Moon Mission





  • Elon Musk is Tony Stark



  • @Stockcar86 said in Moon Mission:

    Elon Musk is Tony Stark

    But less debonair



  • I suppose with the cash it would be fantastic, although I'd have reservations that NASA still had the best engineers. Whether that's true or not would be a moot point.



  • @antipodean said in Moon Mission:

    I suppose with the cash it would be fantastic, although I'd have reservations that NASA still had the best engineers. Whether that's true or not would be a moot point.

    And they still had rockets explode, it's a bloody risky trip no matter who's running it.

    I hope this is the start of another space race, space tourism.

    Also, it will be great for the hi-def shots we will get of the moon, and piss off the conspiracy nuts that say the radiation belts would kill people.



  • Yeah, this is awesome. Too bad there's no carbon on the moon.



  • @NTA said in Moon Mission:

    @Stockcar86 said in Moon Mission:

    Elon Musk is Tony Stark

    But less debonair

    With intact nasal septa



  • @Tim said in Moon Mission:

    Yeah, this is awesome. Too bad there's no carbon on the moon.

    Why? Harder to make a moonbase?



  • @Kirwan Yeah. Every carbon atom (food) you want to use has to be transported there.



  • @Tim On the plus side, didn't they find ice a while ago?





  • @Kirwan said in Moon Mission:

    @Tim On the plus side, didn't they find ice a while ago?

    so the Community is fucked before they get there? Just send the Huks in first



  • alt text



  • The moon shot thing coincidentally came out at the same time as -

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-outlook-idUSKBN1621W5

    Tesla Inc (TSLA.O) Chief Elon Musk has taken big risks repeatedly since going public in 2010, but investors were spooked on Thursday after he said the electric car company could get "close to the edge" as it burns cash ahead of its crucial Model 3 launch. Facing yet another cash crunch, Tesla will likely be forced to head to Wall Street for more capital, analysts said. Shares tumbled 5.8 percent on Thursday, their biggest intraday percentage fall in eight months.

    Musk told investors after the company released its fourth-quarter results on Wednesday that the upcoming Model 3 sedan, the $35,000 mass-market vehicle on which the company's future profitability hinges, requires no additional outside funding as it readies for production this year. "But we get very close to the edge," Musk said. "So we're considering a number of options but I think it probably makes sense to raise capital to reduce risk."

    And their CFO quit.

    Basically Musk has a fantastic vision, but it involves bleeding cash till.. well, almost forever. So he needs people to buy the dream & give him more cash. So far so good.



  • @gollum said in Moon Mission:

    Basically Musk has a fantastic vision, but it involves bleeding cash till.. well, almost forever. So he needs people to buy the dream & give him more cash. So far so good.

    Diversion of sort, but I read an interesting piece the other day about Steve Jobs and Pixar. I had never really been interested in the Jobs story so I didn't realise that he 'bled cash' for years propping up Pixar without even really understanding why he was doing it. I don't know if it was a gut feel that it was a worthy thing to keep going but it's funny how things turn out. It seemed from the story that Apple (as we know it) would never have happened if it wasn't for Woody and Buzz
    Sometimes I guess the best entrepreneurs are the ones whose gut feel pans out



  • @Crucial

    Yeah that Sunday Times write up was great. This -

    http://fortune.com/steve-jobs-pixar-apple-lawrence-levy/

    is basically the same story with no paywall (the times one is too long to paste).

    Tho' the diffeence between Jobs & Musk is Jobs could 100% cashflow Pixar, Musk has already way over reached that, to the extent that he's bailing out one of his companies using his other company. And not using his own cash to do it.



  • @gollum said in Moon Mission:

    Basically Musk has a fantastic vision, but it involves bleeding cash till.. well, almost forever. So he needs people to buy the dream & give him more cash. So far so good.

    The theory among Musk fanbois (of which I am, unashamedly, one) is that he gives scant fucks about profit. He needs about enough to keep the lights on, and carry out his plan of decarbonisation and getting onto other planets etc.



  • @NTA said in Moon Mission:

    @gollum said in Moon Mission:

    Basically Musk has a fantastic vision, but it involves bleeding cash till.. well, almost forever. So he needs people to buy the dream & give him more cash. So far so good.

    The theory among Musk fanbois (of which I am, unashamedly, one) is that he gives scant fucks about profit. He needs about enough to keep the lights on, and carry out his plan of decarbonisation and getting onto other planets etc.

    Yup, I am such a Musk fanboi, but from an investing point of view (what I do for a living) I think a lot of people still don't fully get it. The implications of his companies not being run for profit / not being run for the benefit of shareholders, but instead being run for the benefit of his vision (of which the ultimate beneficiary is all mankind) are far-reaching.



  • The issue I have with Musk is I don't buy the logic of sending humans in the first 100 years of Mars. For me its all robots. I think its lunacy to try to stick 100 humans on Mars, I'd be trying to stick 100 semi autonomous little bulldozer / basic construction robots up there. Its less cool. But would actually work.

    Its like deciding you have oil in the Mariana Trench & your firsr thought is to send some people down there instead of a bog standard drilling robot

    His dreams are beautiful, but impractical. He'll put 20 humans up there who will acheive nothing then die, meanwhile GE & Catapillar will actually colonise Mars using Intel AI.



  • @gollum said in Moon Mission:

    The moon shot thing coincidentally came out at the same time as -

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-outlook-idUSKBN1621W5

    Tesla Inc (TSLA.O) Chief Elon Musk has taken big risks repeatedly since going public in 2010, but investors were spooked on Thursday after he said the electric car company could get "close to the edge" as it burns cash ahead of its crucial Model 3 launch. Facing yet another cash crunch, Tesla will likely be forced to head to Wall Street for more capital, analysts said. Shares tumbled 5.8 percent on Thursday, their biggest intraday percentage fall in eight months.

    Musk told investors after the company released its fourth-quarter results on Wednesday that the upcoming Model 3 sedan, the $35,000 mass-market vehicle on which the company's future profitability hinges, requires no additional outside funding as it readies for production this year. "But we get very close to the edge," Musk said. "So we're considering a number of options but I think it probably makes sense to raise capital to reduce risk."

    And their CFO quit.

    Basically Musk has a fantastic vision, but it involves bleeding cash till.. well, almost forever. So he needs people to buy the dream & give him more cash. So far so good.

    That shouldn't come as a shock. Tesla has never made money and hasn't looked remotely close to doing so. Model 3, their car for the masses, needs to change that.



  • @gollum That reminds me of the excitement about finding seven Earth-like planets. Everyone seemed to ignore the distance; ~40 light years. I normally pack light, but should I take my entire record collection?



  • @antipodean said in Moon Mission:

    @gollum That reminds me of the excitement about finding seven Earth-like planets. Everyone seemed to ignore the distance; ~40 light years. I normally pack light, but should I take my entire record collection?

    I'm a firm believer than humans will never colonise dick. It'll all be AI. AI is perfectly suited to go out & explore, no life support needed, minimal heating, no food, doesn't go insane, doesn't give a shit about time. Space is almost a perfect environment for them once you toss on some basic raditation sheilding. Why send humans to those planets, send a ship with no life support, no food, minimal heating & full of AIs out there.

    Even on Mars, close as that is, I expect there will be basic AIs building all the habs, exploring everything, mining everything for 100 years before any scale human populations go there. The most important thing on Mars wont be a fragile human wandering about, it'll be a basic tractor that hoovers up mars soil, filters it & shits out breeze blocks.

    Same with space flight. AI can already park cars better than 99% of people, like we are going to let a human manually pilot a space craft in 50 years time FFS... we wont even be trusted to drive to the shops.

    To be fair I've read a LOT of Iain M Banks books...



  • @gollum what rubbish.
    AI could never pilot the Millennium Falcon as well as Han and Chewie.



  • @Crucial said in Moon Mission:

    @gollum what rubbish.
    AI could never pilot the Millennium Falcon as well as Han and Chewie.



