Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space

Study Shows Large Space Tourism Market 189

Posted by timothy from the las-vegas-effect dept.
HobbySpacer writes: "A serious market study has finally been done on space tourism and it shows a substantial market, even for brief sub-orbital flights. The Futron/Zogby study of high income individuals found that 19% would pay $100k for a sub-orbital flight. Furthermore, 7% would pay $20M to go to the Space Station (if they had the money.) The percentages go up if the prices could come down, especially with availability of private orbital facilities. With around 30 million high-net-worth households ($500,000+) in the US, this indicates a market of several million for suborbital on the short term and eventually for orbital. We can hope that like previous expensive luxuries, e.g. jet travel and ocean cruises, the wealthy will pull the prices down to a level reachable by the rest of us."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Study Shows Large Space Tourism Market More

Study Shows Large Space Tourism Market

Comments Filter:
  • Getting to space in the first place is the key to space tourism. That's where the X-Prize [xprize.org] comes in...
  • Well, you can bid for a flight on eBay...

    Unless you're going to be up there for a while, it's really not as interesting as you'd think. They sure won't let you press any buttons.

  • But How? (Score:2, Funny)

    by drinkeycrow ( 556431 )
    would one open those little bottles of booze they give you in 0-G??

  • If only I had the money... (Score:5, Funny)

    by seanadams.com ( 463190 ) on Monday May 20, 2002 @09:46PM (#3555469) Homepage
    Furthermore, 7% would pay $20M to go to the Space Station (if they had the money.)

    If I "had the money", I'd pay $3B for my own private space shuttle. Duh.

  • Hmmm... (Score:4, Funny)

    by TheQuantumShift ( 175338 ) <monkeyknifefight@internationalwaters.com> on Monday May 20, 2002 @09:48PM (#3555483) Homepage
    Was this study perchance done by the Center For Figuring Out Really Obvious Things [theonion.com]? People want to see space? Whouda thunk it...
    • NASA acts like a bunch of prurient old maid temperance saloon bashers -- space is serious stuff only, no tourists no lookieloos no rubberneckers omigodno. We could have had space station hotels and cheap orbital access by now if NASA would just get out of the way. But noooo, space is for serious professionals only.
  • Now if I could only come up with the 500k / year. :(

  • Who will pilot the ships? (Score:4, Funny)

    by dosun88888 ( 265953 ) on Monday May 20, 2002 @09:48PM (#3555485)
    The same Captain Obvious who came up with this earth-shattering observation?

    I'm sure Admiral No Fucking Shit has his own 2 cents to contribute. Maybe he'll figure out now that people think that it would be cool to go back in time too.

    I'd give my left nut for a space ship. More interesting would be a study of which body parts people would be willing to trade for the ability to take a weekend excursion to Mars.

    ~D

    • Re:Who will pilot the ships? (Score:5, Funny)

      by CaptainCarrot ( 84625 ) on Monday May 20, 2002 @10:06PM (#3555568)
      I'd give my left nut for a space ship.

      And if I had a space ship, I wouldn't take your left nut (or anyone else's) in exchange for it. I strongly suspect that I don't value your nuts anywhere near as much as you do.

    • Re:Who will pilot the ships? (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Hell, I'd volunteer for a one-way mission to Mars. I'd be accomplishing more on this suicidal mission than most people accomplish in their whole life, so it'd be worth it.

      They can send a bunch of shit with me so I can setup a camp for the next batch of people to come around. Maybe some stuff for generating oxygen, or exploring for water sources, or whatever. It'd be a helluva way to go.
      • > Hell, I'd volunteer for a one-way mission to Mars. I'd be accomplishing more on this suicidal mission than most people accomplish in their whole life, so it'd be worth it.

        Ditto. Strap me into the ship with a bunch of DVD-ROMs full of geology textbooks. By the time I land, I'll be a decent enough geologist to know what rocks to look for. One human with a pick-axe and a week's supply of oxygen could accomplish the work of a hundred probes.

        Heck, build two or three identical ships (the cost is in designing the ships, not building the parts). Lob the ships into orbit via unmanned boosters, and fuel them in orbit from tanks filled at ISS. Lob the contestants up on a Shuttle flight for a week of media interviews on ISS. Then detach the ships from ISS and head for mars en masse.

