2017 Investor Roundtable:General Discussion

[Intl Professor]

This is much better than blundering into war with a real nation.

China's concern as you know and probably anticipated above, is securing "loose nukes" and remnants of the army. Both S. Korea and Japan have much more at stake than we, which should be the restraining factors on any tantrum by the US.

In politics and economics the rational actor schools are now in disfavor. One of my more distinguished colleagues talked me into using one of his books in government 1 on that subject. I never accepted it as an appropriate model and now even he doesn't.

You probably agree with many here that the rational model applied to markets fails as well, although it has guided my estimates of where technology leads in the long run. First purchase of TSLA in August 2010 as low as $17.80, last in April 2016 at $249.95, respectable average lifetime cost at just under $60. However....

Pitifully small number of shares—commensurate with income from someone whose supped at the public trough for life—while enjoying and spending nearly all of it on the way.

 

[GoTslaGo]

China's concern as you know and probably anticipated above, is securing "loose nukes" and remnants of the army. Both S. Korea and Japan have much more at stake than we, which should be the restraining factors on any tantrum by the US.

In politics and economics the rational actor schools are now in disfavor. One of my more distinguished colleagues talked me into using one of his books in government 1 on that subject. I never accepted it as an appropriate model and now even he doesn't.

You probably agree with many here that the rational model applied to markets fails as well, although it has guided my estimates of where technology leads in the long run. First purchase of TSLA in August 2010 as low as $17.80, last in April 2016 at $249.95, respectable average lifetime cost at just under $60. However....

Pitifully small number of shares—commensurate with income from someone whose supped at the public trough for life—while enjoying and spending nearly all of it on the way.

Agree, but we may want to take this discussion into the macro thread instead, rather than here in the General thread. Probably more appropriate there...

 

[EnzoXYZ]

Pray for the chance to buy for $290. Or even better - $150!

I'd be taking out money on my home equity line for another crack at TSLA at $30.

I be doing it at $150 never mind $30.

Bought 50% more shares today vs the small buy on Monday.

 

[Intl Professor]

Pardon for this brief regression to the theme of this thread.

Now that I think of it the time to invest in TSLA is at any price while the products remain popular. If you have doubt the M3 will not be at least as good—eventually—for what it is as the MS, then don't touch the stock. In the long run which for me is at least one to two years, I have no doubt Tesla will produce as we hope. If I live another five, a possibility but not a probability, my wife will be a wealthy woman for her remaining forty years.

Then Elon Musk will remain on track as this century's Henry Ford. So far, so good. The short term is mouse nuts, mouse insanity?

 

[EnzoXYZ]

Ugh. OK, so here's a scenario. If the US does incompetently blunder into a war with North Korea, I would not be surprised to see China invade North Korea officially in support of the US, under the pretext of "establishing security" (basically kicking out Kim Jong-Un, who has been causing them trouble for a long time.) The North Korean missiles are much more of a threat to China than to the US, and China doesn't want the US next door. It would be a pretty slick diplomatic move because the US would have no excuse to complain about it. China could probably even run it through the United Nations and get it past the Security Council.

I really hope the US does not blunder into war with North Korea, but it could be a lot worse. Essentially every country in the world thinks that the North Korean goevrnment is a bucket of trouble now; it has no real allies. This is much better than blundering into war with a real nation.

If China isn't massing troops on the North Korean border and preparing their defenses and war games against a North Korean attack, I'd be surprised.

I noticed that the city from which North Korea is launching the missiles is on the west coast. I know this is supposedly directed against the US, but, uh... looks to me like the target he's really picking a fight with is China.

Never thought it like this. Good points especially with recent 2017 development that this is one way to look at it.

Several of us pointed out when that was first posted that he has a really poor track record, and that the chances of having several thousand cars produced by now were close to zero. If you believed that you should start paying more attention to the quality of your sources.

The fact that Tesla is delivering any M 3 in July 2017 should be the headline people.

All the "experts" said it was impossible. What say you now?!

Can any of these self proclaimed "experts" be better source than Elon? I think not.

 

[SpaceCash]

Unfortunately, people who are actually buying a car right now don't agree with you - other wise X sales would be much higher. I think that is pretty much common sense.

lol, dude I know many people who have them and you're straight up lying.

 

[Lessmog]

Pray for the chance to buy for $290. Or even better - $150!

I'd be taking out money on my home equity line for another crack at TSLA at $30.

YESS! Oh, goddang, market's closed. Otherwise I'd'a been buying @ -150 forever. Or until my mortgage went dry. Or infinity whichever comes first.

 

[myusername]

You're asking him to prove a negative, another indication of your trollish behavior on this forum.

trollish behavior?... too many people hung up on the idea that anyone with a negative sentiment is a troll... are you really defending ValueAnalyst on this subject right now?

