Moon Mission
-
@Kirwan said in Moon Mission:
Not sure that is right, the Pixar stuff was right around Next, not a very successful period for Jobs. Pixar was a punt that paid off big time, and was what made Jobs a billionaire.
He was 100% cashflowing Pixar right up till Toy Story hit. The article pointed out every month the Pixar guiys would go to Jobs & go "umm... we have no money" & he'd write them a cheque. But the numbers were tiny by most standards - he'd put $50m into Pixar & it was 100% his deal, so he could fully cashflow it. Ross Perot stuck a big wedge of cash into NEXT, so Jobs wasn't cashflowing that.
In contrast Tesla, Solar City & Space X are all WAY beyond Musks ability to personally cashflow even as a billionaire.
-
@gollum said in Moon Mission:
In contrast Tesla, Solar City & Space X are all WAY beyond Musks ability to personally cashflow even as a billionaire.
Agreed, but SpaceX have contracts in place, and while SolarCity weren't exactly running hot, the outlook for vertically integrating it to Tesla Energy is obvious
-
@gollum said in Moon Mission:
@Kirwan said in Moon Mission:
Not sure that is right, the Pixar stuff was right around Next, not a very successful period for Jobs. Pixar was a punt that paid off big time, and was what made Jobs a billionaire.
He was 100% cashflowing Pixar right up till Toy Story hit. The article pointed out every month the Pixar guiys would go to Jobs & go "umm... we have no money" & he'd write them a cheque. But the numbers were tiny by most standards - he'd put $50m into Pixar & it was 100% his deal, so he could fully cashflow it. Ross Perot stuck a big wedge of cash into NEXT, so Jobs wasn't cashflowing that.
In contrast Tesla, Solar City & Space X are all WAY beyond Musks ability to personally cashflow even as a billionaire.
It might have been as much as $60 million, be intially bought it for $10 million - what a steal in hindsight. He then made $4 billion when it sold to Disney, not bad.
Financed by selling all but one of his Apple shares when he got fired.
-
@NTA said in Moon Mission:
@gollum said in Moon Mission:
In contrast Tesla, Solar City & Space X are all WAY beyond Musks ability to personally cashflow even as a billionaire.
Agreed, but SpaceX have contracts in place, and while SolarCity weren't exactly running hot, the outlook for vertically integrating it to Tesla Energy is obvious
I still think Tesla will get bought out by a mainstream manufacturer. It'll end up like Porche or Rolls Royce. Could easily see someone like VW stepping in for Tesla & leaving Musk in place.
The Solar City bail out was reeeeally shady, he lost a lot of investor credability with that. There is defininately synergy, just not $2.6bn in synergy.
Space X I'm less sure, but again someone like one of the big engineering firms (GE, Seimans) maybe sees a link, but thats a stretch. Then nagain you get government contracts that a licence to print money & blow out costs.
@Kirwan said in Moon Mission:
He then made $4 billion when it sold to Disney, not bad.
Yip, one of the most ironic things about Jobs, he never understood Pixar, didn't try, didn't do anything re the innovation, had zero input creatively, and it was the biggest success of his career, probably one of the best investments anyones made in 30 years for that matter.
-
@Tim said in Moon Mission:
How of that sweet, sweet military money can SpaceX get? Unfortunately they have to compete against government procurement masters Lockheed.
There you go. Thats the out for Space X. get a chunk of government contract, sell out to Lockheed.
-
@gollum said in Moon Mission:
@NTA said in Moon Mission:
@gollum said in Moon Mission:
In contrast Tesla, Solar City & Space X are all WAY beyond Musks ability to personally cashflow even as a billionaire.
Agreed, but SpaceX have contracts in place, and while SolarCity weren't exactly running hot, the outlook for vertically integrating it to Tesla Energy is obvious
I still think Tesla will get bought out by a mainstream manufacturer. It'll end up like Porche or Rolls Royce. Could easily see someone like VW stepping in for Tesla & leaving Musk in place.
The Solar City bail out was reeeeally shady, he lost a lot of investor credability with that. There is defininately synergy, just not $2.6bn in synergy.
Space X I'm less sure, but again someone like one of the big engineering firms (GE, Seimans) maybe sees a link, but thats a stretch. Then nagain you get government contracts that a licence to print money & blow out costs.
@Kirwan said in Moon Mission:
He then made $4 billion when it sold to Disney, not bad.