        Defray the cost of the additional ships by selling advertising space on a 1-year series called "Survivor: Mars".

  • Space tourism is a great idea.
    1. Space research programs are strapped for cash.
    2. Rich people have lots of cash.
    3. Space research has long-term, not-very-tangible goals.
    4. People who have lots of cash generally made it by focussing on short-term, tangible goals. Therefore, they are not likely to spend money on space research.
    5. However, "going into space" is immediate and extremely tangible, not to mention fun.
    6. So rich people will spend their cash on space tourism. And the profits will go to space research. Great!
    • 4. People who have lots of cash generally made it by focussing on short-term, tangible goals. Therefore, they are not likely to spend money on space research.

      Sounds more like a consumer mindset to me. After all, in your own model, it's this attitude which is pushing these people to spend on something with no solid possibility of future finacial return.

      Everything I've ever read on becoming rich recommends relatively long-term planning over instant gratification, be it a liberal plan (relatively short-term trades in the stock market over a longer period of time, real-estate investing, riskier business venues such MLM, etc) or a conservative plan (long-term investing starting with high-return items moving into lower-risk venues as you age, maybe starting a a more traditional business, so on and so forth). Heck, even get-rich-quick schemes usually don't promise becoming a billionaire overnight.

      The rich might enjoy being able to do more things now instead of later, but I don't think there's any evidence that the majority of the rich "got rich quick."
      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • How?

          And no, inheritance of any sort, in the broadest sense of the term imaginable, does not count. This eliminates gambling, gifts, death of a family member, marriages in certain states and under certain conditions, etc.

          You could argue that some people became rich "overnight" when some sort of asset they owned went up dramatically in value. Unless they just started investing and made a miracle trade, such an event would occur within the context of a larger plan, hence they would have really become rich over a longer period of time.

          Of course, if you do know a way to make a couple million in the next twenty-four hours starting with only nominal capital, I'd love to hear it. SW needs a new pair of sandals, and the EFF could always use another donation. :)
  • There's still time to bid on this auction [ebay.com]

    • Re:Still time (Score:3, Insightful)

      by doooras ( 543177 )
      maybe i just missed it, since it is a rather lengthy description, but i didn't see anything that mentioned actually GOING to the ISS. it just talks about training and simulators and the like. i sure as hell wouldn't pay $20M to fly on a plane that *feels* like 0-g

  • Time (Score:1)

    by hlopez ( 220083 )
    Even with the initial boom in sales and media coverage that the first space turism company will get, it will most defenatly take more than a couple of decades before space travel is available to the masses.
  • Commercial Space Tourism.

    Like all industries, first for the superrich, then for the rich, and then for the rest of us.

    Expect things to go through several false starts first though.
  • ...but only if they let me have the controls on re-entry. I would love to buzz the neighborhoods where a few people from my past live.
    • I find it funny that the person who currently has the high bid , previously bought cell phone parts.
      • I was taking a look at that myself. In fact, I looked at the previous auctions of many high bidders. Most purchases were under $20. And these are the people who have a disposable 20 million?

  • Actually... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Qwerpafw ( 315600 ) on Monday May 20, 2002 @09:55PM (#3555516) Homepage
    Most people with worths between 500K and 1000K would be insane to pay 100 grand for a sub-orbital flight.

    Think about it this way: Most people's equity is in their house, which, for "wealthy" families, usually costs around 500K.

    So maybe they have their mortgage half-paid-off (which is uncommon). That leaves 250K-750K of money. Again, most, i'd say 75% or so, of that is in a retirement account, or some other form of non-liquid asset.

    So you have somewhere between 60K and 190K of liquid assets. Do you really want to spend half-to-all of your assets on a sub-orbital flight lasting several minutes, at most?

    In my book, you'd have to be insane.

    The "wealthy people" discussed here are probably in double digits of million dollars of assets, or at least $5M or so.

    Either that, or the "researchers" just asked "would you do this if you had the cash?" which is, pretty much, a bull-shit question. Its like saying "would you buy 30 houses, if you had the cash?" The people who *actually* have the cash still don't consider themselves "rich" enough to have it, as wealthy people tend to invest their money.