 

[Lessmog]

Pardon for this brief regression to the theme of this thread.
. . .
Then Elon Musk will remain on track as this century's Henry Ford. So far, so good. The short term is mouse nuts, mouse insanity?

Nuts' nuts?

 

[Lessmog]

Sorry for spamming the thread, but current politics is just too depressing.

 

[EnzoXYZ]

Unfortunately, people who are actually buying a car right now don't agree with you - other wise X sales would be much higher. I think that is pretty much common sense.

Didn't you see the survey where 11 out of 10 people would rather take the X over the S if price wasn't considered?

 

[myusername]

You're asking him to prove a negative, another indication of your trollish behavior on this forum.

here you go:

2017 Investor Roundtable: TSLA Market Action

@ValueAnalyst :
"They didn't say they won't do 100k. They said they never guided 100k, and that is a factual statement, and I know that.

My independent analysis points to that Tesla will produce 100k+ Model 3's in 2017. This willl become clear after July."

and then people will probably come back and argue some other crap... but here's the point...

Longs and media were touting 100k+ claims for nearly a year... and then you all changed your tune... it's ridiculous to watch. this is the last time i'll pull out these references...

if anyone wants to suggest that Elon did not hand wave and misconstrue the number of 2017 and 2018 M3 deliveries... then you are lying... either intentionally on this board or simply to yourself.

 

[Ichabod]

Never thought it like this. Good points especially with recent 2017 development that this is one way to look at it.


The fact that Tesla is delivering any M 3 in July 2017 should be the headline people.

All the "experts" said it was impossible. What say you now?!

Can any of these self proclaimed "experts" be better source6 than Elon? I think not.

I say the "experts" were wrong, but that is just because they ignored what was done to get the X out by promised end of Q3. If I remember right, it was 6 hand built units handed to people on 30 September who were certainly not going to go on youtube the next day to show off the defects of their cars. It was a good 3-4 more months before they were really being "produced", as in coming off a functioning assembly line.

I honestly don't give much weight to the 1, 30, or 150 unit months. Those volumes are not indicative of a functioning assembly line. The assembly line will work, and probably much sooner than the prominent bears are predicting, but I wouldn't claim total victory because hand built units are released in order to meet a certain timeline.

 

[erthquake]

here you go:

2017 Investor Roundtable: TSLA Market Action

@ValueAnalyst :
"They didn't say they won't do 100k. They said they never guided 100k, and that is a factual statement, and I know that.

My independent analysis points to that Tesla will produce 100k+ Model 3's in 2017. This willl become clear after July."

and then people will probably come back and argue some other crap... but here's the point...

Longs and media were touting 100k+ claims for nearly a year... and then you all changed your tune... it's ridiculous to watch. this is the last time i'll pull out these references...

if anyone wants to suggest that Elon did not hand wave and misconstrue the number of 2017 and 2018 M3 deliveries... then you are lying... either intentionally on this board or simply to yourself.

Well, that doesn't necessarily mean @ValueAnalyst was including it in their DCF. In literal sense, @ValueAnalyst is right in that they never said it was included in their DCF. Furthermore, you can't characterize all the longs here, by @ValueAnalyst. He/she's is at the uber far end of the bull spectrum, and many here have criticized that. To say that "you all" changed your tune is a gross exaggeration.

 

[myusername]

Well, that doesn't necessarily mean @ValueAnalyst was including it in their DCF. In literal sense, @ValueAnalyst is right in that they never said it was included in their DCF. Furthermore, you can't characterize all the longs here, by @ValueAnalyst. He/she's is at the uber far end of the bull spectrum, and many here have criticized that. To say that "you all" changed your tune is a gross exaggeration.

yes... i can characterize... because it was the general unrefuted mantra for nearly a year... just go read that thread. you will see that the entire conversation was ABOUT him/her putting it in their DCF and advertising it. that was the beginning of the turn of opinion on the subject by longs when they realized 100k+ was a pipe dream... and I sat here on this forum arguing the subject for months prior to that... and now you're all like: "yeah... duh... they never said that".

and my response now is the same as it was then... go revise your DCFs WAY down... the timelines are too aggressive and the risk is childishly underestimated.

 

[Reciprocity]

here you go:

2017 Investor Roundtable: TSLA Market Action

@ValueAnalyst :
"They didn't say they won't do 100k. They said they never guided 100k, and that is a factual statement, and I know that.

My independent analysis points to that Tesla will produce 100k+ Model 3's in 2017. This willl become clear after July."

and then people will probably come back and argue some other crap... but here's the point...

Longs and media were touting 100k+ claims for nearly a year... and then you all changed your tune... it's ridiculous to watch. this is the last time i'll pull out these references...

if anyone wants to suggest that Elon did not hand wave and misconstrue the number of 2017 and 2018 M3 deliveries... then you are lying... either intentionally on this board or simply to yourself.

