> 3/4th of F9 launches are Starlink launches

Everybody should pay attention to this! This is what we call the SpaceX distortion effect.

1/4th of F9 launches are a gigantic number of launches in the pre-SpaceX world.

To act like '25% ony' therefore small, is just complete idiotic and misunderstanding of actual rocket industry.

> so it's not like reuse has converted to sales that much or at all

It has literally allowed for groundbreaking new communication systems that is producing billions of dollers per year. To just act like because they are not making money from selling launches, the launches don't matter is just purely idiotic.

With the increase capacity somebody was gone build a LEO constellation. And SpaceX would have to be part of launching that constellation. Everybody is planning larger constellations. Its just that SpaceX got their first and actually owned that, rather then being the launch provider.

> Reuse supposedly saves massive cost too, but SpaceX isn't charging that much less to customers,

Why would SpaceX massively reduce prices if they have a full manifest and still win most launches? And just FYI, if there ever was a serious commercial thread, SpaceX can just lower prices easily. That why the actual smart people at Arianespace already in 2014 realized that they had no chance long term and by 2018 they knew that even the Ariane 6 wasn't go do it. That's why their marketing changed so much from 'competition' to 'independent access'.

> and some competitors are aiming to undercut it by pure expendables

They can talk about it if they want, nobody believes them its just marketing spin for people like you. Every serious company is working on reuse. Even ULA has comited to making their reuse system work because literally everybody knows that reuse is the only way to compete.

Arianespace knows it and doesn't really try to compete. They got some commercial contracts thanks to massive subsidizes and the massive launch shortage that Starlink constellation brought. The other reusable system simply weren't on the market fast enough.

Outside of that Ariane 6 doesn't have much commercial and the universal message from ESA/Arianespace is about forcing European institutions to use Ariane 6 because 'Europe'. Even in their marketing they have stopped claiming to be competitive.

> so that's kind of a dubious claim too.

> Those guys chanting such claims are just regurgitating marketing messagings.

Its only dubious to people who need to categorically hate Musk and claim anybody who says anything good about SpaceX must be some Musk worshiper, rather then just somebody who looks at actual reality.

You are parroting the worst most delusional pro-Europe nationalist PR spin and act like you are above the 'SpaceX fanboys'. Ironically not even the mainstream European PR agrees with your position anymore. You are like relic from pre-2020 still repeating the same delusional spin that made Europe the laughing stock of the global launch market.

While literally every well financed rocket company in the world announced re-usability plans, RocketLab, ULA, Relativity, Blue Origin, NG-Firefly, many in China, Arianespace was still producing PR spin while their rocket was delayed and more and more Arianespace launches shifted to SpaceX. There is basically not a single large new rocket design in the works that doesn't have re-usability plans.

Sadly the idea that anything is competitive when SpaceX launches 100+ times a year is so utterly deranged and delusional that even French burocrates have realized that their media PR was only serving to make them an international laughing stock. That why their PR strategy has radically shifted. Only the people who have to somehow 'own the fanboys' still hold on to that old Arianespace PR nonsense.

Even the French space agencies who was pushing for 'Ariane Next' by 2028 (yes a delusional timeline) was literally proposing a rocket that is basically a Falcon 9 clone with methane fuel, down to the same engine configuration and engine cycle. Its almost as if the actual engineers knew what was up.

But all of these people must be wrong, every rocket company in the world is wrong because 'some competitors are aiming to undercut it by pure expendables'. Sure buddy. The rise of non-reusable rockets is just around the corner they are about to make a big comeback soon. I can't wait for that dominate market force to emerge. SpaceX will truly be shook when the cheap mass produced expandable vehicles come online.