Are launch prices up, or is the demand continuing to be high?
According to a Space News yesterday, high demand and inflation have resulted in an overall increase in launch prices in recent months.
At the recent Satellite 2023 conference, industry officials said they saw evidence of growing prices in the last year. Growing demand along with a constrained near-term supply that some have dubbed a “global shortage” is a factor, they say, along with inflation that has remained historically high for more than a year.
The only evidence of this increase that the article presents however is a 10% increase in SpaceX’s launch price, which the company claims is almost entirely due to inflation, not demand. Furthermore, this increase still leaves SpaceX’s launch prices well below the lowest prices that other launch companies can yet offer, which means the competition can’t really raise its prices significantly.
The important take-away from the article is not that the cost of rockets has gone up, but that the demand remains very high, which bodes well for the new startups trying to enter the market. For example, the article notes that the next SpaceX smallsat launch opportunity is 2025. There thus remains plenty of business for the many new rocket companies trying to enter the market in the next two years.
The support of my readers through the years has given me the freedom and ability to analyze objectively the ongoing renaissance in space, as well as the cultural changes -- for good or ill -- that are happening across America. Four years ago, just before the 2020 election I wrote that Joe Biden's mental health was suspect. Only in this year has the propaganda mainstream media decided to recognize that basic fact.
Fourteen years ago I wrote that SLS and Orion were a bad ideas, a waste of money, would be years behind schedule, and better replaced by commercial private enterprise. Even today NASA and Congress refuse to recognize this reality.
In 2020 when the world panicked over COVID I wrote that the panic was unnecessary, that the virus was apparently simply a variation of the flu, that masks were not simply pointless but if worn incorrectly were a health threat, that the lockdowns were a disaster and did nothing to stop the spread of COVID. Only in the past year have some of our so-called experts in the health field have begun to recognize these facts.
Your help allows me to do this kind of intelligent analysis. I take no advertising or sponsors, so my reporting isn't influenced by donations by established space or drug companies. Instead, I rely entirely on donations and subscriptions from my readers, which gives me the freedom to write what I think, unencumbered by outside influences.
Please consider supporting my work here at Behind the Black.
You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are five ways of doing so:
1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.
2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.
3. A Paypal Donation:
5. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652
You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above. And if you buy the books through the ebookit links, I get a larger cut and I get it sooner.
According to a Space News yesterday, high demand and inflation have resulted in an overall increase in launch prices in recent months.
At the recent Satellite 2023 conference, industry officials said they saw evidence of growing prices in the last year. Growing demand along with a constrained near-term supply that some have dubbed a “global shortage” is a factor, they say, along with inflation that has remained historically high for more than a year.
The only evidence of this increase that the article presents however is a 10% increase in SpaceX’s launch price, which the company claims is almost entirely due to inflation, not demand. Furthermore, this increase still leaves SpaceX’s launch prices well below the lowest prices that other launch companies can yet offer, which means the competition can’t really raise its prices significantly.
The important take-away from the article is not that the cost of rockets has gone up, but that the demand remains very high, which bodes well for the new startups trying to enter the market. For example, the article notes that the next SpaceX smallsat launch opportunity is 2025. There thus remains plenty of business for the many new rocket companies trying to enter the market in the next two years.
The support of my readers through the years has given me the freedom and ability to analyze objectively the ongoing renaissance in space, as well as the cultural changes -- for good or ill -- that are happening across America. Four years ago, just before the 2020 election I wrote that Joe Biden's mental health was suspect. Only in this year has the propaganda mainstream media decided to recognize that basic fact.
Fourteen years ago I wrote that SLS and Orion were a bad ideas, a waste of money, would be years behind schedule, and better replaced by commercial private enterprise. Even today NASA and Congress refuse to recognize this reality.
In 2020 when the world panicked over COVID I wrote that the panic was unnecessary, that the virus was apparently simply a variation of the flu, that masks were not simply pointless but if worn incorrectly were a health threat, that the lockdowns were a disaster and did nothing to stop the spread of COVID. Only in the past year have some of our so-called experts in the health field have begun to recognize these facts.
Your help allows me to do this kind of intelligent analysis. I take no advertising or sponsors, so my reporting isn't influenced by donations by established space or drug companies. Instead, I rely entirely on donations and subscriptions from my readers, which gives me the freedom to write what I think, unencumbered by outside influences.
Please consider supporting my work here at Behind the Black.
You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are five ways of doing so:
1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.
2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.
3. A Paypal Donation:
5. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652
You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above. And if you buy the books through the ebookit links, I get a larger cut and I get it sooner.
Based on conjecture, it would seem SpaceX’s main constraint is in launch facilities rather than boosters. If they somehow come up with more launch locations, they might be able to increase their supply..
Elon Musk @elonmusk
Replying to
@SciGuySpace
Provided there is no serious launch anomaly, SpaceX will deliver 80% of Earth’s payload to orbit this year.
Not counting Starship.
9:41 AM · Mar 20, 2023
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1637856860190433284
There is *definitely* a lot of room for additional medium-lift capacity!
I’m more skeptical that any of these small-class launchers can close a business case now, though.
I don’t know about launch prices, but lunch prices sure are up due to Bidumb’s “temporary” inflation
It would be nice to get some competition going in the marketplace. With the exception of Rocket Lab and Firefly, there really isn’t much in the way of rides. What I don’t understand is that if the demand is so high, why aren’t companies increasing their launch cadence?
I could really use an added launch to someone’s manifest right now.
Joe: I think the problem is that until SpaceX and Rocket Lab proved that commercial space could do this fast and cheaply, no one else was trying. Since then a lot of new players are trying to get off the starting line, but it takes time to build a new rocket and test it.
Meanwhile, the old rocket companies –ULA and Arianespace — don’t have the culture or inclination to switch gears and build cheap fast rockets. Expect little from them.
The result is we are essentially in the lull before the storm. In five years I expect you will begin to have lots of launch options.
Gary: Bottleneck is actually landing facilities.
ASDS needs 3+ days to get out, and 3+ days to get back. Only 3 (2 East Coast, 1 West coast).
They seem able to launch faster if they have the ASDS available, from SLC-40.
LC-39A is slower, since a F-Heavy means swicthing around the launch table which is non-trivial. A CRS cargo or Crew mission means changing out the head of the TEL.
If you look, SLC-40 is launching at an astonishing rate, while LC-39A is lagging a lot. Due to these switches and govt payloads needing more ‘care’.
My thought is pretty basic. As the price per pound comes down the demand will go up. More people will be able to get into the game that way.
But one of the real limits will be regulations and orbits available. Orbital costs will mainly be priced by their height and thus possible time in orbit.