RPK going down fighting - may sue

[docm]

Link....<br /><br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>><br />'NASA's requirements, as outlined in the original COTS program materials, changed significantly. NASA's decision to procure additional launches of the Russian Progress and Soyuz vehicles significantly reduced near term cargo requirements, and therefore potential revenues during the critical early years of operations,' RpK added.<br /><br />'While one can appreciate NASA's desire to 'hedge' its bets, RpK needed to provide investors with information with which to assess NASA's real requirements, and that information needed to project economic returns that justify the risk of investment.<br /><br />'Public comments by certain senior NASA personnel surrounding the Progress/Soyuz transaction and otherwise during this period heightened the concerns being raised by Jefferies Quarterdeck about the basis of our original projections. Those issues had to be resolved before Jefferies Quarterdeck - RpK's investment banker - would solicit investment from third parties.<br /><br />'RpK was required to make significant changes to its business plan and projections to accommodate NASA's reduced requirements.'<br /> /><br />'If NASA declines to do so, we must reserve all of our rights under the Space Act Agreement and applicable law, including without limitation the right to treat NASA's actions as either a breach by NASA of the agreement or a unilateral termination by NASA without cause.'<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /> /><br />As to what NASA could do to change the status of the pending termination is unclear, although some of the driving forces RpK themselves note as the cause of their problems include issues which are totally irreversible.<br /><br />Such cited issues, for instance, with NASA contract extension with the Russians are unlikely to hold any water in the halls of power</p></blockquote> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[holmec]

Unfortunate and crazy. They don't look like they have a case. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[no_way]

i think we space cadets should organize a class action lawsuit against RPK for putzing around for decades with nothing, except red bottom line and viewgraphs to show for it, undermining the credibility and the image of the entire "newspace" sector in the progress.

 

[j05h]

This has to be a joke. Is it April First? <br /><br />RpK is incredibly unprofessional. They failed to raise funds, now their going to sue their client? Hello, FLY SOMETHING FIRST. They've been in business for 15 years! The only thing I've ever seen RpK fly was an unmodified LearJet. Lame. <br /><br />They have a warehouse full of shiny Russian engines and at least one K1 structure. Why haven't they flown something, anything with a rocket in 15 years and several incarnations? Vampire-rocket is right. Get the garlic.<br /><br />Here's my problem with this whole thing: They have almost everything to put the K1 together now and have since the late 90s. But somehow they still need "ARES" levels of funding to make it fly? They're talking almost a Billion$ to get the K1 through flight testing. This is after already burning how much money as both Kistler and RpK? And now they want to sue NASA? <br /><br />The thing that is truly astounding is that this is being churned up over essential ISS maintance contracts. Literally, RpK is trying to steal their oxygen and supplies. That NASA and RKA have a limited and expiring contract is something to point investors towards. Soyuz/Progress are the gold standard in station supply and crew exchange. A savvy new.space company would point to these deals and tell their investors "we know there is at least this much available each year, and can make a timeline that matchs the INA sunset provision." Instead, they are suing. <br /><br />Ridiculous.<br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[docm]

NASA Watch and NSF are reporting that company President Randy Brinkley has left RpK.<br /><br />http://www.nasawatch.com/archives/2007/10/more_bad_news_f.html <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[radarredux]

> <i><font color="yellow">I believe most if not all of the top RpK management are ex high level NASA....that should explain a lot of their problems.</font>/i><br /><br />Ouch. Coming from SG, double ouch.</i>

 

[crix]

Agreed. I don't want these bozos to have a penny more.

 

[PistolPete]

From that statement I would assume that NASA has the same promotion policy as the Army: Screw up, move up. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><em>So, again we are defeated. This victory belongs to the farmers, not us.</em></p><p><strong>-Kambei Shimada from the movie Seven Samurai</strong></p> </div>

 

[docm]

With how Ares I/Orion are being handled the answer to that should be self evident <img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[PistolPete]

It <i>would</i> be funny if it weren't so real. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><em>So, again we are defeated. This victory belongs to the farmers, not us.</em></p><p><strong>-Kambei Shimada from the movie Seven Samurai</strong></p> </div>

 

[josh_simonson]

Yeah, suing customers worked so well for SCO...

 

[j05h]

SCO is a beautiful example. <br /><br />Title of thread should be "RpK goes down whining"<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[frodo1008]

This is why that despite some reasonable doubts, I do like Elon Musk and spacex. They at least are willing to cut metal, and launch rockets (even with some initial failure, but it IS a learning curve).<br /><br />If NASA had the guts, I would like them to tell Rpk to put their law suit where the sun doesn't shine. Then take the money and either give it to spacex for COTS II, or even better, place COTS II up for open bid for anybody that at least has launched rockets, such as either spacex or ULA. And then move forward to keep the ISS supplied with the results. Is this too difficult to understand?

