Starlab developer Voyager seeks $1.6 billion valuation in US IPO
Voyager Technologies said on Monday it was targeting a valuation of $1.6 billion in its U.S. listing, as the defense and space tech company looks to capitalize on a spending boost for the sector under the Trump administration.
Companies are finding renewed opportunities to list shares on U.S. exchanges after the IPO market recovery was delayed by policy uncertainties linked to President Donald Trump's trade policies.
Voyager's filing comes after digital banking startup Chime and stablecoin giant Circle also reignited their plans to go public in recent weeks.
The Denver, Colorado–based company plans to sell 11 million shares and would raise $319 million if priced at the top of its proposed $26 to $29 range.
The U.S. government is expected to boost spending on defense and space projects, with policymakers predicting Trump would push ahead with a race to the moon and possibly Mars, bolstered by his friendship with SpaceX founder Elon Musk.
Last month, Trump selected a design for his $175 billion Golden dome missile defense shield, which aims to create a network of satellites to detect, track and potentially intercept incoming missiles.
Founded in 2019, Voyager has completed more than 2,000 missions from about 35 nations, according to its website.
The company is also developing Starlab, a potential commercial successor to the International Space Station, via a joint venture with Airbus, Mitsubishi, and Palantir.
The company reported $34.5 million in net sales for the quarter ended March 31, up 14.2 per cent from the previous year. Losses attributable to Voyager, however, nearly doubled to $26.9 million in the period.
Voyager's shares will trade on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol "VOYG".
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
an hour ago
- Straits Times
Ukraine asks allies to allocate 0.25% of GDP to boost its weapons production
Ukrainian servicemen preparing to fire a howitzer towards Russian troops, at a front line position in Ukraine's Zaporizhzhia region, on June 16. PHOTO: REUTERS Ukraine asks allies to allocate 0.25% of GDP to boost its weapons production KYIV - President Volodymyr Zelensky has called on Ukraine's Western partners to allocate 0.25 per cent of their GDP to helping Kyiv ramp up weapons production and said the country plans to sign agreements this summer to start exporting weapon production technologies. In remarks released for publication by his office on June 21, Mr Zelensky said Ukraine was in talks with Denmark, Norway, Germany, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Lithuania to launch joint weapon production. 'Ukraine is part of Europe's security and we want 0.25 per cent of the GDP of a particular partner country to be allocated for our defence industry and domestic production,' Mr Zelensky said. As the war with a bigger and better-equipped Russia has intensified in recent weeks, Ukraine's need for new weapons and ammunition is constantly growing. This year, Kyiv had secured US$43 billion (S$55 billion) to finance its domestic weapon production, Mr Zelensky said. Member nations of the Nato military alliance are expected to meet next week in The Hague, to discuss higher defence spending. Nato Secretary-General Mark Rutte has proposed that countries should each agree to spend 5 per cent of their GDP on defence and security measures. Mr Zelensky said he was likely to visit the Nato summit, adding that several meetings with Western leaders had been set up on the sidelines. He also said that he hoped to meet US President Donald Trump. Last week, Mr Zelensky attended the Group of Seven summit in Canada as he sought to discuss stronger sanctions against Russia and more military support for Ukraine with Mr Trump there. But he failed to meet the US President as Mr Trump left a day early for Washington to address the Israel-Iran conflict. Ukraine currently covers about 40 per cent of its defence needs with domestic production, and the government is constantly looking for ways to increase production further. Kyiv plans to launch joint weapon production outside of the country and will start exporting some of its military production technologies, Mr Zelensky said. 'We have launched a programme 'Build with Ukraine', and in the summer we will sign relevant agreements to start exporting our technologies abroad in the format of opening production lines in European countries,' Mr Zelensky said. The discussions focused on producing different types of drones, missiles, and potentially artillery, he said. REUTERS More on this Topic Zelenskiy says Ukraine developing interceptor drones to counter Russian attacks Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
CNA
3 hours ago
- CNA
I started using corporate lingo ironically – and now I can't stop
I nodded as a coworker listed out a few suggestions on ways her team and mine could collaborate in the next few months. 'Yeah, that sounds like a good way to synergise,' I said. And then we both made a face. Almost a decade ago, when I started my first official 'office job', I made a silent vow to myself that I would never become One of Those. A corporate drone on autopilot, mindlessly regurgitating buzzwords and key phrases day in and day out to no real end until I would one day reach my final form: a glorified LinkedIn bot. I didn't really 'use' corporate lingo so much as make fun of it – in a good-natured, tongue-in-cheek sort of way. It was a quick fix for lightening the mood for everybody, myself included: 'Well, since that project fell through, guess that's one less loop to close, huh?' But these days, I find myself starting to slip into corporate lingo unironically, the same way I started doing years ago with skinny jeans, emojis, and the acronym 'LOL'. LINGO LIMBO More people are expressing annoyance or frustration with it these days, especially on social media, but make no mistake – corporate lingo is nothing new. From the 'value chains' of the 1980s and 1990s to the 'key performance indicators' you hear your own manager wax on about today, such jargon has long been a mainstay of working