Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2013

[mershaw2001]

Tapering means that the Fed will be buying treasury bonds from the large banks at a slower pace, perhaps at first 75% of the current rate. It doesn't mean that they will immediately stop the purchases. The bonds are bought with money newly created by the Fed. The electronic payments for bonds are money because the Fed says so. This is sometimes euphemistically referred to as printing money. The Fed's intention has been to boost the economy. However, while the economy has been growing at a slower than hoped pace, much of that new money has been winding up in the stock market. If the economy perks up, more of that money will be spent on the consumption of goods and services (including Model S's). That will boost corporate profits. Money will circulate more rapidly, obviating the need for more to be created. Much of that would be invested in companies with swelling profits. Of course for every stock buyer there is a seller who can spend the proceeds on either consumption goods or another investment. The economic growth feeds on itself. I wouldn't worry about tapering, despite the gloom spread by media pundits with political agendas that leads to occasional market corrections. Wise investors know how to take advantage of those who throw them curveballs.

Thanks Curt!
DaveT, as far as seeing it remain in the 130's: I think we just got a large short position added to this stock on the day before the market dropped 200 points. If there's a rebound in the market, then I think we'll be seeing tesla go right back up to 150. I think we have tremendous news: Added to indices, Q3 going ok. I don't see tesla as overvalued at 140 or 150, and if fund managers are adding at 125/130 and they are looking for 100% profits in the future, not 10% profits, then they don't see it as undervalued either.

As far as the company being in the same position as before: I don't agree with that completely.
1) we've seen the competition, it isn't good (BMW i3).
2) tesla's new hybrid battery patents
3) Beat Q2 and looking good for Q3.
and I think it's important to add that the stock is not the same as it was before. Finding fund managers eager to buy in between 100 and 130 makes this have tremendous staying power and support. There's no way that with the contrafund buying in at over 100/share we'll ever see the numbers tossed out on sites like seekingalpha. The only way that would happen is with a disaster at the factory or equivalent.

 

[AlMc]

I posted this on Aug 5 a few days prior to Q2 ER as just some speculation. Most of it was incorrect (thus I'm not saying I called anything)... we went into earnings below $135 and we got a pop but not as high as I was expecting (partially because I think we entered ER lower than $145 and partially because guidance wasn't raised like I was hoping). But what's interesting is what I wrote about the possibility of the stock trading at $135-140 the week after ER:
"Then, stock drops in following week to $135-140 as people realize earnings was good but company is still in similar position as before."

I wonder if that's what really happened or not. Did people realize earnings was good but the company is still in similar position as before, thus deflating some of the expectations and enthusiasm that was fueling the pre-Q2 ER runup? Just some food for thought.

That would be my opinion as well. This is a momentum stock as you have mentioned. EM planted the seed for keeping the stock/company moving forward by indicating he would release a series of reports that would be of interest to the TM community about the company. We all waited in anticipation for Q1, Q2 and these strategically released tidbits. Now there appears to be little to spark 'new' interest until Q3 earnings.
I have no quantitative analysis skills! However, I believe the stock will short term trade in a pattern of 130s and mid 140s for several weeks pending some large good or bad announcement about TM or the US/World economy. As we approach Q3 then we get a slow steady run up to 160-70 level. If good Q3 report then bump to 180. I will be VERY happy if we see a stabilization in 180-90 range by year end.

Short of the announcement of weekly production consistently 700-800 cars/week; or early introduction of X or prototype of Gen III being introduced with the reservation for said car being opened up, I don't see 200/share.

 

[Julian Cox]

I don't know about that. I've written a few lucid, articulate, and factual comments rebutting SA's outlandish negative remarks regarding TSLA, only to have them not published or removed. This behavior does not show integrity. It only proves that they have an agenda to slander. Plus my inbox is flooded with negative articles lately.... But I just smile to myself as I press the delete button and think, "poor little shorts losing their shirts making me some money!"

As a result of their actions I think Seeking Alpha is garbage.

There is assuredly an issue with Seeking Alpha that goes beyond courting controversy for clicks.

Petersen is very sure that he is able to instruct the moderators to do his bidding despite zero credibility on the subject of Tesla and frequently being called out on his undisclosed conflict of interest. (BTW Axion's Q2 call specifically denies any reasonable prospect of BMW placing the "big order" and goes almost as far as to insult BMW and the like as time wasters, no doubt sealing the fate on Petersen's cornerstone pumping argument for AXPW vs Tesla).

