Well hello again, let’s… WHOA! Sorry, I was spun off-balance by the rush of Musk defenders to the comments before they even read this far. Let’s just dust myself off and start over, shall I?
So we already had a nice long chat about how the FAA has a lot to answer for after that circus in Boca Chica, Texas on 4/20. Then I had to do a quick follow-up, because everything in the video analysis we were speculating on was confirmed by Elon Musk himself, in particular that that the Flight Termination System (FTS) failed to terminate the flight and the rocket flew out of control for roughly 40 seconds.
That’s real bad, by the way. Just to level-set reality here.
Musk also lavished praised on the Soviets famous and disastrous “Test by Flying” N1 program, a detail curiously not reported in other coverage I’ve seen of his Twitter Spaces chat:
“Um, like, you know, success means you’re a Hero of the Soviet Union. Failure? You’re probably going to the gulag. So A+ players, maximum motivation. And still the N1 failed. It never reached orbit. So you know, so that’s the team, for one, you really have to have a tremendous amount of respect for the N1 team and they did not succeed.
Not as many of you saw that diary — that’s alright, it’s still there.
An emerging theme in the conversation around these stories was what exactly Starship is for. I mean, it sure doesn’t appear to be going to Mars anytime soon (not in this form, or any other carrying humans). Before you howl, trust me — we will talk about this in-depth very soon.
So we really need to talk about Starlink. I know, patriotic Starlink, helping the war in Ukraine. For the purposes of our talk today, I’m going to ask you to just set that part aside so we can concentrate on the core business and, oh wait… what was my headline again?
Oh yeah, the Bond-villain-like threat Starlink poses to humanity. Right, right. I got lost there reflecting on how Elon’s takeaway from the Soviet N1 is “even the threat of the gulag doesn't guarantee success” instead of, say, the N1’s flame diverters and trenches.
This is going to be a long one, but stick with me.
So in preparing for this, I thought I’d just pop in the term “understanding Starlink” and see what useful information is offered to a casual observer.
From CNET.com in April 2023:
Technically a division within SpaceX, Starlink is also the name of the spaceflight company's "constellation," or growing network, of orbital satellites. The development of that network began in 2015, with the prototype satellites launched into orbit in 2018. Since then, SpaceX has deployed thousands of Starlink satellites into the constellation across dozens of successful launches, the most recent of which took place on March 29 and delivered another 56 satellites into low-Earth orbit. That brings the total number of satellites launched to just over 4,200.
Here’s Space.com, offering more details of Elon’s wonders of space:
A Starlink satellite has a lifespan of approximately five years and SpaceX eventually hopes to have as many as 42,000 satellites in this so-called megaconstellation. The current version of each Starlink satellite weighs approximately 573 lbs. (260 kilograms), according to Spaceflight Now.
And let’s go Forbes.com, bringing us home about why this is all so important to the world:
If you live in a major city or a densely populated area of a developed country, you probably already have high-speed internet. But for those living in rural or remote areas, Starlink is a major game-changer. It’s capable of delivering 150Mbps internet speeds to pretty much anywhere on the planet. All you need is a clear view of the sky, and you’re good to go.
Wait, you know what — I somehow missed on the first read that this was a “game changer” for rural and remote areas. Golly, I’m embarrassed, scratch everything, let me just click unpub…
Wait, what? Rural areas already receive satellite internet?
Both HughesNet and Viasat provide similar satellite coverage to Starlink. Let’s not go too deep into the technical differences here, I’ll let this PC Mag comparison of the three services do the heavy lifting, and I’m going to be super favorable to Elon with this choice of excerpt (though as we will find out later, some of these superlatives mask heavy costs):
The top performer in Ookla's survey of North American satellite ISPs was Starlink, by a large margin, and we've already covered the main reasons why: LEO satellites provide strong signals with less latency, and the sophisticated antenna array inside Starlink dishes allows for faster connectivity while automatically managing the constant switching between different satellites in the sky.
