Anyone knows what their profit margins are like so far?
The main difference between them and SpaceX is that SpaceX offers it products & services at fixed price contracts rather than the cost plus contracts used by the competition. That and SpaceX is developing the rocket with its own money rather than on contract.
Cost plus contracts guarantee a fixed profit above whatever cost the contractor incurs building and flying the rocket. SpaceX profit is not guaranteed, but if they do their job well their profit margins could be greater than their competitors margins -- or worse if things go badly. It's that risk/reward balance.
http://www.lloyds.com/News_Centre/Features_from_Lloyds/News_...
Q: What special skills does a space underwriter need?
A: With only 150 satellites in orbit and perhaps 25 satellites being launched per year, statistics are less meaningful than most other classes. Instead we have to use experience and engineering judgement to assess the risks. Most space underwriters have some level of engineering support.
At ASIC, the London-based underwriting team is supported by a Canada-based engineering team, with almost 60 years of satellite industry experience between them. Having good engineering support however is only of use if the underwriter can translate the engineering risk assessment into a suitable coverage design, and a thorough detailed bespoke policy wording with no ambiguities.
http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear_weapons_and_global_security/sp...
It saddens me we won't see many more 100-ton launches (70-ton shuttle + 30-ton payload) for a while, as those will be replaced by far less impressive 30-ton launches.
