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

Now you can see why I sold all my shares

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Tesla has already begun impacting the world more profoundly than Apple: disrupting both automotive and energy industries, leading in autonomous mobility, having the only supercharging infrastructure, a gigafactory that will revolutionize the manufacturing process, and, so far, being the only major solution towards a sustainable future.

No other companies come close. Period.

Yet all this has nothing to do with TSLA stock price, at least not until the company turns into a moneymaking machine such as Facebook. Right now it's more about potential than profit.

All this being said, while there is no guarantee of making short term gains from the stock, it would be hard to convince me not to invest in Tesla for the long term!
 
  • Like
Reactions: jdw
I find that with the right time horizon, investing in Tesla requires very little in the way of a strong stomach.

I ask myself a version of the Apple or Google or Microsoft question - if only I'd known and bought <somebody or other> 20 years ago and held on all this time, look at where I'd be. If one had known what Apple would become back in the early '90's, think of it!


My version of that question is to look at the world as I see it today, and ponder - which company am I going to look back at from 2026 or 2036 and wish I'd bought back in 2016, and forgotten about?

This is all consistent with my own investment hypothesis around Tesla - that the company is disrupting businesses (plural) that makes the cell phone business look small. Does that mean Tesla will actually carry through and do the disrupting, or will somebody else come along in 5 years and upset the apple cart? Will #2 to market be able to learn from Tesla and take away all it's toys? Maybe.

And that's why I monitor the investment, to see if something in the investment thesis has changed. But quarterly numbers are WAY too fined grained for this evaluation. On this time scale, I am equally indifferent whether TSLA reaches 110 or 440 first (roughly 1/2 or 2x) - both are at least remotely possible based on swings we've seen in the past - as long as the larger investment thesis holds. (Except that if TSLA were at $110 today, I'd be buying :)).


I just know that, based on what I know of the world today (2016), when 2026 comes along, I'll be able to say I bought my first batch of TSLA at $27 and I'm still holding it today (2026).
 
I played the tick-tock of Apple's ups and downs in the early/mid 1990's - the stock regularly moved from $30 to $50 and back (a number of splits ago). So, when I needed a new computer, I bought in at $30 and sold at $50 ... I didn't go long until about 2004.

At the time, I felt pretty good about this. However, each transaction was 500-1000 shares, and I ended up with 3 or 4 computers that have a present day value of $0.00. If I had just held the stock I traded, it would be worth almost $500K.

Very expensive laptops in hindsight.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: SΞXY P100D
In some ways - *ouch*. In other ways, if you'd known Apple would go from $30 to $700/share, you'd obviously have held.

The challenge isn't knowing what you would do, knowing what you know now using hindsight. The question is what would you do knowing what you knew then? If you knew Apple was going big, long before the iPhone, and you bought and held all the way through, what did you see that led you to that conclusion?

If you bought and held Microsoft back in the early DOS days, and maybe the pre-Windows 95 days, what did you see that would lead you to believe world domination was coming?

Or Google?

What we CAN learn from those examples, is the kind of economic gain to be had when you have that clarity of insight; when you see something that the world doesn't yet see, and you buy and hold on. I don't know when the opportunities will arise, but I don't expect that I'll see something clearly very often. For me, Tesla is the biggest of those less than 1/year opportunities that I expect to see. In fact, I'm seeing really good investment options (as I define them) more like 2 or 3 per decade, and this is 1 of them.

We can only act on the information we have at our fingertips today. One of my pieces of information is that frequent trading, at the scale of the market, is chiefly beneficial to the market makers and not to me. For me to trade frequently, I need to believe confidently that I am smarter than at least 50% of the money, by volume, in the market AND that I'm enough better to also pay the vig. And while that might or might not be true, it also means I need to invest what looks like close to full time effort to be smarter. Or luckier. I'm not betting on the luck, and I'm not willing to do a 2nd or 3rd full time job (job, school/degree, ..).

But on a long enough scale, the bias is heavily up for the overall market.

And the overall economy is heavily biased towards more sustainable/renewable, and less burning hydrocarbon liquids for energy and transportation. I want to be on the right side of that trend for many reasons - economic / personal gain being one of them.
 
What we CAN learn from those examples, is the kind of economic gain to be had when you have that clarity of insight; when you see something that the world doesn't yet see, and you buy and hold on. I don't know when the opportunities will arise, but I don't expect that I'll see something clearly very often. For me, Tesla is the biggest of those less than 1/year opportunities that I expect to see. In fact, I'm seeing really good investment options (as I define them) more like 2 or 3 per decade, and this is 1 of them.

^^^Great comment!

I'd do exactly the same thing with the information available at the time. In fact, that's more or less how I got into TSLA; I wanted a Model S so I started trading the volatility, and in doing so learned a lot about the company which converted me into a TSLA long.

