TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

Checking in on John Peterson

Discussion in 'TSLA Investor Discussions' started by Cattledog, Aug 7, 2014.

  1. Cattledog

    Cattledog Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2012
    Messages:
    1,709
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    As many here are aware, John Peterson is a famous naysayer on Seeking Alpha. On April 7/8 John Peterson wrote a Seeking Alpha article entitled, Is Tesla's Gigafactory Becoming a Gigafarce? To refresh your memory, in it he indicated if you invested in TSLA, you would make money 1 time out of 64, break even 1 time out of 64, and lose money 62 times out of 64. In the comments section I asked John to pick 64 data points for verification, and when he didn’t respond, I chose 64 dates being the next 4 Mondays of April and the first Monday of every month from May 2014 until April of 2019. Well, as of today we have 8 data points, with the reference TSLA value being the close on 4/7/14 of 207.52. Here’s the data to date:

    Close on 4/7: 207.52
    Close on 4/8: 215.46 Gain: +7.94 TSLA wins
    Close on 4/14: 198.09 Loss: -9.43 JP wins
    Close on 4/21: 204.38 Loss: -3.14 JP wins
    Close on 4/28: 198.51 Loss: -9.01 JP wins
    Close on 5/5: 216.61 Gain: +9.09 TSLA wins
    Close on 6/2: 204.70 Loss: -2.82 JP wins
    Close on 7/7: 222.66 Gain: +15.14 TSLA wins
    Close on 8/4: 238.52 Gain 31.00 TSLA wins


    So TSLA wins 4 and JP wins 4. Wouldn’t be bad for JP except for two things – he said he’d win 62 of 64 times (oops) and as of today, he’s $45 in the hole (oopsx2). I hope none of you invested with him. BTW, John edited out the section of that article where he said TSLA would lose money 62 of 64 times, so don't click there looking for it. Hmmmm…

    I'll try to remember to come back monthly to update, but I think the rout is on.
     
  2. bonnie

    bonnie Oil is for sissies.

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    14,241
    Location:
    Columbia River Gorge
    I'm happy to say that it's been weeks since I even thought about John Peterson. He's become that unimportant in my mind.
     
  3. brianman

    brianman Burrito Founder

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2011
    Messages:
    15,487
    He was always unimportant in my mind, except perhaps as a counterindicator of when and how to invest.
     
  4. bonnie

    bonnie Oil is for sissies.

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    14,241
    Location:
    Columbia River Gorge
    I think at one point, he was causing some damage to the brand. Not serious damage. But he got picked up but the investor feeds and such. Now he's just an ankle biter and seems to have become pretty much inconsequential. The best punishment of all, imo.
     
  5. purplewalt

    purplewalt Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,414
    Location:
    Dallas, Texas
  6. techmaven

    techmaven Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2013
    Messages:
    2,579
    I really enjoy reading Mr. Petersen's articles. Not only do they demonstrate just how nonsensical so many of the short arguments turn out to be, but his articles usually presage a rise in TSLA stock price.
     
  7. mitch672

    mitch672 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2012
    Messages:
    1,868
    Location:
    Stoughton, MA
    He's too busy worrying about his penny stock (that used to not be a penny stock), and trying to come up with reasons why lead acid batteries are superior to lithium ion batteries (good luck with that one, soon even the only advantage they had, cost, will also be gone)
     
  8. vgrinshpun

    vgrinshpun Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2013
    Messages:
    3,919
    Location:
    PA
    Mr. Petersen, also made another pretty inaccurate prediction in the article with characteristically over the board title "Why Tesla's 'Not A Recall Victory Will Crush Q1 Earnings".

    Mr. Petersen, accountant by trade and CFO of the ePower Engine Systems according to his Seeking Alfa profile, stated the following: Tesla's total cost for the "not a recall" underbody armoring program will be somewhere in the $20 to $60 million range.

    As we all know the "crushing" impact of the under-body shields was around $2M, whopping 10 to 30 times less then predicted by the esteemed accountant (oopsx3).
     
