Space

>>1838364
>SpaceX also wants to send people around the moon next year,
I think this can be a somewhat crucial thing. If this works, it might kickstart a general interest in space (probably not as strong and naive as the space craze around the moon landing), but if Elon Musk just produces some expensive billionaire BBQ, no one will want to have anything to do with space, and he might as well need his boring company to dig a deep hole for him to hide.

Still, it's a risk (as an investment), I'd want to take.

But how?

SpaceX (and blue origin and virgin galactic) is private (as far as I know), so I can't simply walk to my broker and buy some shares in them. And using companies such as Tesla or Amazon as a proxy is a bit far fetched.

>>1838375
The only things I can think of so far, is investing in aerospace and defense firms that also have space operations. But the likes of Boeing and Airbus are tied with government activities, a lot of other stuff but not really the privat (space) sector. While I'd assume they still get a gentle push by a successfull space race, they'll probably not reach orbit any time soon. But on the positive site, they'll probably not crash and burn, if two silicon valley billionaires do.

What companies (startups, pennystocks…) can you actually buy, that might as well go bust, but also might as well go to the moon, as they say, though this time, litterally and figuratively?

So far I have only found a crowdfunding for Deep Space Industries, and while a possible seventupling of my money over 10 years sounds quite good, it's also a rather weird way to invest, when you are used to stocks and shares.
>https://www.spacestarters.com/investments/deep-space-industries#updates
Should I just throw a few hundred this way and hope for the best? Company is legit, but the platform is really new.

Bump.

Seems like you can buy Aerojet Rocketdyne (AJRD), but they appear to be very government and defense tied, though they might be supplying engines to united launch alliance, if they wont get blue origins new engine, but ULA is also a government contractor.

Blue Origin is creeping ahead. In fact, I'd say if any company is going to mars, it's them. Look at what patents they hold. If any money is going to be made, it's them.

Musk is the "face" of space right now. Anything goes wrong, he gets it. Blue Origin, on the other hand, will push on minus any public perception setbacks. The average person may have heard of SpaceX but they sure as shit have never heard of Blue Origin. This is a good thing.

>>1838583
>The average person may have heard of SpaceX but they sure as shit have never heard of Blue Origin. This is a good thing.
I agree that they are less well known than SpaceX (well know as in "I heard that name"), but stuff like this (http://www.theverge.com/2017/3/2/14797704/jeff-bezos-blue-origin-amazon-lunar-shipping-cargo-delivery-moon) which got a lot of coverage in main stream media might change that.

>If any money is going to be made, it's them.
I'm sure that they'll make money at some point soon, especially when New Glenn turns up, but I would also expect SpaceX to turn a profit. Dont know about their patents, but they do have a quite good track record in getting stuff up to space so far.

And speaking of money made, I also believe in deep space industries. Mining whole asteroids for platinum and gold to be sent back to earth is probably not going to happen, until we "fix" gravity, but their bet on mining water, to be used in space (supposedly, NASA/ISS already want to buy) could be big.

Just not sure if I want to put some money in them, via some untested crowdfunding site.

>>1838364
Space finance SHOULD be a big thing, but I can kind of understand how it isn't.

Space businesses are cash-gobbling whores (consider how much it would cost if you planned a mission, the rocket blew up, then you had to repair everything and do it all again from scratch), and the payoff is basically zero until asteroid mining becomes a reality (at which point the payoff will absolutely ridiculous)

As for small-time investing, I'm not sure how many of the New Space companies are actually public.

Think VC's will do well off space startups (e.g. cubesat or nanosat stasrtups), but that's a tiny amount of capital compared to what SpaceX has the potential to gather

>>1838648
>Space businesses are cash-gobbling whores (consider how much it would cost if you planned a mission, the rocket blew up, then you had to repair everything and do it all again from scratch), and the payoff is basically zero until asteroid mining becomes a reality (at which point the payoff will absolutely ridiculous)
In some ways, a lot of this sounds like the tech industry, where you have a lot of unicorns, burning cash and now way to turn a profit anytime soon, yet, in the tech industry, you have the occasional IPO, whereas we still have to see a single one creating some waves in the space industry.

Venture Capital is probably already in it, but how can we get in it?

bump for space!

>>1839818
Not really surprising, but what does that have to do with anything?

>>1839844

He's the CEO of spaceX

File: My_face_when.jpg (26KB, 500x361px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 500x361px

>>1839851
really?
I did not know that!
The more you know…

Proponents of space mining don't seem to appreciate that if they developed a way to mine asteroids etc and opened up huge new supplies of precious metals the price of said metals would fall significantly and their venture would no longer be profitable

>>1839884
Yes and no.
On the one hand, if there is only one or two companies that bring the occasional small haul of gold or platinum to earth, this will just be another normal sized mine that wont affect prices too much.
But yeah, if they somehow figure out a way to bring tons of the stuff to earth, prices will drop, killing any possible profits. Also, if simply and cheaply grabbing insane amounts of gold and such from the sky (the tonnages of the stuff simply floating around us are staggering), it'll just become simething as ubiquitous as steel.

That's why I like DSI's approach: Mine stuff, to be used in space (water as an important component for propellants and to sustain human life and later, metals to be 3D-printed in space, to built and repair stuff). Of course that is still years away to be feasible, and they do have Gold in their sights too (everyone loves gold…), but generally I deem that much more sensible than just
>lol, we are going to mine tons of gold
>lol, gold is valuable
>lol, we rich
some seem to see space mining as.

>>1838364
The most effective efficient way I see is bring the asteroid to us.

Sync it into orbit, mine it empty and drag it into the sun

>>1839923
Well, that'll have the above discussed problem of wreaking havoc on (precious) metal prices and you will probably have a hard time to convince people that it is a good idea to drag a killer asteroid close to earth on purpose.
Also, as of now, this does not help the huge costs of getting from earth to orbit and back.
Once you left earths gravity well, travel only takes time, but almost no fuel/money.

>>1839890
This, they will literally go full Spain.
The spanish brought over so much silver from south america it made it fucking worthless in its own time. Same with motherload asteroid mining.

>>1839884
What happens to Spain when they took all that gold back from South America?

>>1839942
>>1839945
I'd hope that companies playing in that field are aware of Spain.

And even if not, it will be many, many years until we get any material from space down to earth.

Until that point, there should be a lot of gains to be made, but I can't find any way to fucking invest in the industry. But I really wan't too.

>>1838364
>What do you think about investing in "space"?
Itt:Empty minds tha twe have to fill with insight and knowledge.

>>1839959
>Itt:Empty minds
How so?
> tha twe have to fill with insight and knowledge.
Please do so.

>>1839974
he's just memeing mate

File: nautilus.png (50KB, 817x605px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 817x605px

>>1840006
Thought as much, but I have a slight glimmer of hope that we might occasionally have an interesting discussion on /biz/ that goes beyond the usual
>which memestock to buy?
>I made $5 on robin hood, I'm a big player now!
>which coin will go to the moon?
>I'm a worthless NEET, how do I get rich quick without any skills, money or personality?
threads.

Oh, and just read this in last weeks economist:
>http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21717351-fruits-de-mer-plucking-minerals-seabed-back-agenda
Not space, but deepsea mining is a quite similar "frontier region", with potential huge gains, as well as losses.
On the monthly base, they are looking quite good. Other scales, not so much.

We need space elevators to reduce cost of low orbit access before can consider mining asteroids imo

>>1839890
>Yes and no
Didn't even read the rest

Reduce cost of sending miners to space, first. Machinery is heavy. Send up containers on elevator to miner in space, 'goto mine,' haul payload and drop container to earth. Fix prices of mineral to keep from flooding the market, have large quantities in storage like diamond market. Rinse and repeat with different rare minerals until you have essentially cornered the market for each one.

>>1840121
they had a quite intersting talk aboout that at ccc:
https://media.ccc.de/v/33c3-8407-an_elevator_to_the_moon_and_back

>>1840147
Hey neat. That gave me another idea (if its not in the link already)...tether cables to the moon. Solve 2 problems.

>>1840155
You want to tie the moon to the earth!?