OK I'll feed the troll. You got downvoted because your comment makes it seem like you didn't read the article, or any of the supplemental articles linked to in this thread. A few quick examples of why I think this - Why did you assume 50 billion - that is not supported at all by the article. Why are you asking what resources are in the asteroid when the article answers that? Why are you assuming they want to resell those to "earth dwellers" when the article mentions applications involving resupplying other space missions? TL;DR - if we criticized every poorly researched post in detail instead of just downvoting, we'd have no time left in our day to do anything else.