No longer a financial reservoir? Saudi Arabia’s spending confirms clear shift in strategy
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Xavierarnau | E+ | Getty Images
Saudi Arabia is moving full steam ahead with its focus on domestic investment — and with that, higher requirements for foreigners coming to the kingdom to take capital elsewhere.
The kingdom’s $925 billion sovereign wealth fund, the Public Investment Fund, saw its assets jump 29% to 2.87 trillion Saudi riyals ($765.2 billion) in 2023, its annual report published earlier this week revealed — and local investment was a major driver.
The fund’s investments in domestic infrastructure and real estate development grew 15% year-on-year to 233 billion riyals, while its foreign investments increased 14% to 586 billion riyals. At the same time, the Saudi government introduced laws and reforms to facilitate and even mandate investment in the country as it builds out its Vision 2030 plan to diversity its oil-reliant economy.
“The PIF’s report marks a shift from externally driven investments to a focus on domestic opportunities. The days of viewing Saudi Arabia as a mere financial reservoir are ending,” Tarik Solomon, chairman emeritus at the American Chamber of Commerce in Saudi Arabia, told CNBC.
“Today, success with the PIF hinges on partnerships grounded in mutual trust and long-term vision, where stakeholders are expected to contribute meaningfully with capital and not just seek profits.”
One example is the kingdom’s headquarters law, which went into effect on Jan. 1, 2024, and requires foreign companies operating in the Gulf to base their Middle Eastern HQ offices in Riyadh if they want contracts with the Saudi government.
Saudi Arabia’s recently-updated Investment Law seeks to attract more foreign investment as well — and it’s set itself a lofty goal of $100 billion in annual foreign direct investment by 2030.
Currently, that figure has averaged around $12 billion per year since Vision 2030 was announced in 2017, according to data from the kingdom’s investment ministry — still a long way from that goal.
Some observers in the region are skeptical as to whether the $100 billion figure is realistic.
“The new investment law is absolutely critical to facilitating more FDI, but it remains to be seen whether it will lead to the huge increase and quantum of capital required,” a financier based in the Gulf told CNBC, speaking anonymously due to professional restrictions.
Solomon echoed the sentiment, pointing out that higher spending on major projects will require higher breakeven oil prices for the Saudi budget.
“It remains to be seen whether the PIF’s domestic investments will deliver the anticipated returns, especially in a region full of instability and oil-dependent budgets facing prolonged periods of low oil prices,” he said.
Still, the new law will “improve local business conditions to attract investment from abroad,” James Swanston, Middle East and North Africa economist at Capital Economics, wrote in a recent report.
Investors have long complained that murky and often ad-hoc rules deterred greater involvement with the Saudi economy. The new law will make foreign investors’ rights and duties uniform with those of citizens, introduce a simplified registration process to replace license requirements, and ease the judicial process, among other things, according to the Saudi government.
“We’ve argued for a long time that so-called ‘wasta’ (loosely translated as ‘who you know’) has been a major deterrent to foreign companies establishing themselves in Saudi,” Swanston wrote.
Spurring greater foreign buy-in “should also ease the burden that has recently been placed on the Public Investment Fund to offset the weaker foreign investment into the Kingdom,” he added.
No more ‘dumb money’
The turn toward greater scrutiny and domestic priorities is not exactly new — rather, it’s picked up more speed each year.
While many overseas firms have long seen the Gulf as a source of “dumb money,” some local investment managers said — referring to the stereotype of oil-rich sheikhdoms throwing cash at whoever wants it — investment from the region has become much more sophisticated, employing deeper due diligence and being more selective than in past years.
“Before it was much easier to come and say, ‘I’m a fund manager from San Francisco, please give me a couple million’,” Marc Nassim, partner and managing director at Dubai-based investment bank Awad Capital, told CNBC in 2023.
“I think that a very small minority of them will be able to take money from the region — they are much more selective than before.”
If the kingdom’s priority was not clear to foreign investors before, it is now, the Gulf-based financier who declined to be named said.
“PIF has been focused on co-opting investment into Saudi for last several years,” he said. “It took a while for bankers to fully appreciate the scope and scale of the pivot. It’s rightly all about transforming the economy.”
