Orbit Alpha Issue 15 · 26 Jul 2026
Starship flew. The stock didn't care.
MARKET OVERVIEW
🌎 Starship flew. The stock didn't care.
Track every space stock live at Orbit Alpha
SpaceX launched Starship Flight 13 on Friday evening, deploying 20 next-generation Starlink V3 satellites for the first time in history, nailing what engineers called the "softest splashdown" ever for the upper stage, and confirming contact with all 20 satellites after deployment. The stock closed launch day at $115.07. By Friday close it was trading at $113.45, within 3% of its all-time low of $110.26. The most important test flight in the company's history as a public company did not move the share price. That tells you everything about where this sector stands heading into August earnings.
The rest of the group had a better week. Rocket Lab won a $266 million Space Force contract, the largest single government launch award in the company's history, and rose 4% on the week. AST SpaceMobile received approval for a 400,000 square-foot satellite manufacturing facility in Midland, Texas, a campus nearly 5x larger than its original plant, and bounced 12% on Tuesday as the sector staged its first coordinated rally in weeks. Redwire announced a major Huntsville expansion to scale UAS and space infrastructure production. SpaceX separately confirmed it has stopped accepting dedicated Falcon 9 bookings beyond 2028 and paused parts of expendable hardware production, a development that tightens launch supply and directly benefits Rocket Lab's Neutron programme. The operational evidence continues to build. The tape continues to ignore it.
SPACEX (SPCX)
Starship Flight 13 launched from Starbase at 5:51 p.m. CT on Friday 24 July, after a July 16 abort (four Raptors failed to ignite) and a July 23 weather scrub (Tropical Storm Bertha). All 33 Raptor engines fired on liftoff, generating approximately 16 million pounds of thrust. About 18 minutes into the flight, Ship 40 deployed all 20 Starlink V3 satellites through its payload bay door: the first time SpaceX's next-generation broadband satellites had been deployed from Starship. SpaceX confirmed contact with all 20. The satellites were on a suborbital trajectory and burned up approximately 20 minutes after deployment (by design, to validate the deployment mechanism), with six carrying cameras and flashlights to inspect the heat shield during reentry. Ship 40 made a controlled splashdown in the Indian Ocean; the booster splashed down in the Gulf of Mexico, though only 5 of 13 planned engines fired during the landing burn, producing a harder-than-intended impact. Musk said Flight 14 will attempt a tower catch of the booster if data review clears it.
The stock barely moved. SPCX fell 2.7% on launch day to a new closing low of $115.07, then hit an intraday low of $110.26 on Friday, closing the week at approximately $113, down 48% from the $225 peak and roughly 16% below the $135 IPO price. Morgan Stanley reiterated its $300 target, calling the disconnect between sentiment and fundamentals "an attractive entry point." Macquarie reaffirmed $250. Morningstar's fair value remains $63. SpaceX also confirmed it has stopped accepting new dedicated Falcon 9 launch bookings beyond 2028 and paused parts of its expendable hardware production line, signalling a strategic shift toward Starship as the primary vehicle. First earnings are now scheduled for 4 August, with the first lockup release on the second full trading day after publication.
ROCKET LAB (RKLB)
The contract pipeline keeps growing. On Tuesday 22 July, the Space Force's Space Systems Command awarded Rocket Lab a $266 million firm-fixed-price contract for 12 suborbital launches from the Pacific Spaceport Complex on Kodiak Island, Alaska, with an option for six additional flights, all through the end of 2028. The award, which came with $112 million in fiscal 2025 funds obligated immediately, is the largest single US government launch contract in Rocket Lab's history by announced dollar value, surpassing the $190 million MACH-TB 2.0 block buy signed in March. It arrived one business day after the Space Force tripled the ceiling of its National Security Space Launch programme to $17 billion, naming Rocket Lab among seven selected providers. The stock rose 5% in after-hours on the announcement.
SpaceX's decision to stop accepting new Falcon 9 bookings beyond 2028 is the other story worth watching. Every Falcon 9 slot that closes pushes commercial and government customers toward alternatives, and Neutron, targeted for its debut in Q4 2026, is the most credible medium-lift alternative on the horizon. Morgan Stanley called Rocket Lab "Player 2" in the aerospace sector. Q2 earnings are scheduled for 10 August. The stock ended the week up approximately 4%, trading around $69, still down more than 50% from its May all-time high of $150.23.
