Voyager Technologies Aims to Build Space Stations for Under $4 Billion—Can They Pull It Off?

The International Space Station took 13 years, 15 nations, and roughly $100 billion to construct—an astronomical investment by any measure. But what if a single company could deliver a comparable facility for just a fraction of that cost? That’s exactly what Voyager Technologies is betting on, with an ambitious plan to develop Starlab, a next-generation orbital platform designed to eventually replace the ISS. The company recently went public with its IPO prospectus, revealing financial details that paint a fascinating—if risky—picture of this space venture.

The Starlab Opportunity: Cheaper, Faster, Simpler

Voyager isn’t working alone on this audacious project. The company is one of four teams competing for NASA contracts to develop a private replacement for the aging space station. What sets Voyager apart is its radical cost proposition: building and launching Starlab would cost approximately $2.8 billion to $3.3 billion—roughly 3% of what the original space station consumed.

How is this possible? The answer lies in simplicity and technological efficiency. Starlab features a “proven metallic habitat design” that can be deployed and reach initial operational capability using a single launch on SpaceX’s Starship rocket, scheduled for 2029. This elegant engineering approach means one module would provide approximately 45% of the pressurized volume currently offered by the U.S. segment of the ISS. Two launches would essentially replicate the entire functional capacity of the American portion of the station.

The partnership backing this venture is equally impressive: Palantir Technologies, Airbus, Japan’s Mitsubishi, and Canada’s MDA Space serve as equity partners in the international joint venture, with Voyager holding a controlling 67% stake. Northrop Grumman and Hilton provide strategic non-equity support.

Follow the Money: Revenue, Costs, and the IPO Math

Now here’s where the investment thesis gets tricky. Voyager generated $136.1 million in revenue during 2023, growing that figure to $144.2 million in 2024—a modest 6% increase. The company’s largest customer is NASA, which accounted for 25.6% of last year’s revenue and has awarded Voyager $217.5 million specifically toward ISS replacement development (with $147.2 million already disbursed between 2022 and 2023).

Across all contracts and Space Act Agreements with the U.S. government, Voyager has secured approximately $800 million in total commitments, suggesting substantial revenue potential ahead. However—and this is a significant caveat—the company currently operates at a massive loss. In 2024, Voyager posted a $65.6 million net loss, representing a deterioration from prior years. Net losses per share reached approximately $9.88, up 88% year-over-year.

The company carried just $175.5 million in cash at last report, far short of the $2.8-3.3 billion needed to build Starlab, which explains why the IPO is essential. Management expects continued losses for years as development spending accelerates—meaningful profitability likely won’t materialize until 2029, when the space station launches and begins generating operational revenue.

Valuation Questions: Is Voyager Worth the Bet?

Here’s where investors need to think carefully. Voyager’s IPO valuation is projected between $2 billion and $3 billion. Against trailing-12-month revenue of $147 million, that implies a price-to-sales ratio of roughly 13.6 at the midpoint—a premium valuation for a company that isn’t yet profitable and won’t be for several years.

There is no meaningful price-to-earnings multiple to calculate, since the company has no earnings. The investment case essentially rests on whether Voyager can execute its vision of building a functional orbital platform, securing additional NASA contracts, and eventually transitioning to profitability once Starlab becomes operational.

The upside scenario is compelling: a next-generation space station operating at a fraction of ISS’s cost, opening new frontiers for scientific research, commercial activities, and long-term space exploration. The downside risk is equally real: project delays, cost overruns, technical setbacks, or competitive pressures could significantly impact investor returns—or worse, threaten the venture itself.

The Bottom Line: Speculation, Not Investment

This IPO represents a legitimate but decidedly speculative opportunity. Voyager possesses real revenue, credible partnerships, major government contracts, and a visionary technology roadmap. But the company also operates at substantial losses with uncertain profitability timelines and a valuation that requires execution on an ambitious multi-billion-dollar development program.

Before considering participation, investors should be fully transparent with themselves: this isn’t a traditional equity investment in a profitable business. It’s a speculative bet on whether a talented team can deliver breakthrough engineering on budget and on schedule. Risk tolerance becomes the primary consideration, not traditional valuation metrics.