economics of bootstrapping (was New Book on Space Colonies)

--- In ssi_list@... "Arthur P. Smith"
>
> >Very, very wise of you. I've not yet seen a space-based business
> >plan that was actually worth the time invested in reading it.
Having
> >read over 10,000 plans so far in my career (the bulk when I was
at
> >the bottom of the totem pole :-) that should tell you something.
> >
> You must have missed SpaceDev (SPDV, up 250% since October 2002,
was up
> over 400% at one point),
> XM Satellite Radio (XMSR, up 840% since November 2002), Sirius
Satellite
> Radio (SIRI, up about 250% for
> the year), Echostar (DISH, up 130% since September 2002), etc. etc.
>
> All of these are space-based businesses which have been (at least
in
> investor's eyes) quite successful. There are many more successful
space
> ventures that are business units of major corporations; there are
also
> many more that are privately held. If all the space business plans
> you've seen were worthless, you must have been looking at the
wrong kind
> of plans.
>
> Arthur

I'm going to praise you in another post, but here I'll have to
direct some criticism your way.

Your comments above are snide. If you had read the post, and if you
haven't then go back and read that last paragraph, you'll see that I
wrote this: "I should note that I don't include satellite based
business proposals as space-based, just those that propose to
conduct their activity in orbit."

Perhaps you're looking to attack what I write because of animus and
you won't let the facts stand in your way. Shame on you. I don't
understand how you could quote public companies that are centered on
satellite activities as your examples when I purposely exclude them
from consideration of space-based plans. Further General Motors
didn't have any need to seek equity partners for its satellite
venture, nor did SpaceDev, nor the radio networks. As I've stated in
my first post and restated above, these businesses conduct their
economic activity on Earth and they are not bootstrapping in any
fashion. (Look at the title of the post for a hint of its content.)

I've probably read from 15-20 space based plans, and they came with
pretty much all of the baggage you would expect. I would say that
almost without exception, they were completely technology driven,
and almost the whole exphasis was on how one could appraoch the NEO
and survey it, how one could meet the challenges of orbital
refueling, and that type of thing, without having a strong
management team, little emphasis on financial controls and marketing
plans, or identifying a growth path that could lead to a major
operation, or a competitive analysis, or a host of other issues that
should be addressed as part of a due diligence process. The plans
looked like they were templated from a "How to write a Business Plan
in 40 pages or less" handbook. Why would anyone invest in a
trailblazer operation, that if successful, Boeing could deploy its
resources and enter and then dominate that market. No matter who the
private investors are, they'll have a tough time competing against
the majors' capital sources. A successful entrepreneur should
anticipate a number of contingencies and plan for them. It doesn't
bode well for the venture if your investors ask you how you would
deal with a situation and you're stumped because it never occured to
you. Bad omens.

If you feel that these types of questions are inappropriate for an
investor to ask, then you should look to a fund manager who states
that they won't look after your interest and will invest your money
in any business that deals with space. That's true risk capital!

TangoMan