>>13283182How I see it, these companies can be grouped up.
>companies racing to medium launch (Rocket Lab, Firefly, Relativity)The outlook on these are pretty grim. Their "smallsats need custom orbits" marketing is falling flat, and Starship is already beating some of them out for contracts. They need the investment to survive for ~5 years until their medium launchers are online, and those will be competing for scraps that Starship left behind.
Side note: given the $12M price point of Terran 1 and Relativity's stated intent to keep it flying if Terran R flies, they're not planning for Terran R to compete directly with Starship on price.
>"responsive" launchers (Virgin, Astra, ABL)These companies are the ones who believe small launch will prevail, and they have decent business cases. Virgin is focused on offering small launch capability to those without it (the others are too to a lesser extent), and Astra is committed to cheap rockets. ABL... their rocket is great on paper compared to current offerings, and their dev costs are actually pretty low, but I don't know what their long-term strategy looks like.
>localized launchers (RFA, PLD, Isar, etc.)Like Virgin, but focused on Europe (I think there's a couple in Australia too?) instead of underserved markets in general. Some of these will receive enough government backing to survive, but Virgin and ABL are already eating into their markets.
>scams>Launcher giving up 
