ValueAnalyst
Closed
Whoever has written the January 2019 calls has a big big BIG problem in their hands...
This may be the real reason for all the FUD.
This may be the real reason for all the FUD.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
Not necessarily. They are hoping to buy them back on a major dip. I suspect they are calculating one IF the model 3 ramp does not go well OR Q2/Q3 ERs show a significant slow down in S/X deliveries. Now, the people writing ST calls are/may be in big trouble.
I would not write a call against this stock at this time.
These are very good questions. Regardless of the technicians views, no matter how sophisticated, it is common to defeat the quants.
A brief historical note: There are numerous fairly recent cases in which market evaluations by quant, some with famous names and Nobel prizes, missed the markets entirely.
Statistically the problem in all was very simple; they operated outside the boundary conditions of their models.Long-Term Capital management is the lost famous, nearly 20 years ago.
I cn offer case after case of similar failures, some catastrophic (Wachovia Bank did it with Option ARMs.) some nobody outside narrow specialities has ever heard of (DeHavilland Comet).
The rule is logically quite simple: never use a stochastic model outside the parameters of the sample used for the development of said model.
What has that to do with your five questions?
My answer: Nobody knows what market movements mean in a case that has no precise analogies. TSLA generates such widely opposing views and such volatility precisely because none of the analytical tools can find an adequate analogy for dependable modeling. Thus the technical evaluations will be consistently in error for major swings, while appearing to be consistent with something else from time to time. Thus, the 'bulls' may believe that the existence of Tesla is a 'black swan' in a good way, while the pessimists sometimes think TSLA resembles a government subsidized Ponzi scheme. Traditional industry analysts view the latter because they are incapable of imagining the former (Marchionne, paraphrased- we could do better than Tesla in a few months if we wanted to") while the former disdain everything the latter say.
So, the short squeeze question will not answer with either validity or reliability precisely because there is no dependable method to evaluate market movements for an outlier security like TSLA. That is hard enough to do for a conventional security, widely improbable for TSLA. The primary reason is that many institutional holders themselves have schizophrenic views of TSLA, so some Longs are really not dependably so, some Shorts change their views quickly when they sense the need for an unscheduled underwear change.
For anybody who thinks they can overcome these impediment I suggest reviewing the biographies of Myron S Scholes and Robert C Merton. FWIW, Fischer Black was not with them during the LTCM days.
I might be biased. I studied the subject in 1969-1973 in graduate schools and then thought Modigliani, Miller and the foregoing three were superhuman and could actually price options correctly. LTCM, Providian, WaMU, Wachovia, Lehmann, Bear Stearns and many others have made the same fundamental error. They act on the assumption that the future will hold the same patterns as the past. Were that true we could solve world hunger,
I understand that I may seem to suggest that a valiant effort to predict the future should not be made because it is hopeless. I do not agree. However, it is essential to ensure we understand that 'black swans' do happen. You might want to disregard my views because my personal history involves a good deal of my income having come from unwinding my former hero's disasters.
So, ValueAnalyst, on your questions 1-4 I have views, but I do not seriously advocate them and will not state them. On your question 5, this was my response.
Finally, I was a Scholes-Merton-Black acolyte in the 1970's. By the later 1980's I transmogrified to a Graham-Dodd (and successors)advocate, and there I remain. While that may mean I have the perspective of Zaphod B, I think being very long TSLA is consistent with those views. Long live cognitive dissonance!
T3slaTulips
Member
Fidelity again had a lot of shares available for shorting, but seem to cut back, pulling 500K shares, similar to yesterday, but pre-market. Not too many borrowers around...
LargeHamCollider
Battery cells != scalable
It looks like I pushed the wrong buttons. But I assure you it was entirely accidental. When I said "You have so many millions, I can't even count it straight." I was really referring to my own mistake in confusing the net equity of 7mil with 6mil as I incorrectly said 6mil in prior post. Once the first sentence is misconstrued everything else goes down the drain. Written text has very little tone.
In any case, when you post big numbers you do attract attention. To some degree that's the point anyway right. People would want to know what you did, how you did and what you went through. As the moderator points out your profile is not accessible and only a public discussion is possible. So I asked very genuinely what you meant by "after 19 years trading and millions in tuition to Wall Street" but somehow that's lost in translation.
If you are not willing to share that's fine. But you don't need to post enticing snippets either if you don't want the attention
i would point out, that with a bit of poking Montana Skeptic said he had long term options (he once said puts) implying they were way out there, like 2019, but....i advise caution
T3slaTulips
Member
racer26
Active Member
Feels to me a lot like what we've seen many times before. Morning pop leads to STRONG headwinds around 10am which are heavily rejected by strong support in the slightly green area, and then a trudge upward the rest of the day.
Impressive resilience considering the markets and oil dumped
T3slaTulips
Member
Was more referring to everyone else (dow, daq, cyclicals, sector) flying the red no-swimming flags.
Most of us expected Trump would drop out already. So, maybe "priced in".
racer26
Active Member
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Article
