Hacker News Reader

> If you're relying on your competitor to enable your business model then you're not competing with them.

They're not though, they're using a contracted service from a company that wholly owns a subsidiary that may have some competing business with your system.

They can switch to any other capable provider at any time and once the satellites are in orbit, there's no continuing business relationship with the launch company required to operate them.

View on HN

Are there any other capable providers that are in the same ballpark in terms of cost?

That's close to the right question. I'd suggest "are there about to be any other capable providers in the same ballpark?" In which case, probably, in Ariane 6.

Outside of the US and EU governments this has not been a large market. The fact that another launch client is entering the space should suggest what the overall trajectory here is going to be.

Finally, with a lifetime of 5 to 10 years for each launched satellite, and SpaceX not being required for operation of the satellites, I'd suggest they're not nearly as dependent on a "competitor" as the OP implies.

Not yet, but there will/should be in the near future. And that’s how most businesses work. Have to make some assumptions and calculated risk.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com