Positive TSLA articles are very difficult to publish on SA. I had to nail them to the wall repeatedly to publish precisely two entirely fact and information based pieces, zero hype - took 72 hours of argument to get them to publish the first (the one that got credited on these boards as the best article written on the subject) and greeted on SA itself as a MAster Thesis on ivesting in Tesla. It took 24 hours of argument over the message content contained in the second. Poorly written Negative articles lacking all logical consistency appear on SA within 15 minutes of the news they ostensibly discuss.

Negative undeducated and repetitive garbage with sensationalist and even libelous headlines and content - what is it 4 today. "Fairy Tale" "April Fools Joke"

Negative ad-hominem trolling and misleading content has a free pass while intelligent and well referenced rebuttals of negative trolling are aggressively moderated.

I have received two messages in the past 24 hours from folk interested in contacting the SEC regards SA prompted by unbalanced comment moderation.


I was banned from Seeking Alpha without satisfactory explanation at the head of a bear attack that accompanied the publication of the $84 GS report. The next article that came up on SA thereafter had a headline claiming that $84 was a downgrade (previously GS PT was $61 - really). This same anonymous author (Odysseus) was apparently encouraged to declare a bogus 12% sales decrease followed by a garbage-filled rebuttal to Doghertys $200 analysis.

I suspect quite strongly that my on SA was paid for and I have an idea whom to refer to the SEC to (not Petersen, at least not for this reason). The problem for Seeking Alpha is that my silence was not theirs to sell.

 

[Citizen-T]

I am hopeful for tomorrow. I rolled the dice and bought some Aug $140s near the close for $1.22.

BTW, yes, this is gambling, not investing. I basically just put a few dollars on black and spun the wheel. I didn't post about this move before hand because I didn't want anyone following me. Don't try to take away any lesson from this if I end up winning big. Now, if I lose it all (very likely) then maybe there is a lesson for us both to learn in that. =P

 

[Jack6591]

Any feedback on Ken Heebner buying into Tesla?

 

[brianstorms]

Any feedback on Ken Heebner buying into Tesla?

What took him so long?

 

[Julian Cox]

Any feedback on Ken Heebner buying into Tesla?

Yes, this fits a pattern I described a few messages ago - a change in character of TSLA from a pure story stock to a momentum stock. Profit taking from high risk high reward plays, and in inflow of serious players that won't invest in startup risk. Tesla is clearly out of its startup risk phase.

Note that the bear arguments in the market are very often from those claiming to have no position. The arguments are generally rehashed pre-earnings gripes that did not work out for the shorts, or sour grapes over Non-GAAP. Basically folks irate that they got it wrong and lost their shirts. Overvalued - there is no such thing, there is a market value.

It is also telling that even the most bearish on CNBC or online state: Don't short the stock. Confident that TSLA will shake off volatility and go on a sensible growth tragectory in the buy and hold direction of $400 over 3 years.

 

[brianstorms]

By the way he apparently bought 215,000 shares (worth around $30 million) [1]


[1] http://www.gurufocus.com/StockBuy.php?GuruName=Ken+Heebner

 

[AlMc]

Any feedback on Ken Heebner buying into Tesla?

I have not heard this. Any link/further info. I know he is not afraid to short stocks. Would be interested in how he is investing as I have a few $ in CGM Focus.

 

[smorgasbord]

(not Petersen, at least not for this reason). The problem for Seeking Alpha is that my silence was not theirs to sell.

Even if you don't believe in conspiracies, SA makes money off of Petersen and for that they give him wide leeway, including even letting him break SA's own rules on writing articles on penny stocks, such as Axion.

BTW, the great thing about Axion continues to be that every couple of months you get to buy it at the new all-time low. ;^)

 

[MikeC]

Every time I read a Julian Cox post I have the strange urge to buy more TSLA. Anxiously awaiting my direct deposit paycheck before the stock jumps again, at this point I seem to be basically working for shares.

I would have had no idea what SeekingAlpha was if it didn't show up on my iPhone ticker every time I check TSLA. Ridiculous that people can post under anonymous names like Odysseus, at least JP uses his real name.

 

[Mr. Farmer]

This morning I missed out on buying on the $135 dip.

