Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

2017 Investor Roundtable:General Discussion

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Map Shows Growing U.S. ‘Climate Rebellion’ Against Trump (National Geographic)

IMG_0163.PNG



Meantime in CT - another loss to the dealerships
Tesla’s direct sale bill fails again in Connecticut
 
Adam Jonas is clearly reading TMC forums!

Adam - if you're reading this: please adjust your projections to reflect Tesla's real growth, instead of fearing to look foolish on Wall Street.



SeekingAlpha is not monolithic, so this is just one author's view.

By the way, he's a recent college grad: https://www.linkedin.com/in/william-maurer-24912723/

upload_2017-6-8_16-11-4.png



"King Elon?" - What a tool this kid is. All that s*it talking for ONE contract?

Way to lay it out there and put it where your mouth is son. I'd make the same comment over on SA but it would just get deleted so no point.
 
Thanks. That starts to make more sense. So Tesla will settle in cash for the equivalent amount of the stock price. Rerunning the exercise then. Let's say stock is $600. Then for each $1000 in debt

- bond holder receives $600*2.7788 from Tesla
- Tesla buys 2.7788 shares at $359.87 from the hedge counterparty
- Tesla sells 2.7788 shares at $512.66 to the warrant holders

Total cash Tesla needs to pay is 2.7788 times (600+359.87-512.66) = 2,7788 times 447.21 = $894,42. Correct this time?

(2,7788 times 447.21 = $894,42. I see $1,240.29)

Essentially (after correcting the math it's correct, but more complex since the detailed terms of the hedges and warrants have never been fully disclosed) The warrant strike price is $512.66 for the 2019 notes and $560.64 for the 2021 notes. So I assume you are posing a hypothetical for 2019 notes.

My presumption has been the hedges/warrants operate contemporaneously (and only) with a conversion. If so, I think it looks more like:

Note holder receives for each note value worth $1,667.28 (2.778 x $600):

-$359.87/share in cash from Tesla or $1,000 ($359.87 x 2.7788)

-Tesla decides how to settle the amount betwee $1,667.28 and $1,000 or $667.28:

-if all shares, that's 1.112 shares ($667.28/$600). Tesla buys 2.7788 shares from the hedge counter-party for $359.87/share, pays the hedge parties $1,000, transfers 1.112 shares to the holder to settle the remaining $667 of value owed to the holder and has 1.6668 shares remaining to settle with warrant holders. At that point, the warrant is worth 2.7788 shares, so Tesla can issue an additional 1.112 shares or pay them $667.28 to extinguish the warrant holders rights. Tesla might also be able to negotiate privately a purchase of just 1.112 shares/note from the counter-parties and settle with the hedge/warrant counter parties privately with no dilution. (FWIW, Neroden has convinced his/her self that the warrants can not be exercised until the notes' maturity.)

-if all cash, Tesla pays the an additional $667.28 to the holder in cash and there is no dilution. What happens between Tesla and the hedge/warrrant counter-parties is unknowable since details of those transactions have never been disclosed, but at that point Tesla has a counter-claim against the hedge/warrant counter-parties on $424 of the $667 paid to the note holder.

-if a combination of shares and cash above the principal amount .ie. $667.28 there are an infinite number of scenarios.

Bottom lines:

- if the share price is $600, Tesla will have to pay back in value from some combination of shares and cash $1, 243/ $1,000 note [ $600 - ($512.66-$359.97)] = $447.3 x 2.7788

- if the share price on any note issue is converted at or below the conversion value, neither Tesla nor the hedge/warrant counter-parties are harmed. Tesla repays the note with $1,000 in cash.

-if the share price on any note issued is converted above the conversion value but below the warrant strike price, Tesla is indifferent, but the hedge/warrant counter-parties are exposed and potentially for more than their receipts from the hedge/warrant transactions.

--if the share price on any note issue is converted above the warrant strike price, Tesla is exposed for the difference between the share price and the warrant strike prices times the number of shares at par on the respective issues. If the difference is settled in shares it will be dilutive.

-the four existing convertible note issues will never provide Tesla net new value in capital. Paraphrasing the Phram filter guy, they can pay the excess above the warrants in cash or in shares.
 
Last edited:
i thought the top end cap limits tesla's exposure, so they don't end up in a situation where they have to sell 1 billion worth of shares at some stupidly low price (assuming stock has gone much higher). ugh why is this so confusing!

my understanding was:
tesla sells a bond + call option on equity packaged up in a convertible bond.
to limit how much the short call option might cost them, they effectively sell a call spread by buying a call option at a much higher strike from the hedge counterparty.
to provide the hedge counterparty some protection, they issue them warrants.

and i think i've talked myself in a circle. if anyone has a clear explanation please post. thanks in advance.

The warrants top out the hedge counter-parties' exposures (and the strike level is when more dilution is possible if Tesla redeems the notes for valuations above that strike with shares.)
 
(2,7788 times 447.21 = $894,42. I see $1,240.29)

Essentially (after correcting the math it's correct, but more complex since the detailed terms of the hedges and warrants have never been fully disclosed) The warrant strike price is $512.66 for the 2019 notes and $560.64 for the 2021 notes. So I assume you are posing a hypothetical for 2019 notes.

