NASA has announced a groundbreaking mission to rescue its aging Swift space telescope, which is rapidly deteriorating and faces destruction within months. The operation, billed as a ‘daring first-of-its-kind attempt,’ involves sending a robotic spacecraft to latch onto the tumbling observatory and boost it to a stable orbit. At first glance, this sounds like routine space maintenance—a cosmic tow truck for a broken-down satellite. But let’s think for a moment. If NASA can rescue a telescope from the brink of destruction, what’s stopping it from charging tolls for using orbital lanes? Imagine space traffic jams with telescopes honking at each other while trying to get a better view of a supernova. And who pays for this rescue? Taxpayers, of course. But what if Swift’s real value isn’t scientific but commercial? Insurance companies could start offering ‘orbital collision coverage’ with premiums based on how many near-misses a telescope has had. Soon, aging space telescopes will be sued for property damage if they decay and hit something valuable. The real consequence? A new frontier of space debt collectors and repossession agents, all wearing spacesuits and waving liens. Is NASA saving science or creating the universe’s first intergalactic AAA? And if a telescope can be rescued, can it be towed to a used satellite lot? The question remains: who profits from a celestial repair shop?