Was this translated from Chinese or Brit English? Or bad journalism. Multiple grammatical errors.
Having read about the Space X booster landing, I remain skeptical of the cost benefit, especially since for this particular mode of recovery, a substantial sacrifice in payload weight must be made. They said they launched 11 satellites, but they never said what the payload weight to orbit was, in the articles I read.
It would seem to me that the STS method of parachute recovery would remain the best bet, but of course just locating and recovering the booster at sea remains an expensive propostion. But what does that tell you? It tells me that all imagined benefits are marginal, and it would be wiser to reduce the per unit cost of the booster, and turn them out like hot cakes.
Onboard cam of the reentry burn, and landing (a little iced up on the lens)
http://www.space.com/26609-spacex-falcon-9-1st-stage-landing-captured-by-on-board-cam-video.html
SpaceX says Falcon 9 rocket is undamaged after historic landing
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/220276-spacex-says-falcon-9-rocket-is-undamaged-after-historic-landing
What’s Ahead for Recovered SpaceX Falcon 9 Booster?
http://www.universetoday.com/126486/whats-ahead-for-recovered-spacex-falcon-9/