Me too!!! I thought you guys would bid the shares up premarket and I wouldn't get a chance to pivot. Coulda had a 400% profit on my 135 puts but I slept in. Sold half for +100% around 139 and bought some 140 calls for tomorrow in case there was a share offering or something.

There was more buying interest than selling triggered today. The selling was triggered by daytraders going short in the morning and hitting other's stop losses. The buying was based on the "lockup news" being completly false, and speculation that a share offering may drive the price up again since the lockup that applied to TSLA no longer does. This happened in the morning, the daytraders (and possibly some small fry longer term bears) covered their shorts and then went long. They closed their positions at the end of the day... So don't worry about sentiment, their isn't any - most of these are probably robots. By my estimates they account for about $70M in buying power per day, so these will probably dwarf any other purchases or sales by retail investors.

The good news: Even if there's some bad news tomorrow, the bots will short and won't be able to trigger any stop losses unless people who are holding shares for the longer term start to sell (or if there's more shorting than usual). People haven't been doing this until they start losing money, and there's a $5 buffer until the next wave do. However I think you'll see the shares bid up in the premarket, the bots start the day long, and you may see a high of $145-6 before petering off towards the days open.

The bad news: I personally think this stock will be in limbo for awhile, and it's not a good idea to be on the buy side of options at this point given the anticipation of high volatility that may not be there. Also I think the risks are to the downside into the 120's, but you probably won't see a massive sell off tomorrow.

 

[sleepyhead]

I posted this on Aug 5 a few days prior to Q2 ER as just some speculation. Most of it was incorrect (thus I'm not saying I called anything)... we went into earnings below $135 and we got a pop but not as high as I was expecting (partially because I think we entered ER lower than $145 and partially because guidance wasn't raised like I was hoping). But what's interesting is what I wrote about the possibility of the stock trading at $135-140 the week after ER:
"Then, stock drops in following week to $135-140 as people realize earnings was good but company is still in similar position as before."

I wonder if that's what really happened or not. Did people realize earnings was good but the company is still in similar position as before, thus deflating some of the expectations and enthusiasm that was fueling the pre-Q2 ER runup? Just some food for thought.

Ok, I am going to say it because nobody on this forum has even considered this possibility:

The reason for the Tesla sell-off post earnings was/is the supplier bottleneck. Elon said that it will take 6 months to sort it out. They just delivered 5150 vehicles and guided towards 5000 in Q3, and the market extrapolated another 6000 in Q4 (based on 21,000 guidance for full year).

Going into earnings there was evidence that Tesla was producing at a 25,000 - 30,000 annualized rate. So the market was extrapolating 23,000 for FY13, and since they didn't get it the stock sold off.

The reason for this sell-off is that the market figures it will have almost 6 months of minimal growth from Tesla (production pretty much the same, high margin growth offset by low ZEV revenue). So the market thinks that it will be able to buy back TSLA at the same price towards the end of the year. And there is no reason to hold, since you are exposed to execution risk as well as other risks.

Tesla simply can't grow fast enough to justify its stock price in the short run.

 

[Jonathan Hewitt]

Ok, I am going to say it because nobody on this forum has even considered this possibility:

The reason for the Tesla sell-off post earnings was/is the supplier bottleneck. Elon said that it will take 6 months to sort it out. They just delivered 5150 vehicles and guided towards 5000 in Q3, and the market extrapolated another 6000 in Q4 (based on 21,000 guidance for full year).

Going into earnings there was evidence that Tesla was producing at a 25,000 - 30,000 annualized rate. So the market was extrapolating 23,000 for FY13, and since they didn't get it the stock sold off.

The reason for this sell-off is that the market figures it will have almost 6 months of minimal growth from Tesla (production pretty much the same, high margin growth offset by low ZEV revenue). So the market thinks that it will be able to buy back TSLA at the same price towards the end of the year. And there is no reason to hold, since you are exposed to execution risk as well as other risks.

Tesla simply can't grow fast enough to justify its stock price in the short run.

I think that's quite logical. I was considering it and even told my work buddies that it could be a major reason short term for downward or sideways movement when they asked me if "now" is a good time to buy or not.

 

[Citizen-T]

Ok, I am going to say it because nobody on this forum has even considered this possibility:

The reason for the Tesla sell-off post earnings was/is the supplier bottleneck. Elon said that it will take 6 months to sort it out. They just delivered 5150 vehicles and guided towards 5000 in Q3, and the market extrapolated another 6000 in Q4 (based on 21,000 guidance for full year).