    As noted in the excellent book "The millionaire next door," high income, and especially high expenditures and consumption, or a "rich" lifestyle, almost never correlate to a large amount of assets. People who live such a lifestyle usually never save up enough to maintain a large amount of assets.

    Still am sure there are thousands of people who would pay for this stuff. But it is definately NOT the incredibly large amount of people they make it out to be.
    • If you've got a million in the bank, and I mean the BANK, with a shitty savings account, then you would get $100,000 in 5 years of interest.

      If you're making 10% in the stock market, then you make that much in a year.

      So, if you're 40 years old and in that situation, I'd say GO FOR IT. By the time retirement comes at 75 years of age, you'll have had 35 years to make back what you spent on the trip of your life.

      • > So, if you're 40 years old and in that situation [$1M in the bank], I'd say GO FOR IT. By the time retirement comes at 75 years of age, you'll have had 35 years to make back what you spent on the trip of your life.

        Ah, but a more frugal use of that money would be to invest it for ten years.

        You're still only 50, but your $100K gets you an hour in zero-G instead of a 10-minute suborbital hop.

        The early bird catches the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

    • Either that, or the "researchers" just asked "would you do this if you had the cash?" which is, pretty much, a bull-shit question. Its like saying "would you buy 30 houses, if you had the cash?"

      Sounds like this is exactly what happened. Junk polling but probably good enough to land on CNN, and I hope that happens. This may be about as sound as the silly online political opinion polls we see everyday but stories like this might start to really regenerate some grassroots interest in lower cost spaceflight.

      The average Joe American might start to buy into these dreams, because he believes that he's got a shot at being rich one day (this is why so many people are in favour of repealing the "death taxes" that only affect about 1% of the population).

      I'd personally love to see public (and corporate) interest swing back to funding advances in space exploration and travel. Maybe a little razzle dazzle PR like this will help. It probably can't make things much worse.

    • well (Score:3, Interesting)

      by martissimo ( 515886 )
      I recently went to dinner with my father, he is a employee of Rocketdyne in California, he has spent the better part of his career working on things for the Shuttle. A few months ago when the launched he was invited to Canaveral to be honored for his work at the launch. To put it mildly he loves being onvolved with the shuttle project, and is very well off (but he doesn't break that 5 mill number you propose, maybe 2 or 3 at best).

      So anyways back to the dinner, i had just read a story about the Russian 100k sub-orital trip deal, and asked him what he thought. I was pretty surprised to hear how interested he was in it, no doubt he wouldn't risk his life on some crackpot ride... but if there was one available with a fairly proven track record i now know he would jump on the opportunity.

      This is a very well educated and well informed person when it comes to space flight, and he loves the idea. It doesn't surprise me one bit that it's a fairly common view.

  • What we really need is a space lottery. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by eyegor ( 148503 ) on Monday May 20, 2002 @09:56PM (#3555518)
    What about a Space lottery? You sell lottery tickets and the grand prize winner gets a space trip (assuming they qualify physically). Runners up get suborbital flights. The profits could fund other space programs.

    Finally!! A lottery a self-respecting geek can play without feeling like a mouth-breathing idiot!

  • Only the rich can afford to take advantage of new travel methods for the purpose of leisure.
    Countries send people off to do new things, for national pride like the US and USSR space programmes in the 50's and 60's, then comes a time where it is for scientific advancements only, then come the rich people who can afford the high cost for personal pleasure, then it becomes a commodity available to the masses.

  • Comparison With Cars (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ltsmash ( 569641 ) on Monday May 20, 2002 @09:57PM (#3555525)
    It was only 80 years ago that "horseless carriages" were the "rich-man's toy".
  • We can hope that like previous expensive luxuries, e.g. jet travel and ocean cruises, the wealthy will pull the prices down to a level reachable by the rest of us.

    I only hope someone invents "Extra Strength Dramamine" by then!
  • Report fails to mention that 43% of those who responded favorably also thought that a trip to the planet where Kirk banged the green chick was part of the package.

    • Damn! We aren't going to that planet? I was already signing up. The green chick looked a lot like Yvonne Craig, the actress who played Batgirl. She was the inspiration of many wet dreams and self-exploration sessions...

