Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register
This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Not contradicting anything you're saying here or disagreeing - but they discontinued the term "ADD" back in 1987. It is now ADHD. If one doesn't show the signs of hyperactivity, it's ADHD-PI (Primarily Inattentive). I recognize ADD is common usage, but thought you or your SO might find it informative. Guessing she already knows since she reads a lot.

Yup, she's aware, ADHD is more of a mouthful and it really is not as accurate because so many people with it don't have hyperactivity. But it is the official abbreviation. The latest DSM also relabeled personality disorders as something else, but people still use the old terms. Asperger's Syndrome is also gone as term and it's now just part of the autism spectrum. Sort of like Pluto not being a planet.

Most women with ADD/ADHD are just the inattentive type. Another variation is whether someone is impulsive or not. Her ex-husband is her ex because he has a rather severe case that wasn't diagnosed until she left and he has both inattentive and impulsive, though not hyperactive. She is still good friends with him, but she said she can't live with that level of unpredictability.

For me I have some mild dyslexia and almost always mistype ADHD (I did a couple of times writing this). That particular combination of letters is very difficult for me to type correctly the first time.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: abasile

From the article:

The SEC decided to pursue massive penalties against Elon Musk and Tesla in the name of “protecting” shareholders. Their “protection” of shareholders tanked the stock. A penalty for making a major announcement without notice in the middle of a trading day warrants some penalty, but not what the SEC was seeking (and partly got), and the idea that Elon should be penalized for being as transparent with shareholders as he was is ridiculous, in my humble opinion.

So let’s really look at what he is complaining about.

1)Elon drops periodical hints about the short burn of the century on Twitter.

2) Elon announces a take private deal, w/o sufficient legal council on Twitter. This deal doesn’t work out and it becomes more and more apparent that it would never have worked out.

3)The SEC proposes a deal in which Elon would have to step down as chairman for 2 years, Tesla would have to hire two independent directors and both Tesla and Elon would have to pay 10 million each and there should be some vetting of Elon’s tweets.

4) Elon doesn’t accept, SEC sues, stock tanks.

5) Now Elon wants the old deal back, SEC increases the ban to 3 years and doubles the fine, still no very hard punishment. Elon accepts and stock price increases.

6) Elon calls the SEC shortseller enrichment commission on Twitter, stock tanks again.

So who actually caused the stock to tank? The SEC? Not really, right? It was Elon tweeting stuff, or not taking a generous deal.

If he keeps quiet for a week, the stock increases, if he tweets, the stock goes down. But apparently that’s too easy of an answer to some, so it must be the Koch brothers funded SEC at fault...

I just hope the new chairman takes Elon’s Twitter away. Then we can focus on the good progress Tesla is doing, instead of their CEO‘s moronic Tweets.
 
Meet Teslas new chairman...

Screen Shot 2018-10-09 at 1.52.58 PM.png
 
If he keeps quiet for a week, the stock increases, if he tweets, the stock goes down. But apparently that’s too easy of an answer to some, so it must be the Koch brothers funded SEC at fault...

I just hope the new chairman takes Elon’s Twitter away. Then we can focus on the good progress Tesla is doing, instead of their CEO‘s moronic Tweets.
One would think that company's SP is determined by it's performance. Can you explain how Musk tweets can influence company's performance? Cars become cheaper, service more expensive? What his "questionable" tweets change for a company?
Would BoD fire him? Rhetorical question.
More of it, his relevant tweets (like tweets about changes in sales' campaign) which reduce dramatically sale expenses are ignored. Introduction of new software features is ignored. How come?

To return to the current situaiton
Even if he has SEC complain to fight against. The possible timeframe for it's conclusion is 2-3 years. Years, not months, not days, and definitely not half seconds which pass before SP fall. (facepalm).
 
  • Love
Reactions: SpaceCash
One would think that company's SP is determined by it's performance. Can you explain how Musk tweets can influence company's performance? Cars become cheaper, service more expensive? What his "questionable" tweets change for a company?
Would BoD fire him? Rhetorical question.
More of it, his relevant tweets (like tweets about changes in sales' campaign) which reduce dramatically sale expenses are ignored. Introduction of new software features is ignored. How come?

To return to the current situaiton
Even if he has SEC complain to fight against. The possible timeframe for it's conclusion is 2-3 years. Years, not months, not days, and definitely not half seconds which pass before SP fall. (facepalm).

Oh sure, when he is not arguing with shorts, he is doing good PR work for Tesla on Twitter.

You ask why he has an impact on the stock at all? Mostly psychology I guess. People think that Tesla needs Musk, I disagree, but if he behaves reckless, he seems unstable and risks having to step down.

And why does Tesla need a high stock price? 9 billion in debt.
 
Oh sure, when he is not arguing with shorts, he is doing good PR work for Tesla on Twitter.

You ask why he has an impact on the stock at all? Mostly psychology I guess. People think that Tesla needs Musk, I disagree, but if he behaves reckless, he seems unstable and risks having to step down.

And why does Tesla need a high stock price? 9 billion in debt.

First about Tesla&Musk.
His tweets about shorts shouldn't hurt SP. There is no explainable mechanism which would describe why investors should be scared or repulsed by such tweets. As well there is no objective reason not to react on positive tweets addressing very important improvements in V9, or sell procedures. But it happens.

