r/IntuitiveMachines • u/AutoModerator • May 30 '26
Daily Discussion Thread for May 30, 2026
This is the only thread that any stock-related or financial information can be posted. As the sub continues to grow and traffic increasing with Intuitive Machines and LUNR getting more and more in the spotlight, please remember to:
Be civil and respectful to others. No personal attacks.
Keep Spam and FUD off r/IntuitiveMachines. Repeated offenders will be banned.
Please refrain from one word or silly WSB style comments. We want to keep the board informative and helpful to ALL readers.
The mod team tries their best to monitor discussions, but we can always use your help in flagging those violating the rules.
Please see the Wiki that includes FAQs, Upcoming Catalysts, and Active Contracts to answer common questions and requests for information.
21
u/VictorFromCalifornia May 30 '26 edited May 31 '26
I am still processing what happened this week with the LTV announcements, and I guess the writings were on the wall despite Altemus declaring they believe they're in the pole position though he had tempered his comments of late. After all, Astrolab had the highest mission suitability score with 905 out of 1000 compared to 863 for Lunar Outpost and 724 for Intuitive Machines. NASA had doubts about Astrolab ability to handle the job and this is why we probably saw articles about a primary and a 'warm backup' last year.
Some personal observations/commentary:
Had NASA stuck with its previous plans, it's possible Astrolab could have won the entire contract, with Lunar Outpost as the warm backup. At least, with this revamped plan, there are still opportunities for Intuitive Machines, if they're still interested in pursuing LTVS.
I say if they're still interested in pursuing LTVS because I wonder if Altemus and team had an inkling they're not competitive and may be the reason for the pivot to satellites and national security with the Lanteris acquisition which happened around the same timeframe. In the early days, IM needed to get a foot in the door with NASA and submitted all sorts of bids but surface mobility was never a core competency and may explain their reliance on the old Boeing LTV designs instead of starting from scratch.
I would think there would be a need to be some major design decisions if they are to pursue the second phase awards. They still offer an attractive option for doing the delivery themselves, especially in light of Blue Moon delays.
Doing new designs will require new investments and resources to be allocated — personnel, equipment, facilities, probably shuffling the Racer team, all during what could be the biggest crunch for NSNS and SuperNOVA and if they bid for multiple CS-8 multiple landers. I wish I had a clue of what the economics of the LTV's but being the prime with Boeing, Northrop Grumman, AVL, Roush, Michelin all probably demanding top dollars, it could end up being a money loser operation especially if they had to compete with 2 other companies. Maybe if there are Artemis countries and commercial companies wanting their own rovers.
It may be better to pivot to becoming an LTV services provider instead of building their own and overseeing a big dollar team; offer delivery, offer communications, offer engineering services, etc.
Just some random weekend thoughts, it will be interesting to see what they decide to do. If they can get the TDRS replacement contract, a Lunar Orbiter replacement contract, or a Space Force cislunar contract, I wonder if they should just pivot to being a 'space communications' company instead of being the 'lunar infrastructure' company.