The sheer number of satellites Starlink has available to use allows more throughput per satellite, and thus more bandwidth per user, but limits to this performance still exist. Starlink's satellites can handle only a certain number of users at a time, and your overall speed will drop as more people in your area use the service. For some parts of the country, Starlink has actually put interested customers on a waiting list rather than allowing immediate activation, because their areas are at capacity until new satellites are in the air.
The sharper Columbo fans out there probably picked up a few clues in that last section, and don’t panic — we’ll come back to them.
But let’s first acknowledge, roughly speaking, each satellite service has their pluses and minuses. For example, some carry professional installation; Starlink does not. When it comes to satisfaction, PC Mag details how horrible Starlink’s customer service has been:
You can find similar complaints on Facebook(Opens in a new window), Reddit(Opens in a new window) and Twitter(Opens in a new window), some of which will claim Starlink has the “worst customer service ever.(Opens in a new window)”
The issue can be particularly maddening for users who received their Starlink dish hardware, only to encounter errors when setting it up. Subscribers have no way to call SpaceX, all they can do is send a support ticket through the company’s website or app.
“I wish more people knew how awful the human element is there,” says Joseph Browning, a former Starlink subscriber. Although Browning says Starlink's internet service is “awesome,” he was forced to cancel after the company’s customer support failed to restore access after he paused his subscription.
“I get that it's a new company and all that, but really I have not gotten a single coherent response from them on how to fix the problem,” he adds.
Starlink customers are required to purchase a $599 antenna and install it themselves. It’s a sealed unit with a built-in, non-detachable cord and needs to be completely replaced if damaged. Unfortunately for Elon Musk, these units cost considerably more to manufacture than $599. Exactly how much, let’s just be fair to Elon here as he assures us the manufacturing cost is “decreasing rapidly” and leave it at “more.”
And yes, obviously, the hope there would be to recoup that loss with subsequent customer subscription fees (if you stick through the allegedly lousy customer service). But let’s not bog down in precisely how big of a money drain this is. I mostly brought it up only because you all deserve a break here to enjoy that the heated Starlink antenna makes an absolute legendary throne for cats.
I mean that’s adorable. Look at those snuggly cats. Blocking the signal of a dish. On the ground. In reach of where an animal might chew its irreplaceable cord. Cats!
But again, let’s just move on with a shared reality that Starlink is not providing a unique service. Maybe it’s a little better in some areas, worse in others, but basically similar.
Except for one significant, arguably terrifying difference.
HughesNet currently operates through two satellites: Jupiter 1 (EchoStar XVII) and the Jupiter 2 (EchoStar XIX). A third satellite, the Jupiter 3 (EchoStar XXIVV) will be the heaviest geostationary satellite ever launched when it hitches a lift into orbit sometime in August, ironically aboard a SpaceX Falcon Heavy.
As for Viasat, the company utilizes resources on four satellites to provide coverage, the ViaSat-1, WildBlue1, Anik-F2 and ViaSat-2.
Now how can those two companies provide a comparable service to Starlink with only a few satellites, while Elon Musk’s Starlink operation requires… wait, what did Space.com say again?
SpaceX eventually hopes to have as many as 42,000 satellites in this so-called megaconstellation.
Hold on, why does Starlink need 42,000 to do what their competitors do with a couple? The answer is location, location, location.
HughesNet and Viasat are geostationary, 36,000 kilometers safely away from Earth, utilizing line of sight. We’ll let Jeff Goldlum explain that concept in the delightfully hammy Independence Day:
(The clock is ticking on my word count, but onward we must!)
The Starlink satellites sit in lower-Earth orbit, Musk much closer to the Earth at 550 kilometers.
So you might ask at this point, “Hey Siri, how many satellite are in orbit right now?”
There are approximately 3,000 satellites operating in Earth orbit, according to the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), out of roughly 8,000 man-made objects in total. In its entire history, the SSN has tracked more than 24,500 space objects orbiting Earth. The majority of these have fallen into unstable orbits and incinerated during reentry. The SSN also keeps track which piece of space junk belongs to which country.
