Paying For Mars - How to afford to send humans to Mars

David Ellard · 2002-12-23 04:37:28

This is an idea I?ve been working on for a little while now. It all came to me a few years ago when I read an article that said we wouldn?t be able to send humans to Mars for forty or fifty years. I wasn?t born when men walked on the Moon (Can it really be thirty years ago?), and it dawned on me that I could live my whole life knowing people could walk on other worlds, but never actually being alive to actually see it.

Then I read Robert Zubrin?s brilliant ?Case For Mars? and I was dumbfounded at just how easy it was, this wouldn?t take fifty years, we could actually do this in ten, and for a reasonable amount of money.

So why are we spending billions upon billions on a space station and shuttle? I?ve seen survey?s that show most people want to go to Mars, so what?s stopping us?

The quote, ?No Bucks, No Buck Rogers?, was coined at the beginning of the space age, and even today it remains true. The only thing stopping a manned mission to Mars is simply the money required to do so. A Mars Direct style mission was estimated to cost twenty to thirty billion dollars for a government or less then five if a private company makes the attempt. Either sum is not a small amount of money, and the obvious reason that no one has actually gone to Mars so far is because there will be little initial return on this investment.

But what if there is another way, what if we can make going to Mars a profitable venture?

What I propose is something I call Sell-Mars. The way it works is simple. A non-profit organization is established to administrate the sale, marketing, and ultimate colonization of Mars.

If the planet were sold for $10 an acre, it would be worth 350 billion dollars. A hundred times more money then we need.

Any person, government, or private company may be a part of Sell-Mars, but we aren?t just a cosmic estate agent. For a $1000 you could have your own small Mars rock delivered to your door. For varying amounts you can name the mountains and valleys the first explorers discover. A billion people watched Apollo 11 launch, that?s a big advertising market, how much would Coke or Pepsi pay to paint a rocket tank to look like a giant soft drink can?

Maybe your country can?t afford their own mission, but for five million we?ll plant your flag in the Martian soil, perhaps your country might like to send its own astronauts and scientists to Mars, simply sponsor them for fifty million each. You only pay what you can afford to. For private citizens, it may only be a few dollars. For multinational corporations or governments, it may be millions, but regardless of how little you spend, your name is sent to Mars on a CD. Anyone who wants to can become a part of history.

But of course we don?t own Mars. This organization would have to land there in order to have any sort of claim, but how can we sell you land and Mars rocks before we get there?

Which came first the chicken or the egg?

The only way to pull this off is with a little faith. Yes, this is the catch. People must buy the land and rocks before we even launch the first rocket. Most of you at this point are screaming scam, there?s no way we could guarantee the investors money, and this is true. We may never raise enough money, or the rockets could blow up on the pad, we could never actually give people a 100% guarantee that the money they send us would return as Mars rocks, or a legitimate land deed. But we could go partway to satisfying their concerns.

For example, say you want to risk it, and be a part of Sell-Mars, you only buy an acre of land, it?s only $10, so you?re not particularly worry if the whole thing fails. Your money, along with everyone else?s is deposited into a secure bank account where the money just sits and waits. You see, Sell-Mars cannot touch it until it reaches a certain level. Let?s say one hundred million dollars. The interest from that money is used to snowball the whole scheme, it?s used for advertising, to let people know what we?re all about and how they can join. But until the bank account reaches the hundred million dollar level, you?re $10 isn?t touched.

Two things can happen here. The first is that we never reach our goal, no one in the world is interested enough to spend a few dollars on a crazy scheme, colonizing a whole planet just isn?t a priority for us as a species and the whole project is cancelled, in which case the money in the bank account is returned to you, untouched. No one looses.