AST SPACEMOBILE (ASTS)
Two milestones landed in the same week. On 20 July, the Midland Development Corporation voted to approve an economic development agreement with AST SpaceMobile for a new 400,000 square-foot satellite manufacturing facility alongside its existing Texas campus, nearly five times larger than the original plant. At full buildout, the project targets 1,800 jobs, $144 million in annual payroll, up to $150 million in taxable capital investment, and an estimated $1.46 billion in regional economic output. You do not build a workforce and facility this large unless you are planning for sustained satellite manufacturing at scale, including next-generation replacements and international customer demand.
The stock surged 12% on Tuesday to $64 as the sector staged a broad rally (SPCX +7%, RKLB +5%, SPCE +6%, UFO +3%). The convertible offering, which reached a final size of $1.15 billion after full option exercise ($983.6 million in net proceeds), is now closed and funded. BlueBird 11 has arrived at Cape Canaveral, with the company describing the next launch as "imminent." New Zealand also approved a gateway licence for frequencies between 37.5 and 39 GHz, adding ground infrastructure for a network covering more than 3 billion subscribers globally.
REDWIRE (RDW)
On 20 July, Redwire announced a major expansion of its Huntsville, Alabama operations, scaling production capacity for its combat-proven UAS systems and mission-critical space infrastructure. The expansion follows the $21.5 million in FoSUAS drone programme follow-on orders received the prior week, and the confirmation of Redwire's selection for the Space Force's $6 billion Andromeda programme. The dual defence and space infrastructure footprint is growing, even as the stock remains down roughly 40% on the month.
SPIRE GLOBAL (SPIR)
On 23 July, Spire announced an ESA-funded programme to develop real-time onboard satellite diagnostics and more autonomous constellation operations, funded through Italian Space Agency (ASI) and UK Space Agency (UKSA) subscriptions to ESA over an 18-month period. The programme advances Spire's positioning as a satellite data and analytics platform, building on the Chief Commercial Officer hire announced the prior week.
Takeaway: Starship Flight 13 was, by any engineering measure, a success. All 33 engines fired. Twenty next-generation satellites deployed. Both stages returned intact. The ship achieved its softest ocean landing yet. And the stock printed a new all-time low the next morning. The market is telling this sector something it does not want to hear: execution milestones alone are not enough to hold a stock trading at $113 against a $135 IPO price, a $4.28 billion quarterly loss, and a lockup calendar that starts releasing shares in ten days. What matters now is the 4 August earnings print, the fundamental test that will either validate or collapse the case that SpaceX's revenue trajectory justifies the remaining premium. Alongside it, Rocket Lab's $266 million contract and the Falcon 9 booking freeze are quietly reshaping the launch market in its favour, AST's factory approval signals a production ramp that goes well beyond the current 45-satellite target, and Redwire is deepening its defence footprint while the market ignores it. The sector that was up 360% over the prior twelve months has now given most of it back. Whether the bottom is in or still ahead will be answered in the next ten days.
BROKER PULSE
🚀 Consensus prices
Live prices for all names below at Orbit Alpha Markets
SPACEX (SPCX) · Avg target $236.71
ROCKET LAB (RKLB) · Avg target $114.33
AST SPACEMOBILE (ASTS) · Avg target $83.32
PLANET LABS (PL) · Avg target $40.10
INTUITIVE MACHINES (LUNR) · Avg target $40.78
GLOBALSTAR (GSAT) · Avg target $90.00
FIREFLY AEROSPACE (FLY) · Avg target $48.11
MDA SPACE (MDA) · Avg target $44.20
REDWIRE (RDW) · Avg target $14.88
VIASAT (VSAT) · Avg target $94.56
BLACKSKY TECHNOLOGY (BKSY) · Avg target $40.50
VIRGIN GALACTIC (SPCE) · Avg target $3.52
SPIRE GLOBAL (SPIR) · Avg target $20.88
LAUNCH WATCH
🔭 Launches that could move your portfolio
Full launch calendar with live status at Orbit Alpha Launches
Jul 29 · CASC — Unconfirmed vehicle (possibly Long March 7A) · LC-201, Wenchang Satellite Launch Center, China. Unconfirmed payload.
Jul 30 · CASC — Unconfirmed vehicle · LC-9, Taiyuan Satellite Launch Center, China. Unconfirmed payload.
Jul 30 · SpaceX — NROL-95 · Falcon 9 · SLC-40, Cape Canaveral SFS, Florida. National Reconnaissance Office classified payload.
Aug 01 · SpaceX — Starlink (17-53) · Falcon 9 · SLC-4E, Vandenberg SFB, California. Booster: B1063.