Though of course, Starlink is in lower-Earth orbit. What’s the picture there?
In 2021, the European Space Agency estimated there were more than 130 million space debris objects larger than 1 millimeter.
These objects, including Starlink satellites, are also causing considerably more light pollution, affecting astronomy. From The Verge:
In only three years, satellite megaconstellations have become an increasingly serious threat to astronomy,” says a perspective paper published in Nature Astronomy yesterday. “We are witnessing a dramatic, fundamental and perhaps semi-permanent transformation of the night sky without historical precedent and with limited oversight.
To be fair, SpaceX has been trying to reduce the light pollution, but here’s NewScientist with an update from mid-April:
SpaceX is working hard to dim its Starlink satellites to minimise their effects on astronomy, but so far the company’s efforts haven’t worked as astronomers had hoped. That might mean that there is a difficult choice ahead: high-speed internet via satellite megaconstellations, or ground-based astronomy unmarred by bright streaks.
For some, the light pollution could be a deal-breaker, but I can also understand the passions of those wanting to press ahead in the name of space technology and science. So with that in mind… how about some more cool space science?
Here’s Creon Levit, who spent over three decades at NASA, explaining the The Kessler Syndrome in a talk given in April, 2022, “Space Debris and The Kessler Syndrome: A Possible Future Trapped on Earth"
“[Don Kessler and associates in 1978] essentially invented this field, or even started thinking about space debris. He had started thinking about in the 70s, and there had been no space collisions at that time. He was just thinking, what if we keep launching stuff into space? Occasionally things blow up, occasionally pieces come off, and there’s going to be a probability that things could collide over time and create more pieces.
“The idea is if the debris collisions produce more debris, and more debris at a rate than it can be naturally removed or removed by humans, then you can just end up with an impassable cloud around the Earth, and you can just not be able to launch anything into space maybe for thousands of years, even.
“So the Kessler Syndrome is this idea you can have this runaway chain reaction and it just becomes — I don’t want to say uninhabitable, but space becomes unusable, at least near the Earth.”
You might have seen this depicted as the inciting incident of the 2013 Alfonso Cuarón-directed film starring Sandra Bullock, Gravity:
Before you think this might all be simply theoretical, or safely in the realm of movie magic or science fiction, let’s return to Creon Levit’s talk, at 8:30:
“So, what I did is I took this original paper from Kessler from ‘78 and I looked in all these reports from the Johnson Space Center, talking about the different events that have happened — collision events, fragmentation events, and I overlaid the cumulative number of events on Kessler’s graphs. … We can see it’s tracking his predictions rather well.”
Admit it, coming in you thought my headline was hyperbole. Not so wild now, is it? And we haven’t even gotten to it all yet.
"Satellite and orbital debris rules" will be one of the primary responsibilities of the newly created Space Bureau of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The regulator announced(opens in new tab) the new bureau on Tuesday (April 11).
The FCC is trying to pivot quickly amid a fast-changing space environment; more satellites launching and an increasing collision risk are among the challenges it faces. For example, SpaceNews reports(opens in new tab) that the regulator has an application backlog representing 60,000 new satellites targeting low Earth orbit.
You might recall (from thousands of words earlier, so don’t beat yourself up if you don’t) that Starlink satellites have only a five-year lifespan. And not all of them have worked correctly. From SpaceNews (SpaceX experiencing problems with first upgraded Starlink V2 satellites, March 22, 2023):
The first set of larger second-generation Starlink satellites is experiencing problems that could require SpaceX to deorbit at least some of them.
In a March 22 tweet, SpaceX Chief Executive Elon Musk said there were “some issues” with the set of Starlink satellites launched Feb. 27, confirming industry speculation over the last several days based on the changing orbits of the spacecraft.
“Lot of new technology in Starlink V2, so we’re experiencing some issues, as expected,” he wrote. “Some sats will be deorbited, others will be tested thoroughly before raising altitude above Space Station.”