China’s EV automakers have surged ahead of the competition in global EV sales, and a new report shows just how far ahead they are.
The International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) just dropped its third annual Global Automaker Rating, showing that Chinese carmakers dominate the zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) space. China now accounts for over 11 million EVs sold annually – over half of global EV sales.
Its massive domestic market has helped Chinese automakers build serious momentum. They’ve scaled up, improved tech, and are now setting the pace globally. Companies like Geely and SAIC have already hit 50% EV sales share, meeting their 2025 targets a full year early. In fact, Chinese automakers took the top five spots for ZEV class coverage, and five out of the top six for EV sales share.
Meanwhile, automakers in the US and Europe are trying to catch up. But they’re facing a dual challenge of falling behind on tech while navigating shaky regulatory environments.
The report also confirmed a big milestone: In 2024, BYD officially surpassed Tesla in global battery electric vehicle (BEV) sales for the first time. BYD’s BEV sales jumped 25%, and its combined BEV and plug-in hybrid sales climbed an impressive 47% year-over-year. Still, both BYD and Tesla remain in the “Leaders” category.
Automakers boosted energy efficiency, charging speed, and driving range thanks to newer, high-performance models.
“Our assessment revealed widespread improvement in BEV technology performance across the industry,” said Zifei Yang, ICCT’s global passenger vehicle lead. “GM and Honda made significant advancements by introducing high-performance models to their previously limited offerings, while companies like Geely, Chang’an, and Chery improved substantially with new high-performance EV lines.”
India’s Tata Motors also hit a turning point. For the first time, it graduated from ICCT’s “laggard” group to “transitioner,” thanks to new EVs and big moves on battery recycling and repurposing. While Japanese and South Korean automakers are still lagging behind, Honda and Nissan are inching forward. Honda launched its first US BEV, and Nissan finally clarified its ZEV targets.
One newer addition to this year’s report: a green steel metric. Since steel is the second-largest source of emissions in vehicle manufacturing (after batteries), ICCT now tracks which automakers are cutting emissions in the supply chain. European brands like Mercedes-Benz, BMW, and VW earned high marks for sourcing renewable-powered green steel.
ICCT’s CEO, Drew Kodjak, summed it up: “The rapid evolution of the EV market in China has created technological and manufacturing advantages for companies there. For the wider global auto industry, this is no longer just about meeting future goals – it’s about remaining competitive today in a market that’s charging up.”
The full Global Automaker Rating, covering 21 major automakers, is now live on ICCT’s website.
Read more: EV prices dipped in May – and Tesla Model Y led the slide
Now is a great time to begin your solar journey so your system is installed in time for those longer sunny days. If you want to make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. They have hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20 to 30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here. –trusted affiliate partner
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Environment
Bloomberg just released the most embarrassing report about Tesla, Waymo, and self-driving
Bloomberg has just released an embarrassingly bad report about the self-driving space, in which it claimed Tesla has an advantage over Waymo by misrepresenting data.
There are currently many eyes on Tesla’s imminent launch of its “robotaxi” service in Austin, Texas.
We have just published a new report today to highlight how the launch is a game of smoke and mirrors, meant to reframe the optics of Tesla’s self-driving effort following years of broken promises.
At the same time, Bloomberg Intelligence released its own report, claiming that Tesla is ahead in self-driving technology, but the firm misrepresented data to support its claim.
The report compares Tesla’s and Waymo’s self-driving efforts, going so far as to claim that “Tesla is closer to vehicle autonomy than peers.”
Here are the two main charts that Bloomberg circulated from the report:
The problem is that the report is misleading by comparing completely different data.
Steve Man, the Bloomberg Intelligence analyst behind the report, based his report on Tesla’s own quarterly misleading “Autopilot Safety Report.”
The report is widely considered to be unserious for several main reasons:
- Tesla bundles all miles from its vehicles using Autopilot and FSD technology, which are considered level 2 ADAS systems that require driver attention at all times. Drivers consistently correct the systems to avoid accidents.
- Tesla Autopilot, which is standard on all Tesla vehicles, is primarily used on highways, where accidents occur at a significantly lower rate per mile compared to city driving.