What converted me to an AAPL long at the time was that the media and analyst coverage was so negative and out of touch with what I saw as the reality that it created an "opportunity gap". Not many people gave much consideration to the sum being much greater than the parts, yet everything Apple was doing reinforced all the other things they were doing and all the parts worked together really well. Plus, the company was beginning to have a well established history of disruption, punching way above its market share.

There are a lot of similarities between the two companies - the synergy between an iPod and iTunes is not far off that between EV's and Superchargers, supply chain innovation, company stores, vertical integration, visionary founder, poor media coverage and some "invincible" competitors.

Apple was not just a "computer manufacturer" then any more than Tesla is just a "car company" now - or Amazon is just an "e-commerce company" etc.
 
Last edited:
...

What converted me to an AAPL long at the time was that the media and analyst coverage was so negative and out of touch with what I saw as the reality that it created an "opportunity gap". Not many people gave much consideration to the sum being much greater than the parts, yet everything Apple was doing reinforced all the other things they were doing and all the parts worked together really well. Plus, the company was beginning to have a well established history of disruption, punching way above its market share.

....

This sounds like the beginning of an ah-hah that we can use in today's behavior and thought, to recognize tomorrow's "gee - I wish I'd bought and held forever" opportunities.

The opportunity gap as you called it is also something I see. What I see often around Tesla in particular, and EVs more generally, is that there is a paradigm shift between the old gas car and new electric car; Tesla as it is and Tesla just like any other car maker (sort of like how Apple was a computer manufacturer, just like Packard Bell :)).

Heck - I drive a Tesla, and I thought I understood how driving electric would be different. And it was still 6 months of driving the Roadster before I realized I had changed and really understood the paradigm shift. The problem is that if you're investing from the paradigm where Tesla builds cars, just like other car makers, then shorting the company is a totally rational and sane thing to do. It's just having the courage of your convictions.

The problem is your convictions are drawn from the wrong paradigm. And thus the opportunity for us early investors.

The day will arise where Tesla is huge and growing, but the information gap will have disappeared. That's probably where I personally will stop valuing Tesla as a growth company that is changing the world, and start evaluating Tesla on the basis of the cash returned to shareholders (dividends), and either divest or hold on the new basis for owning the company. I'm thinking 10 years is aggressive, and likely more like 20 years before that arises.
 
One of my pieces of information is that frequent trading, at the scale of the market, is chiefly beneficial to the market makers and not to me.
This is something I generally believe in. However, I have found that I make a lot more individual trades than I used to, though it's all one-directional (I don't do "in and out" moves). This is because I've gotten to the size where my orders might not be insignificant to the minute-by-minute movement. I'm accumulating shares while trying not to get elevated purchase prices due to putting an overly large order into the market all at once. An order to buy 1000 shares of TSLA seems small enough to avoid affecting the minute-by-minute market, but an order to buy 10000 shares of SCTY... not so great. An single order to sell 100 options of the same strike and expiration into the market is even worse.
 
This is something I generally believe in. However, I have found that I make a lot more individual trades than I used to, though it's all one-directional (I don't do "in and out" moves). This is because I've gotten to the size where my orders might not be insignificant to the minute-by-minute movement. I'm accumulating shares while trying not to get elevated purchase prices due to putting an overly large order into the market all at once. An order to buy 1000 shares of TSLA seems small enough to avoid affecting the minute-by-minute market, but an order to buy 10000 shares of SCTY... not so great. An single order to sell 100 options of the same strike and expiration into the market is even worse.

Heh - we all have our little crosses to carry :)

Your observation makes total sense to me, and I see as being completely consistent with the larger observation about infrequent trading.


It's also a problem Buffet's talked about in his Annual Letter to Shareholders. For Berkshire Hathaway, finding opportunities that can move the needle for Berkshire is tremendously difficult. AND being able to get into those opportunities while still maintaining the economics is even tougher. So Buffet thinks in terms of buying the #1 or #2 railroad in the country, and then getting it's capital investment program back on track - that's a place where he can deploy a LOT of money, and get a decent return on it.

It's still within the larger buy and hold good businesses - it's just that the details of you get into the holding of the good business is more difficult than it is for others.
 
  • Like
Reactions: neroden
I find that with the right time horizon, investing in Tesla requires very little in the way of a strong stomach.