Now, I’m not an economist, rocket scientist or billionaire influencer, but off the top of my head, I’m guessing that three or four satellites are considerably cheaper than 42,000 satellites that periodically fail, need be upgraded every five years, and add to what is already a frightening amount of unregulated space junk we hope are auditioning to be extras in the sequel to Dodgeball, as I rather enjoy GPS directions.
So let’s try and figure out together why exactly Elon Musk, SpaceX and Starlink took this far more expensive and arguably more risky route.
If we start at the Starlink home page, we’re greeted by this text:
High-speed, low-latency broadband internet in remote and rural locations across the globe.
There’s that word that keeps coming up, latency. Elon Musk explains this all to Kara Fisher during an interview at CodeCon in 2021. Jump to 13:13 for the relevant portion:
“So in order to get high-bandwidth, low-latency connectivity to a large number of people, you need a lot of satellites, and they need to be at low-Earth orbit, so latency is low. The problem with satellites that are at geostationary orbit is they are, you know, around 36,000 kilometers [from Earth], whereas we are at 550 kilometers. So, gigantic difference in latency. For the Starlink system you could play, like, a competitive video game, that’s latency-dependent and still be able to play it with Starlink.”
Remember, Starlink provided similar service to its competitors, except on latency (or ping time), and Elon here specifically points to competitive gaming as a feature.
Is Elon launching 42,000 satellites instead of three or four to benefit competitive gamers? That can't be the only reason, can it? If so, is that the prudent business decision?
Again, in the comments, educate me on any other advantages this system provides beyond reaction time in gaming. But just from common sense, the idea a competitive gamer would choose satellite over fiber is... a bit of a stretch.
Let’s see what gamers think (Is Starlink Good For Gaming — The Truth, March 23, 2023):
Starlink is a good option for hobby gaming as speeds are good and latency is within playable limits for most users. However, Starlink is not good enough yet for competitive gaming as other users who have fiber internet will have a slight advantage due to less latency.
Hey, silver lining — at least some yacht owners may get to enjoy Call of Duty a tiny bit more.
I fully expect that some of you reading right now might not think this is all staggeringly stupid (yet). Fortunately, there’s a lot more, because Starlink also has a big, growing problem tied to this specific business decision (Elon Musk Admits: Starlink Is Losing Money, The Motley Fool, December 2022):
As Starlink's user base has grown, the amount of bandwidth it can support has rapidly filled up -- to the extent that Starlink may soon be unable to deliver on its promises of great download speeds. Granted, even 50 Mbps is a big improvement over what many rural internet users were able to obtain pre-Starlink. But as speeds continue to slow, Starlink's user growth is likely to slow as well. And if that happens, it will hurt Starlink's ability to scale its service, spread its costs over more users, and grow its profits -- or even earn a profit at all.
Indeed, here’s one Wisconsin customer who recently “rage-quit” Starlink in frustration after speeds had gradually reduced to a crawl (Starlink's Massive Growth Results in Congestion, Slow Speeds for Some Users, PC Mag):
“It was really fast for the first few months, and then it got predictably bad every single day,” said Bernhagen, who decided to switch back to her previous internet provider.
“I was lagging so much I couldn’t participate in the video meetings,” she said. Download speeds would drop to 8 to 10Mbps in the afternoon. “It was at the point I couldn’t be functional at my job.”
So obviously, Elon needs more satellites in space to solve for this and continue to grow the Starlink business, and in turn SpaceX. So now let us return to Boca Chica on 4/20.
As we all saw in the video, Starship launched with three Raptor engines failing at the get-go (again, confirmed by Elon himself), with as many as half exploding in flames before the flight terminated (though not via the Flight Termination System, by Musk’s own admission).
Let’s recall how Musk describes these Raptor engines, as we heard in his recent Twitter spaces chat:
“So we’re running a higher-chamber pressure engine that’s full-flow stage combustion, so it’s the most complex and difficult engine configuration, but the one with the highest efficiency.“
Remember our friend, Voice of Thunder, and his analysis of the launch? While Musk fans on Reddit have been trying to convince me that he’s a grifter trying to make money off being anti-Musk, personally I find his spot-on analysis (backed up by Musk himself in that Twitter spaces) lends him some degree of credibility, though of course that’s entirely on you to judge for yourself.
