Wed, Sep 17, 2014, 2:04 AM EDT - U.S. Markets open in 7 hrs 26 mins

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Orbital Sciences Corp. Message Board

SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Hey Clam...fat fingers, sorry. I went to give it thumbs up and pressed the stupid down finger by mistake. This was a big test indeed. I heard it described as hitting a bb with a bb. Congrats to Ray, Boeing , Northrop and Orbital for the success and hopefully keeping us safe from the bad guys. Lord knows that there are quite a few out there....

  • Reply to

    Russia and ULA Contract

    by alex_assyia Jun 23, 2014 9:16 AM

    Not sure Tom. It was once a subsidiary of Orbital. Orbii... Launched

    the first generation ORBCOM sats off the Pegusus back in the mid 90s

  • Reply to

    Russia and ULA Contract

    by alex_assyia Jun 23, 2014 9:16 AM

    What is the business relationship between ORBCOM and Orbital? I cannot remember if ORBCOM was once part of Orbital or if they have ever been.

  • Reply to

    Russia and ULA Contract

    by alex_assyia Jun 23, 2014 9:16 AM

    This is old school versus new school for sure. Again , I like Musk but , right now he is having a heck of a time with the new Falcon. He was supposed to launch some ORBCOM sats in early May and had some engine leak issues, and the second , third and fourth attempts this weekend have forced more delays. This is for sure adding fuel to ULA's arguments. SpaceX has another 10-12 launches on its manifest for the remainder of the year. Not sure Musk can pull this off. I somehow think ORB can benefit from all this in someway. Maybe their long sought after strategy of smaller launches will come to fruition. as I said , their is allot going on in the launch business these days ,and the synergies as the result of the merger may be very positive for ORB/OA going forward.

  • Reply to

    Russia and ULA Contract

    by alex_assyia Jun 23, 2014 9:16 AM

    Yes, I saw that one yesterday and got confused. Mötley had essentially the same story on 5/18. I know that Putin tried to muzzle that "trampoline guy" . So I am not sure if this is new news. It also begs the question if it is true, do we continue to need the CRS. The big issue in my mind right now is the Stennis AJ26 failure investigation. That has kept ORB2 in the launch hanger ,and some valuable revenues and cash flow.

  • Reply to

    Russia and ULA Contract

    by alex_assyia Jun 23, 2014 9:16 AM

    This one was published yesterday, since Yahoo wont let me post links just add ".aspx" to the end of this "http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/06/22/russia-bans-us-from-international-space-station-am"

  • Reply to

    Russia and ULA Contract

    by alex_assyia Jun 23, 2014 9:16 AM

    Hey Alex... All of this is in the stock price I think. If I am not mistaken you read a Motley Fool article,which was out a week or so ago. That said , there is a ton of news on the launch business making its way around these days. The last I heard about the RD 180s was that Russia would not sell to US for military purposes. That prompted ULA to talk about new engine development. In fact ,last week Congress added something like 220 million in appropriations for that purpose. What is interesting, and something to follow, is that Orbital is in talks directly with the Russian manufacturer for the purchase of the RD 180 engine. I assume that because they are not certified for Military launches that Russia may sell to Orbital for CRS2 and commercial use.

    Sentiment: Buy

  • Reply to

    Russia and ULA Contract

    by alex_assyia Jun 23, 2014 9:16 AM

    Also SpaceX and ULA are in quite the battle right now and it looks like Musk better be careful who he goes up aganist because ULA is taking the offensive aganist them.

  • I just read an article on the Russia and America tensions in space talking about Russia wanting to ban the US from the space station. The also may cut off supply of the RD-180s engine. The ULA is planning on developing a new engine to be ready by 2019 and whichever company gets the contracts will have billions of dollars of development work and revenue from the sell. In the article it mentions Orbital ATK and GY as the likely contenders but says GY is the front-runner. How do you think this will affect the company? What chances do you think we have on getting the contract with the new company?

