Artemis vs. SpaceX
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 6 months ago (7 children)

When SpaceX was founded literally all of their contracts were government contracts.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (6 children)

    Yeah they were saved early on by NASA’s private commercial development programs. Are you saying NASA should not have implemented these programs? Do you prefer cost plus contracts?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (5 children)

    I was simply commenting on the fact that people think SpaceX is a private company. It may be a private company on paper, but it's first contract was an ISS contract funded by tax payer dollars. To me, that's not a private company, that's all.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    Are you saying that any company that takes government contracts initially should not be considered a private company? Wouldn’t this apply to all launch providers? Why is SpaceX singled out?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (3 children)

    Because it's a post about SpaceX...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    Isn’t it also about Artemis (Lockheed, Boeing, Northrop, and Rocketdyne)?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments