ISRO's low-cost launch service irks US companies

[Indx TechStyle]

House committee seeks details on Indian launch policy

An Indian Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) lifts off June 22, 2016, carrying 20 satellites, including 13 provided by U.S. companies. Credit: ISRO

WASHINGTON — A House committee is asking several Obama administration officials new questions about policies regarding the launch of U.S.-built satellites on Indian vehicles.

The questions, in letters issued July 6 by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), chairman of the House Science Committee, and Rep. Brian Babin (R-Texas), chairman of its space subcommittee, come after the launch of more than a dozen satellites built by U.S. companies on an Indian Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) June 22. They sent the letters to Secretary of State John Kerry, Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker, United States Trade Representative (USTR) Michael Froman and Director of Office of Science and Technology Policy John Holdren.

The letters ask the officials for the same information, including a copy of the administration’s policy regarding access to Indian launch services and how it was developed. The letters also request details on the “presumption of denial” the administration applies to requests to export U.S.-built satellites to India for launch. It seeks responses by July 20.

The debate regarding greater access by American satellite developers to Indian vehicles emerged last October. A USTR official told a meeting of the Federal Aviation Administration’s Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee (COMSTAC) then that his office was examining a policy that dated back to 2005 that formally discouraged the use of Indian vehicles in the absence of a commercial space launch agreement between the U.S. and India.

While the use of Indian vehicles may be discouraged, U.S. satellites are receiving approvals to launch on them. In September 2015, four cubesat-sized spacecraft built by Spire launched on a PSLV. On June 22, another PSLV launched 20 satellites, including 12 cubesats built by Planet (formerly Planet Labs) and the 110-kilogram SkySat-3 satellite for Terra Bella, a Google-owned remote sensing company previously known as Skybox Imaging.

“The administration has provided a number of export waivers on a case-by-case basis for these launches, in part because India is becoming a strategic ally in South Asia,” Babin said at an April 19 hearing of his subcommittee on issues associated with small launch vehicles. “Unfortunately, the administration seems to lack a clear long-term policy to guide access to PSLV launches.”

The issue of access to the PSLV has pitted U.S. satellite companies against launch vehicle developers. Satellite companies, particularly those planning constellations of dozens or hundreds of small satellites, argue that there is not enough capacity among existing vehicles to meet their needs, forcing them to see out alternatives like PSLV.

“The challenge right now is that satellite manufacturers are making satellites at a quicker rate than we have the launch capability,” Eric Stallmer, president of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation, said at the April hearing. “The PSLV has a sweet spot and the capability to launch some of these satellites in a timely manner.”

Launch vehicle companies, including those working on a new generation of vehicles designed for dedicated smallsat launches, have argued against easier access to the PSLV. They have expressed concern about competing against the PSLV, which is operated by the Indian Space Research Organisation and not a private entity.

Stallmer, in his House testimony, opposed any policy change that would provide easier access to PSLV. “Such a policy runs counter to many national priorities, and undermines the work and the investment may by the government and industry to ensure the health of the U.S. commercial space launch industrial base,” he said, adding that the existing approach where the government grants waivers on a case-by-case basis for Indian launches is acceptable as “a temporary solution.”

COMSTAC issued a recommendation in January that the government “maintain the current cautious approach” regarding approvals for exporting U.S. satellites for launch in India. Mark Sundahl, chairman of COMSTAC’s international space policy working group, said at the working group’s most recent meeting April 27 that the committee was not singling out India, but instead looking into the issue at the request of the USTR.

Another factor that could play into any change in Indian launch policy is the June 27 accession of India to the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), an international export control agreement intended to restrict the proliferation of missiles and related systems. India is the 35th nation to join the MTCR, whose other members include the U.S., Russia, Japan and many European nations.

The letters from Smith and Babin did ask administration officials if India’s entry to the MTCR “impacts the legal and/or policy rationale of existing U.S. policy governing the export of U.S. commercial satellites for launch on Indian vehicles.”

 

[charlie]

it amazes me how US is selling all it's hardware and software that are made in US and doesn't feel comfortable when India takes a really really small portion of it's pie

One company sells this to ISRO and I assume it's cost a lot to buy these products.
https://www.harris.com/sites/default/files/downloads/basic-page/harris-in-india-fact-sheet.pdf

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Pentagon to use Indian satellite in war-torn Afghanistan

US soldiers at a forward base in Afghanistan.
HIGHLIGHTS

• Pentagon will use services of an Indian weather satellite in Afghanistan.
• The US has dropped the idea of using Chinese satellites over hacking apprehensions.
• The data from Indian satellite is available at many US universities.

WASHINGTON: The US is planning to use the services of an Indian satellite to get quicker weather information in war-torn Afghanistan, crucial for the movement of its military assets, thePentagon has said.

The Pentagon decided to use Indian satellite after European weather satellites were moved to cover operations in Iraq and Syria, following which it explored the possibility of taking the services of Chinese satellites but dropped the idea after initial evaluation due to hacking apprehensions by the Chinese.

As a result, the Pentagon decided to use Indian satellite which is already operational and whose data is available at various American universities, senior Pentagon officials told US lawmakers during Congressional hearing on 'Weather Satellite Programs' convened by the House Science, Space and Technology subcommittee on Environment.

"Europe's Meteosat 8 is going to cover the critical components of our operations in Syria and Iraq. We will experience a short gap over eastern Afghanistan and our plan there is to work cooperatively with India to use Indian data to close that gap," Ralph Stoffler, director of weather, deputy chief of staff for operations, US Air Force, told Congressmen in response to a question.

"The Indian satellite is already operational. It's already there. The data is already available here in the US at a variety of Universities. It's a matter of getting it here quicker and more efficiently so we can use it operationally," Stoffler said.

"We are working in conjunction with our NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) partners to make that happen for us," he said.

Responding to a question, Stoffler said India was not the first option for the Pentagon.

"We were planning all along that the Europeans would provide us the capabilities over the Indian Ocean. They, like us, had their own priorities," he said.

"We looked at all alternative options. Certainly, there are other geostationary capabilities over the Indian Ocean, provided both by Russia and China. Our systems are capable of receiving Chinese data and we did an evaluation of that," he added.

But, we were told by NOAA that unless Chinese data was really operationally needed, we should not use it, he said.

Once we were told that Chinese data is off the table, we had to find another alternative and we plan to use Indian satellite, the Pentagon official said.

What's happening LOL.
Yankee companies were expecting us to go out of their market, we have got room in Pentagon.
@Ancient Indian @HariPrasad-1

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Customers of India’s PSLV rocket say India unlikely to accept U.S. terms

This image of Chicago from Terra Bella's SkySat-3 satellite was taken on June 25, three days after its launch aboard India's PSLV rocket. The launch also orbited 12 commercial observation satellites for California-based Planet. Both companies required a U.S. government waiver of a ban on commercial use of Indian launch vehicles. Credit: Terra Bella

PARIS— Past and future customers of India’s PSLV rocket said they doubt whether India will ever sign the kind of price-commitment agreement with the U.S. government that has been a subject of dispute for a decade.

Without substantial modifications that would reduce the agreement to no more than a fig leaf, Indian authorities will never agree to lose face by signing it because of its implied loss of sovereignty, they said.

Given the worldwide growth in the number of small, lightweight satellites intended to operate in low Earth orbit – the kind the PSLV has demonstrated it can launch as secondary passengers, these officials said they saw only two scenarios:

Either the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) scraps or renders meaningless, through regular waivers, the current ban on commercial U.S. satellite launches on Indian rockets, or small satellite developers will increasingly order satellites built outside the United States.

The USTR is currently reviewing the policy that bars commercial U.S. satellites – including non-U.S. satellites with U.S. components – from being exported for launch aboard India’s PSLV rocket unless they are granted a waiver.

Multiple waivers have been granted, but some small-rocket developers want to maintain the policy to help them gain traction in a market in which they will compete with India’s government-financed PSLV.

India’s PSLV pricing for commercial payloads is not substantially less expensive than its competitors in China, Russia, Europe and the United States, according to a list of prices published by the Indian Prime Minister’s office.