  • If this link won't work just google it: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-22/pentagon-says-missile-defense-system-hit-target-in-test.html?cmpid=yhoo

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    Number of ATK shares on Merger

    by meteorbyte Jun 18, 2014 6:27 PM

    I look at the Seeking Alpha articles each morning and, like you, would really appreciate some "cutting through the fog" on this whole combination of companies. It seemed as though it was an easy to understand concept until the Orbital shares went from 28-33-25 and now back to almost 30 indicating that the market does not fully understand the value and then the Stennis issue made it more murky.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    Number of ATK shares on Merger

    by meteorbyte Jun 18, 2014 6:27 PM

    Hey Amigos! It's me drmyeyes,now mcrf52. Who is doc? :) Anyways, I stand by my numbers Clam. OA will have 60.5 million shares outstanding when the new company is formed. Atk shareholders will get one share for each share of Atk they own ( that is roughly 32 mil shares ). Orbital shareholders will get 44.5 % of one share in OA ,for each share they own ( that is roughly 28.5 mil shares). As Tom states that will leave about a 53/47 ownership in favor of ATK shareholders. The new BOD will have 9 members,with 7 coming from Orbitals current BOD. The Chairman of the Board will be from ATK .

  • Reply to

    Number of ATK shares on Merger

    by meteorbyte Jun 18, 2014 6:27 PM

    Sorry, Tom, I was adressing "Doc's" analysis. I agree that it is a little murky at this time. Waiting for a Seeking Alpha article or something.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    Number of ATK shares on Merger

    by meteorbyte Jun 18, 2014 6:27 PM

    Who is the Tom to which you are referring clamdigger? Is that mcrf52 who I thought was doc? The way I see the math is that, using mcrf52's numbers, Orbital shareholders will have about 47% of the new company and ATK will have 53% plus the spinoff value of the consumer business. Anyway, this whole thing is confusing me (which seems to happen more as I get older) so I will wait to see what happens just as you will and let's hope it benefits current ORB holders.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    Number of ATK shares on Merger

    by meteorbyte Jun 18, 2014 6:27 PM

    Tom, so you are saying that ATK shareholders will own about 2/3 of the new OA? I understand ORB top mgmt will hold some top positions in OA (since ATK top mgmt is going with the spinoff sporting ammo company), correct? Do you know how the BOD will be composed? I assume ATK will have roughly 2/3 of the BOD? Seems like whoever controls the BOD controls the new OA? I'm not saying this is not a good merger (acquisition) as the companies certainly have some strategic synergies (I think). I'll hold to see what happens. clam

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    Number of ATK shares on Merger

    by meteorbyte Jun 18, 2014 6:27 PM

    My understanding is that the new company Orbital /ATK ( symbol OA), will have 60.5 million shares outstanding. Each ATK owner will get 1 share of OA for each share of ATK they own. That will be 31.8 mil shares for OA. Orbital currently has roughly 62 mil shares outstanding ,and each share owned will receive 44.5 % of one share of the new company. If my math is correct that will yield about 28.7 mil shares of OA.

  • do excuse me if it's been mentioned already...
    anyone know the number of ATK shares to be
    given to Orbital share holders?

  • Reply to

    Musk has great plans for SpaceX but

    by wright.tom64 Jun 17, 2014 11:22 AM

    That can be true. The thing is that buring nat gas is way cleaner then coal but the methods for getting the natural gas such as fracking is where the methane and polution can come from. Fracking is the reason nat gas is so cheep now but it is also becoming pushed back by enviormental groups. I say the biggest thing holding back nat gas is the polution of fracking.

  • Reply to

    Musk has great plans for SpaceX but

    by wright.tom64 Jun 17, 2014 11:22 AM

    Alex, maybe you can react to the comment heard recently (OK, it was on NPR) that nat gas produces alot of methane to the atmosphere and that methane is 50 times more harmful in terms of greenhouse effect than coal and CO2. Currently EPA and Obama are fixated on and smelling victory over coal. I am not informed on this stuff and have invested in midstream nat gas and liquids transport and processing via entities such as EPD and ETE. (PS, I also heard that Musk is looking at the sun to solve our clean energy goals.)

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    Musk has great plans for SpaceX but

    by wright.tom64 Jun 17, 2014 11:22 AM

    I work for a company that engineers power plants and industrial plants. I can can tell you that our projects have changed to a large majority nat gas. We no longer build coal plants because right now nat gas is so cheep everyone wants to build nat gas plants. There is also a project in the works changing an old plant that use to recive nat gas from overseas to an export plant that sends gas over to other countries. That project has gotten some notice from the EPA but it worked past it. Overall Nat gas is way cleaner than coal and right now it is defently being used.

ORB
27.92+0.32(+1.16%)Sep 16 4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.