You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And that's really why I moved it. Yes, I have an agenda to keep the Short-Term Price Movements discussions be about short-term price movements and the things that are likely causing, or will cause, them. The WSJ has historically had some very unflattering coverage of Tesla, and so the article ended up on this particular dissection table.My question about the article is why was it posted in the short term thread? Was it anticipated that there was something in it that would alter the course of the share price? I didn't view it as having anything in it that someone would trade on.
FUD does not mean untrue, however to some people there is that connotation.
There was clearly a spin on this one, but not as bad as most.
My question about the article is why was it posted in the short term thread? Was it anticipated that there was something in it that would alter the course of the share price? I didn't view it as having anything in it that someone would trade on.
A lot of the recent news is not so much FUD as it is confusion. We have to remember that we are tremendously better informed about Tesla than those shorting the stock (forget the bias) and think just how much less informed random financial or, even worse, auto journalists are.
Take, for instance, the latest piece about P85D delivery schedule. To know that this is likely a non-issue you need to know that Tesla has always heavily prioritized delivery of higher-end models, that Tesla always focuses on US sales at the end of the quarter, realize that the timing of these deliveries corresponds with the end of the quarter, and understand that the P85D is in a price category where even a 4 week backlog is impressive (given the addressable market).
These points are obvious to us, but at best the journalist who wrote that piece recognizes the final point (though he gave no indication of that) because it is pretty intuitive. The spokesperson for Tesla did point out the first point (that they prioritize higher-end cars), but it is easy to disregard that if you aren't familiar with the history of the company like we are. You can easily write it off as an excuse given that everybody knows Tesla's demand is wearing thin.
I think it is fine for us to pick apart these articles. But, there seems to be a tendency that has grown in recent months to attribute malice where stupidity (or really just the fact that these people have a life) is much more likely. And, rather than moan and complain about it, realize that this right here is what every investor dreams about. To know more than the rest of the market. This is your chance to make money, because there is an imbalance in information about the future of this company. We have more information and a higher quality understanding of it.
The bigger and better known and more popular Tesla (and TSLA) get, the harder and harder it is going to be to have such an advantage.
TSLA had been steady in the green around $192 for nearly an hour, then quickly fell into the red under $190 shortly after the article was published online. The spin of the article was that a shortened wait time implies reduced demand:
“… but the short waiting time raises additional concerns about the strength of demand for Tesla's products…”
“…Earlier this week, Tesla said it is trimming staff in China, amid weak demand…”
“…Still, investors are hungry for more details about the company's progress toward meeting its goals, particularly after Tesla fell short of its delivery target in 2014…”
“…One of the biggest question marks facing the company relates to inventory. Credit Suisse auto analyst Dan Galves said on Monday that his firm estimates inventory of unsold vehicles is 1,000 vehicles. CVC Research pegs inventory at 3,000 vehicles…”
“…the level of unsold sedans is the latest indication that the company's build-to-order model is under pressure…”
No mention was made of the facts that Tesla normally hastens the delivery of more expensive models, and works hard to meet delivery targets during the last month of a quarter. No consideration that having some non-customized cars ready for quicker delivery is likely an option that would have been made available eventually. No thought that an acceleration of production may have been a factor, and that might be a good thing. No hint that shorter waiting times might encourage more demand.
Who's Murdoch? The market doesn't distinguish who's behind I think.
Keith Rupert Murdoch /ˈmɜrdɒk/,[SUP][8][/SUP] AC, KCSG (born 11 March 1931) is anAustralian American business magnate. Murdoch became managing director of Australia's News Limited, inherited from his father Sir Keith Arthur Murdoch in 1952.[SUP][6][/SUP][SUP][9][/SUP] He is the founder, Chairman and CEO of global media holding company News Corporation, the world's second-largest media conglomerate, and its successors News Corp and 21st Century Fox after the conglomerate split on 28 June 2013.[SUP][10][/SUP][SUP][11][/SUP][SUP][12][/SUP][SUP][13][/SUP]In 1986, keen to adopt newer electronic publishing technologies, he consolidated hi UK printing operations in Wapping, causing bitter industrial disputes. His News Corporation acquired Twentieth Century Fox (1985), HarperCollins (1989)[SUP][14][/SUP]and The Wall Street Journal (2007). He formed BSkyB in 1990 and during the 1990s expanded into Asian networks and South American television. By 2000, Murdoch's News Corporation owned over 800 companies in more than 50 countries with a net worth of over $5 billion.
