Avatar feed
Responses: 4
COL Ted Mc
0
0
0
CPT Alexander Grant - Captain; The article points out the fact that monopolies (and "quasi-monopolies") have absolutely no incentive to operate efficiently and effectively.

There are times when you actually have to have a monopoly on something (it really wouldn't do anyone any good if there were several corporations bidding to provide America with a COMPLETE military) but those are times when the "supplier" is doing more than "operate" assets already provided.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SSG Satellite Communication Systems Operator/Maintainer
0
0
0
Thanks for pushing out this article. Very informative. A few years go by, some competition, suddenly things look different... This is part of the hangover from ending the shuttle program without a reliable replacement available.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
Alan K.
0
0
0
There is a huge surprise......A $350 hammer in the Space Industrial Complex. Except it is a $350 MM hammer! One of the many reasons that "they" tried so hard to bring Trump down.....He is going to go after those that screw the taxpayer. He has a lot of work to do!
(0)
Comment
(0)
COL Ted Mc
COL Ted Mc
>1 y
Alan K. - Mr. Korb; The hammer doesn't cost $350. What DOES cost $350 is the hammer PLUS the costs of testing and analysis to ensure that the hammer meets a set of design criteria that have no relationship to "hammers" at all. I mean, face it, what would it cost you to design, test, certify, and build a (or a maximum of 300) "Mr. Coffee" machine that won't spill hot coffee in a sudden 3+G manoeuvre?
(0)
Reply
(0)
Alan K.
Alan K.
>1 y
COL Ted Mc - COL Ted Mc - Just wondering why SpaceX can produce the same results and only charge 83MM instead of 265MM from UTA, excuse me ULA and SpaceX uses American Made Propulsion instead of Russian made units. They started from scratch..... My B.I.L was chief Patent Atty. For SpaceX a number of years ago , he didn't agree with Musk's "Open Patent" policy and they butted he
(0)
Reply
(0)
COL Ted Mc
COL Ted Mc
>1 y
Alan K. - Mr. Korb; I suspect that the basic difference is that when you have no competition and control something that others actually have to have then you can charge pretty much whatever you feel for it but that when you have an incentive to charge the lowest price consistent with the highest profit then you have a real incentive to get costs down at least twice as fast as you lower your prices.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Alan K.
Alan K.
>1 y
COL Ted Mc - I'll go with that....
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close