Freight-service economies (was Molaunches, and price goes down)

> To send a ton of payload into orbit I don't think you'll ever
> see a whole rocket launched for $200,000 (2,000 lbs * $100/lb.)

2,000 lbs seems small. Aren't larger rockets cheaper?

> His latest project, Falcon 9 (Heavy), projects costs at
> $1,300/lb. Note further, that this is only to LEO. To achieve
> higher orbit takes more coin, $3,000/lb to GTO.

For freight, there are potential competitors to rocket-to-GTO:

1. Permanent catapult at LEO. (Maintained by ion-drive)
2. Tugboat from LEO. (Ion driven; slow, but freight is OK)
3. Ion-drive on upper stage. (100% payload)
4. Slow space-elevator. (nuclear and/or solar powered; 1-way only)
5. Slow elevator from LEO.
6. Catapult from Earth. (solo or assisting; to LEO or GTO)

...And myriad others...
http://www.islandone.org/LEOBiblio/SPBI1GU.HTM#hydrogen_injection

...some of which can benefit from combination with a tall (miles
high) building built mainly for other purposes.

This is why I used the term "importation services".

> I think that $1,000/lb is a more realistic goal than $100/lb.

Are you considering the upper-stage as part of the payload? If the
upper-stage is part of the payload:

1. The stage does not have to de-orbit itself.
2. Weight-shaving engineering is eliminated.
3. Weight-shaving manufacturing is eliminated.
4. Exotic materials are not needed.
5. Leftover propellant is also payload.

Are you considering the economies of increased failure-tolerances for
freight?

> Mass economies in the production and launch of rockets yield
> diminishing marginal returns with increased volumes and
> eventually hard limits are approached, which is why cars
> don't sell for $20.

Neglecting the opportunity costs of real-estate, as automation
approaches infinity, car cost approaches zero.