Mars ETF?

[Fermion]

Those of us retiring rather early (mid 40s, but some here are in their 30s) might one day have a little bit of money invested in Mars (not the candy).

If Musk meets his goal of landing humans on Mars in 2025, I will be 55 and still years away from even early SS. By age 62 perhaps there are several companies doing various projects on or toward Mars.

I may eventually be able to buy shares in a Mars ETF before I am 70. Amazing as that sounds now.

 

[Gone4Good]

One can certainly hope.

Although it's hard to see the commercial viability of a Mars investment. Musk is making an altruistic investment in the continuation of humanity; figuring a multi-planetary species has better chances of avoiding extinction. That's a noble and worthwhile goal. But I don't quite understand how anyone makes a buck off of it, including Musk.

 

[Lucantes]

Maybe the money isn't actually made off of the "commercial viability of a Mars investment" but the associated technologies etc. that are developed to make it actually possible and such?
Were the Moon landings commercially viable? Doubtful, but there has been significant money made off of the technologies that were developed to make them possible.
And yes I realize that they were government sponsored activities, but the resultant technologies and engineering capabilities have created financial benefits long after the actual related space programs ended.
Asteroid mining may (?) become commercially viable at some point, but the ability to actually do it will be standing on the shoulders of previous space programs.
Who/What/When to invest in is a more complicated question I would imagine.

 

[Totoro]

I can't think of any technology or resource that makes Mars a good location.

Maybe in relation to the asteroid belt? There are a few initiatives aiming at mining those already, they're privately held though.

 

[Fermion]

Well, if you establish a decent habitat on Mars and Earth gets Shoemaker-Levied, then any amount of money investment was worth it.

 

[Totoro]

For sure.

Interesting is: how do you make a profit out of it before that day?

Tourism maybe. And government.

[Edit] Insurance and emergency shelter type of companies I guess. Buy a house on Mars, escape judgment day on Earth.

 

[Fermion]

Baring the discovery of a Martian mineral that cures cancer, I am guessing it will be tourism and a rich person playground.

But hey, that is the way these things start. Tesla did not start up by trying to make a $20,000 car. They made something rich people wanted.

 

[LOL!]

Better to invest in something worthwhile like Biotech because at least it has a purpose.

 

[stepford]

Well, if you establish a decent habitat on Mars and Earth gets Shoemaker-Levied, then any amount of money investment was worth it.

Wouldn't it just be a whole lot easier to put a colony up in LEO and recolonize Earth after the big one. Unless we take a hit way bigger than Chicxulub I suspect that even post-impact Earth would be a lot more benign environment than Mars.

I read plenty of Heinlein as a kid and I'm happy to see Elon the "visionary" spend his billions on his interplanetary dream, but practically colonization of Mars doesn't make much sense for a variety of reasons.

 

[Gone4Good]

Maybe the money isn't actually made off of the "commercial viability of a Mars investment" but the associated technologies etc. that are developed to make it actually possible and such?

Sure someone can make a buck on Mars if someone else is willing to lose many more bucks first.

The moon landings are a perfect example. There never was a commercial reason to land on the moon. It was entirely driven by nationalistic, cold-war, inter-government politics and rivalries.

It turns out that the Apollo project did generate a lot of worthwhile spin-off technologies. But no company would ever plan a trip to the moon on the off chance we'll discover Tang in the process. No company but SpaceX, I guess.

Even there you have to think his ultimate goal is to goose NASA or other governments into another space race with SpaceX acting as the lead contractor.

 

[NW-Bound]

What's there on Mars? The temperature ranges from -225F to 60F, and there's nothing to burn to keep warm. Oh wait, there's no oxygen to burn anything with, as the atmosphere is 95% CO2, and is 100x less dense than the earth's.

It takes 6 months to get there, and once you are there there's no rocket to take you back.

So, you endure a 6 month trip, and die a painful suffocating cold death once you get there. How fun! I say let Musk go first. I will be watching his selfie video. I have no interest in reality shows on TV, but this one I will watch.

 

[Lucantes]

Sure someone can make a buck on Mars if someone else is willing to lose many more bucks first.
The moon landings are a perfect example. There never was a commercial reason to land on the moon. It was entirely driven by nationalistic, cold-war, inter-government politics and rivalries.
It turns out that the Apollo project did generate a lot of worthwhile spin-off technologies. But no company would ever plan a trip to the moon on the off chance we'll discover Tang in the process. No company but SpaceX, I guess.
Even there you have to think his ultimate goal is to goose NASA or other governments into another space race with SpaceX acting as the lead contractor.

Someone already has decided to "lose many more bucks first" right (NASA, ESA, Musk etc.)? So the investments are already planned or are underway. Technology is already being pursued to make it feasible, monies are already allocated for some.
Why a certain space related goal was, or is to be, accomplished becomes less of an issue once it is actually accomplished. I don't care supposedly why we went to the moon, I am just glad that we did. I think the collective "we" gained much more than we lost, or invested or even wasted.
Now what financially was gained by the entire moon program, and all the related technologies and engineering that had to be developed in order to accomplish it, versus what was actually spent I do not know. But it feels that we gained way more than we actually put in, IMHO (no, I have no source to site for this except my internal "truthiness" ).
I want us to continue to do difficult things, I want us to continue to stretch the boundaries of what we can achieve in every area. Sometimes for purely selfish reasons, sometimes just because we can, sometimes because we should.
I would very much like to be 95 years old sitting on my dock watching a rocket launch from Kennedy knowing that there were people on it going on some great new adventure or expedition....or even just going to do a routine maintenance activity on a lunar mine....it all works for me.

