You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Trying to join the 2PM central time meeting. Says waiting on host to start....
Meeting ID: 843 9817 1219
Passcode: 519958
@kbd512
Thanks for that! I truly enjoyed reading your analysis of the current state of development for ablative propulsion. That is exciting stuff! You are clearly very knowledgeable and an asset to this forum.
I however must insist on preventing scope creep for my presentation. It thus partly (largely!) leans on Dr. Johnson's previous talk to North Houston NSS and his extensive calculations for chemical propulsion needs for a given dead head mass.
Looking forward to anything you might have to add that is within scope!
FoQ1
NOTE:
My presentation is not intended to produce a bona-fide FINANCING PROPOSAL. It is intended to educate the public on how finance for big projects "works" in the modern world. "Proper" risk underwriting is beyond the capabilities of any single human (however assisted by a rabid internet forum). I am seeking to fulfill the NSS charter to "educate" the public on space topics. The talk, will thus, be largely theoretical.
This is by design as accounting and finance are ... sort of ... boring. I seek to entertain as well as inform my audience. This is, therefore, not a Master's level finance class presentation. Some (many?) estimations will be used. This is also by design as I'm seeking to present a conceptual framework for how to think about financing a 'large ship' in a manner that is academically robust. The particulars, are clearing still evolving on this forum. And will continue to evolve. Thus, a conceptual framework, only.
HTH
FoQ1
For all NewMars members ...
FriendOfQuark1 would appreciate feedback on Post #4
Posts about other subjects may be a distraction.
The structure of the financing presentation is firm:
500 passenger ship and chemical propulsion.
Imaginary future capabilities are interesting but not pertinent to this topic.
We will (probably) have Warp Drive some day. That is not part of the present topic.
(th)
Thanks TH,
Financing "cost" includes interest rate. Finance theory posits that interest rate is partially driven by a "risk premium". My reasoning for going with chemical propulsion is while it may be more upfront cost, and less efficient, its financing overhead will be lower as it is accepted technology. Once the first ship is financed, more exotic propulsion can be retrofitted (or used on additional ships) for relatively low marginal cost.
The propulsion system above (kbd512's) intrigues me. I LOVE cool tech. But for my presentation, I don't want to have to sketch up the cost and financing for SBSP and laser ablation research and development.
When it comes to modern finance, there are no "heroes" or "creative types" because stepping outside the colored lines tends to land you in prison. For (plausible) financing, from plausible sources (the "plausible" investor is human with wealth) we need as much "off the shelf"/"widely accepted" tech as possible. [EDIT] - Else, the 'risk premium' grows more onerous...
FoQ1
OK, I'm behind schedule. I'm going to start with a brain-storming pile of disorganized thoughts - with a goal of cleaning this up into a 30-45 minute presentation for NSS North Houston.
First things first - dependencies. I have the cost estimate for the 500 person big ship, which I will add a 33% fudge factor to. I still need to get the weight of the ship and run Dr. Johnson's calculations on how much fuel we are talking about and get a cost estimate, plus estimate for the "tug".
Acknowledgements: Get permission/pictures of contributors, included for the two previous talks and acknowledge their contributions to this complex project.
Interactive moment: Ask audience to name some of the largest financed projects they can think of. Show slides of Pyramids, Great Wall, Hoover Dam, Interstate Highway System,(large) Vegas Casinos, Titanic, QE2, Shell Prelude, Boeing 777, Apollo Program, etc with cost estimates converted to 2022 dollars.
-Compare those figures to our three part cost estimate for ball parking and establishing that financing is in fact plausible.
Make presentation academically robust (in line with NSS educational mission) by educating the audience on finance theory, including the theoretical components of an interest rate.
- estimate those components for our project (SWAG)
Main potential sources of funding:
-Government (pros/cons)
-Insane billionaires (interactive moment - question audience as to who their favorite billionaire space cowboys are)
--Musk
--Bezos
--Branson
--Dark Horses
-Crowd sourcing (compare to largest successful CS program ever to establish implausibility)
-Debt
--[EDIT]Include an initial period with PIK bonds?
--Discuss colonization (including debt finance of passage) of the New World as an analog
---The role Lloyd's of London and the development of Insurance playing a key role (source material "Against the Gods; The Remarkable Story of Risk")
-Establish which blended approaches are most probable; handicap as percentage (SWAG)
--Interactive moment - ask audience to give their own handicapped percentage of which approaches will prevail - why? (discuss)
Establish the time frame for financing, interest rates, and economics of a ~40 year ship(s) life
-Estimate one way "ticket" price (x500 passengers) that makes the program economically plausible
-Include cost of fuel for each trip in calculation!
-Explore how building multiple ships changes the economics
-[EDIT 1.22PM Local time] ask around if a "discounted cash flow analysis" is 'interesting' or 'too academic/dry'
===================================================
Board input, especially on missing elements is sought. Fire away!
Team,
I come this way via the North Houston National Space Society chapter. We have had in recent months presentations by New Mars members on "Big Ship" and "Big Ship Propulsion". Both of those topics are above my paygrade as more of a lifelong accountant. I will be following up on those two talks with "Big Ship Finance". Designing the things is one thing, and paying for them is quite another.
I'm fleshing out a talk that is hopefully highly interactive and accessible to laypeople.
The two main assumptions I've settled on so far is the competing 500 person version (because it uses no precision materials/methods) and Dr. Johnson's calculations for chemical propulsion. That is probably slightly more expensive than more exotic propulsion but I feel it is easier to attract financing for known and proven methods.
Hopefully, I will begin building out a preliminary outline for the powerpoint in this space tomorrow.
FoQ1
Pages: 1