Firstly, the same public-private partnerships are happening everywhere- in Russia, India, and to
somewhat lesser degree in EU, Japan and China.

True- NASA as a launch service provider has failed and is never going to come back (for reasons that are too many to list in one page or even in a 200 page book). And NASA should completely get out of that business as the private industry rapidly matures in terms of
costs. The days of US space industry as a cheap launch provider are just beginning.

But- NASA as a good science agency has always been good at that and still is- and that part is only going to get better as the diversity and cost of launch available to NASA (globally not just from US private industry) keep going down.

An important point missed in the article- such as cost advantage will be there for *all* the science doing government institutions not globally embargoed by the modern democracies- such as ESA, RSA, ISRO(India), JAXA etc. So even leadership in space science is not a given for NASA, and it will have strive for it.

In fact, one can argue that ESA's productivity per science dollar spent on space science contributions already are better than that of NASA's, though it does not compare in terms of total science discovery- thanks to NASA's (still) much bigger space science budget.

Its the only way we are going to plant another American flag on the moon–to be observed by colonists on the moon.

If I'm reading this right, it sounds like you are saying that Blue Origin is a smaller startup than Armadillo Aerospace. If that is what you are saying, then it is definitely incorrect.

Hmmm. I KNOW that you meant to actually say:
>> .. their first unmanned resupply….

since we both konw that progress was the first unmanned resupply ships.

What I find interesting is that so many are missing opportunities.
For example, Bigelow should be pushing to have sundancer, followed by BA-330 added to the ISS. At the least, by adding sundancer it can be used for storage, but it would be better as crew space. They could be ready to go within 2 years.
Likewise, I am amazed that Spacedev, which pushed their dreamchaser for COTS, has not pushed to put a tug into space. ISS can use it. So can a number of sats. Several sats are in much less useful slots because of misfires. A tug would allow for raising these, deorbiting, etc. Ideally, they might even set up the tug with an electric ladder to be able to move up the orbit with minimal energy being wasted. That same tug could then be used for bigelow or other crafts.
Once this gets moving, I think that we will see a great deal more investment. In particular, Paul Allen has always been ahead of other investors and currently pushes space. My guess is that Jobs, Gates, McNealy, etc will jump into this arena within 2 years. Plenty of opportunities.

Of course, the 3 biggies will be going for the moon, mars and an asteroid. And not in that order. I suspect that within 8 years, somebody will send a tug to an asteroid to ultimately push it towards earth for the minerals. While It may take 20 years, by the time it arrives, it will be used for factories and raw supplies in space construction.
And of course, the first mars trip will also be interesting. Almost certainly, the first one will be a one way trip. At least one that is ASSUMED to be one way. It will send at least 4-6 ppl. These ppl will push not to explore, but to construct. FAR, FAR cheaper to send ppl there to live, then simply to explore. Going there and back is VERY expensive unless and infrastructure is built on mars.