life. Like with most things that eventually trigger widespread discussions and accusations online of being 'annoying' or 'cringe', there's a legitimately useful element to corporate lingo's villain origin story. Business and work have grown more complex over the last few decades. Thanks to globalisation, the systems we operate in have become more interconnected and as a result, more expansive and intricate. So have the individual roles we play in those systems. We started needing quicker, simpler ways to sum up big or complicated ideas – or ideas that weren't that big or complicated, but were just a mouthful to say. After all, it's definitely easier to say 'outsourcing' than 'farming this out to a peripheral individual, group or organisation so I have more time and energy to focus on more important things'. But over time, something happened to corporate lingo: People started creating buzzwords and phrases for things and situations that didn't seem to require it at all. We stopped postponing or revisiting discussions of an issue and started 'circling back' instead. We eschewed talking to each other and started 'touching base' instead. And then people started 'checking in', but not just any checks, mind you. Temperature checks. Sense checks. Vibe checks. Instead of coining new terms to neatly condense big, complicated ideas, we now seem to be finding overly complex ways to phrase very simple things. WHEN YOU SAY NOTHING AT ALL Again, it's not a bad thing to develop lingo over the course of engaging with other fellow humans in labour. Well before we became office dwellers, plenty of colloquialisms from agricultural work had been leaving the farm to become part of everyday English. For example, "No reason to have a cow about that" or "beat a dead horse". Such jargon of yore does the work it's meant to do, which is to replace a wordy sentiment or thought process with a bite-sized turn of phrase. In comparison, what exactly does the phrase 'moving the needle' accomplish, particularly when in most cases, you immediately have to go on to explain exactly what needle you're hoping to move and in which direction? (Yes, we've done it, we've made shop-talk more efficient – all we had to do was transform our seven-word statement into a 15-word run-on behemoth.) The danger is when we're more concerned about communication for communication's sake, rather than the purposes and objectives for which we're communicating. Are we trying to be in the know, or simply appear so to others? Are we really achieving or improving productivity, or just performing it? MAKE WORK JARGON WORK AGAIN Either way, corporate lingo is here to stay. The exact words and phrases in rotation may come and go, but humans will always want to find a way to jazz up interpersonal communication simply because we're creative, social beings. So is there a way to salvage this? (Or, for the corporate jargon-heads out there: What are the actionable insights and key takeaways to be derived from this?) For my part, I still find myself resisting what I feel are inorganic attempts to shoehorn unnecessary lingo into conversations about work, but I'm trying not to be pedantic about it. If someone says 'Can we align or bridge the gap on this?', I respond, 'Sure, what's unclear right now?' If someone says 'Can I get a sense check on when this might be completed?', I give them a date. (But maybe I'll also have a little rant to a fellow coworker later on about why the question can't simply be 'When will this be done?') Instead of the snark I used to deploy perhaps a little too freely in response to cringey corporate jargon, I try to reach for the same attitude I employ whenever I'm speaking with someone who may not be entirely fluent in English – if I understand what they're saying, maybe how they're saying it doesn't have to matter as much. Still, at the end of the day, there's never any harm in asking, plain and simple: 'What do you mean?'
Straits Times
5 hours ago
- Straits Times
Two days of terror: How the Minnesota shooter evaded police and got caught
FILE PHOTO: A handout photo posted by the Ramsey County Sheriff's Office appears to show Vance Luther Boelter, 57, the suspected gunman in the shooting deaths of a Minnesota Democratic state lawmaker and her husband, in custody, at an unidentified location, released June 15, 2025. Ramsey County Sheriff's Office via Facebook/Handout via REUTERS/File Photo Two days of terror: How the Minnesota shooter evaded police and got caught NEW HOPE, Minnesota - Vance Boelter's disguise wasn't perfect. The silicone mask was somewhat loose-fitting and his SUV's license plate simply read "POLICE" in black letters. But it was good enough on a poorly lit suburban street in the dead of night. At 2:36 a.m. on Saturday, 30 minutes after authorities say Boelter shot and seriously injured Minnesota State Senator John Hoffman and his wife, he paused behind the wheel of the SUV near the home of another senator, Ann Rest, in the city of New Hope. The SUV was stocked with weapons, including AK-47 assault rifles, as well as fliers advertising a local anti-Trump rally scheduled for later Saturday and a written list of names of people he appeared to be targeting. Senator Rest, prosecutors would later say, was among those Boelter set out to kill on June 14. As Boelter sat in the SUV down the street from Rest's home, another police car - this one an actual police car - approached. A female officer from the New Hope police department, after hearing about the Hoffman shootings, had come out to check on Rest. Seeing the SUV, complete with flashing lights and police-style decals, she believed the man inside was a fellow officer. But when she attempted to speak to him - one officer greeting another - she got no response. Instead, the man inside the SUV with police markings simply stared ahead. The New Hope officer drove on, deciding to go ahead and check on Rest. Rest would later say the New Hope officer's initiative probably saved her life, an opinion shared by New Hope Police Chief Timothy Hoyt. "With limited information, she went up there on her own to check on the welfare of our senator," Hoyt told Reuters. "She