In 2017, Saudi Arabia unveiled an audacious vision for Neom, a $500 billion futuristic metropolis on the Red Sea coast. Conceived as the crown jewel of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s Vision 2030, Neom was designed to be a beacon of innovation, sustainability, and economic diversification. The original master plan, led by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF), aimed to kick off construction in 2020, with the first phase completed by 2025. The city was to be powered entirely by renewable energy, feature cutting-edge technology like flying taxis and hyperloop systems, and serve as a hub for industries ranging from robotics to biotechnology.
However, as the project has unfolded, significant challenges have emerged, raising questions about its feasibility and the management of this ambitious endeavor.
The Vision and the Reality
Neom was intended to be a city of the future, a place where technology and urban planning would converge to create a utopia for businesses and residents alike. The project was touted as a key component of Saudi Arabia’s strategy to reduce its dependence on oil exports and build a knowledge-based economy. The initial excitement attracted global attention, with major companies like Bechtel, Siemens, and Boston Consulting Group signing on as partners.
But the execution has been far from smooth. Internal reports and sources close to the project have revealed a series of missteps and miscalculations. One of the most significant issues has been the lack of a clear, actionable plan. While the vision for Neom was bold, the practical steps to achieve it were often vague, leading to delays and confusion among stakeholders.
Financial Troubles and Mismanagement
The financial challenges facing Neom are equally concerning. The project was initially estimated to cost 500 billion,but reports suggest that the actual expenditure could be much higher. Internal document shave revealed significant financial losses, with some estimates point to a 2.5 billion loss in 2022 alone. These losses have been compounded by allegations of financial mismanagement, including the manipulation of financial statements to obscure the true scale of the project’s struggles.