Aug 04 · CASC — Unconfirmed vehicle (possibly Long March 8A) · LC-1, Wenchang Satellite Launch Center, China. Unconfirmed payload.
Aug 06 · JAXA — Michibiki No. 7 (QZS-7) · H-3 · LA-Y1, Tanegashima Space Center, Japan. Quasi-Zenith Satellite System navigation satellite augmenting GPS coverage in the Asia-Pacific region. H-3 flight no. 9.
Aug 06 · Isar Aerospace — "Onward and Upward" · Spectrum · Andøya Space, Norway. Second test flight of Isar Aerospace's Spectrum launch vehicle, carrying payloads for ESA's "Boost!" programme including Spectrum Flight Two, CyBEEsat, TriSat-S, Platform 6, FramSat-1, and Let It Go.
Aug 09 · CASC — Unconfirmed vehicle (possibly Long March 7A) · LC-201, Wenchang Satellite Launch Center, China. Unconfirmed payload.
Aug 17 · CASC — Unconfirmed vehicle (possibly Long March 12) · LC-2, Wenchang Satellite Launch Center, China. Unconfirmed payload.
Aug 24 · CASC — Chang'e 7 · Long March 5 · LP-101, Wenchang Satellite Launch Center, China. Lunar rover, orbiter, and lander mission.
Aug 27 · Arianespace — MTG-I2 · Ariane 6 · ELA-4, Guiana Space Centre, French Guiana. Third launch of EUMETSAT's third-generation weather satellite.
Aug 30 · SpaceX — Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope · Falcon Heavy · LC-39A, Kennedy Space Center, Florida. NASA's next flagship infrared space telescope, launching to a Sun-Earth L2 orbit.
Jul (date TBD) · South Korean ADD — Demo Flight · GYUB · Offshore pad, Jeju Island, South Korea.
Jul (date TBD) · Rocket Lab — "The Grain Goddess Provides" · Electron · Rocket Lab Launch Complex, New Zealand. Eighth Electron mission for Japanese SAR operator iQPS, deploying one synthetic-aperture-radar satellite to a 575 km orbit. Multiple prior scrubs.
Jul (date TBD) · Rocket Lab — LOXSAT-1 · Electron · Rocket Lab Launch Complex, New Zealand.
SENTIMENT SIGNAL
🎯 THE FALCON 9 SUNSET: WHAT SPACEX CLOSING ITS ORDER BOOK MEANS FOR EVERY LAUNCH COMPANY
Bloomberg reported this week that SpaceX has stopped accepting new dedicated Falcon 9 launch bookings for missions beyond 2028. The company has also halted future reservations for its Transporter and Bandwagon rideshare programmes, the sub-$300,000 shared flights that made low-Earth orbit accessible to an entire generation of small-satellite startups. And it has ceased production of some expendable Falcon hardware, including the rocket's massive upper stage, a supply-chain decision that is far harder to reverse than a scheduling one. SpaceX has not announced a formal retirement date for Falcon 9, and the rocket will continue flying existing contracts, NASA missions, and Department of Defence payloads. But the signal is unambiguous: the most prolific launch vehicle in history is being wound down, and the company is betting everything on Starship filling the gap.
This is not just a SpaceX story. It is a structural shift in the global launch market that affects every company in the space sector, from constellation operators who depend on cheap launch access to the competing rocket builders who have spent years preparing for exactly this moment. This deep dive unpacks what is closing, what replaces it, who benefits, and what happens if the transition does not go smoothly.
WHAT FALCON 9 ACTUALLY IS: THE BASELINE THE MARKET IS LOSING
To understand what the closure means, you need to understand what Falcon 9 built. The rocket has flown 587 times with a 99.8% success rate. It has landed its first-stage boosters on 590 of 596 attempts. Booster B1067 completed its 36th flight this week, the most by any orbital-class rocket in history. In 2026 alone, SpaceX has launched approximately 80 Falcon 9 missions through late July, a pace that no other launch provider in the world comes within an order of magnitude of matching.
The economics are equally dominant. A dedicated Falcon 9 mission costs approximately $67 to $74 million, delivering payloads to low-Earth orbit at roughly $2,720 per kilogram. Its rideshare programme, Transporter (sun-synchronous orbit) and Bandwagon (mid-inclination), offers slots starting below $300,000 for standard CubeSats. Before Falcon 9, a comparable orbit insertion cost $15,000 to $20,000 per kilogram. SpaceX did not just reduce the price of launch; it collapsed it by roughly 90% in a decade, enabling business models, Starlink, Planet Labs, Spire, BlackSky, that would have been economically impossible at prior pricing.
