Amazon Shareholders Think SpaceX Should Have Been Picked For Kuiper Launches

YouTube ^ | September 1, 2023 | TheSpaceBucket

[SunkenCiv]

[snip] ...In the suit, however, shareholders claim that Amazon "acted in bad faith" and made no effort to properly discharge their fiduciary duties when picking the launch providers. They primarily claim that SpaceX, the leader within the industry was glossed over and not even considered when making the decision. If that were the case, they would have a valid point considering the cost per launch and timeline these satellites are meant to launch by... [/snip]

Amazon Shareholders Think SpaceX Should Have Been Picked For Kuiper Launches | 8:06
TheSpaceBucket | 23.3K subscribers | 17,895 views | September 1, 2023

[SunkenCiv]

Simmer down please.

The SLS managed to throw a payload around the Moon, while the bulk of the Launch System went to the bottom of the ocean as planned. Besides being years late and much more expensive, any plans to make it reusable are at best afterthoughts. This is literally as good as it is going to get for cost.

If the Artemis 2 mission actually takes place (slated for 2024) it’ll be a nice follow-on to the Apollo landings, other than the astronauts will be planting the rainbow flag on the lunar surface.

[SunkenCiv]

I doubt it, but I’m not SpaceX, and you’re so snarky I have no interest in further contact.

[Vermont Lt]

Bull crap.

The clear intent of your post was to suggest that the craft was not flightworthy and that is why it blew up. But the inference was that SpaceX has been suggesting otherwise.

Not sure what message you are trying to convey, but to use photos from a test that was planned to fail to suggest it isn’t flightworthy is pretty much the definition of disingenuous. It’s a polite way to call you a liar.

[NorthMountain]

Get your head out of your ass, please.

SLS sent a spacecraft around the moon. Starship got terminated on a launch that was expected to not make orbit.

Those are facts, plain and simple.

As a long term “path to the Moon”, SLS sucks. It has a lot wrong with it, and not being inherently reusable is the least of its problems. Still, it actually works.

As a long term “path to the Moon”, Starship has a lot to prove. Being able to launch without breaking itself would be a good start.

[butlerweave]

Bezos likes to get free money and do nothing but bank it ,watch the lander he never builds

[jmcenanly]

The second Starship is on the pad, while the second SLS is in pieces all over the country.

[NorthMountain]

Do you deny that the first flight of Starship/SuperHeavy ended with an explosion? You cannot.

And it is absolutely NOT FLIGHT WORTHY. Not even remotely. There's no legitimate question of that.

Not sure what message you are trying to convey,

Message is simple: Starship isn't ready. Very simple, and unquestionably true.

[NorthMountain]

The second Starship is on the pad,

And I will be watching the launch, in the hope that it gets farther than the last one. I'd particularly like to see it get off the pad with all 33 engines running properly. That's key to the rest of the flight.

[Vermont Lt]

Did you see where it had been certified as resolving the checklist of issues brought about from that test?

Or, aren’t you keeping up?

I know it’s past noon…but you should wait for the sun to go down to start imbibing.

[NorthMountain]

Get back to me when it manages to launch without having to be "terminated".

On second thought, piss off ... I'll be watching the launch myself. Don't need someone like you bothering me.