What does he have to say about that “higher-chamber pressure engine” Elon is so proud of?
“So it all boils down to, from the very beginning Musk’s deal with the Raptor is, it was going to be the highest chamber pressure engine, blah blah blah. Lots of superlatives, but that’s basically made a rod for their own back. The engines blow up, they’re unreliable. Can’t make a rocket out of unreliable engines.
If you believe Voice of Thunder has an axe to grind, that is of course your right. So let’s go to another source, as reported by SpaceExplored.com.
SpaceX is currently developing its next rocket, Starship, down in Boca Chica, Texas. Starship is the vehicle that Musk plans to take humanity to Mars with, and first, it will return humans to the surface of the Moon as the lunar lander for the Artemis program. But before Starship can carry humans anywhere, SpaceX will need to resolve its engine production issues.
The company is having trouble with the production of its Raptor engine – a full-flow staged combustion Methane engine – for the Starship vehicle. The production issues have become even more pronounced, as Musk outlined in a recent email that has been obtained by Space Explored.
That’s right, the source in the article is Elon Musk:
“Unfortunately, the Raptor production crisis is much worse than it had seemed a few weeks ago. As we have dug into the issues following the exiting of prior senior management, they have unfortunately turned out to be far more severe than was reported. There is no way to sugarcoat this.
“I was going to take this weekend off, as my first weekend off in a long time, but instead, I will be on the Raptor line all night and through the weekend.”
In this same e-mail, Elon appears to draw a direct line between the ongoing failure of the Raptor engine and the growth of Starlink — and, by extension, SpaceX:
“Unless you have critical family matters or cannot physically return to Hawthorne, we will need all hands on deck to recover from what is, quite frankly, a disaster.
“The consequences for SpaceX if we can not get enough reliable Raptors made is that we then can’t fly Starship, which means we then can’t fly Starlink Satellite V2 (Falcon has neither the volume nor the mass to orbit needed for satellite V2). Satellite V1, by itself, is financially weak, while V2 is strong.”
I appreciate the few of you still with me and know your eyes are weary, but I regret to inform you, alas, there’s another leg to this story. Feel free to take a break if you need to, I’ll be here when you get back.
Refreshed? Ayahuasca break? Coca-Cola? All right, let’s take this thing home.
You probably came back wondering just who’s in charge of keeping peace in our heavens. Well, that would be the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Here’s ProPublica:
Because the agency has broad authority over communications, it also licenses commercial satellites. And under the FCC’s watch, space is rapidly becoming a far more crowded place. Five years ago, there were fewer than two thousand satellites in orbit. Last December, the FCC approved the deployment of 7,500 satellites by a single company, Elon Musk’s SpaceX, that is building an extraterrestrial broadband network called Starlink. By 2030, experts project that as many as 60,000 satellites will be orbiting the Earth. In January the FCC approved the creation of a new Space Bureau to “better support the needs of the growing satellite industry.”
So now’s a good as time as any to bring up the Federal grants awarded to SpaceX for this expensive, risky project. You knew public money was going to turn up sooner or later, so don’t even be shocked — at least, not until you find out the Federal government clawed it back.
SpaceX and Starlink got their first warning the jig might be up in July, 2021, as seen here in The Verge (Parking lots and airports don’t count for rural broadband funding, FCC tells Space (July, 2021):
SpaceX’s satellite internet network Starlink won $886 million last December as part of the RDOF program, with 196 other companies also getting a chunk of the $9.2 billion. After the awards, reports from organizations like Competitive Carriers Association, an advocacy group, highlighted widespread flaws and waste with the FCC’s approach. “Pervasive errors in broadband data will soon send hundreds of millions of dollars of Federal broadband subsidies to areas of the country least in need of support,” a May CCA report said.
And who was in charge of dispersing these funds to Starlink?
