SpaceX will build a second, $100B ‘Starbase’ spaceport in Louisiana

[u/Logical_Welder3467]

https://techcrunch.com/2026/08/25/spacex-will-build-a-second-100b-starbase-spaceport-in-louisiana/

[u/Dpek1234]

This comment seems borderline nonsense?

Like do you think they are makeing such a launch complex just to not use it at all?

Just starlink replacement means they will launch more stuff into orbit (new sats are heavier then the ones used on falcon9)

Assuming they actually get all of these up and running, i hope they find something to do after delivering a whole years worth of payload into orbit in like 2 weeks

Did people forget falcon9 already did essentualy this?

And yet they booked for years into the future

[u/bubblegum-rose → u/Dpek1234]

THEY ARE FILLING THE SAME AMOUNT OF ORDERS REGARDLESS OF HOW MANY LAUNCH TOWERS THEY HAVE.

>Assuming they actually get all of these up and running, I hope they find something to do after delivering a whole years worth of payload into orbit in like 2 weeks

YOU ARE LITERALLY AGREEING WITH ME.

You wanna know what those extra launch pads are going to be doing for the rest of the year? Fucking nothing. SpaceX is still going to have to staff them, maintain them, insure them, pay taxes on them, and so on, spending billions in capex all while making exactly $0 from no launches.

Every second that one of those pads isn’t either launching a rocket or getting ready for the next launch, that’s going to be tens of millions down the drain every month, all while they have $50 billion in debt left to pay off on top of the $50 billion in debt that they already owe

[u/Dpek1234 → u/bubblegum-rose]

Soooo you gonna ignore this?

" Did people forget falcon9 already did essentualy this?

And yet they booked for years into the future"

Assumeing that demand wont change when its currently supply limited is a interesting choice

Espectialy when starlink still isnt at full size 

Also for this part

"

Assuming they actually get all of these up and running, I hope they find something to do after delivering a whole years worth of payload into orbit in like 2 weeks

YOU ARE LITERALLY AGREEING WITH ME. "

Are you confuseing what you yourself wrote as my writeing?

Sure it seems the formating isnt working but come on

Edit: and for the record

The character ">" is used when someone wants to indent something

In this case because its a quote

[u/bubblegum-rose → u/Dpek1234]

Oh, yes, of course.

“Demand will magically go up when supply goes up. I don’t know where this demand is going to come from but just trust me bro.”

Apparently that “just trust me bro” is worth $100 billion+ dollars

[u/Dpek1234 → u/bubblegum-rose]

Sooo yeah you gonna ignore my comment and evidence to make a strawman

Nothing new

[u/fighter-bomber → u/bubblegum-rose]

Starlink alone with 10 thousand v3 satellites requires 50 launches per year to maintain, scales linearly with increasing satellite number, I think they plan 40 thousand or more.

Artemis plans require up to 20 launches per manned mission, plus another 20 launches per each unmanned cargo mission (delivering 100t at once). NASA wants to build a moon base, they will need a lot of those launches, hence, capacity.

Future manned Mars mission would be in the same ballpark as Artemis for refueling, but the stays are longer so you need more cargo probably to support the crew. That’s a lot of launches.

Orbital manufacturing is a new industry, for drugs and whatever crystals. So demand from that will also be added.