Yip, one of the most ironic things about Jobs, he never understood Pixar, didn't try, didn't do anything re the innovation, had zero input creatively, and it was the biggest success of his career, probably one of the best investments anyones made in 30 years for that matter.
At some level though he must have had a gut feel that he was onto something even he he showed no idea how to drive it.
I certainly hope the hard fought equity that those original employees prised out of him made them comfortable for life. -
@Crucial said in Moon Mission:
At some level though he must have had a gut feel that he was onto something even he he showed no idea how to drive it.
I certainly hope the hard fought equity that those original employees prised out of him made them comfortable for life.Yeah, given how viciously he guarded his ownership he obviously valued it, but its more the zero creative input I find interesting. For a guy who micro-managed everything at NEXT & Apple & is famous for his creative input, to make his best ever investment by just writing cheques & going "yeah, whatever, I have no real opinion" makes it a good story
-
@gollum said in Moon Mission:
@Crucial said in Moon Mission:
At some level though he must have had a gut feel that he was onto something even he he showed no idea how to drive it.
I certainly hope the hard fought equity that those original employees prised out of him made them comfortable for life.Yeah, given how viciously he guarded his ownership he obviously valued it, but its more the zero creative input I find interesting. For a guy who micro-managed everything at NEXT & Apple & is famous for his creative input, to make his best ever investment by just writing cheques & going "yeah, whatever, I have no real opinion" makes it a good story
I wondered if it was because he invested on the basis of it being IT based then realised quickly that he had little to contribute other than money because it was creative in an area he had no knowledge in.
-
Perhaps he was just smart enough to realise the opportunity, the skill of the employees and that his greatest input would be his chequebook?
-
@antipodean said in Moon Mission:
Perhaps he was just smart enough to realise the opportunity, the skill of the employees and that his greatest input would be his chequebook?
I think it was probably something as banal as he was having lunch with George Lucas & Lucas said "I'm selling my computer animation studio, want it" & Jobs went "I liked Star Wars & I like computers, sure, I've got $10m in the glove box of my car, will that do?"
-
@antipodean said in Moon Mission:
Perhaps he was just smart enough to realise the opportunity, the skill of the employees and that his greatest input would be his chequebook?
The stubborness around releasing stock options to the employees despite the risk of having the key assets walking away and leaving the company worthless goes against that theory. He only gave in when that point was hammered into him.
-
@Crucial said in Moon Mission:
@antipodean said in Moon Mission:
Perhaps he was just smart enough to realise the opportunity, the skill of the employees and that his greatest input would be his chequebook?
The stubborness around releasing stock options to the employees despite the risk of having the key assets walking away and leaving the company worthless goes against that theory. He only gave in when that point was hammered into him.
That doesn't negate my theory; he just realises that when push came to shove, his investment would be nothing if he didn't share. That doesn't mean he gave artistic or technical direction.
-
@antipodean said in Moon Mission:
@Crucial said in Moon Mission:
@antipodean said in Moon Mission:
Perhaps he was just smart enough to realise the opportunity, the skill of the employees and that his greatest input would be his chequebook?
The stubborness around releasing stock options to the employees despite the risk of having the key assets walking away and leaving the company worthless goes against that theory. He only gave in when that point was hammered into him.
That doesn't negate my theory; he just realises that when push came to shove, his investment would be nothing if he didn't share. That doesn't mean he gave artistic or technical direction.
What I was getting at was that if he really did ''realise the opportunity, the skill of the employees'' he would have been more aware of the need to protect himself from them wanting to leave.
-
Yeah, his willingness to fuck over the only real asset they had (the staff) till his new CFO sat him down & went "what the fuck!" showed he had no real idea. He didn't even come to the realisation by himself.
The whole Pixar thing smelled like "a "me'h, I might as while buy this while I'm waiting for NEXT to take off, I honestly don't give a shit" from start till Toy Story hit.
-
Could have bought it on an acid trip!
-
Moon Machines
A collection of documentaries about Project Apollo, from the designers and engineers viewpoint. Each episode focused on individual components or equipment for the Apollo programme.
-
Saturn V Rocket:
-
Command Module:
-
Navigation Computer:
-
Lunar Module:
-
Space Suit:
-
Lunar Rover:
-
-
@antipodean cheers fella, will review at some stage
-
@antipodean Sweet, I'll give those a watch, I've been watching Apple TV Plus's show 'For All Mankind which is an alternate history about the moon landings.