Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses The Almighty Buck Transportation Technology

Uber Raises $3.5 Billion From Saudi Arabia (fortune.com) 66

An anonymous reader writes: Ride-hailing giant Uber announced Wednesday that it had closed $3.5 billion in new funding from Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund in an effort to shift the country's reliance on oil revenue. Also part of the deal, Public Investment Fund managing director Yasir Al Rumayyan will join Uber's board. The funding will not affect Uber's valuation of $62.5 billion. The company has said in the past that it plans to invest $250 million in the Middle East, where it currently operates in 15 cities across nine countries. Last week, Uber formed a "strategic partnership" with Toyota to provide its drivers with more affordable car purchase and lease terms.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Uber Raises $3.5 Billion From Saudi Arabia

Comments Filter:
  • by rossdee ( 243626 ) on Wednesday June 01, 2016 @11:02PM (#52230265)

    FP?

    • by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Wednesday June 01, 2016 @11:12PM (#52230297)

      So what happens when Saudi Arabia gets self-driving cars? Will unescorted women be allowed to use them?

    • I think they can drive with Burkas, but that's like driving drunk is modern countries. And if you're a drunk female Burka driver might as well drive off a cliff and get it over with.

      • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

        I think they can drive with Burkas, but that's like driving drunk is modern countries. And if you're a drunk female Burka driver might as well drive off a cliff and get it over with.

        period. They also must wear burkas when in view of the public - so the moment they step outside they must be fully dressed. Not wearing one, or driving is a crime and there have been cases tried under Shariah law.

        • by tlhIngan ( 30335 ) <slashdot.worf@net> on Thursday June 02, 2016 @01:59AM (#52230665)

          HTML fail... here;s the post again.

          I think they can drive with Burkas, but that's like driving drunk is modern countries. And if you're a drunk female Burka driver might as well drive off a cliff and get it over with.

          .

          No, they're not allowed to drive, period. They also must wear burkas when in view of the public - so the moment they step outside they must be fully dressed. Not wearing one, or driving is a crime and there have been cases tried under Shariah law.

          • I work for an engineering company that does business in Saudi Arabia, I have been there myself and I have sent female engineers there, with their consent, obviously.

            There is no law that requires women to wear a burka. Basically, to be seen in public a woman must:
            1. Be escorted by a man
            2. Be covered from neck downwards
            3. Have their hair covered, some form of light head-scarf is enough
            Women are not allowed to drive but exceptions can be made. Actually, driving over there is not for the faint-hearted bu

            • by mjwx ( 966435 )

              I work for an engineering company that does business in Saudi Arabia, I have been there myself and I have sent female engineers there, with their consent, obviously.

              There is no law that requires women to wear a burka. Basically, to be seen in public a woman must:
              1. Be escorted by a man
              2. Be covered from neck downwards
              3. Have their hair covered, some form of light head-scarf is enough
              Women are not allowed to drive but exceptions can be made. Actually, driving over there is not for the faint-hearted but that's another story. It's a country torn between its modernising royal family and its regressive clerics. You can see them trying to do the right thing and then failing; it's a delicate power balance.

              Like all third world nations, laws are selectively enforced. Some areas will be more liberal, others will be more strict. This is especially volatile as the Saudi religious police (mutaween) are partially volunteer. Governance is provided by the Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice.

              I've also done business in Saudi, in places where westerners are common the religious laws are relaxed on Saudi's (they don't really apply at all to westerners, the worst that will happen is a woman

    • Where better to operate a taxi service?

  • by Anonymous Coward

    That country funds many similar organizations......

  • The country is owned by a corrupt royal family of a medieval autocratic monarchy. The price of oil is in the tank and they just had their first ever bond sale [cnn.com] to raise cash.
    • by Rei ( 128717 ) on Wednesday June 01, 2016 @11:29PM (#52230353) Homepage

      Of course, the price of oil is in the tank largely because they want it to be. They're trying to squeeze small US and Canadian producers out of business as well as hit Russia.

      • All of those countries will be able to weather the storm. However, it will probably result in Venezuela having a coup of some sort or descending into civil war.
        • by dbIII ( 701233 )
          Countries yes, but there's a lot of unemployed people from the US oil industry at the moment who probably want a little more than knowing that their country can still keep on going without them having jobs.
          If they hadn't put up so much in political donations we'd be looking at the House of Saud as something very different to being an ally.
      • by jrumney ( 197329 )

        They're trying to squeeze small US and Canadian producers out of business as well as hit Russia.

        If that was their intention, they would have done this long ago. They are actually trying to squeeze Daesh, who get a large portion of their funding from the oil fields in Iraq and Libya which they've taken over, and are a much bigger threat to the Saudi regime if they are allowed to expand further.

        • by AaronW ( 33736 ) on Thursday June 02, 2016 @12:18AM (#52230437) Homepage

          They're mostly trying to squeeze their mortal enemy Iran after the lifting of sanctions. They see little downside in the long term since it hurts the other oil producers as well. SA doesn't particularly like Russia especially after they invaded Afghanistan (SA encouraged people to wage jihad against the Soviet invaders and helped create the Taliban).