That is what is closing its order book. The question is not whether something will replace it. The question is whether anything can replace it at the same price, the same cadence, and the same reliability before the last booked Falcon 9 flies.
WHY SPACEX IS DOING THIS
The strategic logic is straightforward: SpaceX is prioritising Starship. The company's internal Falcon 9 manifest is increasingly consumed by two programmes that dwarf any external customer's needs. First, the deployment of Starlink V3 satellites, each weighing approximately 4,400 pounds, that are too large for Falcon 9 and can only be launched on Starship (Flight 13 deployed the first 20 this week). Second, the buildout of SpaceX's orbital AI data centre infrastructure, which requires payload volumes that Falcon 9 cannot deliver.
With its own demand absorbing the majority of remaining Falcon 9 capacity, SpaceX is making a rational decision: stop selling launch slots it will need for itself, wind down the expendable hardware production that has no long-term future, and redirect engineering and manufacturing resources toward Starship. The company has publicly stated its intention to transition to Starship but has not disclosed a specific timeline, leaving ambiguity about whether Falcon 9 might continue flying beyond 2028 on existing contracts if Starship's commercial ramp is slower than planned.
The production halt on expendable upper stages is the detail that matters most. A scheduling decision can be reversed with a phone call. A factory shutdown cannot. Tooling, supplier contracts, and skilled labour do not reassemble quickly. If Starship encounters further development delays and SpaceX needs Falcon 9 capacity it has already dismantled, the rebuild timeline is measured in quarters, not weeks.
THE SUPPLY GAP: WHAT HAPPENS BETWEEN FALCON 9 AND STARSHIP
This is where the story becomes relevant to every satellite operator and every investor in the sector. Falcon 9 currently dominates the global commercial launch market. If its order book closes in 2028 and Starship is not yet flying at commercial cadence, there is a genuine capacity crunch in the medium-lift segment (roughly 5,000 to 25,000 kilograms to LEO).
SatNews described the situation in stark terms: the halt on new rideshare bookings "leaves a massive supply vacuum in the market." Startups that raised capital based on sub-$300,000 Transporter pricing now face significantly higher launch costs or prolonged deployment delays. Constellation operators who planned their economics around a Falcon 9 flight every few days must find alternative providers or accept longer timelines.
The gap risk is concentrated in the 2028 to 2030 window. SpaceX's own projections, as cited in the Starship cost analysis literature, assume Starship reaches 8 to 12 flights per quarter by mid-2027. As of mid-2026, the actual cadence is 1 to 2 flights per quarter, and Flight 13 was Starship's first successful mission since Flight 12 in May. If the ramp to commercial cadence takes longer than projected, every constellation customer, government programme, and commercial satellite operator faces a narrowing set of options.
WHO BENEFITS: THE ALTERNATIVE LAUNCH PROVIDERS
The Falcon 9 wind-down creates a demand tailwind for every credible alternative launch provider. Here is how each stacks up.
Rocket Lab (RKLB), Neutron. This is the most direct beneficiary. Neutron is designed to compete in exactly the payload class that Falcon 9 dominates: approximately 13,000 kilograms to LEO, with a reusable first stage, at a target price of approximately $50 million per launch (roughly $3,000 to $5,000 per kilogram). The vehicle's first flight is targeted for Q4 2026, meaning it could begin commercial operations during the exact window when Falcon 9 availability starts to tighten. Rocket Lab's $266 million Space Force contract this week, its $190 million MACH-TB block buy in March, and the Iridium acquisition (which creates internal demand for constellation-replacement launches) all position Neutron to absorb displaced Falcon 9 demand. The risk is execution: Neutron has not yet flown, and a tank-rupture incident earlier this year pushed the debut back. If Neutron delivers on its timeline, RKLB is the clearest winner of the Falcon 9 transition. If it slips further, the opportunity passes to others.
Firefly Aerospace (FLY), Alpha. Firefly's Alpha rocket operates in the small-satellite class (approximately 1,000 kilograms to LEO at roughly $15 million per launch), not the medium-lift segment where Falcon 9 dominates. But Falcon 9's rideshare closure directly affects the small-sat market: operators who previously hitched a ride on Transporter for sub-$300,000 now need a dedicated launcher, and Alpha is one of a handful of vehicles that can serve them. Firefly's Esrange pad in Sweden and its growing NASA relationship (two CLPS contracts, plus the JPL Mars subcontract) position it as a niche beneficiary, particularly for European and government customers seeking alternatives to SpaceX.