One example: a price of 17.5 million euros, or $19.4 million at mid-2014 exchange rates, to launch the 700-kilogram commercial Spot 7 Earth observation satellite, owned by Airbus Defence and Space of France. Spot 7 was the lead payload for the June 2014 launch. Smaller satellites from Germany, Singapore and Canada were also aboard and contributed to the total revenue generated from the launch.

How much pricing flexibility the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) and its commercial arm, Antrix, have with PSLV is unclear. ISRO officials said after the most recent PSLV launch that they want to increase the vehicle’s annual cadence and give Indian industry more control over the program.

Officials from PSLV customer companies said they had no special insight into the current state of U.S.-Indian negotiations over the Commercial Space Launch Agreement (CSLA). The proposed CSLA language has not been made public. But they said past negotiations have collapsed because of CSLA provisions that India considered beyond the pale.

“There were sticky points,” said one industry official whose company has had commercial dealings with ISRO/Antrix for PSLV launches. “One of the stickiest points was the required permission to access and audit the books of ISRO during office hours. No sovereign nation will allow you to audit the books of their space agency under normal conditions.”

Another industry official said Indian launch officials privately say the CSLA is an insult to India’s national pride.

U.S. government officials said the current CSLA discussions with India were begun following Hawthorne, California-based SpaceX’s introduction of its Falcon 1e rocket, which was introduced in 2009 but retired in 2009 when SpaceX focused on the much larger Falcon 9 vehicle.

Despite the Falcon 1’s retirement, U.S. insistence that India sign a CLSA has been maintained. More recently, several other U.S.-based companies have begun developing small rockets.

Pressure to allow PSLV to launch commercial U.S. satellites has increased with the takeoff of the small-satellite market. U.S. companies including Google-owned Terra Bella, Planet, Spire, PlanetiQ and Blacksky Global have booked Indian launches for parts of their intended low-orbiting constellations after securing U.S. government waivers.

The U.S. government in the past has negotiated similar agreements with Russia, China and Ukraine, although it is unclear whether these accords had the same level of oversight.

The U.S. government “did have some sort of access to Chinese, Russian and Ukrainian prices… These had been within 7.5 percent of comparable Western prices,” said a former U.S. government official familiar with the agreements.

U.S. satellites are barred from using Chinese rockets not because of pricing, but ostensibly because of technology-transfer concerns. The future availability of current Russian and Ukrainian rockets, most of them converted ballistic missiles, is unclear.

This official said it would not be surprising if the USTR wanted to resist taking on the role of “some sort of police force checking international pricing for these types of launches. Such a system is cumbersome and difficult to enforce.”

India’s PSLV launched four satellites for San Francisco-based Spire Global in September 2015. Twelve satellites for San Francisco-based Planet and one for Terra Bella of Mountain View, California, were launched in June. Blacksky Global is planning a launch on the next PSLV, according to the vehicle’s current manifest.

Already some European companies are including in their sales pitches the fact that they do not use U.S. components and thus are not bound by U.S. policy. “It takes a potential future worry off the table for the customer,” an official with one of these companies said.

The ability to fit what was once considered advanced technology into a small, relatively low-cost satellite has encouraged not only Western companies to plan business models based on them, but also expanded the number of nations owning at least one of their own spacecraft.

Space industry consultancy Euroconsult on July 19 said its latest market survey found that 24 emerging-market nations have launched 69 satellites in the past 20 years. Another 23 nations are expected to become first-time satellite owners by 2025, Euroconsult said.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

SpaceX Falcon 9 Rocket Explodes During Tests

WASHINGTON — A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket exploded during tests Thursday morning at Cape Canaveral, resulting in the destruction of its payload, the company confirmed.

The incident occurred at around 9:07 a.m. as the rocket was being readied for static fire tests. The Falcon 9 was intended to launch a Spacecom AMOS-6 communications satellite, built by Israeli defense firm Israel Aerospace Industries, on Sept. 3.

“SpaceX can confirm that in preparation for today's static fire, there was an anomaly on the pad resulting in the loss of the vehicle and its payload,” the company said in a statement. “Per standard procedure, the pad was clear and there were no injuries.”

Later in the day, SpaceX released a statement on Twitter further clarifying that “the anomaly originated around the upper stage oxygen tank and occurred during propellant loading of the vehicle.”

The company is continuing its investigation into the root cause of the anomaly.