 

[j05h]

<i>> even though they haven't launched rockets they've still have done good research and flown some hardware.</i><br /><br />Kistler did all the research. RpK inherited the Hangar Queen that is the K1. What have they flown besides the standard, normal LearJet at last year's XPrize? Have they ever even test fired one of their purchased rocket engines? Where's the beef? They have been all-talk for so long - if they were interested in flying they would have done it by now. Unless they have a secret Laboratory in the mountains, their major activity appears to be finding investors since before Kistler went under.<br /><br />t/space, SpaceX and others are actually doing instead of whining.<br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[j05h]

I see, t/space's research on modest budgets vs RpK's pursuit seemingly of nothing but money. <br /><br />AFAIK, this is the definition of a frivolous lawsuit. They wouldn't have been offering actual commercial services until the same timeframe as the ending of the NASA-RKA Soyuz/Progress contract. COTS I is supposed to go through 2010, so what's the problem? <br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[j05h]

I agree generally with your post. But what has RpK actually flown? No one has an answer. <br /><br />J <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[PistolPete]

I always thought that Pioneer Rocketplane had the best idea of all of the first wave of newspace companies. Unfortunately that company was ruined by a certain individual. Now, I won't mention Robert Zubrin's name, but I think we all know who it was.<br /><br />Then there was Rocketplane Limited Inc. They had a cool, scifi sounding name, they had the rights to Pioneer Rocketplane's intellectual property and, most importantly, no Robert Zubrin. I thought they were a shoe-in. IIIRC, they were beginning to actually cut metal on their modified Learjet. Then they had to go and do something stupid like merge with the lead weight know as Kistler.<br /><br />Here's a link to a thread on a different message board by somebody who was on the inside. Not really new info, but interesting to confirm rumors with some inside info. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><em>So, again we are defeated. This victory belongs to the farmers, not us.</em></p><p><strong>-Kambei Shimada from the movie Seven Samurai</strong></p> </div>

 

[gunsandrockets]

<Realistically I can only see an innovative system such as t/space's CXV which is able to carry up to 6 persons to orbit at a total cost of $20 million.><br /><br />I thought the CXV has a crew of four?

 

[j05h]

<i>> Your right, it really ticks me off because companies like this actually make the movement into space and beyond LEO harder for the rest of the companies trying. The mismanagement of funds really ticks me off because they money could have been used for more serious entries and put to better use.</i><br /><br />Perhaps we could remove the squandered value from Chuck Lauer's backside? <br /><br />Purchasing engines and having LockMart build most of the K1 costs a certain amount, but that was done a decade ago. What did they do with the new money? What is RpK's burn rate? How much money have they not spent from COTS I and is there a mechanism to force it's return? <br /><br />This is a shameless episode of fleecing the taxpayer. The first time I met anyone from RpK I thought they were shysters. They didn't seem capable of re-starting the K1's development at all, yet were given a giant pile of money to play with. Judging by their personal performance at the X Prize Cup, it is hard to believe that they were chosen over SpaceDev and t/space. And now they are disrespecting the people who funded them. <br /><br />I don't want to spread discord in the community, but these guys are wankers.<br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

The K-1 wasn't the issue. It was the front end. The K-1 had no spacecraft (the OV really doesn't count). A pressurized compartment, mating adapter and RPOD sensors were needed

 

[no_way]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>I always thought that Pioneer Rocketplane had the best idea..<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />To me, they always looked like yet another bunch putting up websites with great plans, with nothing really ever to show.<br /><br />If you want to retain an image of "agile" new startup company, for chrissakes, do something visible at least once in a few years. Better yet, post a monthly, bimonthly or quarterly update of your progress with documented results. <br /><br />What has RpK ever done, by means of visible progress ? Progress as in milestones on the path from plans to operating, revenue generating hardware ?

 

[j05h]

<i>> The K-1 had no spacecraft (the OV really doesn't count). A pressurized compartment, mating adapter and RPOD sensors were needed</i><br /><br />They just blew $110M and couldn't build that? Those are all complex pieces, but that kind of hold up doesn't make sense. Literally, they could have just bought a Progress pod and bolted it on for less. Did these guys have "dot.com fever" and blow the money? <br /><br />RocketplaneKistler should fold before they embarrass themselves further. This is just lame. Their inability to attract capital is their own fault, not NASA's fault.<br /><br />How much NASA money have they burned through? I wrote $110 above but am not sure. <br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[PistolPete]

Yup, I said best <i>idea</i>, I didn't say anything about the management (or lack thereof). <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><em>So, again we are defeated. This victory belongs to the farmers, not us.</em></p><p><strong>-Kambei Shimada from the movie Seven Samurai</strong></p> </div>

 

[frodo1008]

The latest article here on space.dom (referring to a Space News Business Report) shows that the current president of RPK has resigned. <br /><br />Deserting the sinking ship, perhaps??

 

[j05h]

<i>> Deserting the sinking ship, perhaps??</i><br /><br />The other perspective would be that RpK is clearing out it's leadership to "reinvent" itself. "Now, a theme park ride!" But in reality, yes, it looks like everybody that can is getting out while the getting is good. <br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>