To incentivize a lasting industry, companies must invest in identifying a brand-native Customer Experience—one that links the way the product feels to the way the business thinks. For me, this looks like another change of mindset: from ‘Payload Lifecycle’ to ‘Guest Experience Map’. For LEO habitation, this means asking different questions:  

What does ‘Launch Preparation’ feel like with company Y? How does company Y approach nutrition and exercise onboard? How do I feel when I think of living in a Y habitation module? How will company Y support me after my return? 

This observation has led me to think about the established mentality in the space industry; spacecraft weren’t intended to be comfortable or visually pleasing, and missions weren’t designed to be vacations. The functional design of the International Space Station (ISS) is undeniable; you need to look no further than the sleeping arrangements.  

Astronauts were signing up to be full-time scientists that also slept in the lab, and complaining about discomfort as a side-sleeper would have been improper. These professionals were strapped to explosives and sent to outer space. I’m guessing discomfort-averse candidates didn’t apply.  

However, in an era of LEO commercialization, she argues, space-inhabitants will be customers who will ultimately choose one company over another. And that, she highlights, will be determined by the Customer Experience we provide. Personally, I think this may be the time to swap out the zombie-hand sleeping bags for cozy inflatable sleeping pods. 

At some point, there will be routine LEO clients that swear by Starlab like one may swear by Hilton or American Airlines—you might imagine LEO timeshares and Starlab Advantage Cards for legacy customers. 

I think the important takeaway for technical innovators is that every design choice affects 'the user experience'. Though optimizing 'the user experience' may be thought of as marketing, it is important to keep in mind that every design choice has the potential to become a good review.  

In other words, when the mentality shifts towards a consumer product, so should the technical objectives; because when profitability relies on positive customer reviews, successful projects are those that keep the end user in mind.

From an economy standpoint, the LEO-operations market has fundamentally changed. In the era of the ISS, the dispersed marketing's message was to the taxpayer: "look at all of the groundbreaking research your money is permitting"—  the project was pitching to its investors that they should continue to fund it. However, in the emerging age, marketing is changing and design objectives must follow.

For instance, the ISS was in many ways a proof of concept, and its mission was housing the largest human-made orbital laboratory. Having a weight cap, one fancy bed may have meant one less scientific advancement—customers competed for a slot in the lab, and innovation retained public funding. However, the need for consumer-led funding means profitability relies on recurring clientele, and recurring business relies on positive customer experiences.

This shift is grounded in fundamental economics: The ISS needn't care about its research lease-holders, because they weren't funding it; the user-experience was largely irrelevant as there were few alternatives to host microgravity research. On the other hand, in the market emerging in LEO, providers must convince the customer to invest in their services; thus, the user experience is imperative.

Among the many industries seizing the commercialization of LEO, Starlab is tackling science and technology in microgravity. Be it for tourism or research, clients will discern LEO providers by the customer experience they design.