The RDOF subsidies were announced under former FCC chairman Ajit Pai, a Republican who left office when President Biden became president. Free Press had criticized the RDOF program under Pai’s leadership and lauded Rosenworcel’s oversight after the letters were distributed to RDOF companies on Monday.
Do I even need to say anything here? You get the picture. But fortunately for all of us, those late-night ballot dumps swung the election for President Joe Biden and Elon Musk saw the spigot on this project close. The Verge.com, again from Aug, 2022:
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has rejected Starlink’s application for $885 million in federal subsidies that it would use to provide satellite internet to broadband customers in rural areas. The FCC cites the SpaceX-owned company’s $600 dish and states that Starlink “failed to demonstrate” that it “could deliver the promised service.”
The funding is part of the broader $9.2 billion Rural Digital Opportunity Fund that provides an incentive for telecom companies to extend internet service to rural and underserved locations. In 2020, Starlink won an initial $885.5 million subsidy as part of a Phase 1 rollout of the program. …
“Starlink’s technology has real promise,” FCC chair Jessica Rosenworcel explains. “But the question before us was whether to publicly subsidize its still developing technology for consumer broadband — which requires that users purchase a $600 dish — with nearly $900 million in universal service funds until 2032.”
After cutting off Elon Musk, that same month the Federal government put that money into terrestrial broadband instead (FCC has approved $6 billion in broadband grants despite rejecting Starlink, Aug, 2012):
Today, the FCC announced $791.6 million for six broadband providers, covering network expansions to over 350,000 homes and businesses in 19 states. The ISPs will receive the money over 10 years.
"This round of funding supports projects using a range of network technologies, including gigabit service hybrid fiber/fixed wireless deployments that will provide end-user locations with either fiber or fixed wireless network service using licensed spectrum," the FCC said. Funded ISPs include Nextlink Internet and Starry.
SpaceX subsequently appealed this decision (SpaceX appeals U.S. FCC rejection of rural broadband subsidies, Sept, 2022):
SpaceX on Friday challenged the U.S. Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) decision to deny the space company's satellite internet unit $885.5 million in rural broadband subsidies, calling the move "flawed" and "grossly unfair," in a regulatory filing.
So without those sweet, Federal tax dollars to subsidize what’s increasingly looking a lot like another Elon Musk folly, how on Earth (and definitely not Mars) is this man going to squeak out of this one with another pocketful of cash in this lifelong performance art of failing upwards?
Here’s Teslarati in April, with perhaps a tiny bit of a clue:
Elon Musk has previously laid out what Starlink would need for it to be worthy of an Initial Public Offering (IPO) on the stock market, and it looks like the company has nearly achieved those targets.
Starlink is easily the most successful SpaceX project currently available and has the most mass market appeal. The satellite internet project now reaches every continent on Earth and provides internet to some of the planet’s most hostile and hard-to-reach locations. Following this success, Starlink seems poised for an IPO on the stock market.
So could Elon Musk really be angling for his risky, expensive Starlink satellite system, already rejected from Federal grants for overpromising and underdelivering, which sells customers $599 antennas that cost the company more than that to manufacture, requiring the use of 42,000 satellites that expire every five years (and are launched on not-inexpensive rockets)…
…to be our next hot IPO?
I’m not a financial advisor, and this is a totally unrelated point, but since I brought up Colombo earlier, has anyone seen Rian Johnson’s spiritual update with Natasha Lyonne, Poker Face? Check out this totally unrelated clip:
Sorry, I’m getting loopy at the word count, not sure why that popped into my head. Lyonne is the best, I want to day drink with her more than anything. Moving on.
So Elon may want a Starlink IPO. Let’s revisit SolarCity briefly, because there are a few curious parallels.
SolarCity was founded in 2006 by Musk’s cousins, Peter and Lyndon Rive. It was backed by Musk who served as chairman of the board at both Tesla and SolarCity. Musk’s aerospace company, SpaceX, had also purchased tens of millions of dollars worth of solar bonds from SolarCity.
In 2016 (and with the company insolvent, as it turns out), Elon set out to sell SolarCity to Tesla.