  9. dsm363

    dsm363 Roadster + Sig Model S

    Joined:
    May 17, 2009
    Messages:
    18,235
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
    JP is a sad man. Happy he is finally seen for the great mind he isn't.
     
  10. austinEV

    austinEV Active Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2013
    Messages:
    2,496
    Location:
    Austin
    That is a ridiculous proposition. Enron didn't meet that criteria when it was going out of business.
     
  11. Zzzz...

    Zzzz... Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    Messages:
    867
    Location:
    East Asia/Canada
    I remember back in a days, when TSLA was below $30 John recommended to short Tesla and to invest in some lead-acid battery company. He was talking about long run, but for few months was creating articles showing how lead acid stock outperformed TSLA. Well, by now that company gone bankrupt and was delisted from exchange. And TSLA is not $30 anymore...
     
  12. Robert.Boston

    Robert.Boston Model S VIN P01536

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    Messages:
    7,842
    Location:
    Portland, Maine, USA
    John might be right, in the following, limited sense: if you took the management teams out of 64 randomly selected Fortune 500 companies, then set them the challenge of executing Tesla's strategy (including the Gigafactory), 62 of those teams would drive down the stock price, one might hold it steady, but only one could make it work.

    Good thing that one team is led by Elon and JB. :biggrin:
     
  13. Causalien

    Causalien Reaper of Trolls

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2012
    Messages:
    1,443
    Location:
    Canada
    I feel ashamed because I used John Peterson's argument against a hippie's dream of sustainable purely organic farming. Which also made me realize that for any of these dreams of a green and sustainable business model to work, we need to revolutionize transportation first and switch away from coal power.
     
  14. Robert.Boston

    Robert.Boston Model S VIN P01536

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    Messages:
    7,842
    Location:
    Portland, Maine, USA
    Resurrecting an ancient thread...I thought of JP this morning when I found this in my inbox:
    Sometimes smart people back the wrong horse, neh?
     
  15. ItsNotAboutTheMoney

    ItsNotAboutTheMoney Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2012
    Messages:
    4,503
    Location:
    Maine
    Well, it really comes down to:
    1) Make lots of cheap batteries
    2a) Enjoy better world
    2b) Keep making renewables cheaper
    3) Enjoy way better world

    Making lots of electric cars (as opposed to lots and lots) is the key challenge. The rest, as they say, is technology.

    (I'm not a technoutopian because people insist on getting in its way).
     
  16. ggr

    ggr Roadster R80 537, SigS P85 29

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,485
    At this rate, in a year or two, they can do another reverse split and end up with only a single share.
     
  17. winfield100

    winfield100 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2013
    Messages:
    451
    Location:
    rockville, maryland and Florida
    they had previously don a 1:50 split SO 50 x 35 = 1:1,750 reverse split, and it is down 21.5% already today (11am)
     
  18. derekt75

    derekt75 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2012
    Messages:
    592
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    Petersen was right that you could make huge returns by buying long on AXPW:
    wait for the stock to come close to getting delisted.
    buy a single share.
    wait for the reverse split.
    sell immediately.

    If you did that on both reverse splits, the way that they're rounding up, you could have had a rate of return of 5000% in 2014 and 3500% in 2015. You can't do that with TSLA.
    Of course, you'd still only have $2.50 (not including brokerage fees).
     
  19. joefee

    joefee Over 2 Million TMC page views

    Joined:
    May 29, 2011
    Messages:
    909
    Location:
    CA
    A negative correlation is just as predictive as a positive correlation. Just do the opposite of what JP says and you will do fine!

    Again, I thank the shorts for buying my Sig Perf Model S and now look forward for them paying for my Roadster 3.0 in 2018 :tongue:
     
  20. austinEV

    austinEV Active Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2013
    Messages:
    2,496
    Location:
    Austin
    Maybe $2.50 isn't a big deal to YOU. I am getting ready for the next reverse split!

    edit: on the other hand, I can probably outperform that by buying "forever" postage stamps.
     

Share This Page