[FPSPACE] The MirCorp soap opera continues (fwd)

[Dwayne Allen Day]

On Sun, 15 Oct 2000, David Anderman wrote:

> It is important to note that the current issues that MirCorp are 
> confronting are transitory in nature - basically, everything bad that could 
> happen to Mir is happening at once: money crunches, solar activity, 
> mounting ISS requirements for Progress. If the current issues are resolved, 
> there is a good possibility that Mir will be around for a good while 
> longer, although future soap operas are possible.

-solar activity--predictable
-mounting ISS requirements for Progress--predictable
-money crunches--predictable (I predicted it)


I'm just an observer in all this.  And from the beginning my observations
have led me to believe that these guys did not have much of an idea of
what they were doing.  They clearly failed to foresee some hefty obstacles
to success.


> space tourism were likely, I should say that the public information about 
> MirCorp's  deals represent a fraction of what is really happening, and that 
> the public information about MirCorps' revenues from the announced deals do 
> not correctly state the potential revenues.

The public information from MirCorp?

Each press release from them usually represents a retraction of previous
plans.  You might remember that they claimed that they were going to
launch a Progress to Mir in October.  Well, this week we learned that this
is a Russian government Progress, NOT a MirCorp Progress.

Two long-duration missions planned for 2001 have become two short-duration
missions.

A Fall 2000 (manned?) mission was supposed to carry up an "internet
portal."  This has not happened.

The second quarter 2001 IPO that was supposed to generate $400 million
plus is now a first quarter, rushed IPO that is supposed to generate $117
million.

Translation:  MirCorp's press releases follow a diminishing expectations
curve.


> I believe that MirCorp's value is in demonstrating the economic value of 
> space stations, and that one day, NASA may use MirCorp as an example of 
> what is possible at ISS.

Here we agree.  I believe that MirCorp's value is demonstrating that
manned space stations are not economically viable.



DDAY