Disappointed to see something this dumb here; carbon copy of the comments below the NY Times article.

Let's be clear about something: NASA doesn't build rockets. NASA buys rockets. This particular contract went to SpaceX, a privately-funded upstart venture funded by an eccentric billionaire. Most launches up to now have been by the United Launch Alliance, the cartel formed by Lockheed Martin and Boeing. That probably sounds like two corporations working in concert but those two corporations (which operate as one for space launch) contain the merged husks of

- Lockheed

- Martin Marietta Aerospace

- RCA Astro

- GE Aerospace

- Boeing Aircraft

- Vertol Aircraft

- Rockwell International

- McDonnell Aircraft

- Douglas Aircraft

- Hughes Aircraft

...and those are just the big players.

Look. Since 2006, the United States has been prisoner to launch monopoly. From 1996 to 2006, the United States was prisoner to a launch duopoly. It's not like there's ever been a whole lot of market choice - aerospace dollars are doled out in a system very reminiscent of Soviet patronage. Even Ben Rich said so (he was griping about the Rockwell B-1B, pretty much the last thing Rockwell made, which might explain why they ended up getting eaten by McDonnell Douglas rather than Lockheed). So for the past 20-plus years, the price of a space launch as been "whatever the fuck we want." Not because NASA has things that dialed but because the military-industrial complex has us that over the barrel.

Worthy of note: SpaceX's launch platforms are the only ones IN HISTORY not derived from WMD research. Know the real reason nobody ever tries to land the rocket after it launches the payload? 'cuz they're all derived from mutherfucking ICBMs.

So yeah. You can be snarky but fuckin' A we're so knee-deep in predatory privatization that sweet holy jesus there's little reason to be bad-mouthing competition, particularly when it's coming from a company that has never once gotten a bailout, built a bomber or faced congressional hearings.