The question here is whether the next launch will be substantially delayed by regulatory agencies (eg FAA license) past when they otherwise would have been ready to fly.
This could be a bit of a judgement call (at least, without having an insider at SpaceX and the FAA). If anyone has a suggestion in the comments for more precise resolution criteria, I'm open to hearing it.
I also reserve the option of resolving this one to market if the market price seems reasonable and not manipulated.
Because it is a judgement call I will not trade in this market.
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ74 | |
| 2 | Ṁ49 | |
| 3 | Ṁ47 | |
| 4 | Ṁ33 | |
| 5 | Ṁ29 |
Is Musk tweeting
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1699233677979390280
"Starship is ready to launch, awaiting FAA license approval"
then having a substantial delay before launch satisfy the requirements?
How long is "substantially delayed"?
Is this changed at all, if while the licence application is worked on submitted and reviewed, SpaceX does work on starship and/or ground support equipment without it being clear whether this work was necessary or just a useful improvement that wasn't strictly necessary.
@ChristopherRandles Sorry, at the time I wanted to wait and see a little bit as there seemed to be some ambiguity as to:
- They were actually ready (subsequent destacks and rehearsals vaguely suggest to me that at that time they weren't quite ready)
- It should be considered a regulatory issue, or perhaps more of a "they need to finish the plan they committed to" issue.
But now with them having done the wet dress rehearsal two weeks ago and still delayed due to Fish and Wildlife Service, that definitely qualifies in my book, so I just resolved YES.