Comments on: Knipfing’s Notes: Troubles in Space(port)

By: Thom Campbell

Thom Campbell — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 06:18:52 +0000

Bob- that’s not quite right… the million/year is for “base rent” and there is supposedly another component to the rent based on number of flights conducted with a minimum annual guarantee to the facility… also, the spaceport has never been intended (please note… “intended”) to be a single tenant facility and they want to generate revenue from additional sources (including visitor experience for those of us without the resources to actually take a flight)… whether any of this comes to be is obviously an open question at best right now… I’m afraid the word may be out within the commercial space industry that NM is not a good place to do business and I’m hard pressed to see how that’s going to change. With additional tenants, in twenty years, the Spaceport could be one of the epicenters of an incredibly exciting industry. Without additional tenants it’ll be a boondogle curiosity in the middle of nowhere within five. It COULD be a great idea… I just don’t see the vision or drive from the state as a whole to make it happen. This is what you get in the “Land of Manana”…

By: Bob Jones

Bob Jones — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 03:52:41 +0000

So at a million per year for rent, New Mexico will have to wait 209 years to make their money back. Is this a good investment for the people?

By: steve smyth

steve smyth — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 18:08:01 +0000

this all goes back to Will Whitehorn’s dealing with US House Sub Committee prior to anything happening…the deals were shady from day one…Virgin presented to Committee RE doing all this with zero government involvement…Whitehorn had a deal in place to share the burden with NM before they left the building…and it has all been shaky since then…now, Whitehorn is long gone from Virgin with little or no fanfare for the first CEO of a civilian space company…