      Yummy!

      E
  • with my current financial situation, it looks like i'll be going to the space station pretty soon. if i save every penny i can (post bills et al) i can buy a ticket in about 200,000 months.

    fsck.

  • Whaddya Know... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by anzha ( 138288 ) on Monday May 20, 2002 @09:58PM (#3555534) Homepage Journal
    well, it seems that in the same vein. I tried to submit this earlier, but I presume that this article is the reason that it was rejected. :D

    I found this [ebay.com] while I was reading NASA Watch [nasawatch.com] (a slashdot like site with space as it's main focus). It seems that they are Ebay auctioning off a trip to the International Space Station. Last I checked it was at $19 mil and hadn't quite met the reserve. Sounds like a market to me...
    • Can't wait to visit Moscow Russia, USA - is that in Texas?
    • I found this [ebay.com] while I was reading NASA Watch [nasawatch.com] (a slashdot like site with space as it's main focus). It seems that they are Ebay auctioning off a trip to the International Space Station. Last I checked it was at $19 mil and hadn't quite met the reserve. Sounds like a market to me...

      The auction is probably totally bogus. The current high bidder has previously been mostly buying cell phone cables and faceplates for $5-$60. Doesn't really look a serious buyer to me.
    • from the bottom of the auction:
      Attention Bidders: Please be advised that this experience may be utilized for up to one year from the close of this auction. And that the proceeds of this auction (All profits Generated from this sale) will go to benefit "The Deane F. Johnson Alzheimer's Foundation" that supports "The Motion Picture Fund" and "Harry's Haven" (A specialized unit of "The Motion Picture Home" devoted to the care and well-being of patients in the entertainment industry suffering with Alzheimer's). The unit "Harry's Haven" was named in memory of Harry Demsky, Kirk Douglas's father in recognition of Mr. Douglas's generous support.


      So you get a 1 year window of opportunity for who knows what the final bid is (my guess is the reserve is atleast 25mil) of which the profits (it's 20mil according to the spaceadventures.com site, so say 5mil profit) goes to benefit a foundation that supports a fund, that really supports a specialized unit that's purely dedicated to support patients (in the ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY ONLY) that suffer with a very specific diseas.

      WTF ARE THEY SMOKING, AND CAN I BRING SOME OF THAT TO THE ISS WITH ME!?!?!?

      • No kidding. Note also that the seller has zero feedback and has changed his username [ebay.com] in the last 30 days. From 2001-10-29 through 2002-05-13, the name was "thecelebritywarehouse". Since May 13, the username has been "flight-technologies". Something just doesn't smell right...
    • Okay, maybe I'm just a weirdo, but I sure wouldn't bid US$6 mil when the seller has zero feedback!

  • completely flawed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mosch ( 204 ) on Monday May 20, 2002 @10:00PM (#3555544) Homepage
    This math is completely broken.

    First of all, $500k isn't a high net worth, that's not even upper-middle class, it's just plain middle class. $500k is a guy with a house, a car, and not much else.

    Secondly, the study itself was of people with $1m net worths, or $250k annual salaries, where did the submitter get that $500k figure anyway?

    Lastly, a higher percentage of people said they'd pay $20m than is possible. Fewer than 7% of all people with a net worth > $1m have a net worth that would allow $20m to be spent on a vacation, which is contrary to what this study shows.

    Who fucking cares?

    • The numbers excluded houses. $500K means $500K of investable cash. Or wastable cash if spent on 10 minutes in a fancy plane.
      • even so, $500k isn't much cash, it's distinctly middle class. $500k only earns about $20k/year after taxes, and assuming 5% reinvestment. It's not exactly big bucks.
        • 500k isn't much cash?????? exactly WHICH planet are you on?? I know it ain't the good old' planet earth... I make about 40k, spend as little as possible, and I'll NEVER see 500k in cash in my bank account no matter what I do! Middle class is usually someone who owns a 100-150k house, maybe a nice car, and has a small retirement fund. probably not even 500k of assets -- certainly nothing like 500k of spendable cash!