But say for example people are interested in going to Mars, say the world gets inspired by this, and wonder if we really can do such a thing. If the money gets past the cut off point, your $10 is ours and it?s committed to Mars. The first thing we do is start designing and building our own rockets, a cheap, expendable booster that we mass produce. We will test this rocket hundreds of times by launching satellites, proving the rockets reliability, and making money for the Mars fund at the same time. More money will be spent on an advertising blitz the likes of which the world has never seen. Every major advertising medium will present our plan. If the world wants to go, they?ll have the chance.

As I mentioned before, a Mars Direct style mission could be accomplished for less then five billion. Five billion dollars isn?t pocket change, and even when the ball gets rolling we might fall short, in which case any profits from launching satellites or space tourists will pay off our investors.

But is five billion really that much? At least thirty billionaires could pay for it by themselves, or if the whole world chips in, it?s less then a dollar per person. Several corporations could afford five billion from profits alone. If every country in the world split the bill, it would only amount to twenty-five million each.

But of course none of these are valid options. I don?t expect Bill Gates to pay for it all himself, (But if he?s smart, he?ll invest in some land). Sell-Mars will work only with the combined efforts of the general public, business, and governments. By setting ourselves no limits, by utilizing every money making scheme we can think of, from muffin drives to movie rights, we should reach our target.

Here are just a few examples of Sell-Mars ideas.

Selling land on Mars, $10 per acre, or $100 for 100 acres
Selling Mars rocks, price dependent on size
Selling the naming rights for Martian geographical features (Mt Zubrin?)
Selling the broadcast rights, movie rights, and a reality Mars TV show
Planting your country?s flag on Mars, $5 Million
Martian astronaut sponsorship, $50 Million
Tourist flights into orbit, $10 Million
International lottery with the prize being a trip to Mars
Auctioning off the rights to examine the first returned Mars rocks
Auctioning off the rights to name the first Martian life

The first mission will launch to a worldwide audience of billions, this is a rare advertising market, on par with events like the Olympics, and so major corporations can both advertise to the world, and show their support for Mars at the same time.

After the launch, the astronauts will host a weekly reality TV show, of life in space, and the exploration of Mars. Permanent cameras will be mounted to the astronaut?s suits, allowing viewers back home to experience Mars along side the astronauts.

The first astronauts will plant a red United Nations flag in the Martian soil. They will claim the planet for all the people of the Earth, to be administered at first by the Sell-Mars organization, and later by a fully autonomous Martian government. Please don?t assume that we?re claiming the planet for ourselves only, while the land that we have sold will be legitimately owned by the people who bought it, it will only amount to less then one percent of the surface, so there?s plenty of room for all, If anyone else wants to mount their own mission to Mars their more then welcome to it.

The first explorers, by landing there on behalf of all the people who invested money in the plan will have the right to claim a few percent of the planet, and so the land deeds will be therefore valid. I imagine that the land will rise in value after it has been claimed, as it will now be leally recognized.

As the astronauts spend a year traveling around Mars, they will no doubt have to catalog many mountains, craters, valleys, and other features. The digital camera?s they carry will send back pictures to Earth, so John Smith, who paid to have a mountain named, will get to see his investment.

In a year the astronauts will have plenty of time to explore and carry out experiments on the Red planet. They will also examine techniques vital to building a sustained human presence on Mars, the ultimate goal of the project.

After the year is up, they will leave for Earth, carrying with them as much Martian soil and rocks as possible. Six months later they will splash down to a hero?s welcome, and then probably spend another six months doing promotional tours, and book signings. All profits would be injected back into the program.

The Martian rocks will be studied by the universities and organizations which secured the first examination rights. Once they are found to be free of any Martian life, and are no use for further research, the small rocks and dust will be distributed to the customers who previously purchased them. Several larger rocks will be auctioned off. Again the profits will go back into the program, (A fist sized Moon rock was valued at 350 Million dollars!)

There will probably be three to four initial exploration missions to Mars, but after these the program will change slightly. Instead of returning the astronauts home, the next visitors to Mars will stay there, and begin the establishment of a new civilization.