I ask myself a version of the Apple or Google or Microsoft question - if only I'd known and bought <somebody or other> 20 years ago and held on all this time, look at where I'd be.
Thinking about it this way.... my grandmother did this with Standard Oil of New Jersey and Standard Oil of California in the *early 1950s*. I only sold those positions circa 2008. (You always need an exit strategy *eventually*....) She and her brother were given shares of Coca-Cola even earlier (in the 1920s IIRC) and her brother held them forever. She always kicked herself for selling her shares early... but at the time, she just didn't understand why anyone would want sugar water when they could drink gin. ;-)
 
Thinking about it this way.... my grandmother did this with Standard Oil of New Jersey and Standard Oil of California in the *early 1950s*. I only sold those positions circa 2008. (You always need an exit strategy *eventually*....) She and her brother were given shares of Coca-Cola even earlier (in the 1920s IIRC) and her brother held them forever. She always kicked herself for selling her shares early... but at the time, she just didn't understand why anyone would want sugar water when they could drink gin. ;-)

There we go - two more examples. And it seems to me that "all you need" (see how easy it is?) is the ability to see the major trends in society and civilization during one's life, and invest in leaders of those trends, and ride 'em roughly forever.

From the beginning of the 1900's, we have a big new energy source enabling all kinds of new activities and standard of living for civilization (oil). One of those big trends being consumerization (sugar water among others). I can see not getting the sugar water thing - she was operating from the wrong paradigm (gin is way better than sugar water!).

It seems to me that the big trend of today and the coming century is how we replace our dependence on our new found energy source (oil), with a new energy source that won't be used up - ever (ish). That will manifest in our production of energy (solar, wind, etc..). That will manifest in our storage of energy (batteries, pumped hydro - other ideas that have been kicked around elsewhere), and how we consume energy. Transportation is the biggie to get started, with personal transport the easiest.

Bigger scale logistics will need to follow.

I see agriculture as a smaller consumer by volume, but an industry that is wholly dependent on the energy we get from oil. Those vehicles will need to change.

And of course, air travel will eventually need to follow.

I foresee new energy consumption patterns of the future that are ridiculous in today's context. The two ideas I can think of, neither of which I know if they are feasible, affordable, or profitable or not, are desalination plants at a scale that beggars description (I'm thinking enough water being desalinated in California, to pump it uphill to the mountains and pour it out into the headwaters of different rivers, as a means of maintaining river levels and providing fresh clean water for agricultural purposes).

And plants - maybe today's refineries can be repurposed for this - that take excess renewable energy and use the Sabatier reaction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia to take carbon out of the air and turn it into Methane. Either as a form of energy storage, or even as a way to directly reduce carbon in the atmosphere and sequester it (by pumping it back into wells and closing them back up).


These trends will be occurring worldwide, with people outside of North America afforded the opportunity to bypass big hunks of infrastructure that we've built over the last century. And of course, the adoption of consumerization that we've already done, will be happening among a bigger and bigger population.

And we'll be coasting up to a population of 11B people from 7B today (Don’t Panic – The Facts About Population). Can we feed, water, clothe, and shelter that many people? Good thing that energy is getting cheaper within the world economy - maybe the left over economic activity that won't be going to produce the energy we use, can instead be taken up with the necessities of the additional 4B people we have coming.


I find that I am most of the time, excited to see what we do, and what marvels we accomplish in the coming decades of my life. I am occasionally dismayed and fearful of what we will do, but mostly positive that we will be excellent, and do amazing things.
 
The election year puts me in a fact checking mood, and I'm a glutton for calling people out. Sorry not sorry.


Doesn't have a Tesla


Doesn't have a Tesla

Has a Porshe

Suddenly has a Tesla Model S and a Prius (both hatch backs - keep that in mind for next post)



Has an S again

Never owned another American car - So no Tesla

A porshe or model S would be faster than 12s...both of which he supposedly owns (and at the same time doesn't own)


Back to not having a Tesla, or even wanting a model S


$6,000,000+ profit! Very nice....claim

I added this just because it amused me.


wow
strange he never came back to reply :confused:
 
  • Funny
Reactions: GoTslaGo
Whats even more crazy is you not owning any TSLA stonks.

Can’t believe you are telling on yourself like this.

Back in 2017 after we bought our first Telsa, we were so happy with it that we thought we should put some money into TSLA. But instead, we decided to put them into Merrill Lynch because we are Bank of America customers. We just checked last week and it grew by about 35%. If we bought TSLA instead, it would have grew by 5000%. <-- I hope I did my math right this time.
 
Back in 2017 after we bought our first Telsa, we were so happy with it that we thought we should put some money into TSLA. But instead, we decided to put them into Merrill Lynch because we are Bank of America customers. We just checked last week and it grew by about 35%. If we bought TSLA instead, it would have grew by 5000%. <-- I hope I did my math right this time.

Liquidate all that first thing Monday.

Switch portfolio to

33% TSLA
16% BPTRX (40% TSLA)
16% ARKK (10% TSLA)
33% ARKG
2% GTBC

Enjoy your future riches. :)