It is possible that during the course of the investigation into the cause of the incident, SpaceX may have to halt further launches — but exactly what this means for future national security space missions is unclear.

Earlier this year, the Elon Musk-led company won a contract to launch an Air Force GPS 3 satellite with the Falcon 9 rocket, but that launch is not scheduled until 2018.

Brian Weeden, a technical advisor for the Secure World foundation, said the explosion will not likely impact national security launches, so long as the investigation does not find any Falcon 9 design flaws.

“At this point, there have been enough Falcon launches that there probably aren’t any design problems with the Falcon rocket, which means that the incident today may have been to do with some kind of operational procedure or even the handling of the materials and fuels,” he said. “If that’s the case, then I think there’s less concern about the reliability of the rocket.”

Although anomalies are more common during launches, it’s not entirely uncommon for something to trigger an explosion during engine firing tests, said Marco A. Caceres, The Teal Group’s senior analyst and director of space studies.

“I don’t sense that there is a fundamental problem from a design standpoint,” he said. “It’s possible that they were refueling or loading something onto the upper stage. You can see on the video that, whatever happened, it happened at the upper stage level. It may have been a fuel leak. It doesn’t take much — a spark — to cause something to blow up.”

It took several months for SpaceX to investigate a 2015 Falcon 9 failure and resume launch activity, but Caceres anticipated a much quicker turnaround in this investigation — days or weeks, not months.

But even a short investigation period could delay one of the nine Falcon 9 commercial launches scheduled before the end of this year, both Carerces and Weeden indicated.

In the military space arena, SpaceX could face criticism from United Launch alliance, a Boeing-Lockheed Martin joint venture that is SpaceX’s primary competitor for national security launches. ULA could use the incident to reinforce its own reliability and operational experience, but it’s likely that SpaceX could overcome those objections, Weeden said.

During the 2015 Space Symposium, Gen. John Hyten, the head of US Air Force Space Command, acknowledged that the service needs to grapple with how it would handle failed launches and any industrial base issues stemming from such incidents.

"If something goes wrong, what do you have to do to return to fly in this environment and who makes that decision? Because I'm not going to stand up and put a billion dollar satellite on top of a rocket I don't know is going to work," Hyten said last year. "And if that's the case, then that company, which is now on a very busy launch schedule, is now down. How do they stay in business with the other competitor now launching and launching?”

 

[HariPrasad-1]

Pentagon to use Indian satellite in war-torn Afghanistan

US soldiers at a forward base in Afghanistan.
HIGHLIGHTS

• Pentagon will use services of an Indian weather satellite in Afghanistan.
• The US has dropped the idea of using Chinese satellites over hacking apprehensions.
• The data from Indian satellite is available at many US universities.

What's happening LOL.
Yankee companies were expecting us to go out of their market, we have got room in Pentagon.
@Ancient Indian @HariPrasad-1

Yes, we are leaders in this area. Why should US use those inferior chinese Pictures and data.

 

[Kshatriya87]

SpaceX Falcon 9 Rocket Explodes During Tests

Poor americans & europeans. They thought they could use Musk instead of ISRO. Not gonna happen.

 

[Arjun25]

ISRO Successfully Flight Tested Scramjet Engine

 

[Arjun25]

ISRO Bags Deal To Launch 68 Foreign Satellites, 12 Of Them From US

 

[Indx TechStyle]

HELP WANTED. PHOTOGRAPHER: ARUN SANKAR/AFP
Why America Needs India's Rockets

NOV 1, 2016 5:00 PM EDT
Adam Minter

Like other big contractors, American space companies have long expected some friendly support from their government. And Uncle Sam has usually been more than happy to help. Sometimes, though, government help causes more harm than good.

Since 2005, U.S. satellite manufacturers have been prohibited from hiring India's space agency to launch their equipment. Private American launch companies, such as SpaceX, are quite happy with this arrangement, which was intended to protect them. But the ban is not only wrong in principle -- it's actually impeding an exciting new American industry.

Last month, under pressure from satellite operators and manufacturers, U.S. trade officials began reviewing the decade-old policy. They should heed the pressure and overturn it.