We could never seriously hope to pay for the colonization on our own. But luckily we shouldn?t have too. After the initial exploration missions, people will be able to purchase a one way ticket to live on Mars. With our hardware being mass produced, and a cycling space craft traveling to and fro between the Earth and Mars, the first colonist?s will probably pay around a million dollars for the journey, and while that?s not a sum of money that most people could afford, the majority of the first colonists will be scientists and engineers who could be sponsored by universities and other organizations to conduct legitimate scientific work. Even with ticket prices this high, many private citizens could afford to make the journey from the old world to the new, especially considering that with a one way ticket to Mars, a person could sell his house, car and other possessions.

At this point in the colonization, the Sell-Mars organization would make a small profit of each ticket sold. This money would be reinvested back into space, for what ever scheme seemed appropriate at the time. It may be a new cheaper launch vehicle, or a Sell-Moon scheme. In this way, our expansion into space would be a continuous event, and we should never again fall back to the cradle of Earth, as we did after Apollo.

My father, like so many of our ancestors, traveled from the old world, to the new. The journey for him was comfortable, but many people who took the journey a hundred years ago had a harder time, the trip took six months, with poor food, and cramped conditions, but the goal was worth the discomfort. By leaving the old world, they were starting again, a fresh start in a new place, with unexplored lands to be utilized and new societies to be created. Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States, these nations were all colonized from the old world, and now rank among the leaders in wealth and living conditions. The reasons are simple, a new colony must at first struggle to survive, but this struggle leads to ingenuity, and progress. A new colony must be flexible and inventive to cope with the demands of a developing nation, leading to modern views of government, and society.

This trend can be seen throughout history, from humble beginnings, along a thin strip of vegetation in Kenya, Homo sapiens has spread throughout the world, our constant struggle with this expansion has evolved us into intelligent and self aware creatures. But while the option of a new start, a new frontier was available for our forefathers, my generation does not have that option.

We are the first generation without a frontier.

The task of opening up the new frontier is ours. We are the first generation without a frontier, but we can still remember what that means, we still have some of the drive that pushes us to explore, to expand. If we leave this to our children we run the risk of them having forgotten the frontier sprit, we risk them always passing the challenge on to the next generation. We risk cloning generations of apathetic explorers, eager to discover in theory, but never in practice.

Mars is there for all humanity, but it is all of us who must pay for Mars.

David Ellard
davidellard@ozemail.com.au

Zubrin, Robert And Wagner, Richard. The Case for Mars: The Plan To Settle The Red Planet And Why We Must. Touchstone: New York, 1997

Wolf, Tom. The Right Stuff: Bantam Books: New York, 1979

dicktice · 2002-12-23 09:05:00

Re. Martin Rees's article--I wish to thank the Mars Society for presenting his thoughts, which I found profoundly logical and consistant with my own. He puts into perspective past accomplishments in space, and romanticizes about the not too distant future...which I gather is all that he (and I) have to look forward to due to our advanced age.
As to his views of the far distant future, I couldn't agree with his prognoses more. But I am not satisfied with his view of the immediate future.
I want to see Mars taken possession of by us asap. I want the adventure to take place, and I need it at least to begin in my lifetime. And my need (I suggest) is identical with a great majority of people living in the technologically still-under-developed nations such as the United States & the Commonwealth & Russia & China & the European Union.
While we live out our ridiculously short lives compared with time to reach intellectual maturity, sorting ourselves out on Earth with regard to population, politics, religion, terrorism, justice, energy, ecology, conservation, transportation, communications...I/we need the stimulus--to give it meaning-- of experiencing the simultaneous expansion into human-occupied interplanetary space. Need I go on?

Bill White · 2002-12-23 10:30:37

What I propose is something I call Sell-Mars. The way it works is simple. A non-profit organization is established to administrate the sale, marketing, and ultimate colonization of Mars.
If the planet were sold for $10 an acre, it would be worth 350 billion dollars. A hundred times more money then we need.

Great idea! *IF* *IF* *IF* your non-profit can somehow establish the legitimate ability to have their land grants recognized by the rest of humanity.