From CNBC:
To convince shareholders to approve the deal, Elon Musk hosted a splashy event in Hollywood, where he held up a shiny roof shingle, which he said was a miniaturized solar panel.
Remember? He showed all those lovely tiles on a suburban home and promised great things? Well… this is Elon Musk. Let’s catch up with Fast Company in 2017:
Some people aware of Steel Pulse’s development at SolarCity were shocked by what Musk revealed. “Where the hell did that come from?” says one source, describing a common sentiment among certain teams at the time. Considering how different it looked from the standing-seam metal roof prototype, many sources concluded the demo was simply not real–it was merely vaporware.
(As one jokes, “There’s a reason that they announced the idea on a fake block in a fake neighborhood with fake houses!”) A well-connected source explains, “Basically, from August to October, it was more about getting the thing to look right, and then from October until now, it’s really about getting the thing to work. This is just how Tesla does things. Their first car demo [for the Model S] was held together by magnets.”
Here’s a bit more from Fast Company on how Elon and Tesla conduct business:
This story of the Solar Roof’s beginnings, gleaned through research conducted for Fast Company‘s new feature on the Tesla-SolarCity merger, sheds light on Musk’s approach to innovation. He has always thrived on the perception that he will be able to pull off the impossible, which affords him time to deliver on his promises and an unusual degree of goodwill when that delivery takes longer than expected. Given his successes at Tesla and SpaceX, why bet against him? But in this particular instance, considering the timeline of Steel Pulse’s development with the SolarCity acquisition, some insiders have wondered if Musk sold shareholders on a product that didn’t exist. “It’s all about the narrative for Elon,” says a source close to Musk. “Solar Roof was as ‘real’ as anything he’s ever shown [off to the public]. Was it a finished product? By no means.”
Tesla ended up purchasing SolarCity for around $2.6 billion in 2016.
I’m loathe to use the irrelevant Twitter for content, but this thread has much to say on the topic should you want to familiarize yourself for extra credit (this won’t be on the quiz):
As with all things Elon, once the exciting vaporware art has faded from the presentation screens and the press has retired for some well-earned rest, reality sets in (New research reveals disappointing sales for Tesla Solar Roof, March 2023):
Only 3,000 Tesla Solar Roof systems have been purchased in the U.S., despite the company’s target of 1,000 sales per week. …
Speaking to CNBC, Wood Mackenzie researchers also revealed that the Solar Roof systems generate a maximum of 30 megawatts, significantly less than Tesla’s traditional-style panels which were estimated to support up to 248 megawatts in 2022. …
The new research sheds more light on Tesla’s confusing plans for the future. While Musk has repeatedly promised the rapid arrival of new electric products and technological advancements, many of the automaker’s projects have taken years to reach production.
Ahem.
So here we are in 2023, and Elon once again finds himself saddled with a company that appears to be on uncertain financial ground.
Elon needs Starship to get more Starlink satellites up there to ease the bandwidth crisis, but the Raptor engines that power Starship keep exploding. With SpaceX to date failing to reach orbit, the clock is ticking.
It may be that Starlink’s current situation provides a tantalizing hint for why a man would launch a rocket he seemed to suspect would damage his site and inevitably explode. Who really can say?
Elon didn’t sound particularly sure about the reason to launch on 4/20 during that Twitter Spaces chat:
“It was actually just good to get this off the ground, we made so many improvements with Booster 9 and beyond, that it really… we just really needed to fly this vehicle and move on to the much-improved Booster 9 and later ship designs.”
Remember like four hours ago and twenty pages up when you read that bit about his interview with Kara Fisher at CodeCon 2022? Let’s end with a couple of exchanges from it.
At the 10:05 mark, Fisher questions why Elon hasn’t rode one of his own rockets yet.
Kara Fisher: “You did not send yourself up?
Elon Musk: “Um, no, I’ve not sent myself up. I suppose I will at some point. But my goal is not to send myself up, my goal is to open up space for humanity and ultimately set us on a path to becoming a space-faring civilization and a multi-planet species.”
