SAIC

Accomplished-Run-691

You're full of shit. Ford build a giant battery factory in partnership with CATL (a chinese company). Ford wanted to manufacture batteries for EV and Utilities. The unions wanted to manufacture batteries for EV and utilities. The factory was finished and started production but then trump steps in and makes them shut down because they're using Chinese tech. Every other country in the world allows Chinese autos in now. Canada was the last holdout with the US but trump fucked that relationship too. Ford closed up manufacturing in Brazil and sold the plant to BYD. BYD is now the most popular car brand in Brazil 2 years later. Ford fell behind BYD in unit sales globally in 2025 making BYD the 6th largest auto manufacturer in the world (soon to pass Stellantis). Geely and SAIC made it into the top 10 as well. Your protectionism has failed and all you're doing to making American consumers think your possition is bullshit because your position is hypocritical but you refuse to admit it. Everyone can see the US just can't compete anymore so the US is just putting up trade barriers everywhere and banning the import of products from all over the world, not just China. All the US is doing is fucking the average person with shitty products that cost to much and people know it.

SPQR0027

BYD and China SAIC Motors. Import restrictions and extra tariffs/duties will waver in the face of gas-diesel prices & shortages.

joebraga2

That's basically the tension I was trying to point out. If Detroit maintains higher margins and market share because a major group of competitors is excluded, that's certainly beneficial to Detroit in the short term. But it doesn't automatically tell us whether Detroit has actually become more competitive. Those are different things. A company can be very successful inside a protected domestic market while simultaneously losing competitiveness in markets where it has to face the full field of competitors. That's why I keep looking at Latin America. GM, Ford and Stellantis don't get to pretend BYD, Geely, GWM, SAIC and others don't exist here. They have to compete with them for actual customers. So I wouldn't necessarily use “parasitic” as an economic description, because trade protection can have legitimate industrial-policy and national-security objectives too. The interesting question for investors is where the cost of that protection ends up and what Detroit does with the time it buys. If protection gives US manufacturers time to reduce costs, improve batteries, develop better affordable EVs and become internationally competitive, that's one outcome. If it mainly allows them to preserve domestic prices and margins while their foreign competitors keep improving elsewhere, that's a very different outcome. And that's exactly the distinction I was trying to make in the original post.

joebraga2

I think you're mixing up three different things: profitability, consolidation and government support. China absolutely has too many EV manufacturers, and I fully expect consolidation. Some companies will fail, some will merge and some brands will disappear. But that doesn't mean the Chinese automotive industry disappears with them. The important question isn't whether every Chinese EV startup survives. It's what happens to the companies that do survive. That's also why “Xi is taking away the subsidies, so bankruptcies are coming” is too simplistic. China has been reducing and restructuring EV support rather than simply switching it off. The industry is being pushed toward a more mature phase where weaker manufacturers are increasingly exposed to competition. And look at the companies we're actually talking about. BYD, Geely and SAIC aren't interchangeable with tiny EV startups. SAIC is an especially interesting example because it already has a deep industrial relationship with GM. This matters a lot in Latin America. For decades, Chevrolet's Brazilian and Latin American identity was heavily influenced by Opel engineering. We had generations of cars with European GM roots: Opala/Rekord, Chevette/Kadett, Corsa, Astra, Vectra, Omega, Meriva, Zafira and others. That era gradually disappeared as GM reorganized its global operations during the 2010s. But what replaced it is fascinating: Chinese engineering and GM's Chinese joint ventures became increasingly relevant to GM's global and emerging-market product development. The current-generation Chevrolet Onix, for example, was the first model based on GM's GEM architecture, developed through GM's global engineering structure with substantial participation from its Chinese operations and SAIC-GM/PATAC. And now GM is looking even further toward its Chinese partnerships for South America, including cooperation with SAIC-GM-Wuling on future products. Think about what that means for the original argument. Americans tend to imagine this as a simple competition between “Detroit” and “Chinese automakers.” But the global automotive industry doesn't work that neatly anymore. Chinese engineering can end up inside a Chevrolet. A Western manufacturer can use a Chinese-developed platform or product outside China. A Chinese company can supply technology to the same Western manufacturers that are politically protected from direct Chinese competition in the US. So yes, many Chinese EV brands probably won't survive the consolidation. That's almost beside the point. If ten weak manufacturers disappear but BYD, Geely, SAIC and several other survivors emerge larger, technologically stronger and more internationally experienced, Detroit still has to compete against the resulting industry everywhere outside the protected US market. Latin America is already showing how complicated this becomes. Chevrolet spent decades adapting European Opel engineering to this region. Now Chinese partnerships can play part of the role that European engineering once played in its product strategy. That's the irony: Americans may eventually encounter Chinese automotive engineering without ever buying a Chinese-branded car. Which brings me back to the question in my original post. Excluding Chinese-branded vehicles from the US doesn't stop Chinese manufacturers from developing technology, gaining scale or competing with American manufacturers elsewhere. The investment question isn't whether every Chinese EV startup survives. It's whether the Chinese companies that survive this brutal consolidation become stronger global competitors — and whether insulating Detroit from that same competitive pressure at home leaves it better or worse prepared to face them abroad.

joebraga2

That's actually one of the biggest differences between the US and Brazil: Tesla isn't officially present in the Brazilian car market. You can see Teslas here through independent imports, but Tesla doesn't have the normal official sales/service operation here that it has in the US, Europe or some other South American markets. So Tesla isn't really the company putting competitive pressure on the established manufacturers here. That role has largely been played by BYD, GWM and, increasingly, other Chinese manufacturers. And the results are becoming pretty striking. BYD went from being essentially irrelevant in the Brazilian passenger-car market a few years ago to competing with the country's largest established brands. Its Dolphin Mini has even reached the top of the retail sales ranking. But I think your broader point about industrial policy is important, and I don't think the choice has to be “unrestricted imports or complete protection.” Brazil is actually an interesting example because the government is increasing import tariffs on EVs while Chinese manufacturers are simultaneously investing in local operations. BYD is operating in the former Ford complex in Bahia, and other Chinese manufacturers are also moving toward Brazilian production. That's very different from simply saying: “You can't sell your cars here.” A government can say: you can access our market, but if you want to sell at very large scale, invest here, manufacture here, develop suppliers here and employ people here. I think that's where the US-China debate becomes more complicated. I completely understand the argument about the social consequences of the outsourcing wave. Losing industrial employment isn't just an accounting exercise. Entire communities can depend on those factories and supply chains. But protecting employment and protecting an incumbent company from product competition aren't necessarily the same policy. If Chinese manufacturers could only enter under rules that encouraged or required substantial US production, American workers could potentially get some of those manufacturing jobs while Detroit would still face pressure to improve its products. Japanese and Korean manufacturers are a useful precedent for the broader idea. Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, Kia and others didn't remain purely foreign exporters to the US forever; they built enormous manufacturing operations in America and became part of the American industrial base. Obviously China introduces additional geopolitical, security, subsidy and trade issues that Japan and South Korea didn't present in the same way, so I wouldn't pretend it's an identical situation. On Tesla, though, I think there's another interesting distinction. Tesla gives Detroit serious competition in EVs, but it doesn't reproduce the entire competitive environment that exists in China. China has BYD, Geely, SAIC, Xiaomi, XPeng, Li Auto, NIO and many others fighting across different price segments. That creates enormous pressure not just at the premium end but also on batteries, manufacturing costs and affordable EVs. And that's really the part of the Brazilian experience that made me ask the original question. Chinese competition here hasn't simply resulted in every traditional manufacturer disappearing. Instead, we're watching established manufacturers respond while some Chinese companies move toward local production. So I absolutely agree that industrial employment is worth protecting. Where I'm less convinced is that excluding competitors altogether is necessarily the only way — or the most effective long-term way — to protect it. The interesting alternative is: competition, but with industrial policy attached to market access.

joebraga2

I think a lot of people are missing the broader point here. This isn't simply “China cheats, therefore Chinese cars are cheap.” Yes, China has heavily supported its auto and battery industries. But industrial policy isn't uniquely Chinese. The US has protected and subsidized its own auto industry too, including the interventions during the 2008–09 crisis and, much more recently, huge incentives for EV and battery manufacturing. The bigger question is what automakers did with that protection and investment. Detroit spent years concentrating on high-margin pickups and large SUVs while affordable cars gradually disappeared from their lineups. Then EVs arrived and many manufacturers tried to repeat essentially the same strategy: large, expensive vehicles with large batteries and high margins. That left a huge opening at the affordable end of the market. Meanwhile, Chinese manufacturers invested aggressively in batteries, electric platforms, vertical integration, manufacturing scale and smaller EVs. You don't have to agree with Chinese industrial policy to recognize that this created real technological and manufacturing capabilities. Reducing all of that to “cheating” doesn't explain the product gap. The quality argument is also becoming increasingly difficult to make as a blanket statement. GM itself has spent decades working with SAIC in China, and SAIC-GM-Wuling has become a major part of GM's Chinese operations. Chinese manufacturers aren't simply producing primitive cheap cars anymore. Brazil is particularly interesting because we can actually watch this competition happening in an open market. BYD's Dolphin Mini and Dolphin compete directly against cars from Chevrolet, Fiat, Volkswagen, Hyundai, Toyota and others. Consumers aren't being forced to buy them. They're comparing purchase price, equipment, performance, warranty and operating costs. And now the traditional manufacturers themselves are reacting. GM is bringing products developed through its Chinese partnerships, Stellantis is using Leapmotor technology and products, and other legacy manufacturers are developing cheaper EVs because they know this segment cannot simply be abandoned. So tariffs can keep Chinese-built EVs out of the US market, but they don't solve the underlying product problem. If Detroit wants to remain competitive globally, eventually it has to build affordable vehicles that people actually want to buy at competitive prices. You can criticize Chinese subsidies without pretending that every competitive advantage Chinese manufacturers have today comes from “cheating.” Those are two very different arguments.

joebraga2

One thing I think is missing from this discussion is that Brazil has already been through an earlier wave of Chinese automakers, and it shows that being Chinese, having lower manufacturing costs or offering more equipment does not automatically guarantee success. Chery entered Brazil in 2009, long before the current EV boom. Its first attempt was not particularly successful. The cars could offer a lot of equipment for the money, but the products, powertrains, dealer experience and overall strategy were not yet sufficiently adapted to Brazilian conditions and consumer expectations. Several early models disappeared. But Chery stayed. It built a factory, accumulated experience and eventually partnered with CAOA, a Brazilian automotive group with decades of experience in the local industry. CAOA had previously built its business through Ford dealerships, imported Hyundai vehicles and eventually manufactured Hyundai vehicles in Brazil. The result is that today's CAOA Chery is almost unrecognizable compared with the Chery that entered Brazil more than 15 years ago. And now CAOA is doing something similar with Changan. Changan is a separate Chinese automaker, but CAOA is using its Brazilian industrial and commercial infrastructure to manufacture and sell Changan products here as CAOA Changan. That is important because this competition is no longer limited to cheap imported EVs. Chinese-designed ICE, mild-hybrid, hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles are increasingly competing with traditional manufacturers too. JAC is a useful counterexample because its history went almost in the opposite direction. JAC entered Brazil in 2011 with a huge marketing campaign, quickly established a large dealer network and initially sold quite well. It promised Brazilian manufacturing, but that passenger-car factory never materialized. Over time its light-vehicle operation shrank dramatically and most of that original dealer footprint disappeared. So Brazil has already demonstrated something important: Chinese origin alone doesn't guarantee success. Chery initially struggled, stayed, learned, localized and found a strong Brazilian industrial partner. JAC had a much stronger initial launch but failed to establish the same industrial footprint and eventually became a much smaller player. Now we're watching a much larger second wave. BYD took over Ford's former industrial complex in Camaçari. GWM took over Mercedes-Benz's former factory in Iracemápolis. Renault and Geely are expanding their industrial relationship. GM itself is assembling Chinese-developed Chevrolet EVs in Ceará through products originating from its Chinese ecosystem with SAIC and Wuling. Toyota and BYD have a 50/50 EV R&D joint venture. Tesla complicates the story even further. Tesla is one of America's biggest automotive technology success stories, but its battery supply chain has always been international. Panasonic was fundamental to its early scale, while its later battery sourcing expanded to suppliers including LG Energy Solution and CATL. So the modern auto industry is already much more interconnected than “Chinese technology vs American technology” suggests. And this is why I find the comparison with Japanese and Korean automakers so interesting. Foreign manufacturers don't necessarily remain importers forever. They enter a market. Sometimes they fail. Sometimes they learn. They change products, establish dealerships, find local suppliers, partner with domestic companies, hire local engineers and workers, and eventually manufacture locally. Brazil watched Japanese and Korean companies go through versions of that process. Now we're watching Chinese companies do it. And localization gives us a much better experiment for the question this thread started with. If BYD, GWM, Changan or another Chinese manufacturer loses most of its price advantage after producing in Brazil, Europe or eventually the US with local workers and local regulations, then Chinese wages, subsidies and domestic production conditions were clearly responsible for a large part of that advantage. But if a significant advantage survives localization, then wages cannot be the whole explanation. Battery costs, vertical integration, platform architecture, supplier organization, procurement, automation, manufacturing scale, development cycles and margins all become part of the answer. That's why I don't think the most interesting experiment is simply importing millions of Chinese cars into the US. Make them manufacture there. Make them employ American workers. Make them comply with American safety, labor and environmental rules. Then compare the products. Brazil is increasingly doing exactly that experiment with Brazilian workers. And after watching what happened with Chery and JAC over the last 15+ years, I wouldn't assume the result in advance. Localization can expose weaknesses just as easily as it can expose advantages.

joebraga2

There is another part of this discussion that makes the whole “Chinese auto industry vs American auto industry” framing much less clean than it sounds. Tesla itself is a good example. Tesla is American, but its battery supply chain has never been purely American. Panasonic was crucial to Tesla’s early scale, and Tesla later diversified its battery sourcing to companies including LG Energy Solution and CATL. So even the most successful American pure-EV manufacturer was built around a global, heavily Asian battery supply chain. Brazil makes this even more interesting because we are watching several versions of this industrial integration happen at the same time. BYD took over Ford’s former industrial complex in Camaçari and is progressively localizing production. GWM took over Mercedes-Benz’s former factory in Iracemápolis. Renault and Geely are expanding their industrial relationship in Brazil. GM itself is now assembling Chinese-developed Chevrolet EVs in Ceará. The Spark EUV and Captiva EV come from GM’s Chinese industrial ecosystem with SAIC and Wuling and are being assembled locally. Toyota and BYD have a 50/50 EV R&D joint venture. Nissan has had a major industrial relationship with Dongfeng in China for decades. At some point, asking whether a technology is simply “Chinese” or “Western” stops having an easy answer. And Brazil gives us another interesting experiment: range. If you look only at Brazilian homologation figures, some EVs can look surprisingly short-legged. Cars with batteries in the 50-60 kWh range can receive official Inmetro/PBEV range figures around 300 km. But the Brazilian number is deliberately conservative. Inmetro does not simply publish the raw laboratory result. Adjustment factors are applied to produce a more conservative real-world reference. The problem is that a lot of automotive discussion here then treats that number almost as the maximum distance the EV can realistically travel. Owner experience often looks very different. We now have EV owners driving these cars across Brazil, including mountainous areas and routes that climb from the coast onto the plateau. There are owners and independent tests substantially exceeding the official Inmetro range, and under favorable conditions some results get much closer to WLTP. Larger-battery EVs can exceed 400 km in real use even when their Brazilian homologated number looks much less impressive. Obviously that does not mean WLTP is guaranteed real-world range. Drive at 120 km/h, climb continuously, add headwind, temperature changes or heavy HVAC use and consumption changes dramatically. But this exposes an interesting asymmetry in how cars are discussed here. When a small 1.0-liter ICE car achieves an exceptionally good km/l result, automotive enthusiasts and media are perfectly happy to show what the car can achieve under favorable real-world conditions. With EVs, I often see the opposite. The conservative Inmetro figure gets repeated as the defining range of the vehicle, while owner consumption and independent road results receive much less attention. A much better way to discuss EV range is to show the homologation numbers and then show actual energy consumption. If an EV does 12, 15, 18 or 22 kWh/100 km, anyone can understand what a 40, 60 or 90 kWh battery means under different conditions. That's much more informative than saying “this is a 300 km car” because one homologation system printed 300 km on the label. And all of this comes back to the original Detroit question. Brazil is becoming a useful real-world laboratory because Chinese manufacturers are no longer simply shipping Chinese-built cars here. They are buying former Western factories, hiring Brazilian workers and progressively localizing production. At the same time, established American, European and Japanese manufacturers are increasingly using Chinese partners, platforms, batteries, engineering or complete vehicles. Europe is moving in a similar direction as Chinese manufacturers localize more production there. That gives us an opportunity to separate two things that are constantly mixed together in this discussion. If Chinese manufacturers lose most of their price advantage when they manufacture in Brazil, Europe or eventually the US with local workers, then Chinese wages, subsidies and domestic production conditions were clearly doing much of the work. But if a substantial advantage survives localization, then wages cannot be the entire explanation. Battery costs, vertical integration, EV-specific platforms, supplier organization, procurement, manufacturing scale, automation, development cycles and margins all have to enter the discussion. That's why I would actually find an American-built Chinese EV much more interesting than another imported Chinese EV. Require American production. American wages. American safety and environmental standards. Apply the same rules to everyone. Then compare the products. If an American-built BYD ends up costing roughly the same as an equivalent American-built GM or Ford, we learn something important about where the original Chinese cost advantage came from. But if it can still compete aggressively on price, equipment and efficiency while paying American production costs, then tariffs didn't answer the underlying competitiveness question. They only delayed the experiment.

joebraga2

One thing I think this thread is showing is that the question is becoming bigger than simply "Chinese cars are cheap because Chinese workers are cheap." Wages and subsidies matter. But Chinese manufacturers are increasingly moving production outside China, which gives us a chance to test that explanation in the real world. Brazil is a particularly interesting example. For decades, the market was dominated by established American, European, Japanese and Korean manufacturers with local factories, suppliers, dealerships and huge brand recognition. Chevrolet was enormously strong, and the Onix spent years as the country's best-selling car. Now the structure is changing. BYD took over Ford's former industrial complex in Camaçari and is progressively localizing production. GWM took over Mercedes-Benz's former factory in Iracemápolis. Renault and Geely are expanding their industrial partnership and investing together in Brazil. And it gets stranger than simply "Chinese companies versus legacy automakers." GM itself is assembling Chinese-developed Chevrolet EVs in Brazil. The Spark EUV and Captiva EV are being assembled in Ceará using products originating from GM's Chinese ecosystem with SAIC and Wuling. Toyota has a 50/50 EV R&D joint venture with BYD. Nissan has a long industrial relationship with Dongfeng in China. Renault is partnering with Geely. So the borders between "Chinese" and "traditional" manufacturers are becoming increasingly blurry. Europe may become an even better test. Chinese manufacturers are actively looking for existing European factories rather than simply exporting everything from China. BYD says that, longer term, it expects to need three vehicle assembly plants and a battery plant in Europe. That is why I don't think the wage argument settles this. If BYD builds cars with Brazilian or European workers and most of its price advantage disappears, then labor costs, subsidies and producing in China were obviously doing a huge amount of the work. But if a substantial advantage remains, we have to ask what else explains it: battery costs, vertical integration, platform design, automation, supplier organization, scale, development cycles, margins, or some combination of them. And this is where I come back to Detroit. The US doesn't have to allow unlimited Chinese imports to test this. Require local production. Require American wages. Require US safety and environmental standards. Apply trade safeguards. Then let the products compete. Protection can give an industry time to adjust. But the important question is what Detroit does with that time. Because Chinese manufacturers aren't standing still outside the US. They're localizing production, buying or reusing factories, forming partnerships with established manufacturers and becoming part of the same global supply chains that legacy automakers use. Brazil is already experiencing that transition. Europe increasingly is too. Renault and Geely, for example, just announced another €319 million investment in their Brazilian partnership. If an American-built Chinese EV eventually costs roughly the same as an American-built competitor, we'll have learned something important about the original Chinese cost advantage. But if it can still compete aggressively on price and equipment while paying American production costs, then keeping the imported version out didn't solve Detroit's underlying competitiveness problem. It just postponed the test.

bong_fu_tzu

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAIC_Volkswagen

verified-trader

**BanBet Lost** — /u/Level_Counter3062 (0W - 1L, 0%) | Ticker | Entry → Target | Move | Time | Result | |:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:| | **SAIC** ▲ | $128.22 → $130.79 | +2.0% | 1d | Lost |

verified-trader

**BanBet Created** ▲ | Ticker | Target | Entry | Move | Expires | |:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:| | **SAIC** | $130.79 (above) | $128.22 | +2.0% | 23h 60m |

Level_Counter3062

!banbet SAIC +2% 1d

Level_Counter3062

SAIC earnings in 3 minutes

Level_Counter3062

Go SAIC!!!!!!

Level_Counter3062

SAIC about to pump on earnings

Travis--Beckmen

Anybody here go to SAIC?

Travis--Beckmen

SAIC

IDNWID_1900

"Let's put money on a chinese car company, that has to fight for every penny in an extremely competitive market known for itslow margins and whose rivals are some companies that even have major backing by the chinese state like FAW, Dongfeng or SAIC"

Dude_HaHa

### End of June: WTI climbs to 125. We have a concept. ### July 31st: WTI 150. SPY testing the 700 support ### August 10th: New chips from SAIC and Huawei drop, 50% efficiency gains. ### August 20th: SPY 680 ### October 15th: SPY rangebound between 660 and 680 ### November 10th: No rare earth deal. New Tarriffs. SPY 630 ### November 15th: counter tarriffs. SPY 570 ### December 10th: Deepseek v4 drops. Massive efficiency gains over oAI or Claude. SPY 520. ### Jan 2027 WTI 300. Circuit breakers. SPY 370.

Significant-Sense434

In October 2025, Infleqtion (INFQ) and Nvidia announced a partnership to deploy a quantum supercomputing system at the Illinois Quantum & Microelectronics Park. The system integrates Infleqtion’s Sqale quantum computers with Nvidia’s GPU-accelerated systems via Nvidia’s NVQLink technology—creating a unified hybrid quantum-classical architecture for real-time computing. Its partners and customers include DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), NASA, major defense contractors SAIC and Lockheed Martin, Nvidia, the UK National Quantum Computing Centre, and other allied government entities in the UK, Japan, and Australia. Meanwhile, a substantial portion of Infleqtion’s funding has come in the form of non-dilutive government grants and contracts. That’s money that doesn’t require giving up equity. It funds R&D while leaving more of the company’s upside in shareholders’ hands. Recent highlights include: A $17 million NASA contract for a quantum gravity gradiometer designed for space deployment A $6.2 million Department of Energy ARPA-E award for quantum-enhanced energy grid optimization A $2 million US Army contract related to its Linchpin AI program The $11 million DoD award for its Tiqker precision timing work.

Significant-Sense434

In October 2025, Infleqtion and Nvidia announced a partnership to deploy a quantum supercomputing system at the Illinois Quantum & Microelectronics Park. The system integrates Infleqtion’s Sqale quantum computers with Nvidia’s GPU-accelerated systems via Nvidia’s NVQLink technology—creating a unified hybrid quantum-classical architecture for real-time computing. Its partners and customers include DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), NASA, major defense contractors SAIC and Lockheed Martin, Nvidia, the UK National Quantum Computing Centre, and other allied government entities in the UK, Japan, and Australia. Meanwhile, a substantial portion of Infleqtion’s funding has come in the form of non-dilutive government grants and contracts. That’s money that doesn’t require giving up equity. It funds R&D while leaving more of the company’s upside in shareholders’ hands. Recent highlights include: A $17 million NASA contract for a quantum gravity gradiometer designed for space deployment A $6.2 million Department of Energy ARPA-E award for quantum-enhanced energy grid optimization A $2 million US Army contract related to its Linchpin AI program The $11 million DoD award for its Tiqker precision timing work. INFQ long

surfingusatoday

SAIC

moorhound

中国企业财报周重磅来袭。Alibaba, Tencent, SAIC, XPeng, Weibo 博等公司将陆续发布财报，而这一切都得在 小鸡巴 圣油战争

PhilosophyBitter7875

These aren't exactly small drops, if you are talking about the large defense companies sure it could be seen as a small correction because they weren't hit as bad, but for the smaller contractors, they took a big hit. SAIC down 16% PSN down 14% BAH down 12% LDOS down 12% CACI down 9%

fallingdowndizzyvr

> So, which US stocks to concentrate today? GM. A lot of people don't realize that GM makes EVs in China. In fact, the best selling EV in China is the SAIC-**GM**-Wuling Mini.

alanism

I would likely invest $30 million in an index fund to live off of, and the rest in either SAIC (around $5 billion market cap) or Booz Allen Hamilton (around $10 billion market cap) since they are long-established defense contractors; the likelihood of them going bankrupt is next to nothing. That ownership level likely gets you access to political power and secrets that a normal person wouldn't see.

_hiddenscout

Market seems happy with SAIC numbers.  revenues of $1.87 billion, net income of $78 million, and adjusted EBITDA of $185 million (9.9% of revenues). The company reported net bookings of $2.2 billion for the quarter, a quarter book-to-bill of 1.2, and estimated backlog of $23.8 billion(≈$3.8 billion funded). Management noted revenue headwinds including ~$16 million from the government shutdown and announced a preliminary acquisition (SilverEdge) for a $203 million purchase price. SAIC raised parts of its fiscal 2026 outlook: adjusted EBITDA ~ $695M and adjusted diluted EPS $9.80–$10.00. The Board declared a $0.37 per share quarterly dividend payable Jan 28, 2026.

ahfoo

However, at this time real estate is also heavily overpriced and ready for a crash also. Commercial real estate never really recovered from Covid and is barely hanging in there. Industrial investment. . . well, GM is now owned by China's SAIC, so if you call investing in China a rotation then perhaps. You would invest in US utilities at this time, as in coal power or fracking? Really? You wouldn't do that with your own money, would you?

kidneysmashed

Doesn't matter. They are still a small company who is being propped by a larger company pushing the manpower to the customer. So that 66m will be dilluted to the subs, which are probably SAIC, Booz, or Leidos. In defense contracting the bigger companies proper up the smaller to win bids. All this to say, I hope you make money on CTM, but it will not see $2.

looklistenandobserve

A little DD for those wondering about $CCCX https://infleqtion.com/infleqtion-and-cccx/ The same folks that brought $OKLA to the market and seed funded $PLTR are bringing a merger to the table at end of Q4 or early Q1 2026. $CCCX (Churchhill Capital) will merger with Infleqtion, the most valued pure quantum play to date. The investor deck is stacked and they are already doing business with $NVDA. Take a look at Infletions website and download their investor presentation. They are already doing R&D with huge names.  They are: Nobel Prize Winning Technology Global Installations in US, UK, Japan, Australia 130+ PhD Physicists and Engineers 230+ Hundreds of Quantum Customers Customers & Collaborators NVIDIA, US ARMY, AMERICAN NAVY, NASA, SAIC, US AIR FORCE, JP MORGAN,  US DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, ROYAL NAVY, US DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, DARPA, NIST, AND MORE!  Go to https://infleqtion.com/investors/ and download the investor presentation and invest before the merger and thank me later when they race past $IONQ in valuation.  The CEO of Infleqtion and his team were on Capitol Hill this week talking to regulators to advance U.S. leadership in Quantum. THIS is big. Oh and one last tidbit, their board of directors member includes Dawn Meyerriecks who is • Technology and national- security executive with  leadership roles at NASA,  AOL, DISA, CIA. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/infq_quantumcomputing-neutralatom-quantumtechnology-activity-7382138456744910848-b21p?utm_source=social_share_send&utm_medium=member_desktop_web&rcm=ACoAABRkVD8BFgw1-1yIbO8typ9RbEtFSRBrXuU

looklistenandobserve

We're they meeting with regulators on Capital Hill? Nope. CCCX / Infleqtion has unreal partnerships already.  Customers & Collaborators NVIDIA, US ARMY, AMERICAN NAVY, NASA, SAIC, US AIR FORCE, JP MORGAN,  US DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, ROYAL NAVY, US DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, DARPA, NIST, AND MORE! 

looklistenandobserve

We're they meeting with regulators on Capital Hill? Nope. CCCX / Infleqtion has unreal partnerships already.  Customers & Collaborators NVIDIA, US ARMY, AMERICAN NAVY, NASA, SAIC, US AIR FORCE, JP MORGAN,  US DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, ROYAL NAVY, US DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, DARPA, NIST, AND MORE! 

looklistenandobserve

https://infleqtion.com/infleqtion-and-cccx/ The same folks that brought us $OKLA are bringing a merger to the table at end of Q4 or early Q1 2026. $CCCX (Churchhill Capital) will merger with Infleqtion, the most valued pure quantum play to date. The investor deck is stacked and they are already doing business with $NVDA. Take a look at Infletions website and download their investor presentation. They are already doing R&D with huge names.  They are: Nobel Prize Winning Technology Global Installations in US, UK, Japan, Australia 130+ PhD Physicists and Engineers 230+ Hundreds of Quantum Customers Customers & Collaborators NVIDIA, US ARMY, AMERICAN NAVY, NASA, SAIC, US AIR FORCE, JP MORGAN,  US DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, ROYAL NAVY, US DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, DARPA, NIST, AND MORE!  Go to https://infleqtion.com/investors/ and download the investor presentation and invest before the merger into $CCCX and thank me later when they race past $IONQ in valuation.  Oh and one last tidbit, their board of directors member includes Dawn Meyerriecks who is • Technology and national- security executive with  leadership roles at NASA,  AOL, DISA, CIA. Do your DD!!!

looklistenandobserve

https://infleqtion.com/infleqtion-and-cccx/ The same folks that brought us $OKLA are bringing a merger to the table at end of Q4 or early Q1 2026. $CCCX (Churchhill Capital) will merger with Infleqtion, the most valued pure quantum play to date. The investor deck is stacked and they are already doing business with $NVDA. Take a look at Infletions website and download their investor presentation. They are already doing R&D with huge names.  They are: Nobel Prize Winning Technology Global Installations in US, UK, Japan, Australia 130+ PhD Physicists and Engineers 230+ Hundreds of Quantum Customers Customers & Collaborators NVIDIA, US ARMY, AMERICAN NAVY, NASA, SAIC, US AIR FORCE, JP MORGAN,  US DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, ROYAL NAVY, US DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, DARPA, NIST, AND MORE!  Go to https://infleqtion.com/investors/ and download the investor presentation and invest before the merger into $CCCX and thank me later when they race past $IONQ in valuation.  Oh and one last tidbit, their board of directors member includes Dawn Meyerriecks who is • Technology and national- security executive with  leadership roles at NASA,  AOL, DISA, CIA. Do your DD!!!

looklistenandobserve

https://infleqtion.com/infleqtion-and-cccx/ The same folks that brought us $OKLA are bringing a merger to the table at end of Q4 or early Q1 2026. $CCCX (Churchhill Capital) will merger with Infleqtion, the most valued pure quantum play to date. The investor deck is stacked and they are already doing business with $NVDA. Take a look at Infletions website and download their investor presentation. They are already doing R&D with huge names.  They are: Nobel Prize Winning Technology Global Installations in US, UK, Japan, Australia 130+ PhD Physicists and Engineers 230+ Hundreds of Quantum Customers Customers & Collaborators NVIDIA, US ARMY, AMERICAN NAVY, NASA, SAIC, US AIR FORCE, JP MORGAN,  US DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, ROYAL NAVY, US DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, DARPA, NIST, AND MORE!  Go to https://infleqtion.com/investors/ and download the investor presentation and invest before the merger into $CCCX and thank me later when they race past $IONQ in valuation.  Oh and one last tidbit, their board of directors member includes Dawn Meyerriecks who is • Technology and national- security executive with  leadership roles at NASA,  AOL, DISA, CIA. Do your DD!!!

looklistenandobserve

https://infleqtion.com/infleqtion-and-cccx/ The same folks that brought us $OKLA are bringing a merger to the table at end of Q4 or early Q1 2026. $CCCX (Churchhill Capital) will merger with Infleqion, the most valued pure quantum play to date. The investor deck is stacked and they are already doing business with $NVDA. Take a look at Infletions website and download their investor presentation. They are already doing R&D with huge names.  They are: Nobel Prize Winning Technology Global Installations in US, UK, Japan, Australia 130+ PhD Physicists and Engineers 230+ Hundreds of Quantum Customers Customers & Collaborators NVIDIA, US ARMY, AMERICAN NAVY, NASA, SAIC, US AIR FORCE, JP MORGAN,  US DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, ROYAL NAVY, US DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, DARPA, NIST, AND MORE!  Go to https://infleqtion.com/investors/ and download the investor presentation and invest before the merger into $CCCX and thank me later when they race past $IONQ in valuation.  Oh and one last tidbit, their board of directors member includes Dawn Meyerriecks who is • Technology and national- security executive with  leadership roles at NASA,  AOL, DISA, CIA. Do your DD!!!

Charming_Future9111

I’ll try to actually answer your question. Typically in the past, the market hadn’t been affected unless it lasts over three days which this could. I bought VIX calls yesterday and I bought 10 GLD 350C 10/3. I trimmed half so I am on the houses money. IWM and tech could be vulnerable due to the administrations support for them and how their fingers are in so many pies from AI to chips to crypto. Then their are the news effected tickers. Services short (BAH/SAIC/CACI/LDOS/MMS): (headline-sensitive). But simply VIX and GLD but know, MM’s are already priced in.

sammybeta

Agreed. The competition is reaching a climax this year which is the the last year of the stamp duty discount/EV subsidy for most of the Chinese market. And BYD need to move a lot faster to meet their internal target. Some of their new cars recently announced is 50% of the price of the same model last year. But to be honest, I think it's going to be a bad news for all the other smaller players in China. BYD/Geely/SAIC/GWM are likely to be fine. It's the NIO/Xpeng/Li going to suffer.

imposta424

Is this a sign to buy GD, LMT, NOC, RTX, LDOS & SAIC?

londonclash

!banbet SAIC +6% 1d

0v3r_cl0ck3d

Lockheed (LMT) are a subcontractor for NASA's Artemis program. I believe Northrop (NOC) are too. Raytheon (RTX) are a big supplier of satellites to the DoD and intelligence agencies. Amazon are making a Starlink clone with project Kuiper. SAIC supposedly have wreckage from Roswell but good luck speculating off of that considering it has been covered up for 80 years.

Secret-Temperature71

Much smaller projects but: A long time ago now SAIC tried to build the first consolidated train control center for Amtrak. It got built but was anything but smooth. Still a ling time but much more recent Lockheed tried to build some security Control Centers for NYC Transit. That was a class A fiasco. IIRC they were eventually removed from the project.

muaythaimilky

$LMT, $RTX, $NOC, $LDOS, Maybe $SAIC I'm currently a fan of the leveraged ETF $DFEN, I only see defense spending increase as it always have, and while Palantir is well positioned, their valuation is too ludacris. Russia's economic situation seems to suggest it won't stop at Ukraine, China has been eyeing Taiwan, I imagine since the strikes on Iran that won't be the last we hear from them, United States seems to be isolating itself more and more and losing the good will of allies internationally, suggesting a stronger reliance on hard power instead of soft power. international defense companies are a good bet too IMO. And if we don't engineer ourselves out of the climate crisis, resource scarcity is likely to cause more tension. That's reason alone for me, but if you're really looking for that X-factor to beat the market: [https://x.com/UFOB\_/status/1746144076385132829?t=jvX54tjV1HaKtRkUEIMLgw&s=19](https://x.com/UFOB_/status/1746144076385132829?t=jvX54tjV1HaKtRkUEIMLgw&s=19) [https://www.askapoluaps.com/p/exclusive-nancy-mace-says-on-contractors](https://www.askapoluaps.com/p/exclusive-nancy-mace-says-on-contractors) [https://www.democrats.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/majority-leader-schumer-and-republican-senator-mike-rounds-floor-colloquy-on-unidentified-anomalous-phenomena-provisions-in-the-ndaa-and-future-legislation-on-uaps](https://www.democrats.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/majority-leader-schumer-and-republican-senator-mike-rounds-floor-colloquy-on-unidentified-anomalous-phenomena-provisions-in-the-ndaa-and-future-legislation-on-uaps)

Significant-Drawer95

You forgot SAIC (with Volkswagon), Geely, Zeeker and of course Li Auto... Here are H1 Sales of the biggest https://preview.redd.it/flhie9mk5gbf1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c7019a79ba68903e2771262bd46cbeb24e65ce24

Intrepid_Chard_3535

How does your mind even come up with that?  Chinese Brands 65,808 Includes BYD, MG (SAIC), Nio, XPeng, etc. Up 111% YoY Volkswagen Group ~27,000 – 30,000 Includes VW, Audi, Skoda, Cupra. Est. 19–21% of BEV market

dansdansy

SAIC maybe. Probably going to be multiparty contract

SpiritedSpinach8882

No need to import Chinese electric vehicles, Elon Musk has the answer to the Chinese EVS. Musk is the only person in the United States that stays with and ahead of the Chinese, what happened to all the bright people that we had in the United States, what were they thinking that China and Russia were going to go away? The big businesses in this country over the last 50 to 60 years were about greed while the other countries were stealing their technology and making it better than ours, result, the largest deficit of any country in the world, ever. When a president gets in here that wants to do something about it all the losers that gave the technology away all of a sudden want to fight. General motors is going out of business, because Chinese company SAIC THE GM WAS IN PARTNERSHIP WITH, took GM's electric vehicle knowledge and made it better and stop using GMS electric vehicles now GM cars that are sold in America from China the only thing that GM makes on the cars is the emblem saying Buick or Chevrolet in 2027 the 30-year contract with CHINESE COMPANY SAIC IS DONE, and service GM, so you folks at Earth thinking you're buying Buicks and Chevys you're being lied to you're buying Chinese cars with Buick and Chevrolet emblems on them GM is not making anything off of these cars and haven't for the last six or seven years. I just hope Ford the only company that never took the money from the government, the 50 million that general motors in Chrysler each took when the Auto industry in this country was in a downturn Ford said we don't need your money we'll take care of it ourselves. I hope Ford can pull through, stalantis best selling vehicle is the ram. Everything else is downhill for them they won't last long. The only company that will survive that is American is Tesla. And maybe Ford. Lucid might have a chance.

_hiddenscout

SAIC ER didn't look to great. Also I think their guidance is light. Which is interesting, since so many insiders where buying at a higher price now.

creemeeseason

Interesting that the last one was based on fear of DOGE, this one is actually because BAH and SAIC had less than impressive earnings.

Historical-Cost1444

Someone actually posted apparent insider info here to short SAIC today, too bad all the moves happen in premarket and AH. Too late for us fellow regards to profit. Hope that bro made some money.

_hiddenscout

$SAIC  Reports Q1 adjusted EPS $1.92, consensus $2.12     Reports Q1 revenue $1.88B, consensus $1.87B. ”Our performance in the first quarter reflects the steady progress we are making against our enterprise growth strategy despite a still dynamic operating environment” said Toni Townes-Whitley, SAIC Chief Executive Officer.  “As a premier mission integrator, the rapid evolution of new technologies, a renewed focus on deploying software to drive efficiency, and an elevated global threat environment create significant opportunities for SAIC. I am confident that SAIC is prepared and well aligned with these macro trends to drive value for our customers, employees, and shareholders.”

LostFaithlessness201

Trump and Xi trading blows not helping, looking at CPB and SAIC pre market looks like a dump pattern to me as well, Nasdaq gapped down a little bit showing a bit of weakness along with rejecting the high last week

Cantthinkofacoolnam

SAIC 50% drop tomorrow.

semeesee

calls on SAIC because AI is in the ticker. (yes I know they have nothing to do with AI)

Market_Monkey_

I'd exercise caution. I partner with SAIC; they had some big contracts with the gov that are unwinding and they are offloading to partners like me. With DOGE and other actions taking place with the current administration a lot of the big contracts are being pulled or broken up amongst providers. Future guidance will be the thing to watch here.

Cantthinkofacoolnam

SAIC anyone ?

Every_Tap8117

China is the largest car market good sir, and they are number almost 10x Tesla by now. || || |**Ranking**|**Automakers**|**April** **NEV Retail Sales Volume**| |1|BYD|268,778| |2|Geely|118,813| |3|Changan|60,606| |4|SAIC-GM-Wuling|51,828| |5|Chery|36,977| |6|Li Auto|33,939| |7|Xpeng|31,343| |8|Tesla China|28,731| |9|Xiaomi|28,585| |10|Leapmotor|28,317| |11|HIMA|27,555| |12|GAC Aion|26,428| |13|Great Wall Motor|25,118| |14|Nio Group|23,900| |15|Dongfeng|23,872|

AluminiumCaffeine

$LDOS perking up, was a decent Q the wholedoge selloff in def contractors I should have slammed way harder in hindsight it was all free money pretty much everywhere CACI, SAIC, AMTM, LDOS, BAH

NoMorning5015

it's crazy how many are out there. A few weeks ago I learned about SAIC, still kicking the tires on them but am pretty unsure.

Sanpaku

What are robotaxis worth? Google et al have invested about $8 billion in Waymo to date. And they're far more advanced thanks to lidar and not having Mr. Dunning-Kruger in charch. Any robotaxis won't be bought by non-Tesla operators, as there's no value to be recouped after their commercial life from cars with no steering wheels. What are humanoid robots worth? Boston Dynamics is about 20 years ahead of Tesla, here. Hyundai bought them for $1.5 billion. So, there's just a tarnished EV brand (toxic to core EV buyers) that fell behind BYD and SAIC. And a battery storage unit dependent on Chinese LFP cells, unlike competitors like Fluence.

Little_Gray_Dude

Mostly Chinese auto companies since when I visited Germany lately a few chinese cars were pointed out to me. I have an even spread on BYD, Geely, Great Wall Motor, SAIC, Chery, and FAW. From my research the number of increasing Chinese drivers alone should drive all those. Also Cosco shipping which I expect will take a small hit during the tariffs, but since they're China's largest shipping company I expect they'll weather the storm fine. SMIC, Huawei, Hua Hong Semiconductor, and Yangtze Memory Technologies (YMTC) are my electronics investments. And finally since groceries are always a solid investment IMO Bai Hua Bai Huo, CitySuper, and Wumart. I did similar things in the EU market, Tesco for grocery, Volkswagen for cars, and Essilor Luxottica for the Italian monopoly on eyewear worldwide, etc. I'd need to open my EU account to get a full list. I fully admit I may not make as much money, but my primary goal was to diversity my investments worldwide. I think there's a lot of potential growth in India as well and I'm currently looking at splitting a chunk over to them too. In the end I'd like my portfolio to not be beholden to any single country, I think given how shaky the US market is, and how fraudulent it is, that's for the best.

isinkthereforeiswam

You can keep your S&P investment, so they can rebound later his decade. Or, you can sell them now and shift them over to an international or euro / asian ETF or similar. Or, you can check out individual stocks. Basically the "DCA into VOO and chill" (or other S&P etf's) is just swapped out with an international stock. Traditionally, international funds didn't do as well as S&P, but when the S&P is currently tanking, any return is better than negative return. That said... I have retirmenet plant that I DCA into VOO. I'll DCA into it to the bottom, then ride it back up over the decade. Meanwhile, I have a personal investment account that I sold my VOO in after the last bounce, and I'm camping on liquid cash waiting for the next tank to buy VOO and then sell again at the next bounce. If Trump's going to do that, then I'll take advantage of it. That will only work so many times, though, and eventually I'll be stuck holding a bag that's not bouncing back until it hits rock bottom. I'm also diversifying stocks over to EU stuff. I dabble in individual stocks. I have quite a few US-based stocks that have tanked. I'll let those sit until I want to loss harvest or see then bounce back. Other US stocks are doing well (SAIC, UTAM, MBOT).. some I was invested in by dumb luck, b/c I was following a momentum strat when trump did his BS, but they've been lucky to benefit from it. I just recently bought NOK, b/c they're a strong comms company and I think they'll have a good earnings report. I had them previously, sold them when they went up, but am going back into them. Bought some Blackberry and Intel again. Was in on them, sold them when they went up some, but now buying back in after the drops. All that said.. I also bought some Rheinmettal and Alianz per suggestions on Reddit. I already missed the bus on Rheinmettal's big jump. When Trump decided US would part ways with NATO, the EU got busy investing in big EU defense contractors to bolster them. The writing was on the wall in neon lights, and folks were buzzing about them on here. But, for some reason I didn't bother looking at them until recently.. and I feel like an idiot for missing this obvious skyrocket. If you want to "invest and chill" just research foreign / international ETF's. If you want to dabble in stocks, you're going to have to keep your ear to the ground, listen to chatter, and look at the politicial situations to see where the opportunities are. Whenever something really bad will potentially happen, there's often some company that would greatly benefit from it. Figuring out which ones is the tricky part.

_hiddenscout

Still been nerding out on some defense and aerospace names. Still not sure if I would buy them, since they are looking at not the greatest sales growth, but man, insiders are really loving their own stock at SAIC. [http://openinsider.com/SAIC](http://openinsider.com/SAIC) I wouldn't buy at these levels, but KRMN been on a nice little run this they started trading a few months ago. Really expensive based off next years numbers, but they are a really interesting company. Here's their latest investor presentation: [https://s205.q4cdn.com/167499471/files/doc\_financials/2024/q4/Karman-FY-2025-Investor-Presentation.pdf](https://s205.q4cdn.com/167499471/files/doc_financials/2024/q4/Karman-FY-2025-Investor-Presentation.pdf) Still really blown away by how well LOAR has been trading. Way too expensive for my taste. Still find the IT names interesting too, like CACI, LDOS, and PSN. PSN is starting to look somewhat interesting at these levels, depending on how you feel about the government cuts vs the fact they are trying to pass 1T defense budget. Looks like some insider buying last month. [http://openinsider.com/search?q=psn](http://openinsider.com/search?q=psn)

awastandas

No deal has been made. They haven't reduced anything. Their tariff on Chinese EVs varies by manufacturer. BYD is 17%, SAIC is 35.3% etc. then there's a 10% import tax on cars on top of that. There's plenty of room for negotiation and many other industries to take into account. Joint ventures and investment could happen. Both sides will attempt to negotiate a mutually beneficial deal. They're extremely motivated to do so now.

chi_guy8

Tesla was already the 10th in auto sales in China with a 2.5% market share. They are behind- 1. BYD: 13.9% market share 2. FAW-Volkswagen: 7.4% market share 3. Geely: 7.4% market share 4. Changan: 6.0% market share 5. Chery: 5.1% market share 6. SAIC-Volkswagen: 5.1% market share 7. SAIC-GM-Wuling: 4.3% market share 8. GAC-Toyota: 3.5% market share 9. FAW-Toyota: 3.0% market share They have been pretty fucked in China for a while now. This just puts the nail in the coffin.

EmperorPedro2

Yes, but significant R&D, development, manufacturing, employment and tax revenue in the UK to the point that Tata is essentially providing them with funds and leaving them independent so that if they sell JLR to somebody tomorrow, nothing major would change. It's quite different to say, the British MG brand being used by SAIC, until they started opening design centres back in the UK recently.

_hiddenscout

True, but AMTM just spun off and it's harder to kind of see the business as much as SAIC. AMTM had just one inside buyer vs a ton of insider buying from like the past year almost. SAIC also is buying back a fair amount of stock with an already low float. They took out like 6% YoY with only 47M on the whole float. Biggest knock on the company is just not a ton of growth. I think they are looking at like 3% this year and 5% next year. Also, the Return on invested capital has really took a hit for a while: [https://quickfs.net/company/SAIC:US](https://quickfs.net/company/SAIC:US) I think a lot of names in the defense IT sector are pretty interesting if you want to take the contrarian view. Stuff like LDOS, CACI, KBR all look like tempting valuations, just hated by the market.

_hiddenscout

No position in the company, but kind of an interesting name, SAIC.  Fundamentally not a terrible price https://finviz.com/quote.ashx?t=SAIC&p=d Been seeing some insider buys of recently too.  http://www.openinsider.com/SAIC Went through the last earning report, not really projecting a ton of growth, but still not a terrible price.  They do have income from government spending, so same fear with other IT names. 

SHIBashoobadoza

I’ve started to short some stocks. SBLK, SAIC, AAP, SID, ADM. picking overbought that are below their 200SMA that I think have some underlying problems.

krakenheimen

The headline is SAIC from China is on track to supplant European car makers in the EU. 

bratukha0

Hmm, so is SAIC sustainable long-term? Tariffs gonna kill them, right? 🤔

HighwayExotic2808

Damn SAIC is soaring right now, is Wall Street done shitting on the Fed players? Can I finally go back to BAH and LDOS?

HighwayExotic2808

Anyone shorting SAIC tomorrow? Was planning on doing that but got caught bag holding TSLQ. I can’t see any scenario where SAIC finish the day green, every peer like BAH or CACI that posted good guidance got railed. Every vendor that tried to buy shares back to cover up weak guidance got decimated. Too much uncertainty with DOGE and the street is just picking the fed players apart

Josepth_Blowsepth

SAIC I expect to give shit guidance after reporting decent performance. DOGE causing to much chaos in their business environment

deukhoofd

> No they are not, they are contracting, specially in europe. Only chinese brands have seen growth and that's just because at this time last year they were lucky if they sold 3 cars in a month. BEV sales are up by 34% compared to the same time last year, from 92741 in January 2024, to 124341 in 2025. [Source](https://www.acea.auto/pc-registrations/new-car-registrations-2-6-in-january-2025-battery-electric-15-market-share/). While Chinese brands did sell more (SAIC sold 17291 cars, up from 9794), that's about the same amount of units that Tesla dropped by. This means there's 30k units that traditional car producer > Again, looking at car sales for january and february in europe tells you little. They are the worst months for car sales, specially when there's an upcoming model right around the corner. That's why we compare to the same period last year, and see that it's doing horrible even when compared to that. > That's sweet, you think the drop is because of Elon. That's the reddit bubble for ya. No, I'm specifically saying it's not entirely due to that (you know, the entire part of my comment you put inside a '(...)'), and that that's even worse for Tesla, as it means they don't have an easy fix available to resolve the issue. As for the incentives, we can easily look at when countries removed their incentives, and how it affected car registrations. Germany's incentives were entirely stopped on 17 December 2023, which means that if we compare Tesla's sales of January and February 2024 with those of 2025, we're comparing with numbers where the incentives were already not applied any more. Considering we're seeing a massive drop in Germany even with those numbers, that's really not a sufficient explanation.