Unless an appropriate international body (with sufficient firepower to enforce its judgments) were to recognize the legitimacy of any such land grants/land sales a claim would only be worth the paper it was printed on.

By the way, can I sell you a stack of US Confederate currency?

How about a valid and authentic land grant "Deed" to some Beverly Hills, California real estate or maybe downtown San Diego, originally issued by the Mexican government in 1820?

Palomar · 2002-12-23 11:43:17

This is an idea I?ve been working on for a little while now. It all came to me a few years ago when I read an article that said we wouldn?t be able to send humans to Mars for forty or fifty years. I wasn?t born when men walked on the Moon (Can it really be thirty years ago?), and it dawned on me that I could live my whole life knowing people could walk on other worlds, but never actually being alive to actually see it.

*That really is a thought. You've made me extra grateful for being able to remember the Apollo missions; I'd just turned 4 during Apollo 11 and was 7 years old during Apollo 17. I do remember those missions, including Apollo 13. I hope, hope, HOPE!! it doesn't take 50+ years to get a crew of humans on Mars...or another to the moon. I feel like I've been waiting forever for another mission; I guess as a kid I just assumed that these sorts of missions were "a given," and more exciting missions were to follow.

It seems so long ago; it is.

As for budgets, costs, etc.: I have to admit that, for the U.S. space program anyway, the aging baby-boomer population has me worried...all the healthcare costs. By 2030 it's projected that there will be only 1 young worker for every 5 senior citizens. By 2010 Social Security :might: be bankrupt. Hopefully these forecasts are wrong, or are overly alarmist in nature...but still, we do have a very large aging population which might but a damper on space exploration funding. Hopefully not...it's hard to remain optimistic sometimes.

--Cindy

soph · 2002-12-23 12:01:39

and a cycling space craft traveling to and fro between the Earth and Mars

Yay, sounds like my cargo idea!

A billion people watched Apollo 11 launch, that?s a big advertising market, how much would Coke or Pepsi pay to paint a rocket tank to look like a giant soft drink can?

I like this too-I think i've said before that we can help foot some of the cost by advertising on boosters, or using a particular companies lab equipment, etc. How much would X company love to say that their equipment was used on mars?

On another note, I was thinking of the US Homestead Act that helped fuel western development. The US government owned a bunch of land from purchases, war, etc. and they parceled it out to families.

Well, I'd say that anybody who's willing to pay a ticket price to mars can have a permanent, say, 2 acres of land. They could then stay, rent it, or do whatever they want. I don't think we should allow people to buy property unless they intend to go onto it, unless the colonists sell it to them later.

Or, alternatively, we could set up a sort of zoning agency, that parcels land off for different uses ("Earth," "Mars residence," "Farms") etc. they wouldnt necessarily own land, they would just oversee what specific land was used for.

Advertising would be a huge boon to any plan. you could slap an add on everything. beverages, food, the rocket, the hab, the equipment, computers, rovers, suits, clothes, etc. Huge amounts of money could be made.

About the reality TV idea...heres my take. Have them have a digital camera, like you said, and film things all day. then, once or twice a day, they could show their selected clips, and chat with the earth audience. i dont think anybody would want to be watched 24/7. We could fill the rest of the time with programs explaining the technology we use, what we want to accomplish, education, etc. Get people interested and knowledgeable. I think the main reason people are so indifferent to mars right now, is that they dont understand it. if they knew the ins-and-outs, theyd be far more interested.

If we used the space elevators that Phobos discussed, perhaps fuel production would be a viable industry on mars, they could just shoot it back to earth. the cost would be lower (less gravity), and by that time, the technology would have naturally progressed to further reduce the cost. Say at a launch cost of $50/kg...maybe mars can use fuel as its "cash crop."