did the right thing." The brief interaction in New Hope underscored the carefully planned nature of Boelter's pre-dawn rampage and how his impersonation of a police officer, including body armor, a badge and a tactical vest, confounded the initial attempts to stop him. After the encounter with the New Hope officer, Boelter, 57, drove away from the scene, moving on to his next target. Police would pursue him for another 43 hours. In the process, they would draw in a phalanx of state and federal agencies, in what ranks as the largest manhunt in Minnesota history and added to the sense of disorientation in a nation already grappling with protests over immigration, the forcible removal of a U.S. Senator from a press conference and a rare military parade in Washington. Federal prosecutors say they may seek the death penalty for Boelter, who has been charged with murdering two people and trying to kill two others, in what Governor Tim Walz has called a "politically motivated" attack. Prosecutors said they are still investigating the motive and whether any others were involved. Boelter has yet to enter a plea. Manny Atwal, a public defender representing Boelter, said he was reviewing the case and declined to comment. This reconstruction of the manhunt is based on court documents, statements by law enforcement officials, and interviews with a Boelter friend, local police officers, lawmakers, and residents of the impacted neighborhoods. While the events unfolded like something out of a TV crime drama, there were parallels with past shooting sprees, criminal justice experts said. James Fitzgerald, a former FBI criminal profiler, said he would not be surprised if Boelter studied a mass shooting in Canada in 2020, when a gunman posing as a police officer killed 22 people in the province of Nova Scotia. "These guys always do research beforehand. They want to see how other killers were successful, how they got caught," said Fitzgerald, who helped the FBI capture the "Unabomber" Ted Kaczynski in 1996. "And, of course, a way you're going to buy yourself some time is to pose as a police officer." HOFFMAN SHOOTING The violence began at the Hoffman's brick split-level home in Champlin, a leafy, middle-class suburb of Minneapolis. With his emergency lights flashing, Boelter pulled into the driveway just after 2:00 a.m. and knocked on the door. "This is the police. Open the door," Boelter shouted repeatedly, according to an FBI affidavit. Senator Hoffman and his wife, Yvette, soon determined Boelter was not a real police officer. Boelter shot Senator Hoffman nine times, and then fired on Yvette, who shielded her daughter from being hit. As Boelter fled the scene, the daughter called 911. The Hoffmans were on a target list of more than 45 federal and state elected officials in Minnesota, all Democrats, acting U.S. Attorney Joseph H. Thompson told a briefing on Monday. Boelter voted for President Donald Trump, was a Christian and did not like abortion, according to his part-time roommate, David Carlson. Carlson said Boelter did not seem angry about politics. Thompson said Boelter "stalked his victims like prey" but that the writings he left behind did not point to a coherent motive. "His crimes are the stuff of nightmares," he said. "His crimes are the stuff of nightmares," Thompson said. After the Hoffman's, the next address plugged into Boelter's GPS system was a lawmaker about 9 miles away in the Minneapolis suburb of Maple Grove. Surveillance cameras from the home of State Representative Kristin Bahner show a masked Boelter ringing the doorbell at 2:24 a.m. and shouting "Open the door. This is the police. We have a warrant," the FBI affidavit says. Bahner and her family were not at home. From there, Boelter moved on to New Hope and the close encounter with the officer who had dispatched to Rest's home. After that, he wasn't seen by police again until he arrived at the residence of Melissa Hortman, the top Democrat in the state House, in Brooklyn Park. Sensing that Hortman might be a target, Brooklyn Park police officers had decided to check on her. When they arrived at 3:30 a.m. they saw a black Ford Explorer outside her house, its police-style lights flashing. Boelter was near the front door. When Boelter saw the officers exit their squad car, he fired at them. He then ran through the front door on the house, where he killed Melissa and Mark Hortman, her husband. 'DAD WENT TO WAR' When Boelter left the Hortman's home, he abandoned his fake-police SUV. Inside the car, police found a 9mm handgun, three AK-47 assault rifles, fliers advertising a local anti-Trump "No Kings" rally and a notebook with names of people who appear to have been targets, according to court documents. From that point, Boelter was on the run. Little has been revealed about his movements during the period, although police say he visited his part-time residence in north Minneapolis. He also sent texts. In one, to his family's group chat, Boelter writes, "Dad went to war last night". In another, to a close friend, Boelter says he may be dead soon. Police also know that by early morning on Saturday Boelter had met a man at a Minneapolis bus stop who agreed to sell him an e-bike and a Buick sedan for $900. The two drove to a bank where Boelter withdrew $2,200 from his account. A security camera shows Boelter wearing a cowboy hat. But it took until 10:00 a.m. on Sunday for authorities to close in. Police searching the area near Boelter's family home in the rural community of Green Isle, discovered the abandoned Buick, along with a cowboy hat and handwritten letter to the FBI in which Boelter admitted to the shootings, prosecutors said. Law enforcement scrambled to set up a perimeter surrounding the area, SWAT teams and search dogs were deployed, and drones were put in the air. It was the trail camera of a resident, however, that provided the final clue, capturing an image of Boelter around 7:00 p.m., allowing officers to narrow their search. Two hours later, the pursuit ended with Boelter crawling to police. He was armed but surrendered without a fight. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
