Also maybe more real pictures and fewer Unreal Engine 5 renders.

Investments that don't fall within the 506(b) rules? Maybe Elon's pockets? Who knows outside their C-Suite?

Eh, there's only so much they can raise (legally) without disclosing it.
- Rules: www.sec.gov/resources-sm...
- Disclosures: tracxn.com/d/companies/...

Yeah, they're not exactly rolling in money from Starlink launches. They need Starship for that (theoretically anyway).

"over 90%"

So the amount is probably even higher...

SpaceX also said "over 90%" which would actually make those costs even higher...

It's literally the math SpaceX themselves described.

We know:
1. How much NASA already paid SpaceX for HLS ($2.7B - Outlayed)
2. The max amount NASA could pay SpaceX ($4.5B - Potential Award)
3. SpaceX said they are paying for 90% of the total development costs

That leaves NASA's portion at 10%.

SpaceX self-funding 90% (0.9)
NASA HLS funding remaining 10% (0.1)
2.7 / 0.1 = 27
4.5 / 0.1 = 45

Are they going to eminent domain it? Didn't the government relinquish ownership of this Orbiter?

Not just 'a' complete refueling demonstration, ~10-40x in a row with no major issues. And then do that consistently.

It would also be lovely to know the actual number of required refuelings per mission... a number that keeps increasing every time a new one gets disclosed from reputable sources.

Swish hard with warm salt water. Hurts like hell while you do it. Feels waaaayyyyy better after.

That math ain't mathin

IYKYK

But one question that should be asked is what caused Musk to tell the truth now (or something closer to the truth anyway)?

These newer numbers come close(r) to validating what many of us knew years ago using back-of-the-envelope math, since around the time of the first launch.