RobertDyck · 2002-12-23 12:05:59

Interesting idea, but...

http://www.moonproperty.net/en/]Moon Properties, http://www.moonestates.com/cat_Mars.asp]Moon Estates, http://www.tiggypig.com/acatalog/MOONLAND.html]TiggyPig, http://www.moonlandregistry.com/mars.htm]Lunar Embassy, and others are already attempting to sell land. In fact, they are selling land for about $20 per acre. The Lunar Embassy went through a court challenge, to prove they have the right to sell what they sell. You should check out the court decision before attempting to get into that field, or attempting to compete with them. The Mars Society gave out certificates to paid members last year, and that brought controversy at the convention.

If you do try this, don't sell yourself short; don't sell 100 acres for $100 because that is only $1 per acre. The current price for a tourist to space is $20 million per, but you won't get many to pay that price. If you can get it down to $1 million per person then you will get a lot more paying customers. There have been market studies to determine what people are willing to pay and how many will buy at each price. Find a copy of those studies. I believe the X-Prize was involved with one study.

Another money making technique is a robotic sample-return mission. That would give you Mars rocks and Mars dirt to sell on Earth, it would demonstrate technology for the manned mission, it would prove you can do it, and it would cost a lot less than the manned mission. Another idea is selling time for an unmanned rover on Mars. The customer just enters a credit card number on a web page to gain access to a real rover on Mars. You would have to add some software to ensure the customer doesn't drive it over a cliff, and do something to deal with the time lag. Perhaps one price to control the rover, another lower price to watch the video feed, and a high price for exclusive access. You could have 2 sizes of rover: one the size of a Radio Shack toy car that just has a video camera and microphone; the other with scientific instruments, a robot arm, small drilling rig, etc. The rovers would require batteries that could survive Mars cold; you don't want it to freeze like Mars Pathfinder did. How many customers who buy Mars real estate would like to operate a tiny rover to inspect their purchase? How many would like to rent time on the serious scientific rover to prospect for commercial ore?

To compete with the other guys already selling land certificates you would have to demonstrate you have the ability to get something to Mars. Is there any way you could partner with one of the existing "Mars land" companies to gain their funding?

soph · 2002-12-23 12:12:07

This is exactly what i didnt like...i dont want to see companies monolpoizing land they have no claim over. until they send people to claim it, they cannot call the land their own to sell.

Bill White · 2002-12-23 12:41:13

soph writes:

This is exactly what i didnt like...i dont want to see companies monolpoizing land they have no claim over. until they send people to claim it, they cannot call the land their own to sell.

*WHY* does merely getting there mean that the first to arrive "owns" anything? I am fairly certain that none of the major world powers would recognize squatters rights to more than a very small piece of territory actually occupied. And, there would be no police to call or courts to turn to if another groups of settlers came to throw you off "your" land.

soph also writes:

I like this too-I think i've said before that we can help foot some of the cost by advertising on boosters, or using a particular companies lab equipment, etc. How much would X company love to say that their equipment was used on mars?

The recent novel http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de … oks]Oxygen includes the premise that NBC pays $ 5 billion for media broadcast rights to a Mars mission. Great idea!

In that book, there is controversy because NBC asks that the launch be delayed until the Saturday before the Super Bowl - near the end of the January 2014 launch window. Also, wind speeds at launch time hover at or above 15 mph yet if the launch is postponed NBC pays NASA a few billion less for another launch time not the day before the Super Bowl.

On another note, I was thinking of the US Homestead Act that helped fuel western development. The US government owned a bunch of land from purchases, war, etc. and they parceled it out to families.

Another great idea. Hernando de Soto discusses this extensively in his book http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/ … 243968]The Mystery of Capital.

However - there still is one REALLY big problem.

In your example, no one disputed that the US government actually owned all that land and had the legal right to make grants in Oklahoma. Under the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 - all signatory governments (USA included) waived all claims of sovereignty to all celestial objects. Therefore, WHO will be making these land grants?

Note: Actually certain Native Americans did object to these federal land grants but they lacked the lawyers, guns and money needed to object successfully. ???