I'm sticking to our guns that discussions about articles needs to be split out from the Short-Run Price Movements thread. That thread moves so quickly it's impossible to have any focused analysis there. I know that some of you prefer to be able to read one, and only one thread, but such a multi-stranded conversation is impossible for anyone not reading in real-time to make sense of.
That said, I don't mind if someone (emphasis on ONE) puts a post in the Short-Term thread flagging that a new article about Tesla came across the wire. A WSJ piece can move the price. But let's thrash it out here, please.
Although some liked the initial name of the thread, "FUD Bunker", I agree that it's unduly prejudicial (albeit clever). I've changed it to a more neutral "Articles re Tesla—FUD or fact?"
My view is that moving discussions to this thread is not "burying" the discussion. This is a sticky thread, right up there with Short-Term and Investing Strategies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Murdoch
Murdoch's views and media empire are generally very conservative and the audiences of Murdoch media outlets predisposed to be opposed to Tesla Motors. Murdoch's corporations and business associates have been implicated in a distasteful scandal involving cell phone hacking.
News Corp. and its related companies have a conservative agenda and they are pretty open about it.
You put those points in quotation marks but some of them are not even in the article.
I pasted those lines from the Dow Jones (parent of WSJ) article by Mike Ramsey as it appeared in my TD Ameritrade account. In that account there also appears a shortened version by Mike Ramsey for MarketWatch (another Dow Jones company). I now see that Ramsey wrote a third version for WSJ.
Who's Murdoch? The market doesn't distinguish who's behind I think.
The ny times is a liberal rag, and very open about it too. Their views on tesla have been
pretty ugly if I recall .
the Sulzberger family pretty much runs the times, and they are not carrying card
members of the tea party.
cory johnson at Bloomberg despises musk and tesla, and Bloomberg is pretty liberal.
Frankly i I don't think any of these ceo cares a hoot about tesla.
i am a conservative and in 40 years of reading the wsj and Barrons I have never made a penny
that I can attribute to their reports.
Which ones? I could find all but the last one. What I did find was the following:You put those points in quotation marks but some of them are not even in the article.
Whatever the level of unsold inventory, the company traditionally has followed a build-to-order model. Last month, Tesla said in a regulatory filing it change how it refers to finished goods. Once only including cars in transit to customers, the term was broadened to include cars available for immediate sale.
Barclays auto analyst Brian Johnson called that move “a departure from the past—indicating that Tesla production is not as much a build-to-order model as it has been historically.”
The ny times is a liberal rag, and very open about it too. Their views on tesla have been
pretty ugly if I recall .
the Sulzberger family pretty much runs the times, and they are not carrying card
members of the tea party.
cory johnson at Bloomberg despises musk and tesla, and Bloomberg is pretty liberal.
Frankly i I don't think any of these ceo cares a hoot about tesla.
i am a conservative and in 40 years of reading the wsj and Barrons I have never made a penny
that I can attribute to their reports.
Which ones? I could find all but the last one.
Could it be that WSJ has edited this article?
Since I can't link you to my TD Ameritrade account, I'll simply paste the article.
If you don't take my word for the quotes not being in the original article, try Google page search (Ctrl F on the article page if you use Google Chrome); you'll find that the first quote Curt's posted isn't in there at all, the second quote was in there but worded differently, the third quote isn't there, the fourth quote was in there but worded differently, the fifth quote wasn't in there.
No, although I see they've updated the headline a couple of times now. If you read Curt's later post you'll see he was quoting from a different version of the article with a different source.
- - - Updated - - -
Curt, I'm happy as always to take your word for it; we're not allowed though to copy and paste an entire article without the copyright holders confirmed approval.