 

[Gone4Good]

Why a certain space related goal was, or is to be, accomplished becomes less of an issue once it is actually accomplished.

Perhaps. But for any capitalist to invest in a project they need to have a reasonable expectation that they'll make a profit from the project. There is no such reasonable expectation of a profit by colonizing mars.

If you think that profits will come by inventing all the ancillary technologies needed for a mars mission then the more direct way of earning those profits is to invest in those technologies directly. No mars landing required.

The only way someone profits from a mars mission is if the government decides to go and spends a lot of tax payer dollars making it happen.

 

[Totoro]

Billionaires might take the place of government.

 

[GrayHare]

I find Starshot more compelling than Mars colonization.

 

[Options]

Why stop there? If you're going to speculate with your money, why not go for broke?

Rise of the robots is sparking an investment boom ​ - FT.com

 

[HFWR]

IMHO, to make spending time on the moon, or Mars, worthwhile, numerous missions would be required, to put infrastructure in place. Well, containers of stuff to be assembled into infrastructure. Particularly as it pertains to Mars, just transporting humans there to plant a flag and collect a few rocks, while certainly interesting, seems both dangerous and expensive, when the primary reward is bragging rights...

 

[NW-Bound]

Again, Mars is cold, dry, and has no oxygen. It lost its atmosphere for several reasons, and what is left is 95% CO2. What is there to colonize with? It's ridiculous.

Even if humans can build some bubble structures up there to contain the air and to grow food (not possible currently with rockets unless someone invents anti-gravity machines for transportation), the same effort can be used to colonize Antarctica, or the Sahara desert a lot cheaper, by 1000 times or perhaps 1 million times.

Totally absurd! People watch too many science fiction movies and tend to believe the cr*p.

 

[Totoro]

Help me out, why isn't food growing on Mars possible with current technology?

 

[NW-Bound]

It's not just food growing, but to bring equipment and supply up there for initial sustenance involves huge costs. They do not know how to build dwellings for people on Mars, let alone building huge greenhouses for planting.

The problem is not really technology, but rather at what cost and why? Before thinking about how we can build a huge bubble for dwelling, create air for breathing, having enough power to generate warmth, get water to drink and to plant up on Mars, we should be talking about desalination to get fresh water for much of the world, keeping people in the cold climate warm in the winter, having cheap air conditioning for people in hot climate, etc...

Why are people dreaming about the big "pie in the sky" project, when they have not solved much easier problems here on earth? Even in California which is a rich region on earth, people cringe at the cost of desalinating water to help in the drought. And while people are shivering on earth in the winter, what makes them think they can warm themselves up on Mars, where temperature drops to -100F (-63C)?

 

[MuirWannabe]

Someone already has decided to "lose many more bucks first" right (NASA, ESA, Musk etc.)? So the investments are already planned or are underway. Technology is already being pursued to make it feasible, monies are already allocated for some.
Why a certain space related goal was, or is to be, accomplished becomes less of an issue once it is actually accomplished. I don't care supposedly why we went to the moon, I am just glad that we did. I think the collective "we" gained much more than we lost, or invested or even wasted.
Now what financially was gained by the entire moon program, and all the related technologies and engineering that had to be developed in order to accomplish it, versus what was actually spent I do not know. But it feels that we gained way more than we actually put in, IMHO (no, I have no source to site for this except my internal "truthiness" ).
I want us to continue to do difficult things, I want us to continue to stretch the boundaries of what we can achieve in every area. Sometimes for purely selfish reasons, sometimes just because we can, sometimes because we should.
I would very much like to be 95 years old sitting on my dock watching a rocket launch from Kennedy knowing that there were people on it going on some great new adventure or expedition....or even just going to do a routine maintenance activity on a lunar mine....it all works for me.

+1, well stated


Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

 

[Fermion]

Why are people dreaming about the big "pie in the sky" project, when they have not solved much easier problems here on earth? Even in California which is a rich region on earth, people cringe at the cost of desalinating water to help in the drought. And while people are shivering on earth in the winter, what makes them think they can warm themselves up on Mars, where temperature drops to -100F (-63C)?

Because the big stuff is what gets people motivated and advances the human race faster. From a species standpoint, getting off the planet makes more sense than trying to figure out ways we can overpopulate the current one.

A lot of the technology to feed people and create habitats in inhospitable places on earth would likely be an offshoot of a Mars colonization project.

And of course it is cool too.

 

[NW-Bound]

Guess I am not one of the more romantic type when it comes to science.

About the effort of growing food for a small colony to be self-sustaining, I have visited the Biosphere 2 Research Facility in Oracle, AZ. Much has been written about the failures and lessons learned from the experiment of this small closed system. Yet, the Biosphere 2 is a vastly easier environment than on Mars.

It will not matter though, because it will be a very very long time, most likely never, until the human race can ever build enough rockets to bring enough material to Mars to even build something like the Biosphere 2. It will not happen in my lifetime.

 

[Fermion]

Maybe it won't happen, but I hope it does. The other possibility is a breakthrough in virtual reality that lets you visit Mars with all senses through a robot (hey didn't they make a movie or something about this? ). Or really all they have to do is correctly model every detail of Mars then patch the experience into your brain (wait, that sounds like a movie too).

 

[NW-Bound]

I am afraid that the Earth is all we have. If we mess it up, we are done.

About Mars scenery and experience, I guess I can imagine it being the same as standing in a place devoid of all animal and plant life, some place like the Sahara, except that it is not hot but a lot colder than Antarctica.

I have not personally experienced the desolateness of Sahara or the cold of Antarctica, but I think I've got it. I would rather much enjoy the scenery on earth like I have had the privilege to.

PS. Following are some photos from Mars.