Going into earnings there was evidence that Tesla was producing at a 25,000 - 30,000 annualized rate. So the market was extrapolating 23,000 for FY13, and since they didn't get it the stock sold off.

The reason for this sell-off is that the market figures it will have almost 6 months of minimal growth from Tesla (production pretty much the same, high margin growth offset by low ZEV revenue). So the market thinks that it will be able to buy back TSLA at the same price towards the end of the year. And there is no reason to hold, since you are exposed to execution risk as well as other risks.

Tesla simply can't grow fast enough to justify its stock price in the short run.

You might be right that it hasn't been discussed but I thought for sure we've talked about the guidance as being disappointing. I think the sell-off has to do with more than that though. I think it hasn't been a hot topic around here because we've been on to that since at least Teslive.

I know for me personally, the supply bottlenecks are the number 1 thing on my radar since I heard Elon mention it at Teslive. I spent some time thinking about it though and I still believe they are sandbagging Q3 production.

 

[AlMc]

Ok, I am going to say it because nobody on this forum has even considered this possibility:

The reason for the Tesla sell-off post earnings was/is the supplier bottleneck. Elon said that it will take 6 months to sort it out. They just delivered 5150 vehicles and guided towards 5000 in Q3, and the market extrapolated another 6000 in Q4 (based on 21,000 guidance for full year).

Going into earnings there was evidence that Tesla was producing at a 25,000 - 30,000 annualized rate. So the market was extrapolating 23,000 for FY13, and since they didn't get it the stock sold off.

The reason for this sell-off is that the market figures it will have almost 6 months of minimal growth from Tesla (production pretty much the same, high margin growth offset by low ZEV revenue). So the market thinks that it will be able to buy back TSLA at the same price towards the end of the year. And there is no reason to hold, since you are exposed to execution risk as well as other risks.

Tesla simply can't grow fast enough to justify its stock price in the short run.

Agreed. This is what my non analytic post alluded to....I believe with no big announcements we are in a lull period for TSLA because everyone has built in the expectations to price for 2013. If the expectations are exceeded (number of units delivered/gross margins increase) or notice that the battery/supply chain bottleneck is significantly improved or announcement that X is closer/has big surge in reservations/Gen III has prototype introduction with opening of reservations/scheduled start of production date earlier than previously published then and only then, we would see a surge into the 170 and beyond in TSLA price.

 

[aznt1217]

Actually... I mentioned the supply bottlenecks and also mentioned what Tesla could do to solve it. Like Citizen T I also think the q3 numbers are being sandbagged for this reason: underpromise, over deliver but stretch your goals internally.

Elon said that they have to stop being stupid about production. Something to that effect. For me this has to do with the outsourced parts. Things like USB cables stuck in customs, carpets being stuck in Mexico, lack of door handles, etc. these commodity parts are what I believe to be holding up cars. The third party suppliers for some reason haven't caught up yet.

Tesla makes like nearly all parts in house. What they need to do to stop these bottlenecks is to send engineers or someone on Gilbert's team to make these suppliers more efficient. That's what world class companies like Toyota, Honda, and Nissan do.

 

[sleepyhead]

What I meant to say is that nobody here has mentioned the supply bottlenecks as the reason for TSLA sell-off (and I have read every post in this thread for the past couple hundred pages). Even though it is and will be a great company, it's growth is limited in the short run and the market has no incentive to bid up the price until there is proof of exponential growth).

I know it has been talked about and is a concern/annoyance, but I haven't seen anyone post about this being the reason for the sell-off.

 

[FredTMC]

Regarding Elon's comment at Teslive about battery production capacity... My takeaway was that Elon was referring to battery production constraints with respect to Gen III ONLY. Love to hear if someone thought differently.

This being said, there have been plenty of statements from TM about current supplier issues but I don't think Panasonic was one of the ones TM was referring to...

 

[Jack6591]

Oil soars on Egypt turmoil, tops $110 per barrel

- - - Updated - - -

Oil soars on Egypt turmoil, tops $110 per barrel

I live my life by a simple creed. I do not threaten, and I will not be threatened.

The short side of Tesla is FUD. While I do not advocate fear as a motivator, I do believe in fighting fire with fire. It is time that grin and fight.