Some questions that i asked in respect to AST Spacemobile
To calculate the probability of Falcon 9 launch delays over the past five years, we need to:
- Find the total number of Falcon 9 launches in the last five years.
- Determine how many of these launches experienced delays due to various reasons (e.g., weather, technical issues, etc.).
- Calculate the probability as: P(delay)=Number of delayed launchesTotal launchesP(\text{delay}) = \frac{\text{Number of delayed launches}}{\text{Total launches}}
Unfortunately, I cannot browse live data at the moment. However, you can find information on Falcon 9 launches and delays on resources like SpaceX's website, third-party websites like Spaceflight Now or Wikipedia, or through databases tracking space launches like Launch Library.
If you provide the launch data, I can calculate the probability of a delay for you!
ME: I wish you can find the data which is related for me. I don't need exact number just caculate factors for me appoximately.
Between 2019 and 2024, Falcon 9 launches faced delays primarily due to weather conditions and technical issues. These delays have occurred relatively frequently, given the high volume of launches by SpaceX in this period.
For example, Falcon 9 had over 60 launches in 2022 alone, breaking its previous records. However, bad weather, especially lightning and storms, frequently causes scrubs, as seen in multiple recent launches. Additionally, technical issues with engines or booster inspections have sometimes postponed launches.
While exact figures for the number of delays are difficult to pinpoint, roughly 10-20% of Falcon 9's scheduled launches face some sort of delay. Given this, the probability of a delay for any specific launch over the past five years is estimated to be around 0.15 to 0.20(
)( )( ).ME: Translate this into korean
2019년부터 2024년까지 Falcon 9 발사는 주로 기상 조건과 기술적 문제로 인해 지연되었습니다. 이 기간 동안 SpaceX가 높은 발사 빈도를 유지한 만큼 지연이 자주 발생했습니다.
예를 들어, 2022년에만 Falcon 9은 60회 이상의 발사를 기록하며 이전 기록을 깨뜨렸습니다. 그러나 번개와 폭풍과 같은 악천후로 인해 여러 차례 발사가 중단되었습니다. 또한 엔진 문제나 부스터 검사와 같은 기술적 이유로 발사가 연기된 경우도 있었습니다.
지연 횟수에 대한 정확한 수치를 파악하기는 어렵지만, Falcon 9 발사 일정 중 약 10~20%는 지연되었을 가능성이 있습니다. 따라서 지난 5년 동안 특정 발사가 지연될 확률은 약 0.15에서 0.20 정도로 추정됩니다(
)( )( ).ME:
ChatGPT:
SpaceX is requesting a waiver from the FCC regarding compliance with Section 25.202(k)(1), which imposes an aggregate out-of-band emissions (OOBE) limit of -120 dBW/m²/MHz. SpaceX argues that this regulation is too restrictive for its proposed Satellite Communications System (SCS). Instead, SpaceX is asking to permit an aggregate OOBE level of -110.6 dBW/m²/MHz in the United States for the PCS G Block.
This request is based on SpaceX’s claim that the -110.6 dBW/m²/MHz level would still meet the interference threshold of -6 dB I/N (interference-to-noise ratio), meaning that the impact on other services would be minimal and within acceptable interference limits. Essentially, SpaceX is looking to balance regulatory requirements with the technical needs of its network to avoid overly restricting the system's performance.
The FCC waiver request process allows companies to propose modifications to existing rules if compliance would hinder their ability to operate effectively without causing harmful interference.
ME:And now translate this into korean
SpaceX는 FCC의 Section 25.202(k)(1) 규정을 준수하는 것이 자사의 위성 통신 시스템(SCS) 네트워크에 지나치게 제한적이라고 주장하며, 이에 대한 면제를 요청하고 있습니다. 이 규정은 집합적인 대역 외 방사(Out-of-Band Emissions, OOBE) 제한을 -120 dBW/m²/MHz로 설정하고 있습니다. 그러나 SpaceX는 미국 내 PCS G 블록에 대해 -110.6 dBW/m²/MHz의 OOBE 수준을 허용해 줄 것을 요청하고 있습니다.
이 요청은 SpaceX가 제시한 간섭 한계 -6 dB I/N(간섭 대 잡음 비율)을 기반으로 하며, 이는 다른 서비스에 미치는 영향이 최소화되고 허용 가능한 간섭 범위 내에 있음을 의미합니다. SpaceX는 이러한 면제 요청을 통해 규제 요구 사항과 시스템 성능 간의 균형을 맞추려 하고 있습니다.
