Saudi Arabia (out of Market Action)

[neroden]

People being killed don't care if it is from a Houthi AK-47 fired bullet or from a bomb from the air.

Both sides sequester foreign food and medical aid. Starve people. Withhold medical care and watch them die. Demand bribes to let supplies pass. Shell airports and ports indiscriminately.

The Saudis are shelling civilians' houses for no particular reason. There *is* a distinction.

Houthis launched a tribal and sectarian war. Without Iranian help it would have failed but it keeps it going for larger hegemonic reasons.

Actually, there's no evidence of Iranian help being significant. Based on my assessment, having followed the (many) Yemeni civil wars for several decades, it would still be going regardless of what Iran was doing.

But y'know, continue to believe the Saudi/US propaganda stream if you want to....

 

[neroden]

This thread, geez. What a double standard. Everyone's been OK with every US administration kissing the Saudi's ass for 50 years,

I've actually been saying for my entire life that the US needs to cut ties with Saudi Arabia and sanction it. Just so you know. Geopolitically, it is ass-backwards stupid to ally with the unstable, fragile regime of Saudi Arabia, and that's *before* you consider the human rights violations. The second-worst geopolitical choice the US made was backing Netenyahu's apartheid state of Israel, but backing Saudi Arabia is worse.

We lost the Vietnam War because we were on the wrong side. Backing Saudi Arabia is the same mistake 20 times larger. It's basically put us on the wrong side of every regional conflict from Chad to Pakistan.

It's obviously being done because the US government is addicted to oil, and will perform any sort of humiliating, self-destructive act which its oil "drug dealer", Saudi Arabia, demands. We should still stop it.

 

[neroden]

I found this regarding that:

Spread of Wahhabism was done at request of West during Cold War – Saudi crown prince

This is a somewhat dishonest and self-serving claim by the crown prince. It's *partly* true...

The actual history is that there was a "devil's bargain" between the Wahhabis and ibn Saud, way back when he first conquered the Hejaz by force and violence. The bargain has continued, with the royal family feeding the Wahhabis a percentage of their oil profits, which unfortunately ended up very large. This went on continuously.

The right-wing anti-communist lunatics running most of US foreign policy during the Cold War *did* think that promoting religion was a good way to oppose the USSR (because they were demented lunatics) and didn't pay much attention to the particularly violent and toxic details of the religion they were promoting. This got to its most extreme when the US supported the mujihadeen and the direct predecessors of the Taliban in Afghanistan, back in the late 1970s. But anyway, the result is that the US didn't complain when the Saudis continued their policy of feeding money to the Wahhabis to spread their doctrine. But the Saudi policy predates the US, and they were doing it before the US decided it would help them in the Cold War.

The US didn't generally kowtow to the Saudis until the oil crisis in the 1970s. President Carter's response was to attempt an emergency program to get off of oil. President Reagan ended all the alterntative energy programs, his response was "give the Saudis whatever they want as long as they keep oil cheap", and here we are today.

 

[neroden]

Hearing lots of sentiment about people here feeling icky about doing business with Saudi Arabia, and pretty much the whole Middle East. One could make an argue that we shouldn't feel all that clean doing business with China either. And definitely not Russia or North Korea. In fact by the time we rule out all the countries that have despotic leaders, don't take care of the environment, don't treat women well, or minority races or religions, either currently or in the last several decades, there may not be anybody left to work with.

Well, I certainly wouldn't want the US government owning voting stock.

There's a distinction between taking funding from individual investors in various countries, and having *the actual government* of one of those countries have a potentially-controlling interest.

I would be wary of having the national Chinese government investing in Tesla, which is parallel to having the Saudi government investing in Tesla. The Shanghai Regional government has a pretty good reputation and I'm not worried about borrowing money from them.

 

[Vitold]

Natural hydro-carbons are far better refined into useful chemicals rather than combusted for transportation. Ever looked at a process flow diagram for an oil refinery and the adjacent petro-chemical complex?

