Highlights & Thoughts From Rocket Lab Investor Conferences

Going over the Highlights shared by Adam Spice from Recent Rocket Lab Investor conferences and interviews. ($RKLB)

#RKLB #RocketLab #neutron

Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)

[amadeogonzalez]

Hey Dave I’m a Rocket Lab engineer been working there for about a year your coverage is on point

[BarbsUsedCars]

Hey Dave thanks for the shout out. Happy to support the great content here on your channel.

Even if electron reusability doesn’t end up being worth the small gain in margin, I’m sure the lesson’s learned to take into neutrons development were more than worth it.

[JJR]

Great to combine these two SPICE chats .. and hear your thoughts too Dave.. bravo from down under…

[ADC]

5% can also mean the amount of work required to turn around a flown stage 1 is significant. Not all recovery plans are apples to apples comparison. The payload mass penalty for recovery for a small launch vehicle is a lot more impactful than a medium class vehicle such as a F9. Makes the recovery proposition a lot more complex to implement successfully

[j.m.]

Interesting on Archimedes engine. SpaceX Raptor 1st test fire was 2016, 1st product-like test fire Feb 2019, first Starhopper test mid 2019, first Starship mockup 150m flight mid 2020, first integrated test flight early 2023.

Getting Archimedes from 1st product test fire to 1st launch in a year would be really fast.

[Shaydon]

I love hearing them talk about putting their own assets in space. I also feel like if they can pull off the 1 stop shop the business will explode, very bullish and makes me want to add more even at this current

[wellyouknowthatsyouropinionman]

You can tell spice is keen to get going on space applications as soon as Neutron is done

[MarcHoude]

From my understanding, from previous news releases, is that they have a complete recovered rocket, which has passed most key testing requirements to be recertified for flight. So, as you alluded to, most of the R&D into reusability for the electron might be done. If that’s the case, while not tantalizing right now compared to Neutron development and the cash flow that will come with that, a 5% margin improvement on electron is still better than a swift kick in the pants. Plus, proving their success in a reusable small launcher would put Neutron customers spending millions more to launch on the very first reused Neutron rocket at ease.

[terrya]

I agree the more expensive the launch asset the more you save in reusability. Reusable Electron would benefit from really increase Rocket Lab perception more than the occasional 5% savings.

[whisky]

I think its pretty clear by this point that they have abandoned making Electron reusable.

[thomashawaii]

The labor cost on the reusable Electrons takes a huge part of the total cost since the rocket is relatively small with a lower cost to manufact. But for bigger rocket, the advantage of usability will be significant.

[dphuntsman]

Good segment. Spice implied Electron could get into as much as 30s/yr- but, I dunno; I throw a small yellow flag on that. They clearly have given up on Electron reusability (no one can blame them for that, in all honesty). The only company in the entire space econosphere that ever starts out from square one with true mass production ramp up capability in mind, is SpaceX. If he saw orders for say 2026 coming in that looked like it might hit 30 launches, he would have some serious capex (in my opinion) to spend that he hasn’t admitted to- and yet on a realistic timeline, Neutron wouldn’t have started to being accretive yet. I’m not being super-critical; I like the majority of what he’s saying; and I like the path that the company is on- including the fact they have space systems! But saying that the more flights they do that “ a lot just flows to bottom line” is a little simplistic. But all in all a good report. He’s pretty much signaled that they are looking for just the right type of acquisition to round out their in-house expertise; can’t wait to find out what it will be. - Dave Huntsman

[josephspinella]

Dave, I love your videos, however you under estimate of long term value of your personal holdings in Rocket Lab. ( in the 1940, s my father bought 600 shares of Martin Marietta for $20 per share. Those original share are now 8, 000 shares of LMT) or 4 nice homes 80 years later. The hardest thing is not to sell for decades.

[matthewwstine]

I think you are looking at a couple things. With the first being risk reward. Do you risk a customer satellite for a small add back to the bottom line of just fly a new reliable rocket and push the margin on success rate. The second is - how much is gamesmanship. When you show your already struggling competitors that you are recovering and potentially using a recovered rocket when they are just trying to get a rocket into orbit could have been purely a competitive move to deflate the competition.

[colinboniface]

Next share price drop, I'm buying...

[leotka]

Reusability isn't a solution. Rocket Lab should work on airship based launch pads. Such pad can provide start from 40-50km with existing rockets. Same rocket but bigger payload.

[gwynnaldrich]

What is meant by organic vs inorganic?

[kieron]

Reusability on electron does not seem viable….

Thanks Dave

[shanahans]

All eyes on Nuetron is correct. Any news on when the landing barge will be built? The Nuetron is limited to 8 tonne, and limits its attraction until it is ready and they can deliver 13 tonne.

[josephspinella]

Merge, Rocket Labs with AST space Mobile and Blacksky.