FCC 면제 요청 절차는 기업이 기존 규정을 수정하여 운영에 방해가 되지 않으면서도 해로운 간섭을 초래하지 않도록 제안할 수 있는 방법입니다.
ME:
ChatGPT:
SpaceX is seeking a waiver from the FCC's Section 25.202(k)(1) due to its restrictive nature on their Satellite Communications System (SCS) operations. This section establishes an aggregate out-of-band emissions (OOBE) limit of -120 dBW/m²/MHz, which SpaceX claims would severely impact their system's performance and ability to meet operational needs.
Why SpaceX Could Not Comply:
- Operational Flexibility: The -120 dBW/m²/MHz limit is likely too stringent for SpaceX’s planned operations, particularly given the high volume and density of satellite links in their proposed network. The satellites need to communicate concurrently across multiple beams and channels to meet data demands, which naturally increases emissions.
- Beam Density: The high number of beams that SpaceX uses to maximize coverage and bandwidth means that each beam would contribute to the aggregate emissions, potentially exceeding the -120 dBW/m²/MHz limit. SpaceX may find it difficult to manage the total emissions across many beams without affecting service quality.
- Concurrent Downlink Channels: The simultaneous use of multiple downlink channels also increases the cumulative OOBE, making compliance with the strict aggregate limit more challenging. Each additional channel raises the total emissions, so strict limits could restrict the number of active channels.
Measures SpaceX Would Need to Take to Comply:
- Limiting Concurrent Downlink Channels: SpaceX would likely need to limit the number of active downlink channels operating at any given time, reducing total OOBE. This would degrade service by reducing the overall data throughput and network performance.
- Reducing Transmit Power: Another measure could be reducing the transmit power of each satellite. However, this would reduce the coverage area or the signal strength, which might impact the quality of service for users at the edge of the satellite’s footprint. The exact reduction in power needed would depend on detailed technical assessments.
- Reducing the Number of Visible Beams: SpaceX might need to reduce the number of beams visible in any given area. Reducing the number of beams could help control emissions but at the expense of coverage and data throughput. The exact number of beams to reduce would depend on their beam management strategy and how many satellites are visible in a given region.
I/N Model and Received Power Calculation:
SpaceX’s waiver request includes justifications based on the I/N (Interference-to-Noise) model, but this is only one of many factors involved in calculating received power and interference. Other factors such as:
- Distance between satellites and ground stations
- Interference from neighboring satellite constellations
- Atmospheric conditions
are also critical in determining compliance and operational feasibility.
In summary, to comply with Section 25.202(k)(1), SpaceX would need to implement significant changes, such as reducing the number of active channels, limiting beam visibility, or reducing transmit power—all of which would likely compromise the performance of their satellite network. This explains their request for a more flexible limit, citing that the proposed -110.6 dBW/m²/MHz threshold would still ensure acceptable interference levels without overly restricting their operations.
ME:
Hedge funds were heavily shorting a company's stock, driving their short positions to a peak of 32.7 million shares when the stock hit an all-time low of approximately $2. This aggressive shorting was part of a bearish outlook on the company's future.
However, in May, these hedge funds were hit hard when the company signed significant agreements that drastically changed its market outlook. The company entered into a commercial agreement with AT&T and formed a strategic partnership with Verizon, effectively securing 70% of the U.S. wireless market. These major developments caused the company's stock to surge by over 900%, leading to a massive short squeeze.
As a result, hedge funds incurred losses exceeding $500 million due to their short positions being wiped out by the stock's dramatic price increase, a significant hit to those betting against the company's success.
ME:
ChatGPT:헤지 펀드들은 한 기업의 주가가 약 2달러로 사상 최저치를 기록했을 때, 3,270만 주에 달하는 공매도 포지션을 최고치까지 늘렸습니다. 그러나 5월에 이 기업이 AT&T와 상업 계약을 체결하고 Verizon과 전략적 파트너십 및 투자 협정을 맺으며, **미국 무선 시장의 70%**를 차지하는 큰 성과를 이루자, 상황이 급변했습니다. 이러한 소식으로 인해 주가는 900% 이상 급등했으며, 공매도 투자자들은 대규모 손실을 입었습니다.