  • Here's an older study (Score:3, Interesting)

    by serutan ( 259622 ) <snoopdoug@RABBIT ... minus herbivore> on Monday May 20, 2002 @10:02PM (#3555551) Homepage
    This 1998 market study [spacefuture.com] claimed a civilian space travel industgry was feasible. Lots of graphs.

    On the same subject, Discovery or TLC ran a documentary last year that said commercial airliners within the next 30 years will be designed to fly to about 40-50,000 feet, refuel from a tanker, then climb steeply out of the atmosphere and coast to a landing. Passengers will be strapped in, no snacks, no potty break. Max trip time to anywhere in the world: 45 minutes. Now that's my kind of space travel.

    So think twice before shelling out $98K for a suborbital flight. You'll be able to get your 20 minutes of weightlessness on a routine flight to Hawaii.
    • commercial airliners within the next 30 years will be designed to fly to about 40-50,000 feet, refuel from a tanker, then climb steeply out of the atmosphere and coast to a landing.

      Sounds like the National Aerospace Plane of the Reagan era. Ben Rich, head of the Lockheed Skunk Works and designer of the SR-71's powerplant, insisted that Lockheed no-bid that contract. He points out that the SR-71 is friction-heat limited, not engine-power limited. "We used titanium. You know something stronger?" The Shuttle uses ceramic tiles, but those are a giant headache and fragile; the Shuttle can't fly through rain.

      Space travel is trapped between the limits of what materials can do and what chemical fuels can deliver. Things haven't improved much in the last 30 years on either of those items. Unless we get something like antimatter propulsion or gravity control, space travel will remain marginal.

  • market study (Score:4, Funny)

    by doubtless ( 267357 ) on Monday May 20, 2002 @10:02PM (#3555553) Homepage
    in the form of /. polls

    How much are you willing to pay for a sub-orbital flight?

    o Up to $10,000
    o Up to $50,000
    o Up to $100,000
    o Pay? I didn't even pay for my OS!
    o I wanna fly with CowboyNeal!

  • with the first dead rich tourist...
  • We can hope that like previous expensive luxuries, e.g. jet travel and ocean cruises, the wealthy will pull the prices down to a level reachable by the rest of us."
    Just think about that again...many millions of people realistically want to go on space shuttles, and the cheaper it is the more want to go. But, look at supply. There is a very limited supply of space trips, with only 2 having been taken as of yet. High demand plus high supply would drive prices up, not down as the article suggests. Plus, it is very expensive to go into space and to build space shuttles, so I doubt it would go down /that/ significantly. It takes large amounts of energy to go into space and the shuttles won't want to copy the X-Box strategy of taking losses because there is no software to sell. :-)
  • Private space stations?!?!?! Count me in--just think of what it'd be like to get laid in zero-g!
  • This is good news for Joe Normal who hopes to get in space sometime before death. More than that, it's good news for going into space altogether for ANY reason. Space resorts -> Space estates -> colonies -> spreading out across the galaxy. Overpopulation is going to make space look inviting as well.

    Count me in!
  • OK, I made it into one of those groups...

    Lots of really rich folks are pretty old, though -- was the study limited to respondents who are healthy enough to go?

  • if you did the same study, except a 'sub-orbital flight' = touching cindy crawfords tits and a trip to space station was all out sex with cindy, i'm sure you would get very similar results with your study.

    the problem, if cindy doesn't want you all up in her business, then the money doesn't matter.

    NASA is not going to want tourists in their space station. cindy is not going to want CmdrTaco up in the puntang.
    • What an utterly perfect, though vulgar, analogy. However, think of it this way: You may be willing to pay Cindy $100,000 to touch her tits, but she ain't selling. Now, you find out that, say, Gretchen Mol (here playing the part of "another country's space agency") WILL let you touch her tits for $100,000, but there's a good chance you won't enjoy it _nearly_ as much. Still interested? Hmm...

      (OT) I just saw Cindy in a commercial today. What a classy woman, she puts all these new waifs to shame :-)

    • And just like NASA, Cindy Crawford has stringent physical requirements...