It true but petrochemicals are very small part of total

 

[notacoalminer]

And all it takes is 1 tweet - Am considering to reconsider taking Tesla private.

Isn't it amazing how simple these things are?

Already replied but I don't see the post for some reason so sorry if this will appear twice.

No, you can't just dial things back like that.

Elon stirred up this mess for no reason. He tarnished Tesla's reputation by seeking a partnership with SA. He acted in a manner that raises doubt even among his most ardent supporters about what's going on. Imagine how the rest of the world feels.

Elon caused a loss of confidence in him. That's a major thing.

 

[notacoalminer]

My post was not written in the thread and doesn't belong here.

 

[juanmedina]

My post was not written in the thread and doesn't belong here.

You should sue

 

[abasile]

While I didn't feel comfortable with Elon stating "funding secured", I see this as a relatively minor point. He felt absolutely confident in funding being available. I don't have too much trouble forgiving Elon for his sometimes-wayward tweets.

Elon touting the Saudi willingness to fund TSLAP was the primary development that prompted me to trim our TSLA holdings by about 30% yesterday. I feel that turning to the Saudis constitutes a serious lapse in judgment on his part. Whenever I lose a measurable degree of confidence in a key leader of a company in which I'm invested, I feel that I need to consider reducing our exposure to said company in our portfolio. And ~$350 seemed like an okay if not ideal exit point for that 30%.

That being said, although my optimism has been tempered somewhat, I continue to hold high hopes about Tesla's future. TSLA still remains far and away our largest single holding. Also, I am not above some opportunism. I ended up buying back a small portion of that 30% at about $336/share just prior to the end of extended hours. If TSLA drops further, I may continue to buy in small increments. And I'll continue to hope that the Saudis don't end up with a very big stake.

 

[juanmedina]

While I didn't feel comfortable with Elon stating "funding secured", I see this as a relatively minor point. He felt absolutely confident in funding being available. I don't have too much trouble forgiving Elon for his sometimes-wayward tweets.

Elon touting the Saudi willingness to fund TSLAP was the primary development that prompted me to trim our TSLA holdings by about 30% yesterday. I feel that turning to the Saudis constitutes a serious lapse in judgment on his part. Whenever I lose a measurable degree of confidence in a key leader of a company in which I'm invested, I feel that I need to consider reducing our exposure to said company in our portfolio. And ~$350 seemed like an okay if not ideal exit point for that 30%.

That being said, although my optimism has been tempered somewhat, I continue to hold high hopes about Tesla's future. TSLA still remains far and away our largest single holding. Also, I am not above some opportunism. I ended up buying back a small portion of that 30% at about $336/share just prior to the end of extended hours. If TSLA drops further, I may continue to buy in small increments. And I'll continue to hope that the Saudis don't end up with a very big stake.

If you don't like the Saudis, would you prefer the Chinese?

 

[abasile]

If you don't like the Saudis, would you prefer the Chinese?

Yes!

 

[abasile]

Wow, I honestly didn't expect the moderator to move my above, three-paragraph post out of Market Action. My intention isn't to create extra work for the moderators! I did mention the Saudis, but I didn't consider that the primary focus of the post was debating Saudi Arabia and my thinking was that I was more generally sharing my overall TSLA sentiment and sell/buy moves. No biggie, though; I understand that these decisions aren't necessarily black and white.

 

[Ulmo]

Mod: Added: "I wrote a response to," credit to Ulmo:

I wrote a response to

Say no to Saudi Arabia

 

[SPadival]

My post wasn't moved here.. so

New York Times has pulled out as a media sponsor of the Saudi FII conference.

So expect a tonne of FUDage if Tesla is involved in some kind of deal on Oct 18th

Media Companies, Executives Drop Out of Saudi Event Over Missing Journalist

 

[Ellec]

Tesla is based in the US, where guns are legal causing mass shootings like clockwork, also capital punishment is still a thing there. (Most advanced countries outlawed it decades ago). So I wouldnt jump on your high horse about the Saudis if your from the States.