결과적으로, 주가 급등으로 인해 공매도 투자자들은 5억 달러 이상의 손실을 입으며 큰 타격을 받았습니다.
ME:
헤지 펀드들은 단 660만 주만 매수하여 공매도 포지션을 청산했으며, 이는 주가 상승의 대부분이 새로운 기관 및 개인 투자자의 매수 수요에 의해 주도되었음을 시사합니다.
아직도 2,610만 주가 공매도 상태에 남아 있으며, 이는 앞으로 몇 주 내에 예상되는 추가적인 호재와 함께 주가 상승을 더욱 가속화할 것으로 보입니다. 이는 주식 시장에서 가격 발견이 활발히 이루어지고 있는 상황을 반영합니다.
ME:
Yes, Verizon did engage in a merger and acquisition (M&A) deal with Frontier Communications back in 2009. Verizon sold parts of its wireline business to Frontier in a deal worth $8.6 billion. The transaction involved Verizon divesting its local phone lines, DSL, and FiOS services across 14 states, transferring them to Frontier Communications.
This was a significant move for Frontier, as it expanded its customer base, particularly in rural and suburban areas, while Verizon focused on its wireless operations and core urban markets. Frontier’s acquisition allowed it to become one of the largest telecommunications companies serving rural America.
This deal was finalized in 2010, and over the following years, Frontier faced challenges integrating these assets, including service issues and customer complaints. Nonetheless, the M&A reshaped the telecom landscape, helping Verizon streamline its focus on wireless and broadband while giving Frontier access to a larger market.
This is the most significant deal involving Verizon and Frontier. If you were referring to another deal, feel free to clarify!
ME:
As an AST SpaceMobile investor, there are several factors to keep in mind regarding Verizon's business strategy and its dealings with Frontier, but Verizon’s renewed interest in wireline or fiber assets does not necessarily spell bad news for AST SpaceMobile.
Verizon and Frontier's Wireline Deal:
Verizon originally divested some of its wireline assets to Frontier in 2010 to focus on its core wireless business. Recently, Verizon and other telecoms have shown interest in expanding fiber and broadband services. Verizon’s interest in the wireline business may stem from its desire to improve connectivity for 5G services, enhance backhaul infrastructure, and bolster broadband offerings, particularly in less urban markets where demand for high-speed internet is growing.
Verizon might regain focus on fiber optics because:
- 5G Backhaul: Fiber is essential for providing fast data backhaul for 5G networks. As Verizon expands 5G, having control over wireline infrastructure enhances its ability to deliver higher-quality services.
- Diversifying Services: With competition in the wireless space heating up, Verizon could be looking to diversify its service portfolio, especially as demand for home internet grows.
Implications for AST SpaceMobile Investors:
- No Direct Threat: AST SpaceMobile’s business revolves around providing space-based cellular broadband directly to mobile phones, particularly in rural and underserved areas. Verizon’s wireline interest is likely focused on improving terrestrial infrastructure. Since AST SpaceMobile operates in space-based communications, the two sectors aren’t directly competitive.
- Complementary Technologies: SpaceMobile’s low Earth orbit (LEO) satellites could complement Verizon’s wireless and fiber networks. By providing connectivity in areas where fiber isn’t feasible, AST could potentially partner with or provide services that enhance Verizon’s rural coverage, making it a potential synergy rather than a threat.
- Growing Demand for Connectivity: Verizon’s move to strengthen its fiber infrastructure underscores the broader market demand for better connectivity, both terrestrial and space-based. As a result, AST SpaceMobile could benefit from the rising tide of telecommunications investments aimed at bridging the digital divide.
Why Verizon Regained Interest in Wireline:
- Verizon may be seeing opportunities in fiber-to-the-home (FTTH) services or fiber as a support for its 5G rollout. As wireless carriers invest in 5G, fiber acts as the backbone of the network, and having greater control over wireline operations could be strategic.
In summary, while Verizon’s wireline strategy is unrelated to AST SpaceMobile’s space-based approach, the focus on expanding overall connectivity solutions, particularly in underserved areas, aligns with AST’s mission. There doesn’t appear to be any immediate negative impact on AST’s business from Verizon’s wireline interests, and there could be opportunities for collaboration down the road.