Kara Fisher: “So you don’t want to go up yourself?
Elon Musk: “It’s neither here nor there. I will go at some point.”
Read into that what you will, but to me it sounds like a guy not anxious to blast off. I wonder why?
Then, at 11:40, Elon offers a peek at why he’s doing all of this:
“All these things we see in science fiction movies and books, you know, we want those to be, like, real one day, not always fiction. So I think it’s good people are spending their money advancing space technology.”
For some reason, that quote brings to mind this:
Elon Musk doesn't believe space radiation is harmful to humans. He believes water is plentiful and the thought of drought is laughable. He said a hyperloop, floating an electromagnetic passenger train on a bed of air in a vacuum-sealed tube is “Really not that hard! I swear it’s not hard!” He promised the imminent arrival of Full Self Driving and robotaxis in 2014, 2016, 2019, 2020 and can’t even get it to work in the closed-loop Las Vegas tunnel system.
This past year before the Tesla’s 2023 Investor Day livestream, a disclaimer said basically nothing you hear could be trusted at all. Just skim the size of this beast:
Certain statements in this presentation, including, but not limited to, statements relating to the future development, ramp, production capacity and output rates, supply chain, demand and market growth, cost, pricing and profitability, deliveries, deployment, availability and other features and improvements and timing of existing and future Tesla products and technologies such as Model 3, Model Y, Model X, Model S, Cybertruck, Tesla Semi, Robotaxi, our next generation vehicle platform, our Autopilot, Full Self-Driving, and other vehicle software and our energy storage and solar products; statements regarding operating margin, operating profits, spending and liquidity; and statements regarding expansions, improvements and/or ramp and related timing at existing or new factories are “forward-looking statements” that are subject to risks and uncertainties. These forward-looking statements are based on management’s current expectations, and are a result of certain risks and uncertainties, actual results may differ materially from those projected. The following important factors, without limitation, could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements: uncertainties in future macroeconomic and regulatory conditions arising from the current global pandemic; the risk of delays in launching and manufacturing our products and features cost-effectively; our ability to grow our sales, delivery, installation, servicing and charging capabilities and effectively manage this growth; consumers’ demand for electric vehicles generally and our vehicles specifically; the ability of suppliers to deliver components according to schedules, prices, quality and volumes acceptable to us, and our ability to manage such components effectively; any issues with lithium-ion cells or other components manufactured at Gigafactory Nevada and Gigafactory Shanghai; our ability to ramp Gigafactory Shanghai, Gigafactory Berlin-Brandenburg, Gigafactory Texas and new factories in accordance with our plans; our ability to procure supply of battery cells, including through our own manufacturing; risks relating to international expansion; any failures by Tesla products to perform as expected or if product recalls occur; the risk of product liability claims; competition in the automotive and energy product markets; our ability to maintain public credibility and confidence in our long-term business prospects; our ability to manage risks relating to our various product financing programs; the status of government and economic incentives for electric vehicles and energy products; our ability to attract, hire and retain key employees and qualified personnel and ramp our installation teams; our ability to maintain the security of our information and production and product systems; our compliance with various regulations and laws applicable to our operations and products, which may evolve from time to time; risks relating to our indebtedness and financing strategies; and adverse foreign exchange movements. More information on potential factors that could affect our financial results is included from time to time in our Securities and Exchange Commission filings and reports, including the risks identified under the section captioned “Risk Factors” in our annual report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on January 31, 2023. Tesla disclaims any obligation to update information contained in these forward-looking statements whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.
Okay, now click here to accept the Terms of Service… Gotcha! Just seeing that you’re still awake.
It’s up to you to decide if if 42,000 satellites that improve latency speed for competitive gamers likely never to use it make sense. It’s up to you to wonder if Elon Musk has a future for Starlink beyond the splash and potential financial relief of an IPO. It’s up to you to decide when we might want to stop assuming he knows what he’s doing.
Tax Musk. Fund NASA. Get a different result.
Okay, I’m through. See you in the comments.