My daughter has a talent for spacing out — not thinking about space, just gone somewhere. Eyes open, nobody home. You know the look. It's harmless, and honestly kind of useful as a reminder: most of what people call the "future of space" is the same thing. It sounds like focus. It isn't.
So I figured I'd do the work of separating what's actually real — what's generating cash and solving genuine problems today — from what's marketing, mythology, and pure fantasy. Because the line matters, especially when you're trying to make decisions with money.
What's Actually Real
Satellite internet works. Starlink has millions of active subscribers. OneWeb is launching constellations. Amazon is spending billions on Kuiper. This isn't theoretical — people are paying for it. It solves a genuine problem: getting connectivity to places where laying fiber is either impossible or economically insane. Not revolutionary. Just infrastructure that didn't exist before. The margins are harder than they look. You still compete against fiber and terrestrial 5G. You need places where neither exists and people will pay. The economics work. They're just not magical.
Earth observation generates real revenue. Someone needs to know what's happening on the ground: crop yields, pipeline temperatures, port activity, infrastructure wear. Insurance companies price risk using satellite data now. This is a cash-flowing business with paying customers who have actual problems. Not sexy — but boring businesses tend to work better than sexy ones.
Communications infrastructure. Maritime, aviation, remote operations. Real problems. Real customers. Not headlines, but real business.
Launch services. SpaceX proved reusable rockets could work, and that changed the cost curve permanently. Launch costs have fallen dramatically — from tens of thousands of dollars per kilogram to only a few thousand dollars today on modern reusable launch systems. That's not a 10% improvement — it's a wholesale transformation of the economics. Everything above exists at scale because of it.
What Doesn't Matter (Yet, or Maybe Ever)
Mars colonization is mythology dressed as engineering. It matters psychologically — smart people thinking about human expansion, long-term survival, whether we're a single-planet species. That's genuinely interesting. Economically, basically zero. No business model. No economic return. No reason except "because it's cool and we can probably figure it out eventually." It might happen someday. But it's not relevant to understanding where value is being created right now. It's a dream — and dreams are valuable to have. Just don't confuse them with business plans.
Space tourism. Blue Origin. Virgin Galactic. Strap rich people to a rocket for a few minutes, they get a view, they come home. The addressable market is tiny, the economics are terrible, and the upside is a small novelty business. It's just a thing that exists.
Asteroid mining is an interesting thought experiment. The economics and technology aren't there. In 30 years? Maybe. Right now? Science fiction.
SpaceX Deserves Honesty
Everyone wants to talk about SpaceX like it's one thing. It isn't. What SpaceX did well: made rockets reusable, which made them repeatable, which made them cheap — and that fundamentally changed what's economically possible in space. What SpaceX does okay: rockets. Good engineering, good execution, boring and reliable, which is exactly what you want.
What SpaceX doesn't do: Mars colonization economics. Elon wants Mars — he's been very clear. But that's his goal, not the company's revenue engine. The company makes money on launches, Starlink, and government contracts. Mars is the dream the business is subsidizing, not the other way around. Think about SpaceX's actual value separately from Elon's thesis. The company is valuable because it operates rockets well. The Mars stuff might matter someday. It's not the valuation driver today.
Why This Matters
I'm not suggesting anyone should or shouldn't be positioned in any of this. What I am saying is that the space economy is real, it's growing, and the difference between what's generating actual value today versus what's still a story is worth understanding — regardless of what you do with that information.
There's real stuff happening up there. Most of what gets headlines isn't it. Knowing the difference is half the work.
Joshua Staph, CIMA®
Founder, Verak Private Wealth · joshua@verakprivatewealth.com · verakprivatewealth.com
The views expressed are those of the author and are for informational purposes only. Not investment, tax, or legal advice. Individual companies are mentioned for illustrative purposes only and do not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell.
Securities offered through Cambridge Investment Research, Inc., Member FINRA/SIPC. Advisory services through Cambridge Investment Research Advisors, Inc., a Registered Investment Adviser. Verak Private Wealth LLC and Cambridge are not affiliated.