Mars Express Positioned for Beagle 2 Deployment

space.com ^ | 16 December 2003 | Peter de Selding

[Analyzing Inconsistencies]

If they don't produce, taxpayers pay nothing because the prize isn't won.

[DugwayDuke]

"If they don't produce, taxpayers pay nothing because the prize isn't won."

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I recognize that an organization would have to "produce" in order to win the prize. That only states the obvious.

It is also obvious that in order to be an incentive that the prize should exceed the costs plus a risk incentive. Now how does offering a prize save money over the present system where NASA only pays for the costs associated with a project?

[Analyzing Inconsistencies]

Numerous teams would be incentivized, whereas the current program incentivizes one or two at best, per project. Have you had a chance to look at the well-documented

http://www.spaceprojects.com/prizes

yet?

[DugwayDuke]

Yes, I've looked at your link and did not find the answer to my question. Since you've posted that link on at least two threads this morning, you must be more familiar familiar with that site. Perhaps you can tell me where the answer lies.

My question is really a very basic question on incentives. In fact, it is so basic that one cannot make a credible case for prizes as an alternative with providing a comprehensive answer.

[Analyzing Inconsistencies]

Competition leads to cost-cutting, productivity enhancing innovations. If we don't agree on that then there's not much point in our discussing this further. But if we do, then it's also worth mentioning that private industry can seek supplemental funding from philanthropists and entrepreneurial speculators in ways that government contractors, which are numbed by the political process, typically don't.

[Analyzing Inconsistencies]

Related thread:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1046570/posts

Did Astrium, an ESA-anointed monopolistic contractor, actually WANT its lean-budgeted Beagle 2 Mars mission to fail in order to secure greater funding for subsequent interplanetary missions funded by increasingly stimulated European taxpayers?

[DugwayDuke]

"Competition leads to cost-cutting, productivity enhancing innovations. If we don't agree on that then there's not much point in our discussing this further.""

Once again you state the obvious without attempting to answer my question.

Let's get very basic. Suppose, NASA decides they want to offer a prize for a manned Mars landing with safe return. Now how do you set the value of the prize in order to get a number of organizations to compete?

"But if we do, then it's also worth mentioning that private industry can seek supplemental funding from philanthropists and entrepreneurial speculators in ways that government contractors, which are numbed by the political process, typically don't."

Now just how does that matter? All that does is offer multiple sources of prize money without changing the basic fact that the prize must exceed some value in order to get someone to compete for it. Now how do you set that value and why is it less than what we now spend?

[the invisib1e hand]

"Deploy this."

[Analyzing Inconsistencies]

Dr. Robert Zubrin thinks genuine space entrepreneurs could get us to Mars 3 times more cheaply than the government could. If an $8 billion dollar Mars prize were offered, or even a $3 billion one, I bet there'd be at least 2 takers: Bob Zubrin's crew (perhaps backed by Paul Allen) and a competing team backed by Elon Musk and peers.

There are those who say that if a reform is not absolutely perfect or predictable, then it's better to remain with the mediocre status quo. I'm not a member of that camp.

[the invisib1e hand]

The Beagle in an exclusive photo-op prior to lift off

can hardly wait to hear the announcement..."The Beagle has landed!"

[DugwayDuke]

Now, where would either of these groups get financing for such a venture? I'll "bet" no one with that kind of money would touch that kind of "investment".

Whether this prize thing would work would ultimately come down to a source of funding. Now, name a credible source of several billion dollars on such a gamble.

[PoorMuttly]

My sources tell me that the Martians have already listened to the music the probe is to transmit, and are therefore blocking the signal.

[Analyzing Inconsistencies]

Numerous capitalists, entrepreneurs, and philanthropists could come up with "angel capital" and then there's always the IPO on Wall Street. If Wall Street demanded guaranteed profitability, Elon Musk wouldn't be where he is today.

[gorush]

It's been a bad few days for British dogs what with one of the Queens corgis unfortunate demise.

[DugwayDuke]

"Numerous capitalists, entrepreneurs, and philanthropists could come up with "angel capital"..."

Your idealism is to be commended. However, if this "angel capital" were available then you'd not need the prize money. Too bad.

"...and then there's always the IPO on Wall Street. If Wall Street demanded guaranteed profitability, Elon Musk wouldn't be where he is today."

Wall Street doesn't demand profitability, but it does demand a reasonable return on it's investment. With the odds you're offering, they would demand a lot.