>>14275893No, I don't think so. All of the above illustrates what biases in business highlights. SpaceX became their own customer with Starlink because despite the immense advantage of the Falcon 9 bringing to the table, BAU persisted. OneWeb's fate was entirely avoidable. The presence of an SLS class booster with the potential to ferry anywhere from 25-50 people to the Moon while carrying up to 100T of drymass payload independent of the payload necessary to support the crew, while costing ~50x less expensive than the SLS won't change the fact that there's a staggering amount of vested interests and related momentum that will refuse to take advantage of the offering in favor of existing under table promises or what have yous, to keep the old "bird" flying.
The only way this equation changes is if SpaceX reaches a point where civilians are routinely flying on Starship and landing on Mars while legacy contractors are still pushing expendability memes on 10 year design/implementation timelines. A humiliation so significant, that their own investors would demand the company change direction or have the board/CEOs be fired for refusing to get out of the way of progress. Contemporary capitalism is very hostile to evolutionary changes in the market and only emergent capabilities that are outright alien in comparison truly survive and are eventually adopted.