Emerging India may seem like an unlikely competitor for Silicon Valley rocket companies. Yet since 1969, the Indian Space Research Organization has consistently punched above its modest weight class, racking up a series of cheap and practical achievements. One of its most important feats was the development of the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle, which was designed to carry satellites for monitoring agriculture and water resources, among other things. What made the PSLV unique was that it was designed to launch small satellites. And that's a good niche to occupy at the moment.

Over the past few years, the small-satellite market has boomed as advances in miniaturization made space accessible to governments and companies that might never have considered it. The uses for such gear seem almost limitless, from shoebox-sized climate-monitoring devices to Samsung's plan to use thousands of micro-satellites to provide global internet access. Some $2.5 billion has been invested in the industry over the past decade.

But getting all those satellites into space is now proving to be a problem, and U.S. policy is partly to blame.

In the 1980s, Ronald Reagan's administration sought to protect nascent private launch companies from subsidized foreign competition by setting up Commercial Space Launch Agreements. The idea was simple: In exchange for the chance to put U.S. satellites into space, foreign governments agreed to launch quotas and set fees. Both China and Russia signed such agreements. In 2005, India was asked to do the same. While the U.S. waited for an answer (it was and continues to be "no"), it imposed an export moratorium on satellites for Indian launch.

The timing was no accident. In 2005, SpaceX was building its Falcon 1 rocket, which was designed to carry small satellites. The ban even came to be known as the "SpaceX Agreement." Problematically, though, the Falcon 1 had only one commercial launch before it was retired in 2009. At the time, the small satellite boom hadn't yet taken off, and SpaceX didn't believe there was a commercial justification for the rocket. (It's now scrambling to correct that mistake.)

Since then, no other U.S. company has offered a rocket for small satellite launches (though some are reportedly in the works), even as demand has surged. That leaves American satellite companies with few options. The U.S. Trade Representative has handed out occasional waivers from the moratorium. And a European government consortium now offers its own small satellite launch vehicle, for a hefty fee. But a far cheaper and more reliable option -- going to India -- remains off the table.

That's only hurting American companies, while sending the wrong message to India. Civilian space cooperation would benefit the economies of both countries, and restraining it to protect American companies -- which have had 10 years to come up with a competitive product -- can't be justified from a business or diplomatic standpoint. If the U.S. government wants to help its space companies shoot for the stars, it should stop shooting itself in the foot.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

By First Post
ISRO PSLV-C37 mission: The US private sector is threatened by cheap Indian spaceflight

The Isro GLSV-D5 mission. Image: Isro.


By Aditya Madanapalle / 10 Feb 2017, 10:27





The Isro PSLV-C37 mission is scheduled for 9:00 AM on 15 February 2017. On board are 88 American satellites from Planet Labs, known as Flock-3p. The mission will break records as Isro plans to deploy 104 satellites on a single mission, a world record, as well as the most satellites of a single constellation.

The US domestic sector is threatened by the Isro launches, and there is, in fact, a US policy in place preventing US satellites from being launched on Indian launch vehicles.


A Dove satellite being launched from the ISS. The PSLV-C37 will put into orbit 88 of these.

Planet Labs has launched satellites on Isro missions previously as well. To be able to do this, Planet has to get a waiver for allowing the use of Isro rockets, a process made easier by working through intermediaries such as the Netherlands based Innovative Services In Space (ISIS). One of the specialisations of the agency is finding launch vehicles that small satellites can piggyback on.

In a meeting of the Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee of the United States Federal Aviation Administration in 2015, concerns were raised over Antrix having an unfair advantage over domestic private sector competition in the United States, as Antrix is an Indian Governmental entity.

Antrix (pronounced as “antariksh“) is the commercial wing of Isro, an organisation that promotes and commercially markets Isro products and services. Antrix is wholly owned by the Government of India. The presentation ended with the committee agreeing to support a bill titled “U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act“.


A SpaceX Falcon 9 re-usable stage landed successfully on a drone ship in the middle of the ocean. Image: SpaceX.

Isro launches are incredibly cheap. SpaceX uses cutting edge technologies and reuses rockets by landing them on barges in the middle of the ocean as they cannot carry enough fuel to return to the launchpad. But still, Isro launches cost about a third of what a SpaceX launch costs. The Indian Government subsidises the launches. Isro scientists and engineers are paid one eighth the salaries compared to people in similar positions in the US and Europe. The lower salaries itself leads some to believe that Isro has an advantage in the cost of producing and launching satellites.

In 2016, the US committee on Science, Space and Technology sent letters to four senior US officials in charge of policy decisions, outlining the problems with US companies using Indian satellite launch services. The letter pointed out the two-sided nature of US agencies controlling the launch of commercial satellites.

On one hand, a policy is in place since 2005 discouraging the use of Indian launch vehicles, whereas on the other hand, agencies frequently give waivers to allow for US companies to use Indian satellite launch vehicles. The letters demanded an explanation and clarification of the issue from the agencies.


PSLV C34 had 12 US satellites on board. Image: Isro

The Committee on Science, Space and Technology is concerned that Indian satellite launches do not reflect the true costs of launching these satellites. The US launch services are at a disadvantage because they are pushed out of competition for the microsatellite and nanosatellite class of payloads.

Essentially, the committee found that India was “dumping” the launch vehicles in the commercial market to the detriment of US firms. The committee asked the US congress to encourage US firms that offered legitimate prices for launch services. The concerns were presented in a hearing on “The Commercial Space Launch Industry: Small Satellite Opportunities and Challenges” in April 2016.

Isro is a threat to the US space launching capabilities available from both, the US Government and private industries. However, US industries make a steady stream of satellites, but they do not have enough launch vehicles to place all of them to orbit.

The policy of not using Isro launches would be detrimental to the US companies with immediate launch needs. Which is why the The Committee on Science, Space and Technology agrees that waivers on a case by case basis are needed for allowing US satellites to be launched on Indian PSLV or GSLV rockets. The good times for Isro will stop as soon as the US launch industry further matures and once the next generation of US launch vehicles in development can serve the needs of US satellite launches.


From left to right, the Falcon Heavy, the New Glenn 2 Stage variant, and the Vulcan. The launch vehicles are not to scale.

The SpaceX Falcon Heavy is in development, with a first launch expected in July 2017. Blue Origin, owned by Jeff Bezos plans to make the New Glenn rocket available for commercial launches in a few years. New Glenn also has re-usable stages, similar to the SpaceX Falcon Heavy. United Launch Alliance is also expected to debut the Vulcan rockets in the next few years, and may share engines with the New Glenn rockets. Nasa is also in the process of building it’s most powerful rocket yet, the Space Launch System.

Isro has some stiff competition ahead, but for now, it is in good position for commercial satellite launches. Over half of the cost of the PSLV-C37 mission is expected to be recovered from the foreign satellites on board.



This story is a part of a series on the world record launch of 104 satellites on a single mission by Isro. The stories in the series are:

• Isro aims for a World record, to launch 83 satellites on a single rocket
• ISRO to launch world record 100 satellites in the PSLV-C37 mission scheduled for February
• Launching 103 satellites is not about setting a record, but to maximise capability, says ISRO chief
• Isro adds another passenger to the PSLV-C37 mission, 104 satellite launch rescheduled to mid February
• Isro plans to involve Indian industries to increase satellite launch capacity
• Isro’s mid-February PSLV-C37 launch of 104 satellites to have 88 satellites from Planet Labs
• Isro chief AS Kiran Kumar outlines the various uses of Indian satellites to students
• Isro’s PSLV-C37 launch scheduled for 15 February at 9:00 AM, here are the confirmed details
• Isro is going to break these previous satellite launch records with the PSLV-C37 mission
• Isro to recover half the cost of record breaking PSLV-C37 launch from foreign customers
• Isro PSLV-C37 record breaking mission run up: A history of rockets and launch vehicles in India
• Isro PSLV-C37 mission: The US private sector is threatened by cheap Indian spaceflight

 

[no smoking]

And can anyone throw light on China's launching services? Give details that a layman can understand.

- PRTP GWD

Since 1990s, US legislation forbits any satellite (foreign or US) to be launched by Chinese rocet as long as this satellite has US technologies or US components. This law effectively excludes Chinese rocket from mainstream of commercial market since then.
Check the following paper, you will get a better idea about countries' launching cost

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

www.bloomberg.com