HighwayExotic2808

Consulting crackdown is Friday and they’re on the list. 🥭 budget hasn’t been finalized yet. Chance of gov shutdown and SAIC hasn’t filed earnings yet which will send LDOS, BAH, CACI and co down the hole. You’re buying way too early

AluminiumCaffeine

CACI +9%, SAIC +7% very well could be a deadcat though

FEMA_Camp_Survivor

What about sharing information that explains why sectors are where they are while using the colorful language of the sub? For example BAH, SAIC, and CACI have fallen off a cliff while GEO is up bigly because of certain policies.

Maedros90

Tesla sales dropped 45% in Europe, probably due to Musk's political moves. EV market's growing, but Tesla's market share is slipping. Other brands like SAIC Motor are gaining

joninco

Booz Allen and SAIC

Lovevas

Yeah, I was referring to BYD. MG4 is from SAIC, which is known for building decent cars, but so advanced in EV R&D (SAIC is a state owned company by Shanghai Gov)

jaehaerys48

SAIC has a sizable presence in Europe through MG, though.

SjalabaisWoWS

Norwegian here. The model Y - just the model, not the brand Tesla - was 25% of all new cars sales here for a while. But the customer care agencies report that 90% of all car-related complaints are Tesla. It's just American cars all over: Shitty quality at low prices. Why would you buy this twice when Kia/Hyundai is ten times better, BYD/SAIC/MG much cheaper? I drive Teslas regularly and phantom braking etc. with TACC means these cars don't even have working cruise control. The rain sensors are still useless and there's no stalk for wipers, just a screen on the TM3. The list goes on.

gnocchicotti

I see 11th place among carmakers worldwide, trailing Hyundai and China's SAIC TSLA is priced like it has the revenue of Toyota but the margins of Adobe. Hey maybe someday, who knows.

tim3k

First half of 2024 numbers: || || |Ranking| BrandsChinese | VolumeSales | |1|BYD|1.607 million| |2|Chery|1.057 million| |3|Geely|955,000| |4|Changan|809,000| |5|FAW-Volkswagen|754,000| |6|SAIC-Volkswagen|512,000| |7|Great Wall Motor|467,400| |8|Tesla China|426,000| |9|GAC-Toyota|336,000| |10|SAIC|331,500| |11|SAIC-GM-Wuling|331,000| |12|Dongfeng-Nissan|328,000| |13|Brilliance Auto|316,000| |14|FAW-Toyota|308,000| |15|Beijing Benz|278,000| |16|Dongfeng-Honda|236,000| |17|SAIC-GM|225,000| |18|GAC-Honda|207,000| |19|FAW Hongqi|201,000| |20|Li Auto|188,000 |

tim3k

First half of 2024 numbers: || || |**Ranking**|**Chinese** **Brands**|**Sales** **Volume**| |1|BYD|1.607 million| |2|Chery|1.057 million| |3|Geely|955,000| |4|Changan|809,000| |5|FAW-Volkswagen|754,000| |6|SAIC-Volkswagen|512,000| |7|Great Wall Motor|467,400| |8|Tesla China|426,000| |9|GAC-Toyota|336,000| |10|SAIC|331,500| |11|SAIC-GM-Wuling|331,000| |12|Dongfeng-Nissan|328,000| |13|Brilliance Auto|316,000| |14|FAW-Toyota|308,000| |15|Beijing Benz|278,000| |16|Dongfeng-Honda|236,000| |17|SAIC-GM|225,000| |18|GAC-Honda|207,000| |19|FAW Hongqi|201,000| |20|Li Auto|188,000|

tim3k

First half of 2024 numbers: || || |**Ranking**|**Chinese** **Brands**|**Sales** **Volume**| |1|BYD|1.607 million| |2|Chery|1.057 million| |3|Geely|955,000| |4|Changan|809,000| |5|FAW-Volkswagen|754,000| |6|SAIC-Volkswagen|512,000| |7|Great Wall Motor|467,400| |8|Tesla China|426,000| |9|GAC-Toyota|336,000| |10|SAIC|331,500| |11|SAIC-GM-Wuling|331,000| |12|Dongfeng-Nissan|328,000| |13|Brilliance Auto|316,000| |14|FAW-Toyota|308,000| |15|Beijing Benz|278,000| |16|Dongfeng-Honda|236,000| |17|SAIC-GM|225,000| |18|GAC-Honda|207,000| |19|FAW Hongqi|201,000| |20|Li Auto|188,000|

Kooky_Lime1793

anyone who thinks they missed the boat on PLTR take a look at SAIC

BrobaFett_1

I'm eyeing SAIC. Looks like they fell on the DOGE news, but I don't expect them to really be affected when the time comes. Earnings is on December 5th.

jsie-iaiqhsi816278

0 DTE calls on LDOS SAIC or BAH and pray for a dead cat bounce that won’t come

AirborneMarburg

SAIC moving

AirborneMarburg

!banbet SAIC +5% 2d

No_ragretts

I want you guys to look up SAIC. I’m buying puts

bjran8888

The tariff rate for the company BYD was reduced from 17.4% to 17%; Geely from 19.9% to 19.3%, and SAIC from 37.6% to 36.3%. The European Commission has said that other companies that cooperate with the EU's investigation into China's high subsidies for electric cars will face tariffs of 21.3 percent. That rate is higher than the 20.8 percent that cooperating companies would have faced in the EU's previous ruling in July. In other words, only Tesla's tariffs went down, with little adjustment for other companies.

Xatick

ITT: People only reading the headline. Tesla is the only manufacturer getting a significant tariff cut. From the end of the article: “BYD, the Warren Buffett-backed EV firm, saw its tariff rate reduced from 17.4% to 17%; Geely from 19.9% to 19.3%, SAIC from 37.6% to 36.3%. BYD, Geely and SAIC did not immediately respond to a request for comment outside of working hours in China. Other companies cooperating with the EU in its investigation into China’s heavy subsidization of EVs, will face tariffs of 21.3%, the commission said. This is higher than the 20.8% rate cooperating companies would have faced under the EU’s previous July decision. For those not cooperating, they will be slapped with 36.3% import duties. That is down from 37.6% previously.”

Josepth_Blowsepth

J, LDOS, RTX, GD, LMT, LHX,THLLY, SAIC are a few

Josepth_Blowsepth

J, LDOS, RTX, GD, LMT, LHX,THLLY, SAIC are a few

SoggyNegotiation7412

Actually read what you posted, BYD are discounting to retain market share this 1/4. You have to remember the news article is looking at old numbers as 1/4 reports do lag. BYD will be struggling to break even this 1/4 if they want to keep their numbers up because they are up against some very stiff competition from GWM, SAIC who are also selling at cost or lower. On top of this US and EU tariffs are going to destroy their sales numbers.

rupert1920

That's part of China's strategy with all automakers - see SAIC-GM and Geely for example. Tesla's only unique in that they didn't end up having to partner with a domestic Chinese automaker. I wouldn't use that as any slight against any CEO - no more than one can call Mary Barra a "dumb MF" for doing what's needed to access China's car market.