          I'm hoping that with less income will help curtail SA's influence on Islam from their puritanical Wahhabism which has encouraged a lot of violence. Their madrases funded by oil money have pushed their puritanical views far and wide throughout the islamic world.

          • by rockout ( 1039072 ) on Thursday June 02, 2016 @01:25AM (#52230591)

            They're trying to squeeze small US and Canadian producers out of business as well as hit Russia.

            They are actually trying to squeeze Daesh,

            They're mostly trying to squeeze their mortal enemy Iran

            Interesting that these three Slashdot foreign policy experts all disagree on the Saudis' motives. It's almost as if they have no fucking idea what they're talking about.

            • It's almost as if they have no fucking idea what they're talking about.

              Actually, they often don't. [independent.co.uk] :D

              • The "they" in my post referred to the Slashdot users, not the Saudis, but thanks for cramming in the off-topic religious opinion of a random Muslim cleric. As if we don't have Christians in the good ol' USA claiming pretty much the exact same thing [ncse.com]?
            • "They are actually trying to squeeze Daesh,"

              The King may be trying to squeeze Daesh. An unknown, perhaps large number of Saudi's accountable-to-no-one princes support and fund ISIS.

              • Oh look, a fourth Slashdot foreign policy expert rears his head and knows all about the motivations behind the Saudis' current policy of keeping oil prices low. Pity that you're typing on a web forum rather than working in the State Dept.
            • by Rei ( 128717 )

              I don't know about other people, but my father is a president of an oil company and I was just chatting about this issue with another former oil exec, so....

              The US has been en route to become the world's largest producer. Canada's been on a big upswing as well. Most of this production costs significantly more per barrel than what Saudi Arabia can produce it for. Hence Saudi Arabia can crush them by flooding the market. It's not painless to Saudi Arabia, mind you, it's definitely hurting their budget. B

        • by dbIII ( 701233 )

          They are actually trying to squeeze Daesh

          They FUNDED that bunch until not very long ago!

          • by Rei ( 128717 )

            No, this is a common myth. Saudi has always been in opposition to Daesh. Their dog in this game is Ahrar ash-Sham, who works with the US's dog in the game, the FSA. Note that each of these have a number of subgroups.

            While the FSA has until recently been rather undersupported by the US, Ahrar ash-Sham has always received ample patronage from Saudi Arabia and its allied gulf states. And while the US has often tried to keep the FSA on a leash to mainly fight Daesh, Saudi supports Ahrar ash-Sham's fight aga

            • by dbIII ( 701233 )
              Let me rephrase that - Saudi individuals funded Daesh and it wasn't until around a year ago that barriers were put in their way.
              • by Rei ( 128717 )

                Daesh really hasn't gotten that much external funding from big donors, from what it known. It's a fair bit of small donor external funding, but most of its funding has been from oil revenues and, to a lesser extent, taxes (as well as side streams from selling antiquities, slaves, etc). It really has been running what is effectively a state. A state that has always been against Saudi Arabia (they consider themselves the rightful rulers of Mecca and Medina).

                It's true that the tensions have ratcheted up in

      • You're missing the country they want to hit most of all - Iran.
    • by rtb61 ( 674572 )

      Currently their plan to get away from oil, for the ones at the top only of course, is to become an economic parasite, using investment capital from oil, to bleed other countries economies for ever, whilst contributing nothing positive to those economies, ever. It is looking like given recent developments, they might not have that much left to investment, as the the house of Saud royals are about to get royally screwed in US courts and will have to pay the rest of the world for the harm the House of Saud ha

  • I assume that Uber will now receive special treatment in Saudi Arabia, as the country, itself, is invested in the company. I sure hope no one sees that as a good idea.
  • by bkmoore ( 1910118 ) on Thursday June 02, 2016 @12:52AM (#52230519)
    If they want to shift their reliance on oil, shouldn't they be investing in modern, relevant education, ending intolerance, and growing their own economy? Or lets just park all this money in foreign investments... it's much easier.
  • by frovingslosh ( 582462 ) on Thursday June 02, 2016 @01:00AM (#52230531)
    3.5 billion? Didn't anyone warn the Saudis about "surge pricing"?
  • Uber interested in self-driving cars, Uber makes partnerships with Toyota, and here and there... Regardless what one may think about Uber, they're definitely a very dynamic company with a promising future.
  • Well no more uber for me.
  • I ask this as someone who's only used traditional taxicabs, what exactly is so special about Uber?

    What do they offer that can't be duplicated by a competitor? The smartphone app, the pricing algorithm? Brand name recognition?

    • benefits are: The app showing you location of nearby cars and where they are in relationship to you, cheaper prices and no need to tip, the hipster nature of it.

Beware of Programmers who carry screwdrivers. -- Leonard Brandwein

Working...