Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2015

[dc_h]

Jon Fortt (@jonfortt) | Twitter
Let him know the error of his ways.

 

[Drax7]

Elon is an insider, he bought his own stock recently ,
does that have predictive value?

Or was it sentiment manipulation ?

 

[aznt1217]

Elon is an insider, he bought his own stock recently ,
does that have predictive value?

Or was it sentiment manipulation ?

It was part of the secondary offering.

 

[Drax7]

It was part of the secondary offering.

He volunteered to buy it, to express his confidence in the business.

 

[Bobbyducati]

what a roller coaster today. been able to move a few options for some small gains but i really want to exit out most of them this week. Id rather watch this from the sidelines.

 

[clmason]

He volunteered to buy it, to express his confidence in the business.

I don't have the exact specifics handy, but somewhere in his bank line agreement there is a stipulation that he is required to maintain a certain percentage of ownership in TSLA. Therefore when TSLA does a secondary offering he has to buy in as well to maintain his ownership percentage. And I believe that is the reason he has bought into each secondary since the IPO.

 

[jhm]

Morgan Stanley is out reiterating their $465 price target inside a piece assessing "VW Emissions: Raises Questions Over Internal Combustion Sustainability". They allude to CO2 $/gram reductions, and other blood from stone analogies about the ICE. More generally, I think they get it right about the influence the VW scandal is going to have on both the tightening of compliance testing, as well as potentially amplifying the ZEV/BEV/PHEV credit regimes, globally.

Some might believe folding seats are at play, but I'd factor in some under-current of "sector reallocation" coming Tesla's way regardless of this announcement. The "street" might be coming a little closer to Jesus on "gr / mile" and electricity vs. ICE. That can't hurt.

I've heard that VW was avoiding upwards of $8000 in incremental cost per vehicle for emissions equipment. It is doubtful whether consumers would have been willing to bear that cost, which of course is the rationale for cheating. VW avoided upto $88B in cost on 11M vehicles!

But to place this within the context of competition with batteries, $8k per car buys you alot of batteries, 40 to 50 kWh if you're Tesla. So what if tougher testing post VW Emissions fraud leads to an extra $4k or so per car in incremental compliance cost plus drag on performance? This leads to a market place where EVs reach cost parity much faster. Put another way, emissions cheating has put Tesla at an unfair disadvantage all along. Clearing the air should force a higher valuation of Tesla.

 

[dalalsid]

The only way to outperform a buy and hold strategy for any given stock over time is to have access to real insider information. Even if you do it's hard.

Outperforming a market index over time is also very difficult, but can be done by understanding things better than the average investor (for example being overweight TSLA and renewables).

You are joking about the renewables bit, right ?

 

[Johan]

You are joking about the renewables bit, right ?

Did you see my "over time" qualifier?

 

[doggusfluffy]

Volkswagen to refit cars affected by emissions scandal

New Chief Executive Matthias Mueller said the German carmaker would tell customers in the coming days they would need to have diesel vehicles with illegal software refitted, a move which some analysts have said could cost more than $6.5 billion.

 

[RobStark]

I've heard that VW was avoiding upwards of $8000 in incremental cost per vehicle for emissions equipment.

A Chevy Cruze Diesel with urea injection device that is emissions compliant is about $4k more than a Jetta TDI.

And VW has far greater economies of scale for diesel passenger vehicles.

 

[Perfectlogic]

The only way to outperform a buy and hold strategy for any given stock over time is to have access to real insider information. Even if you do it's hard.

Outperforming a market index over time is also very difficult, but can be done by understanding things better than the average investor (for example being overweight TSLA and renewables).

Ofcourse you can outperform a single stock trading it just like you can outperfom an index, and you don't need insider information. Actually believing you can outperform an index, but not a single stock is irrational as you would have to believe in an imperfect market to believe you can beat any part of it, and if you do make that assumption, it is possible to beat every part of it.

 

[Johan]

Ofcourse you can outperform a single stock trading it just like you can outperfom an index, and you don't need insider information. Actually believing you can outperform an index, but not a single stock is irrational as you would have to believe in an imperfect market to believe you can beat any part of it, and if you do make that assumption, it is possible to beat every part of it.

Yes you can, my point is it's a lot harder than most think. Empirical studies show that not even the best traders or the most expensive manager outperform in the long run, neither the market nor when it comes to individual stock. But report back on how you did!

 

[Perfectlogic]

Yes you can, my point is it's a lot harder than most think. Empirical studies show that not even the best traders or the most expensive manager outperform in the long run, neither the market nor when it comes to individual stock. But report back on how you did!

I agree that it is extremely hard, much harder than many [want to] believe. Yes studies shows that even among the paid professionals, only a very small part of them actually does better than an index fund that is much cheaper.

 

[emupilot]

It's difficult though not impossible to beat a buy and hold strategy,
based on predicting all sorts of zig zags.
On an after tax basis , forget about it, your performance worsens.
Though keep trying and good fortune, some do outperform.

A year ago, TSLA was trading at about the level it is at right now, but my TSLA portfolio is up 20% over that time. TSLA is the only stock I attempt this with because I am obsessed with Tesla and I can be better informed (thanks in large part to TMC threads like this one) than the average investor. Although I attempt to predict how TSLA will move a couple months into the future, it's mostly just buying as the stock goes down and selling as it goes up (volatility is awesome!) while keeping a long-term core holding. I agree completely that it wouldn't be worth doing this on a taxable account - I only use tax deferred for TSLA.

 

[Scott Ales]

I've heard that VW was avoiding upwards of $8000 in incremental cost per vehicle for emissions equipment. It is doubtful whether consumers would have been willing to bear that cost, which of course is the rationale for cheating. VW avoided upto $88B in cost on 11M vehicles!

But to place this within the context of competition with batteries, $8k per car buys you alot of batteries, 40 to 50 kWh if you're Tesla. So what if tougher testing post VW Emissions fraud leads to an extra $4k or so per car in incremental compliance cost plus drag on performance? This leads to a market place where EVs reach cost parity much faster. Put another way, emissions cheating has put Tesla at an unfair disadvantage all along. Clearing the air should force a higher valuation of Tesla.

As important are the averaging benefits toward their CAFE requirements. Meaning, the diesels allowed them to produce the pigs and make more money on them! Without them the rest of their fleet no longer qualifies the entire company lineup.

 

[dalalsid]

I agree that it is extremely hard, much harder than many [want to] believe. Yes studies shows that even among the paid professionals, only a very small part of them actually does better than an index fund that is much cheaper.

So the way to beat index A is with index B which has a track record of beating index A over a given time period. e.g. if you want to beat the S&P 500, you get RSP (it even contains the same stocks). I don't think there is any 5 year period in which SPY has beaten RSP. What I wonder is that if equal weighting improves the performance so much, what would inverse weighting do?

 

[austinEV]

Nobody can time the market, if somebody could they wouldn't be on these forums lol

In fairness, some people timed the market got rich and got bored with TMC and left. So you are right but but missing the point

 

[30seconds]

Volkswagen to refit cars affected by emissions scandal

I bet they will need to extend warranties as well

 

[jhm]

As important are the averaging benefits toward their CAFE requirements. Meaning, the diesels allowed them to produce the pigs and make more money on them! Without them the rest of their fleet no longer qualifies the entire company lineup.

Good point! So per Rob's comparison with the Chevy Cruze, if VW had to put another $8k on the Jetta, they would have priced it right out of the market. And then with your point that would have impaired them on CAFE standards. This begins to look like a scenario where the only VW is hard pressed to do anything but cheat.

I think as we come to understand the actual reasons why VW cheated, we'll see a very desperate company.