My presumption has been the hedges/warrants operate contemporaneously (and only) with a conversion. If so, I think it looks more like:

Note holder receives for each note value worth $1,667.28 (2.778 x $600):

-$359.87/share in cash from Tesla or $1,000 ($359.87 x 2.7788)

-Tesla decides how to settle the amount betwee $1,667.28 and $1,000 or $667.28:

-if all shares, that's 1.112 shares ($667.28/$600). Tesla buys 2.7788 shares from the hedge counter-party for $359.87/share, pays the hedge parties $1,000, transfers 1.112 shares to the holder to settle the remaining $667 of value owed to the holder and has 1.6668 shares remaining to settle with warrant holders. At that point, the warrant is worth 2.7788 shares, so Tesla can issue an additional 1.112 shares or pay them $667.28 to extinguish the warrant holders rights. Tesla might also be able to negotiate privately a purchase of just 1.112 shares/note from the counter-parties and settle with the hedge/warrant counter parties privately with no dilution. (FWIW, Neroden has convinced his/her self that the warrants can not be exercised until the notes' maturity.)

-if all cash, Tesla pays the an additional $667.28 to the holder in cash and there is no dilution. What happens between Tesla and the hedge/warrrant counter-parties is unknowable since details of those transactions have never been disclosed, but at that point Tesla has a counter-claim against the hedge/warrant counter-parties on $424 of the $667 paid to the note holder.

-if a combination of shares and cash above the principal amount .ie. $667.28 there are an infinite number of scenarios.

Bottom lines:

- if the share price is $600, Tesla will have to pay back in value from some combination of shares and cash $1, 243/ $1,000 note [ $600 - ($512.66-$359.97)] = $447.3 x 2.7788

- if the share price on any note issue is converted at or below the conversion value, neither Tesla nor the hedge/warrant counter-parties are harmed. Tesla repays the note with $1,000 in cash.

-if the share price on any note issued is converted above the conversion value but below the warrant strike price, Tesla is indifferent, but the hedge/warrant counter-parties are exposed and potentially for more than their receipts from the hedge/warrant transactions.

--if the share price on any note issue is converted above the warrant strike price, Tesla is exposed for the difference between the share price and the warrant strike prices times the number of shares at par on the respective issues. If the difference is settled in shares it will be dilutive.

-the four existing convertible note issues will never provide Tesla net new value in capital. Paraphrasing the Phram filter guy, they can pay the excess above the warrants in cash or in shares.

@Brian45011: I am trying to wrap my old brain around these convertibles. Can you give me a 'Tesla Convertible Bonds Made for Dummies' book explanation.

If you have the time MANY thanks in advance. Al
 
Appears to be DUI related.

Witnesses reported:

Quote:

“Witnesses tell WDIV Local 4 the driver crossed the center line and, at a high speed, intentionally slammed into the people. The witnesses said three people were hit by the truck and flew into the air, including a 73-year-old man who became wedged beneath an air stream. A fourth person who was injured declined medical treatment and appears to be OK. After the truck hit the victims, witnesses said it pulled over on the side of the road and the passenger and driver switched seats.”

Update: the driver is now in custody and undergoing drug and alcohol test.

End quote.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: T3slaTulips
Witnesses reported:

Quote:

“Witnesses tell WDIV Local 4 the driver crossed the center line and, at a high speed, intentionally slammed into the people. The witnesses said three people were hit by the truck and flew into the air, including a 73-year-old man who became wedged beneath an air stream. A fourth person who was injured declined medical treatment and appears to be OK. After the truck hit the victims, witnesses said it pulled over on the side of the road and the passenger and driver switched seats.”

Update: the driver is now in custody and undergoing drug and alcohol test.

End quote.

My thoughts and prayers are with the victims. Hope they all recover fast
 
And when he buys to close, he shrinks the number of shares in circulation for crazy people like us that want to buy and own for the long haul, thereby making each of the shrinking number of shares MORE valuable.

Indeed. Meanwhile, shareholders who haven't placed a Good Till Cancelled limit order to sell TSLA at a very high price, may want to do so. That could discourage your broker from lending your shares to a short seller, and increase the likelihood of a significant short squeeze.

Shareholders who have already done that, may want to increase the limit price after considering the recent share price increase.
 
Interesting to see how fast Musk's twitter following is growing. He's gained about 200,000 in just the last week or so. I think it bodes well for future Tesla as well as TSLA purchases - he's a one man marketing department.
Interesting, but not clear if this translates to sales. For all you know, it could be algobots and 7M people from Nigeria and India :) To put this in context, here are some other people.

People Followers
------------------------------
Bill Gates 35.1M
Jeff Bezos 220K
Donald Trump 32M
Tim Cook 5M
Kim Kardashian 53.4M
Jeniffer Lopez 41.3M
Elon Musk 9.17M
Mary Barra 30K
Reed Hastings 27.4K
General motors: 590K
Nissan USA: 712K
Nissan Electric 55K
Toyota: 662K
Ford motors: 1M
Carlos Ghosn and Sergio Marchionne : No twitter account! Still sell millions of cars.

It is unclear what relationship this has with sales. Getting the word out and talking up the stock, yeah sure.

Most followed accounts are mostly in the entertainment industry. Below stats are as of March 2017.
Check the number of people following twitter! But its share price and profits still suck.
Most followed accounts on twitter 2017 | Statista
twtr.JPG
 
Last edited:
Indeed. Meanwhile, shareholders who haven't placed a Good Till Cancelled limit order to sell TSLA at a very high price, may want to do so. That could discourage your broker from lending your shares to a short seller, and increase the likelihood of a significant short squeeze.

Shareholders who have already done that, may want to increase the limit price after considering the recent share price increase.
Can they really do that? [Cover short sales with stock they hold but don't own?]

As I understand: Use your shares (for collateral) without paying you?
I thought folks like Fidelity reached out to stockholders for permission, and paid these holders a fee. Is that just a courtesy, or a legal requirement?

If my understanding is too naive, or badly flawed, just telling me to go figure it out would be fine. Besides swing trading Apple about 5 years ago, I am basically an idiot on individual stock ownership. [don't even know the rules]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.