This may be way off the wall, but I was thinking about future lunar economies, and what advantages the Moon might have, and an obvious one is that it has 1/6 the gravity of Earth. So a simple, and no doubt incorrect back-of-the-envelope calulation suggests that if you have a rocket that can lift 25 tons on the Earth, an identical rocket should be able lift 150 tons on the Moon. So I could see how it might actually take less rocket fuel to place a satellite into LEO when launched from the Moon than when launched from Earth, even taking into account the extra distance. (Maybe aerobraking could be used to slow down the satellites, thus reducing the need for a big orbital insertion burn.)
So I can envision a day, far in the future, when Lockheed-Martin will have facilities to build satellites and rockets on the Moon using local materials. The Moon might even become a net exporter of food to supply Earth orbiting space stations. Earth launches would mostly be relegated to moving humans into orbit and those rare supplies that can't be made on the Moon.
But I'm not much of a rocket scientist because I don't know how to figure out the delta-v's involved, so I don't know if it would in fact take more or less rocket fuel to place a satellite into LEO from the Moon as opposed to launching from Earth. Any thoughts?