Well, I'd say that anybody who's willing to pay a ticket price to mars can have a permanent, say, 2 acres of land. They could then stay, rent it, or do whatever they want. I don't think we should allow people to buy property unless they intend to go onto it, unless the colonists sell it to them later.

Well, I'd say that personally I would agree with you - but what you and I say have little influence in Washington or London or Zurich, no?

???

soph · 2002-12-23 12:46:13

but this treaty only applies on earth. and we could set it up through the mars society, not necessarily through a government. and it is not unheard of for a government to run a "private" company.

the problem is setting up a real system of claiming land. maybe, if some organization lands on mars, they get, say, the surrounding thousand acres? thats a decent amount of land, not too large, and not too small. and its fair, because it promotes getting there, and rewards those who do.

Bill White · 2002-12-23 13:00:08

the problem is setting up a real system of claiming land. maybe, if some organization lands on mars, they get, say, the surrounding thousand acres? thats a decent amount of land, not too large, and not too small. and its fair, because it promotes getting there, and rewards those who do.

Exactly! And, who gets to decide what "fair?"

10 acres, 100, 1000, 10,000? Who decides?

soph · 2002-12-23 13:06:03

Thats a hard question. we cant rely on the UN, because the countries that cant get people to mars will be against any initiative to do so, because theyll see presence there as a threat, an insult, and theyll try to stop the wealthier countries from getting the benefits they deserve.

we should set up an international space coalition to decide this. they could set up guidelines for travel to other planets. perhaps they could offer incentives to organizations to follow their rules. if they make enough money, they could buy launch sites, and truly regulate travel.

Josh Cryer · 2002-12-23 14:24:19

I think all the arguments have already been made. Owning a piece of Mars is like owning a star in the sky. There was this one company which would put your name to any star you wished (if it was available). Of course, such a thing was silly, because only those who had the companies list could even know to recognize your star as its ?offical? name.

Before government exists on Mars, owning land would first be backed up by possession. If I have a piece of land fenced off (by whatever means), that land is mine. And even then, it would still depend on who has the most firepower. If some other guy comes in with lots of bulldozing equipment, and all I have is a simple rover and no way to defend myself, I better get my ass out of there.

Personally, I don't see much profit in space.

soph · 2002-12-23 14:27:43

like i said, an internationally run agency should mark off land, owned by the organization that landed in that area. the organization can then parcel it off as they wished.

Echus_Chasma · 2002-12-23 15:23:47

I don't like the idea of selling martian land-rights at this point. Rich people will just try take advantage of it and buy heaps even if they don't really give a damn about Mars in the first place.
Its unfair on the less wealthy people who actually care about Mars and spend most of their time on stuff to do with the Red Planet to be left out in the cold by some rich bastard who does'nt care less. :angry:

RobertDyck · 2002-12-23 16:04:01

Mars is a big planet; there is as much surface area as all the continents of Earth combined. You could sell a lot of land and still only sell a small proportion. One of my favourite authors once wrote that any opinion, no matter how expert, is only opinion unless it can be expressed in numbers. Ok, Mars has mean diameter of 6787km so the surface area is 144,712,341.65 square kilometres = 14,471,234,165 hectares = 35,759,051,902 acres. To be correct you should round those figures off to 4 significant figures, since the diameter was only that accurate. That is 35 billion acres. I doubt you will sell more than 1 million acres before you prove you can get there. The Lunar Embassy brags they have 1,002,122 customers who purchased property on the Moon, and 135,140 customers for Mars. Since they have operated since 1980, I don't think there will be a dramatic increase soon unless something happens. By the way, the Lunar Embassy intends to use their money to send something to the Moon. But as for rich people buying up Mars; they may buy an acre here or there as a curiosity, but won't make any serious purchases until there is a return on investment.

So, if you want to spend your time on stuff to do with the Red Planet, and get to Mars that way, what projects do you want to participate in?