- Tesla only counts events that deploy an airbag or a seat-belt pretensioner. Fender-benders, curb strikes, and many ADAS incidents never appear, keeping crash counts artificially low.
- Finally, Tesla’s handpicked data is compared to NHTSA’s much broader statistics that include all collision events, including minor fender benders.
All these facts combined render the comparison between Tesla’s accident rate using “Autopilot technology” and NHTSA’s US average completely useless.
Yet, Bloomberg decided not only to use it but also to compare it to Waymo’s data to claim that “Tesla is 10 times safer”:
The problem with this is similar to the comparison with the US average, as the Waymo data includes all police-reported incidents, which is a much wider net than Tesla’s data, in addition to the previously mentioned issues.
To highlight how big a potential discrepancy there is in the data, NHTSA underscored in a report last year how Tesla is not aware of many crashes involving Autopilot and that only 18% of police-reported crashes involve airbag deployment:
Gaps in Tesla’s telematic data create uncertainty regarding the actual rate at which vehicles operating with Autopilot engaged are involved in crashes. Tesla is not aware of every crash involving Autopilot even for severe crashes because of gaps in telematic reporting. Tesla receives telematic data from its vehicles, when appropriate cellular connectivity exists and the antenna is not damaged during a crash, that support both crash notification and aggregation of fleet vehicle mileage. Tesla largely receives data for crashes only with pyrotechnic deployment, which are a minority of police reported crashes. A review of NHTSA’s 2021 FARS and Crash Report Sampling System (CRSS) finds that only 18 percent of police-reported crashes include airbag deployments.
Knowing full well the comparison is not fair and completely misrepresents the situation, the usual Tesla stock pumpers on X widely shared Bloomberg’s misleading report positively, and even CEO Elon Musk shared the misleading data:
Electrek’s Take
This is embarrassing for Bloomberg. It’s such a blatant error and misrepresentation that it is suspicious. They should issue a correction right away.
Tesla fanboys are now pushing this to try to prove that Tesla’s robotaxi is safe to launch amid Tesla doing everything it can to hide its self-driving crash data ahead of the launch. This is a dangerous report from Bloomberg.
Additionally, it’s not just the primary claim regarding the accident rate that is misleading. The report also contains several glaring errors.
In this chart, Bloomberg claims that Tesla is at “3 billion miles of data collected since launched”:
It looks like they simply use Tesla’s “cumulative miles driven with FSD (Supervised)”, which includes driver supervision, and the driver remains responsible for correcting FSD at all times.
In comparison, they talk about 22 million miles for Waymo. It looks like Bloomberg only used Waymo’s rider-only mileage in San Francisco, which is currently at 22 million miles, but when accounting all markets, Waymo is currently at more than 71 million miles:
It’s not clear why they would only use mileage in San Francisco for Waymo when they used Tesla’s global customer FSD mileage for Tesla.
Again, these are also “rider-only” miles, which means that there are only people riding inside the Waymo vehicles, compared to Tesla’s mileage being completely supervised by customer-drivers at all times.
We simply don’t know how many “rider-only” miles Tesla has, since it only started with one or two cars in Austin over the last few weeks. It is likely to have no more than a few hundred or a few thousand miles.
Regardless, it’s completely nonsensical to claim that Tesla is “ahead of its peers” in self-driving, especially Waymo, based on this report.
Tesla is currently only trying to launch something that Waymo has been doing for years.
The other argument the report attempts to make is that Tesla’s “self-driving” vehicles are approximately 7 times cheaper than Waymo’s.
Again, the problem is that Tesla’s vehicles are not self-driving. Tesla has yet to prove that, and that’s why it is using “plenty of teleoperation” in this launch in Austin. Mapping, optimizing for geo-fenced area, and teleoperations are the real limiting factors here. Not the cost of the vehicles.
Suppose Tesla has anything less than a 100-to-1 vehicle-to-teleoperator ratio. In that case, its system is not profitably scalable and I wouldn’t be surprised if it has a 1-to-1 ratio for the foreseeable future – at least on its current hardware.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike