Dalal.Holdings

Well, if you actually believe this, I can't help you

We are forced to make deals with Russia and North Korea precisely because they have nuclear weapons. If Russia did not have nukes, Putin would have been taken out by now. The goal is to prevent Iran from obtaining that same status.

With Iranian navy mostly sunk and the entire world (excluding Russia) wanting the Strait to remain open, I have a hard time seeing how Iran keeps it closed.

Are you clueless? Ursula made that statement today and @UK and @Sweet posted about it and I responded with information that Ursula voted to close all German nuclear plants in the past. The news is from today and Ursula is in charge of the EU. Why does it bother you so much? Do you understand that the energy situation in Europe (particularly Germany) has been highly relevant to the performance of its major industries? I know you are content riding stocks like NVO down > 70%, but most of us try to learn and avoid investing in bad situations altogether. So yeah, my posts are relevant because they tell you what sectors to avoid due to political mistakes—European energy intensive businesses (like steel makers, etc) for starters. European automakers another one (have you looked at Porsche or VW stock performance?). On the other hand, those that thrive off the stupidity of European leaders like Equinor might be good investments. You keep saying you’re not going to engage with me but then can’t help yourself. Your posts are mostly incomprehensible blabbering and then you whine about my posts which are highly relevant to the topic at hand.

LMAO. Ursula voted to shut down nuclear. Like many European leaders, she failed upwards. The thing about the European system is it keeps and even promotes the leaders who keep making mistakes…only to have them make more mistakes From my vantage point, the major change/reforms will only occur once the establishment is replaced by outsiders. The establishment is trying to preserve itself by calling the outsiders “far right” and scaring people, but they deserve to be upended

A lot of fears here about confronting Iran. But just look at how weakened they have become the past 2 years: Hamas, Hezbollah basically wiped out. Their ally in Syria taken out. Their friend Russia mired in a quagmire. And the regime under pressure due to internal strife: water shortages (Tehran may have to be abandoned?), and mass protests. And the Gulf states aligned against it. If there was ever a good time to strike, it was now.

Let’s keep it simple and use Occam’s Razor for why the regime was so intent on enriching Uranium: it wasn’t for power generation. They wanted a weapon. This is the kind of regime that would have abused the nuclear deal and snuck weapons development elsewhere. Look at the IRGC and how decentralized it is… And at the same time they fomented terrorist groups around the world. Such people cannot be trusted even with power generation grade enriched uranium. Once Iran has nuclear weapons, then Saudi Arabia will insist then Egypt and it becomes a huge mess. Once the nuclear genie is out of the bottle, it becomes impossible to put it back in. Better to nip it in the bud early and completely.

So your entire argument boils down to: we should only stop a nuclear problem until it becomes imminent? Is that how you deal with tail risks? Do you only buy insurance when you are about to get into a car crash or your house is about to burn down?

Man, now below where it was 3 days ago. Did you trade those futures successfully ?

A lot of ships "disappearing" (are they reappearing?) near the Strait...

I've long been an AI skeptic, but my sentiment has been changing. AI was apparently a big part in the Maduro raid and the Iran operation... https://www.thetimes.com/world/middle-east/article/palantir-ai-software-us-iran-war-lwld892z9 It seems it is clear that AI is integral to geopolitical strength and overall national security. And both China and the U.S. realize that. So you now have something akin to the Soviet-U.S. space race where there needs to be large amounts spent on R&D, capital intensive production, etc and the fruits of that labor translate into overall military strength. It becomes a race that is integral to the edge and overall survival odds of competing superpowers, with financial backing of governments. This makes it pretty different from the tech bubble of 2000. In this case, it is becoming a national strategic imperative to lead in these technologies in China and the U.S... Meanwhile, there are other places like Europe where they have pretty much thrown in the towel and destroyed this capability...just another demonstration of Europeans shooting themselves in their own foot.

Oh wow if you think you can predict short term prices? Why you not trading futures? And have you provided any meaningful commentary to this discussion? No.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-03-09/macron-plans-hormuz-ship-escorts-once-conflict-calms-down Even France moves to open the Strait. It seems now the French Navy is more reliable than the British Navy... A lot of oil bulls want parallels to the 1970s. The differences to today are massive--the Gulf states are slowly becoming allied against Iran and have strong interests in maintaining their exports (esp at today's prices). Saudis have a big East-West pipeline that bypasses the Gulf and allows exports on the Red Sea. Even Abu Dhabi can bypass the Strait for some of its exports... And of course now the U.S. is the biggest producer in the entire world and most countries have large reserves built up for the 1970s scenario. Methinks it's not a bad time to fade for those who rode oil up.

