Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

squeevey t1_iu9cdl1 wrote

Sounds to me like Amazon has too many fingers in too many pies.

561

CaBBaGe_isLaND t1_iu9q82i wrote

Yo that internet bookstore is putting up satellites now

254

-_1_2_3_- t1_iubayhc wrote

how far we have come... i'm just not sure we were looking where we were going

13

gerund_acquirer t1_iu9lz3n wrote

How much do I have to pay you to never use that metaphor again

63

Steveeee974 t1_iu9oo7f wrote

I’ll stop saying it for $500

28

cpgainer t1_iu9o3s3 wrote

$600. That’s such a common phrase, though

25

Few_Carpenter_9185 t1_iuattmv wrote

Finger-pies, or bookstores-satellites?

Okay, only the first is a metaphor. I think best when typing. Sorry.

I wonder what the terminal velocity of a satellite delivered book would be though. Delta-V is never free. You don't just "drop" a copy of Zen and the Art of Motocycle Repair from orbit. It just floats beside you etc.

But after that, it's pretty low-mass, so ablative heat shielding requirements aren't a lot. Should be something sustainable and carbon neutral. Bamboo fiber? Dunno. Leave that for R&D.

So terminal velocity should be about average for any dropped object from an airplane really. Assuming the book is wrapped and closed? Roughly cubical, 1kg... drag coefficient of roughly 1.05... Maybe 141km/h? 87 mph ish?

What's the acceptable CEP for impact delivery? A little guidance thingy with an Arduino, servos, and cardboard fins maybe?

What? An Amazon Kindle will download an e-book from Amazon/Audible over Elon's Starlink?

Dammit...

3

thepoopiestofbutts t1_iu9y4ca wrote

They got addicted to AWS money

19

Mntfrd_Graverobber t1_iua83km wrote

All the AWS money in the world couldn't build a rocket that works. So sad.

edit: I do enjoy mocking both Bezos and Blue Origin but can honestly say I would prefer it and the world would be a better place if BO's rockets were doing orbital flights on the regular. I'm just making lemonade with the lemons we got.

21

ackermann t1_iuaw1qc wrote

Not an orbital rocket, at least. New Shepherd worked ok, until that last flight…

6

Mntfrd_Graverobber t1_iuazd87 wrote

Sure, a rocket that doesn't reach orbit is still a rocket. But other than test flights, they are pretty much just good for seeding clouds. Or joy rides.
Reaching orbit is the real goal.

9

sevaiper t1_iubdvld wrote

A profoundly unambitious project that still had a high profile failure after remarkably few launches. That's going to be a no from me

9

ackermann t1_iubebsw wrote

Took Blue 17 years to replicate what SpaceShipOne achieved in 2004! For the X-Prize, SpaceShipOne flew crewed, twice in two weeks reusing the same vehicle!

Actually, it’s also pretty embarrassing that Virgin Galactic also took 17 years to replicate that feat, with just a slightly larger craft!

7

sevaiper t1_iubel37 wrote

I mean lets not go overboard now, certainly New Shepard is a reasonable and fundamentally sound rocket (though limited in scope and overall somewhat pointless) that is in no way comparable to the clownshow at Virgin Galactic lol

8

Deyln t1_iug5epm wrote

Spaceship galactic has different design wants. Among other delays.

Blue origin is a fiasco.

1

Icyknightmare t1_iucxarb wrote

The problem here isn't Amazon, it's the other Bezos company Blue Origin. They're older than SpaceX, but have yet to launch even a single gram of payload into orbit. Two of the three rockets Amazon contracted for Kuiper rely on the Blue Origin BE-4 engine, which has been suffering delays and production issues.

Meanwhile SpaceX has the highest launch cadence in the world, and is the only viable near term alternative launch provider. Rocket Lab's Neutron may be another option in a few years, too.

14

NoxicRox t1_iuazvar wrote

This would more than likely make StarLink more affordable. More competition in a monopolistic firm, will help lower the economic profit, and as a result, lowers the price for consumers.

If a perfectly legal world (lol), Amazon and StarLink cannot collude on price, and because of this, when one lowers price because their profit margins are allowing them to, the other firm will react by lowering theirs accordingly and we get this balancing act until marginal profits equal 0. At this point, the consumers are getting the best deal.

That’s where we are headed if StarLink gets some competition.

7

Maneatsdog t1_iubbifb wrote

Which investor is willing to sink $1B for 0 marginal profits? No one is going to do all that work launching satellites to make your internet cheaper.

Service providers compete by differentiating their offerings, not their prices. Consumers are often willing to pay a lot more for a service provider that meets their demands. Bezos earned his AWS money doing exactly that - there are plenty competitors that may be 10x cheaper.

1

NoxicRox t1_iubjv4k wrote

Through an investors standpoint, the business is actually operating at its efficiency point when marginal profit is equal to $0.

When marginal profit is equal to $0, marginal revenue equals marginal costs, which would indicate the production point where profits would be maximized.

As an investor, you don’t want to see money that’s stagnant, you want the firms you invested into to maximize profits at any given point in time.

What you said completely goes against microeconomic principles. With that said, I’m convinced you have no idea what you’re talking about lol

1

Maneatsdog t1_iudtogd wrote

Today I learned that marginal profit is not what i thought it was! Thanks for your explanation

5

littlebitsofspider t1_iubu3w8 wrote

>That’s where we are headed if StarLink gets some competition.

If, perhaps, greed suddenly ceased to exist.

−1

DarthGinsu t1_iub0w0o wrote

A lot of people have their fingers in too many pies. It's a big club and we're not invited.

0