That article seems odd...almost like it's trying to "damn with faint praise". It dances around what would seem to be the core point in defense of SpaceX, that they have a lower "government surcharge" than their competitors. If that's true, it makes the claims of subsidy ridiculous, and yet why would this article avoid saying it plainly?
1 comment
[ 8.4 ms ] story [ 24.7 ms ] thread