David Ellard · 2002-12-23 18:21:24

Thanks for all the responses guys, I?m new to this, and really didn?t expect so much interest so soon.

Sell-Mars is something that I am seriously considering setting up, but one of the major steps before going on-line is showing it to my peers, (You Guys) and getting your responses for better or for worse?.

I?ll try to respond as best I can to some of the problems brought up.

Several of you brought up the problems of land rights, and I agree with you that this is one of the more pressing concerns. The first is that fact that a man named Dennis Hope, several years ago decided he was going to claim the entire solar system, including Mars. He did this by registering with his local government, and has now made millions of dollars. Does anyone really believe that just because he came up with the idea first that he has a valid claim? The way I envisioning Sell-Mars working is like this, will sell you an acre of land, but we will specify that the claim isn?t valid at the moment. Only when the first Mars mission lands there will the claim be valid. Who would win out in court, someone who just claimed the planets to make money, or a non-profit organization that just landed there? The actual outer space treaty signed in the sixties allows for a private company or individual to claim the planets, but where going to do it the old fashion way, by planting a flag.

Soph mentioned that people should only be able to own land if their traveling there to colonize, but I want to try and keep this open for all the world, for a few reasons, the first is that selling land is part of the money generating we need to build and launch our hardware, if we just limit it to people who are actually going there we won?t make the money we need to send them in the first place. Secondly, Echus Chasma mentioned that only the rich would buy up land, but at $10 an acre this is something that?s affordable to everyone. The rich are more likely to spend there money on buying Mars rocks, or having mountains and valleys named after them. What I want to do is have our prices go up sequentially, $10, $100, $1000, and so on right up to going there yourself on the first missions at $50 Million. This way everyone in the world can be a part of it. Speak to anyone who worked on Apollo, from the astronauts themselves, to the lowliest factory worker and what you will find is a glowing pride that they were a part of something grand, something bigger then anything else in history. With Sell-Mars, YOU can feel the same way, can you imagine watching the first steps on Mars and knowing YOU are a part of this?

But selling the land is only a small part Sell-Mars, as I mentioned before, even if we sell billions worth of land, (Which I seriously doubt), it?ll only amount to less then one percent of the surface. Our thinking is clouded by our constant 1 G, this is a whole planet, there is room enough for all, we aren?t going to run into border disputes until a fully autonomous Martian government is established, and even then, control of land allocation (And everything else) will be passed from Sell-Mars, to the Martians as soon as the colony reached a certain size, (Say a thousand people?) and there?s hardly going to over sell the planet.

Selling land isn?t going to make Sell-Mars that much money compared to our other ventures. Here are my estimations on where the money will come from:

Selling Land - 250 Million

Selling Mars Rocks, price dependent on size ? 1 Billion (Remember the fist sized 350 Million moon rocks, we should be able to bring back 500kg on the first mission alone!)

Selling naming rights for mountains, crater, etc ? 100 million (In all honesty I have no idea what this is worth, anyone??)

Selling the TV coverage of the mission, movie rights, reality TV Mars series ? 1 Billion, (As an example take the NCAA ten year coverage for 10 Billion, or the 60 odd billion Olympic contracts.)

Planting your countries flag ? 500 Million (I estimate at least half of the worlds 200 countries will want to be a part of this, not to mention the hundreds of corporations that could afford 5 million from their advertising budgets.)

Sponsoring astronauts ? 1 Billion (Apart from the 50 Million in return tickets, there?s training to account for also)

Auctioning the rights to examine the first return rock samples ? 10 million

Merchandising ? 100 Million (Lucasfilm made a billion from The Phantom Menace)

Add all this up and we come to 3.9 billion, just short of our target of 5 billion, but then again, that was assuming the Mars Direct Ares or Energia?s were used. Our rocket will be a little cheaper.

But as you can see, the land deeds aren?t the best money generator, the astronaut sponsorship and the TV rights will be.

