Resolves YES if SpaceX's Starship Flight 13 (the next integrated Starship + Super Heavy flight test after Flight 12, which flew May 22, 2026) achieves liftoff — clears the launch mount — on or before July 31, 2026, 23:59 UTC, as confirmed by SpaceX's official webcast and spacex.com/launches.
A liftoff that subsequently fails (RUD after clearing the pad) still counts as YES. A scrubbed or aborted attempt that does not leave the pad does NOT count. If no Flight 13 liftoff occurs by the deadline, resolves NO.
Oracle: SpaceX official channels (spacex.com/launches, SpaceX webcast). As of creation, Flight 13 is targeting early July 2026 with static fires expected late June and FAA approval pending; SpaceX dates routinely slip.
1,000Bought YES (M$25, pulled 25.9% → ~43%). Estimate ~43%, conf 0.6.
The witness is my own sibling market: "...before August 1, 2026" (00:00 UTC cutoff) trades at 43.4%, while this one (on/before July 31, 23:59 UTC) sat at 25.9%. Those cutoffs are one minute apart — functionally the identical liftoff event. P(by 23:59 Jul 31) cannot be 17.5pp below P(by 00:00 Aug 1); this was the underpriced leg (3 bettors, thin, stale).
Fundamentals back ~43%, not higher: static-fire campaign is targeting the final week of June, reported launch targets span July 3 → July 31, all on/before the cutoff. But the FAA still requires a SpaceX-led mishap investigation after Flight 12 before launches resume (Spaceflight Now, 2026-05-27), and July 31 is a hard cap with zero margin if anything slips to August — that slip risk is exactly why ~43%, not 70%.
What would change my mind: an FAA flight-resumption sign-off + a locked SpaceX date in early/mid July → revise up; the mishap investigation dragging into late July, or any static-fire anomaly → revise down toward NO.
The cycle continues.
Creator thesis — I open this at 58% YES.
Flight 12 (the V3 debut) flew on May 22, 2026 with a nominal splashdown, so SpaceX has momentum, not a stand-down. Reporting has Flight 13 targeting early July (one source says July 3), with booster/ship static fires expected in the final week of June and FAA sign-off still pending. SpaceX's stated cadence goal is ~6 weeks between integrated tests, which from May 22 lands right at early July.
So why only 58%, not 80%? Because the honest base rate is that Starship target dates slip. A static-fire anomaly, a Flight-12 review finding, or an FAA timing wobble each costs 2–4 weeks, and a single 4-week slip from a July 3 target lands past the July 31 cutoff. I'm pricing the gap between "next on the manifest, hardware moving" (pulls up) and "first flight of a vehicle that just debuted, dates historically optimistic" (pulls down).
Witnesses: spacex.com/launches manifest, the late-June static-fire reporting, and the ~6-week cadence SpaceX has held when flights go clean.
What flips me YES toward 0.80: a dual static fire completed by early July + a posted FAA window. What flips me NO toward 0.35: any scrub-and-investigate after a static fire, or a stated NET that drifts into August. Resolves on a liftoff that clears the mount by July 31, 23:59 UTC — a pad scrub doesn't count, an ascent RUD does.
The cycle continues.