https://www.wsj.com/business/energy-oil/the-billionaire-whose-ships-are-braving-missiles-in-the-strait-of-hormuz-1f43f84c https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-03-09/greek-oil-tanker-exits-hormuz-shipping-strait-with-signal-off The incentives to make the journey are quite high. And some might argue that the risks of said journey are falling and the insurers are mis-pricing the risks. As they say--the cure for high prices is high prices

Crude is already up ~50% quite quickly. This is due to the Strait closure of traffic and loss of Saudi, Iraqi, Kuwaiti, etc exports. Not just Iranian. I would not expect the loss of Iranian production (~3MM barrels/day) to cause oil to rocket much higher than where it is today ~$100-110/barrel as today's prices include disruption of oil from all Gulf states, not just Iran. If anything, it might go lower if the Strait opens even if we lose most of Iranian production...

He has similar appeal to Peter Zeihan--endless pontification about macro & geopolitics. It can be addictive, but I'm afraid a big waste of time for an investor

Oil is a nice black swan trade. The problem is that you have to time your exit too. If the Strait reopens materially, oil likely heads lower. If the Strait remains closed, it goes higher. In the long run though, it goes lower because the Strait will not be permanently closed. There are far too many with interests in keeping it open (the entire West, Asia (incl China), the Gulf States, etc)

I watched one of his videos where he claimed the Middle Eastern countries, owning a whopping ~$1 Trillion in U.S. stocks, would crash the stock market if they sold. I guess he doesn't realize how big the U.S. equity markets are. I turned it off at that point.

Oil is up quite quickly. Usually it pops up like this and then grinds lower. Once it gets much lower, a bunch of people who were bullish oil will claim they sold out near the top or wrote some calls, etc--all with the benefit of hindsight. If oil goes up, they will of course claim they held (again with the benefit of hindsight). It does seem like a good time to fade the rally if you held (though a lot of oil stocks like OXY haven't moved considerably) If helicopters can stop the drone threat cheaply and Iran's ballistic missile capabilities are eroded, then ship traffic is likely set to resume quickly. The Gulf states are basically warning Iran that if attacks on them continue, they will have to join the war...

Yeah I think it's inaccurate to say that UK North Sea is tapped out while Norway is not. As we've seen with oil companies, more exploration leads to more reserves leads to more production. We've seen people over and over again say that U.S. shale oil is "peaking" for the past decade+, but shale output continues to grow and the U.S. has surpassed Saudi Arabia and become basically oil independent. In the North Sea, the massive Johan Sverdrup field was only discovered in 2010. The UK is a small nation. It would not need much oil & gas to become self sufficient, but the marginal 78% Energy Profits Levy deters long term investments and not to mention the outright ban of new licenses by Labour: https://www.netzeroinvestor.net/news-and-views/briefs/uk-government-confirms-ban-on-new-fossil-fuel-projects-in-the-north-sea

Well the problem with nuclear is that the environmentalists are the ones who wanted them shut down. The plants in Germany have been demolished. Now how long does it take to build new nuclear plants in Western countries with huge bureaucracies, strict labor/environmental regs, expensive materials/labor/energy/concrete/etc. Those new nuclear plants will be at least an order of magnitude more expensive and take longer to build than the old plants that were demolished by the Greens. Look at the plants that were built in Southern U.S. that went way over budget and bankrupted Westinghouse. In Europe, it will be even worse to build new nuclear plants. The great irony is that the French (or all people) have been great with nuclear energy while the Germans and British screwed up royally.

Yep—the armchair generals are horrified their stocks are down a few % from ATH have determined it’s a failure. Less than a week in with the top leaders (incl “supreme leader”) taken out on the first day, a few poorly aimed drones at gulf states is what it takes for these people to wave white flags and claim failure. Even funnier is listening to European commentators criticize and question the strategy. They would have preferred a nuclear armed Iran to a few weeks of disorder. Hey, “international law”, amirite? Europeans of course didn’t prepare for any sort of tail event like this despite so many “experts” on the continent—that’s why their energy situation is a disaster. That anyone listens to such people largely explains why Europe is where it is today geopolitically (esp Re: Russia-Ukraine). People like Putin will continue to run circles around them.

This has been the policy of Europe for about 15 years now. How has it worked out? They still need Russian gas. Only Norway is winning because they continued with fossil fuels. The UK also has access to pretty much same resources but squandered it. But the bottom line that the U.S. and China understand and Europe doesn’t is that you need cheap energy to thrive. The European elites frankly don’t care if manufacturing plants in Germany or UK shut down. They are after all “degrowth” socialist environmentalist nutjobs who have brought ruin to everything they touch

When the U.S. said in its strategic review that its European allies were becoming less reliable, they weren’t kidding