I better finish up, I?m wafting on, and this post is huge, please let me know what you think of the money examples, if you think the prices are too low or too high. I value your input.

Let me know how much you people would support a venture like Sell-Mars, if I get enough positive response I?ll post the Sell-Mars website and the ball could rolling.

Dizzzy · 2002-12-23 19:07:59

I think the biggest problem is that the plan relys too much on selling land and naming rights early on. Most of the funding will come from government and corprate sponsorship, but we cant get goverment or corporate sponsorship until we can show this plan to be a reality.
We'd need to show them that we're well on the way to creating our rocket which basically means we're relying on making something like $100 million on selling the land and the naming rights. The early part of the plan is the weakest and most critical link in the chain... anyone got any ideas where else the early funding can come from?

soph · 2002-12-23 19:32:57

loans. prove that you can make money off of the enterprise, and you can find someone that will give you money. its called venture capital. make it a long term loan, with as low interest as possible. if you use the money wisely and get everything in place, it should be fairly easy to pay off the money with profits.

Echus_Chasma · 2002-12-24 23:38:50

Mars is a big planet; there is as much surface area as all the continents of Earth combined. You could sell a lot of land and still only sell a small proportion. One of my favourite authors once wrote that any opinion, no matter how expert, is only opinion unless it can be expressed in numbers. Ok, Mars has mean diameter of 6787km so the surface area is 144,712,341.65 square kilometres = 14,471,234,165 hectares = 35,759,051,902 acres. To be correct you should round those figures off to 4 significant figures, since the diameter was only that accurate. That is 35 billion acres. I doubt you will sell more than 1 million acres before you prove you can get there. The Lunar Embassy brags they have 1,002,122 customers who purchased property on the Moon, and 135,140 customers for Mars. Since they have operated since 1980, I don't think there will be a dramatic increase soon unless something happens. By the way, the Lunar Embassy intends to use their money to send something to the Moon. But as for rich people buying up Mars; they may buy an acre here or there as a curiosity, but won't make any serious purchases until there is a return on investment.

Ok, you've converted me.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2002-12-23 04:37:28

Re: Paying For Mars - How to afford to send humans to Mars

#2 2002-12-23 09:05:00

Re: Paying For Mars - How to afford to send humans to Mars

#3 2002-12-23 10:30:37

Re: Paying For Mars - How to afford to send humans to Mars

#4 2002-12-23 11:43:17

Re: Paying For Mars - How to afford to send humans to Mars

#5 2002-12-23 12:01:39

Re: Paying For Mars - How to afford to send humans to Mars

#6 2002-12-23 12:05:59

Re: Paying For Mars - How to afford to send humans to Mars

#7 2002-12-23 12:12:07

Re: Paying For Mars - How to afford to send humans to Mars

#8 2002-12-23 12:41:13

Re: Paying For Mars - How to afford to send humans to Mars

#9 2002-12-23 12:46:13

Re: Paying For Mars - How to afford to send humans to Mars

#10 2002-12-23 13:00:08

Re: Paying For Mars - How to afford to send humans to Mars

#11 2002-12-23 13:06:03

Re: Paying For Mars - How to afford to send humans to Mars

#12 2002-12-23 14:24:19

Re: Paying For Mars - How to afford to send humans to Mars

#13 2002-12-23 14:27:43

Re: Paying For Mars - How to afford to send humans to Mars

#14 2002-12-23 15:23:47

Re: Paying For Mars - How to afford to send humans to Mars

#15 2002-12-23 16:04:01

Re: Paying For Mars - How to afford to send humans to Mars

#16 2002-12-23 18:21:24

Re: Paying For Mars - How to afford to send humans to Mars

#17 2002-12-23 19:07:59

Re: Paying For Mars - How to afford to send humans to Mars

#18 2002-12-23 19:32:57

Re: Paying For Mars - How to afford to send humans to Mars

#19 2002-12-24 23:38:50

Re: Paying For Mars - How to afford to send humans to Mars

Board footer