  • @Crucial said in Moon Mission:

    @gollum what rubbish.
    AI could never pilot the Millennium Falcon as well as Han and Chewie.

    I think obviously if we find Wookies in the next few years then fine, we wont need the AI, and Musk has done some amazing things with basic Wookie-making, but it doesn't scale. My concern is he is going to run out of cash before he can make enough Wookies, so we need a fall back.



  • @Crucial said in Moon Mission:

    @gollum what rubbish.
    AI could never pilot the Millennium Falcon as well as Han and Chewie.

    Now you've done it - @MN5 will be here on the flog in minutes



  • @gollum said in Moon Mission:

    @Crucial

    Yeah that Sunday Times write up was great. This -

    http://fortune.com/steve-jobs-pixar-apple-lawrence-levy/

    is basically the same story with no paywall (the times one is too long to paste).

    Tho' the diffeence between Jobs & Musk is Jobs could 100% cashflow Pixar, Musk has already way over reached that, to the extent that he's bailing out one of his companies using his other company. And not using his own cash to do it.

    Not sure that is right, the Pixar stuff was right around Next, not a very successful period for Jobs. Pixar was a punt that paid off big time, and was what made Jobs a billionaire.



  • @NTA said in Moon Mission:

    @Crucial said in Moon Mission:

    @gollum what rubbish.
    AI could never pilot the Millennium Falcon as well as Han and Chewie.

    Now you've done it - @MN5 will be here on the flog in minutes

    The falcon was never as fast as Han claimed.



  • @Crucial said in Moon Mission:

    @gollum what rubbish.
    AI could never pilot the Millennium Falcon as well as Han and Chewie.

    Yeah!!!

    And..."...doesn't go insane..."

    "Open the pod bay doors, HAL!!!"



  • @Kirwan said in Moon Mission:

    Not sure that is right, the Pixar stuff was right around Next, not a very successful period for Jobs. Pixar was a punt that paid off big time, and was what made Jobs a billionaire.

    He was 100% cashflowing Pixar right up till Toy Story hit. The article pointed out every month the Pixar guiys would go to Jobs & go "umm... we have no money" & he'd write them a cheque. But the numbers were tiny by most standards - he'd put $50m into Pixar & it was 100% his deal, so he could fully cashflow it. Ross Perot stuck a big wedge of cash into NEXT, so Jobs wasn't cashflowing that.

    In contrast Tesla, Solar City & Space X are all WAY beyond Musks ability to personally cashflow even as a billionaire.



  • But surely the increased sales he gets from having @NTA as his promoter would go a long way to fixing that?



  • @gollum said in Moon Mission:

    In contrast Tesla, Solar City & Space X are all WAY beyond Musks ability to personally cashflow even as a billionaire.

    Agreed, but SpaceX have contracts in place, and while SolarCity weren't exactly running hot, the outlook for vertically integrating it to Tesla Energy is obvious



  • @gollum said in Moon Mission:

    @Kirwan said in Moon Mission:

    Not sure that is right, the Pixar stuff was right around Next, not a very successful period for Jobs. Pixar was a punt that paid off big time, and was what made Jobs a billionaire.

    He was 100% cashflowing Pixar right up till Toy Story hit. The article pointed out every month the Pixar guiys would go to Jobs & go "umm... we have no money" & he'd write them a cheque. But the numbers were tiny by most standards - he'd put $50m into Pixar & it was 100% his deal, so he could fully cashflow it. Ross Perot stuck a big wedge of cash into NEXT, so Jobs wasn't cashflowing that.

    In contrast Tesla, Solar City & Space X are all WAY beyond Musks ability to personally cashflow even as a billionaire.

    It might have been as much as $60 million, be intially bought it for $10 million - what a steal in hindsight. He then made $4 billion when it sold to Disney, not bad.

    Financed by selling all but one of his Apple shares when he got fired.



  • @NTA said in Moon Mission:

    @gollum said in Moon Mission:

    In contrast Tesla, Solar City & Space X are all WAY beyond Musks ability to personally cashflow even as a billionaire.

    Agreed, but SpaceX have contracts in place, and while SolarCity weren't exactly running hot, the outlook for vertically integrating it to Tesla Energy is obvious

    I still think Tesla will get bought out by a mainstream manufacturer. It'll end up like Porche or Rolls Royce. Could easily see someone like VW stepping in for Tesla & leaving Musk in place.

    The Solar City bail out was reeeeally shady, he lost a lot of investor credability with that. There is defininately synergy, just not $2.6bn in synergy.

    Space X I'm less sure, but again someone like one of the big engineering firms (GE, Seimans) maybe sees a link, but thats a stretch. Then nagain you get government contracts that a licence to print money & blow out costs.

    @Kirwan said in Moon Mission:

    He then made $4 billion when it sold to Disney, not bad.

    Yip, one of the most ironic things about Jobs, he never understood Pixar, didn't try, didn't do anything re the innovation, had zero input creatively, and it was the biggest success of his career, probably one of the best investments anyones made in 30 years for that matter.



  • How of that sweet, sweet military money can SpaceX get? Unfortunately they have to compete against government procurement masters Lockheed.



  • @Tim said in Moon Mission:

    How of that sweet, sweet military money can SpaceX get? Unfortunately they have to compete against government procurement masters Lockheed.

    There you go. Thats the out for Space X. get a chunk of government contract, sell out to Lockheed.



  • @gollum said in Moon Mission:

    @NTA said in Moon Mission:

    @gollum said in Moon Mission:

    In contrast Tesla, Solar City & Space X are all WAY beyond Musks ability to personally cashflow even as a billionaire.

    Agreed, but SpaceX have contracts in place, and while SolarCity weren't exactly running hot, the outlook for vertically integrating it to Tesla Energy is obvious

    I still think Tesla will get bought out by a mainstream manufacturer. It'll end up like Porche or Rolls Royce. Could easily see someone like VW stepping in for Tesla & leaving Musk in place.

    The Solar City bail out was reeeeally shady, he lost a lot of investor credability with that. There is defininately synergy, just not $2.6bn in synergy.

    Space X I'm less sure, but again someone like one of the big engineering firms (GE, Seimans) maybe sees a link, but thats a stretch. Then nagain you get government contracts that a licence to print money & blow out costs.

    @Kirwan said in Moon Mission:

    He then made $4 billion when it sold to Disney, not bad.

    Yip, one of the most ironic things about Jobs, he never understood Pixar, didn't try, didn't do anything re the innovation, had zero input creatively, and it was the biggest success of his career, probably one of the best investments anyones made in 30 years for that matter.

    At some level though he must have had a gut feel that he was onto something even he he showed no idea how to drive it.
    I certainly hope the hard fought equity that those original employees prised out of him made them comfortable for life.



  • @Crucial said in Moon Mission:

    At some level though he must have had a gut feel that he was onto something even he he showed no idea how to drive it.
    I certainly hope the hard fought equity that those original employees prised out of him made them comfortable for life.

    Yeah, given how viciously he guarded his ownership he obviously valued it, but its more the zero creative input I find interesting. For a guy who micro-managed everything at NEXT & Apple & is famous for his creative input, to make his best ever investment by just writing cheques & going "yeah, whatever, I have no real opinion" makes it a good story



  • @gollum said in Moon Mission:

    @Crucial said in Moon Mission:

    At some level though he must have had a gut feel that he was onto something even he he showed no idea how to drive it.
    I certainly hope the hard fought equity that those original employees prised out of him made them comfortable for life.

    Yeah, given how viciously he guarded his ownership he obviously valued it, but its more the zero creative input I find interesting. For a guy who micro-managed everything at NEXT & Apple & is famous for his creative input, to make his best ever investment by just writing cheques & going "yeah, whatever, I have no real opinion" makes it a good story

    I wondered if it was because he invested on the basis of it being IT based then realised quickly that he had little to contribute other than money because it was creative in an area he had no knowledge in.



  • Perhaps he was just smart enough to realise the opportunity, the skill of the employees and that his greatest input would be his chequebook?


Log in to reply