saving the US's bacon when we can't rely on the Russians to launch our astronauts, etc.
no disagreement. it was just the repeated utilization of the term private that I found contrarian to the real source of funding that kept them alive. in the long run they will probably save taxpayers a lot of money if NASA and the AF allows them to
There are a lot of private satellites (telecom, sat TV, etc) in orbit for which the owners had to pay the government to launch. Now much of that business will probably go to SpaceX, or others like them.
They might need to revisit that dumb law...