      --T
  • Wasn't it just a few months ago that we were bitching about the fact that a member of N'Sync was trying to get into space any way he could? Interestingly, he recently had minor heart surgery [azcentral.com] with a possible motivation to be prepping for training. Sure you'd pay millions to go... but would you also go under the knife?
  • Furthermore, 7% would pay $20M to go to the Space Station (if they had the money.)

    Perhaps if they *won* the money. Or, if they had the money to waste because they had so much of it. Really, if you gave these people $20M do you really think they would just go on the shuttle?

    People say a lot about when they have the money. But if they got it, they'll realize the importance of money even more, and it is doubtless that their atitude will change.

  • Furthermore, 7% would pay $20M to go to the Space Station

    Isn't it wonderful that so many governments of the world have harmoniously combined to build us a novelty hotel for everyone to visit in a prime piece of real estate?

    Oh, wait. What was that massively blown out investment supposed to be for again?

  • Approximatly 10% of the population (30 million) have a household net worth of $500k, but I'm sure that includes their house, cars, etc. My guess is that even people who outright own their houses don't have 100k spare cash. And hey, wouldn't it be more fun to go on a year vacation than go for a suborbital flight for a hour or so?

    I'd guess that the a lot of the 7% say they would do it if they had 100k, but if they really had it, they'd think of something more fun, or useful.
  • The submitter didn't bother to read the article he linked very well. According to that fluff article: "The high-net-worth market segment [defined later as $500k nw] has reached more than seven million in the U.S. and is projected to grow 16% annually for the next three years and control more than $30 trillion in assets at that point. (Web Finance)" The 30 million w/ $500k net worth is *projected* by the likes of Web Finance, and it's being promoted by a nonpartial group.
    • No kidding. Add to the fact that just about *every other home owner* in the Bay Area can be defined as having a 500K net worth just based on the market price of their home - although that doesn't necessarily put them into the high-income range. A family whose $40,000-in-1980 home is now worth $500,000 would still have to pay for a play to live after selling.

      Millionaires - especially if you include home equity as wealth - are a dime a dozen, and without liquidity the term is meaningless. It's the Inflation That Dares Not Speak Its Name.

  • 7% would pay $20M to go to the Space Station (if they had the money)

    Brilliant!

    In other news, 100% of those surveyed would have sex with Pamela Anderson (if they could meet and seduce her)

    Also, 100% of those surveyed would assasinate /bin/laden (if they had a sniper rifle and were 40 ft from him)

    • except, but, wait, no straight chicks or gay guys were surveyed about dear Pamela Anderson, and none of them knew a damn thing about using a sniper rifle. Details are for the weak.

    • Hey - I wouldn't have sex with Pam Anderson! How come no one ever asks me for my opinion?

      On the other hand, I would kill /bin/laden with a sniper rifle -- if my hours playing UT don't gimme the clue I need, hell, at 40 ft I'd go beat the sonofabitch with it.

      Change Pam to Angelina Jolie and throw in a trip on the Shuttle and you might get me on the bandwagon ;-)

  • I mean, seriously. What's actually interesting about this? No doubt many people looked forward eagerly to the idea of going up in a plane. But what does it mean now? You sit for a while in a cramped seat in a long skinny room that vibrates. If you have a window seat, you might get a few nice sights. Few people look forward to it.

    Space tourism will be the same. Once they get past the basic novelty and the nice views, most people are going to be bored in space. The interior of a spaceship will be a considerably less interesting place for a tourist than a cruise ship. And the food will suck, too.

  • Yes, Rochester Institute of Technology currently teaches a course titled 0622-534 Space Tourism Development [rit.edu]

  • Space tourism (Score:2, Interesting)

    by herraukuli ( 577449 )
    When I retire I want to move into a space colony. Might sound unlikely but hey, that will be in 2040 or something like that.
  • ...but I don't know about their puns:

    Space is available, but it's filling quickly.
  • WIld Speculation Shows Large Space Tourism Market

    Of course.

  • That's right, I'm selling sub-orbital flights for only $1000. Please line up, I can only fly one at a time. You may get a little dizzy, and your arms and legs may be a little sore, but I guarantee the ride of a lifetime. Please no one over 150 lbs... my back is a little sore this week.

Slashdot Top Deals

One man's constant is another man's variable. -- A.J. Perlis

Close