Using words like guided means they would have filed something or said something very specific in a quarterly conference call or annual meeting. The only thing that was said from Elon and Tesla was about parts orders. Some bulls as you say extrapolated that to mean production and delivery even though Elon specifically qualified it by saying first parts are ordered, then they arrive and you have to build them into cars and deliver them and that process takes a month or longer. If someone somewhere deduced that he meant 100k model 3s would be delivered in 2017, I never saw such bold claims, the most I ever saw was 80k and that was not by anyone from Tesla. My personal top was 50k based on parts orders and assuming that the highest production in Dec would not be delivered until Jan. Many also misconstrue what Elon says about run rates and about total deliveries. For example, 2018 target is 500,000 but includes 120k S/X. If you exit 2017 with 2400 S/X and 5000 3's you get 370k run rate going into Jan 2018. That doesn't mean you plan to produce 370k in 2017 because you have that as a run rate at the end of Dec, 2017.

I read a lot of stuff and I know VA is super bull, but I never got the impression that anyone had a realistic thought that they would deliver high 5 figures in 2017 and most analysts say a token handful of cars or 2000 on the very high end from guys like Adam Jonas. To me, anything in the tens of thousands would be a complete and unmitigated success. Not because producing 30K is meaningful, but because it would mean that the Model 3 is not the Model X. At that point the only question I have left is GM from that production and GM guidance for 2018. Whether they get to 500k cars in 2018 would be great, but not necessary to make the model 3 a world changing vehicle. Its more important that the ramp goes smoothly and the quality and reliability of the much simpler car is good. Reservations will continue to rise for the 3 until sometime in 2020 when they might finally catch up. Some might be canceled for Model Y, but not for a Bolt or what ever other fugly competitor comes out.

 

[SpaceCash]

In my opinion it's not worth responding to these types. Obvious paid shills are obvious. I used to play in marijuana penny stocks and I was a moderator on a certain message board. It became really clear to me that paid shills not only exist, but they or their employers sometimes go to extreme lengths. I was doxxed for example, and was even called late at night by someone speaking through a voice distorter threatening me and more. They reported ME to the SEC and for weeks afterward my LinkedIn account kept getting views from SEC employees. I'm sure I'm forgetting details, and the situation I speak of involved a lot less money than what's involved in TSLA.

My point is, myusername is an OBVIOUS paid shill, and should not ever be taken seriously. These types exist only to derail conversation, to lie, obfuscate, and ultimately steal from you.

Well, that doesn't necessarily mean @ValueAnalyst was including it in their DCF. In literal sense, @ValueAnalyst is right in that they never said it was included in their DCF. Furthermore, you can't characterize all the longs here, by @ValueAnalyst. He/she's is at the uber far end of the bull spectrum, and many here have criticized that. To say that "you all" changed your tune is a gross exaggeration.

 

[myusername]

In my opinion it's not worth responding to these types. Obvious paid shills are obvious. I used to play in marijuana penny stocks and I was a moderator on a certain message board. It became really clear to me that paid shills not only exist, but they or their employers sometimes go to extreme lengths. I was doxxed for example, and was even called late at night by someone speaking through a voice distorter threatening me and more. They reported ME to the SEC and for weeks afterward my LinkedIn account kept getting views from SEC employees. I'm sure I'm forgetting details, and the situation I speak of involved a lot less money than what's involved in TSLA.

My point is, myusername is an OBVIOUS paid shill, and should not ever be taken seriously. These types exist only to derail conversation, to lie, obfuscate, and ultimately steal from you.

"My point is, myusername is an OBVIOUS paid shill, and should not ever be taken seriously"

well... you're wrong... and the truth is it's YOU GUYS that spend your time talking about me and trolls and "paid shills" while I actually talk about topics related to the company and stock. for example, you guys tried to run me off while I said M3 deliveries could easily be under 20k... this was just 3 months ago... and who was right?

 

[erthquake]

In my opinion it's not worth responding to these types. Obvious paid shills are obvious. I used to play in marijuana penny stocks and I was a moderator on a certain message board. It became really clear to me that paid shills not only exist, but they or their employers sometimes go to extreme lengths. I was doxxed for example, and was even called late at night by someone speaking through a voice distorter threatening me and more. They reported ME to the SEC and for weeks afterward my LinkedIn account kept getting views from SEC employees. I'm sure I'm forgetting details, and the situation I speak of involved a lot less money than what's involved in TSLA.

My point is, myusername is an OBVIOUS paid shill, and should not ever be taken seriously. These types exist only to derail conversation, to lie, obfuscate, and ultimately steal from you.

The problem is, if nobody responds, then FUDsters have free reign to affect everyone who doesn't use the ignore feature.

 

[Off Shore]

...FUDsters have free reign to affect everyone who doesn't use the ignore feature.

...thereby suggesting the only viable option.