Tesla's debt is while serious thing is nothing exceptional and they have enough of instruments to refinance even if they would run out of cash. Only autopilot thing i enough to cover all debt.
The thing is they won't because Model 3 is designed in it's basis to be profitable.
Tesla makes autos in the way it makes because of Musk, putting GM executives will make from Tesla GM.
If you want that probably you should just invest in GM.

Now about stock trading.
there is no "psychology" involved in the way they claim.
GS moves stock by making provocative jumps an downs. Others are less aggressive and hijack existing trends (initially by monitoring them and amplifying when detected). It is boring bone headed if to use Musk words mathematics, and no it has nothing to do with "quantum" or other sh^t.
The only piece of "psychology" used is old known banality coming from ethology.
"Sheep follow goats". Lazy shepherds use goats to guide and control flock. Unlike dogs goats eat grass and don't require shepherds approval or every minutes guidance. You have big banks= "goats" and there are "sheep"=you.
You follow the stock trend because it is the rule you are told to follow.

People who were conservative with selling their stock during 2008 crash, lost much less than "weak hands"(people I know lost nothing). People who have bought SP from the "weak hands" earned big money.

long investment is about people and fundamentals. Short trading is speculation, and is essentially gambling. Current system in it's financial base is short term Ponzy Scheme, where people in the first tides collect cream, and the last dust.
Small reminder.
 
Last edited:
  • Love
Reactions: SpaceCash
From the article:



So let’s really look at what he is complaining about.

1)Elon drops periodical hints about the short burn of the century on Twitter.

2) Elon announces a take private deal, w/o sufficient legal council on Twitter. This deal doesn’t work out and it becomes more and more apparent that it would never have worked out.

3)The SEC proposes a deal in which Elon would have to step down as chairman for 2 years, Tesla would have to hire two independent directors and both Tesla and Elon would have to pay 10 million each and there should be some vetting of Elon’s tweets.

4) Elon doesn’t accept, SEC sues, stock tanks.

5) Now Elon wants the old deal back, SEC increases the ban to 3 years and doubles the fine, still no very hard punishment. Elon accepts and stock price increases.

6) Elon calls the SEC shortseller enrichment commission on Twitter, stock tanks again.

So who actually caused the stock to tank? The SEC? Not really, right? It was Elon tweeting stuff, or not taking a generous deal.

If he keeps quiet for a week, the stock increases, if he tweets, the stock goes down. But apparently that’s too easy of an answer to some, so it must be the Koch brothers funded SEC at fault...

I just hope the new chairman takes Elon’s Twitter away. Then we can focus on the good progress Tesla is doing, instead of their CEO‘s moronic Tweets.


My point is, the SEC sure is heterogeneous in what they consider to be a violation. This is pretty shoddy, and there are SOOOOOO many other more obvious instances that go uninvestigated, if not unpunished. Hence, the examples given in the article.
 
The herd behavior of the stock market got even more intense when most of the large investors started using computers to track the market and make decisions. These days the prediction algorithms are actually making the trades and if one with a big portfolio suddenly gets bearish and starts selling, it will trigger all the rest.

The markets put in some safety stops to prevent flash crashes after the first one. But it still results in sharp, sudden downturns like we saw yesterday and today. When the algorithms start seeing bargains and start buying, the market will shoot up again. The stock market is probably less connected to reality today than it ever was.

What is going on with Secure Alpha and a number of other FUDsters out there is essentially pump and dump type strategies (produce "news" that moves the stock in the direction you want and sell or short sell when it gets to the price point you want). These are illegal, but the SEC has decided to largely look the other way.

The current SEC Chair is Jay Clayton
Jay Clayton (attorney) - Wikipedia

According to the above page his clients have included Deutsche Bank and Volkswagen.

Though there are some indications Clayton was involved in ending an investigation into Tesla and Goldman Sachs a year ago:
Naughty or Nice? The SEC, Tesla, and Goldman Sachs Story | Shah Gilani's Wall Street Insights and Indictments
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: SpaceCash
Though there are some indications Clayton was involved in ending an investigation into Tesla and Goldman Sachs a year ago:
Naughty or Nice? The SEC, Tesla, and Goldman Sachs Story | Shah Gilani's Wall Street Insights and Indictments
This was empty investigation. From the start it was obvious (as it is the case with all other cases of Tesla's crashes) that any dangerous use of "autopilot" becaues of the way it is advertised by Tesla can not be used against company.
The only way somebody would blame Tesla autopilot it would be the situaion when the car would do things drivers wouldn't and in the way that the driver wouldn't be able to correct.
This article is just one of very many speculation attacks on TSLA.

Company doesn't have to disclose information not directly related to it's performance or financial health.
New directors close hanging zombie investigations all the time. It is the first thing they do. It is the norm for FBI, it is the norm for any legal body. I am sure SEC is no exception. I doubt it was the only case this guy closed that day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCash
I don't think the stock drops or gaps a lot because of the news itself. There are some really powerful people and specialist's/market makers that want to make money of the volatility of TSLA.

Every time there are news, they make it worse or better than it is. Like Elon has a 3 hour talk about awesome stuff, yet all journalists print the CEO smoking weed for 5 seconds in a state it's legal to do so. That may not necessarily change the price itself by a lot, but it does when the specialists use these catalysts for all it's worth by buying up or selling down the stock in the same direction as the news. That move in context of the news frightens people, and you get these massive sell-offs and gaps in the stock price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCash
Status
Not open for further replies.