ULA, Vulcan Centaur. ULA's Vulcan is the incumbent alternative for high-value government and defence missions, with a price range of $100 to $150 million per launch and payload capacity of approximately 27,200 kilograms to LEO. It is not cost-competitive with Falcon 9 and is not designed to be. Its role is strategic: providing the US government with an assured-access alternative to SpaceX for national-security payloads. The Falcon 9 wind-down does not make Vulcan cheaper, but it does make it more necessary, as the government's launch options narrow.
Arianespace, Ariane 6. Europe's answer to independent launch access costs approximately $77 to $115 million per mission ($5,300 to $7,400 per kilogram), is entirely expendable, and has not yet achieved its target cadence. It is priced 2 to 3x above Falcon 9 per kilogram and cannot compete on cost. But the Falcon 9 closure strengthens the strategic argument for Ariane 6: European institutional customers who might have booked a cheaper Falcon 9 ride will now have fewer alternatives, making Ariane 6's sovereignty premium easier to justify politically if not economically.
Blue Origin, New Glenn. New Glenn targets 45,000 kilograms to LEO with a reusable first stage, at an estimated $60 to $90 million per launch. It is designed to serve Amazon's Kuiper constellation and national-security missions. But the May pad explosion and a return-to-flight target of "end of 2026" (widely considered aggressive) mean New Glenn is unlikely to be absorbing commercial demand in the near term. If it returns to flight successfully and achieves cadence, it becomes a serious medium-to-heavy-lift alternative. If it does not, the gap between Falcon 9's wind-down and Starship's ramp-up widens further.
WHAT IT MEANS FOR THE REST OF THE SECTOR
The Falcon 9 sunset is not just a launch-provider story. It ripples through the entire sector.
For constellation operators (ASTS, Planet Labs, Spire, BlackSky), the closure of the rideshare programme means higher per-satellite launch costs unless they can negotiate dedicated Starship flights or find alternative shared-ride providers. AST SpaceMobile launches its BlueBirds on Falcon 9; if future batches (beyond the 45-satellite target) need launch access post-2028, the vehicle may not be available. Planet Labs flew Pelican-11 on Transporter-17 this week; its Gen 2 constellation ramp depends on continued access to affordable rideshare flights.
For satellite manufacturers (MDA, Redwire), the transition creates both risk and opportunity. If launch costs rise during the gap period, the economics of building and deploying new constellations become harder to close, which could delay orders. Conversely, if Starship delivers on its cost-per-kilogram promise ($10 to $100 per kilogram at full reuse versus $2,720 on Falcon 9), it unlocks entirely new categories of space infrastructure that would need to be built, expanding the addressable market for manufacturers.
For Iridium (and by extension RKLB post-acquisition), the timing is directly relevant. Iridium's current constellation was completed in 2019 and is designed for a multi-decade operational life, but a next-generation replacement will eventually be needed. If Neutron is operational by mid-2027 (the Iridium deal's expected close date), Rocket Lab can launch those replacements internally at cost rather than buying Falcon 9 slots. If Falcon 9 is no longer available by then, the internal launch capability goes from "nice to have" to "essential."
Takeaway: Falcon 9 is the most successful orbital rocket ever built: 587 launches, 99.8% success rate, a 90% reduction in the cost of reaching orbit. SpaceX is now winding it down. The order book is closed beyond 2028. The rideshare programmes are full. The expendable hardware production line is shutting. In its place, SpaceX is betting on Starship, a vehicle that has flown 13 times (with mixed results) and has not yet achieved orbital insertion, commercial cadence, or booster recovery via tower catch. If Starship scales as fast as SpaceX projects, the transition will be seamless and the cost of orbit will fall another order of magnitude. If it does not, the global launch market faces a genuine capacity crunch in the 2028 to 2030 window, and every satellite operator, government agency, and constellation builder will be competing for a shrinking pool of rides. The companies best positioned for that scenario are the ones building alternatives now: Rocket Lab with Neutron, Firefly with Alpha and European pad access, and ULA with Vulcan for government payloads. The Falcon 9 sunset is not a crisis. It is a market-structure shift that will determine which launch companies thrive and which constellation operators face deployment delays. For any investor holding space names, the question is no longer whether the transition happens. It is whether it happens on time.
Previous: Issue 14: Below the IPO price. Below the floor. Below everything. · Next: Issue 16: The bottom before the answer.