Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2016

[JRP3]

This is not a "rare" or "freak" accident. This kind of crash (T-boning crossing traffic) happens all the time on roads like this, and really has nothing to do with autopilot or Teslas.

To be clear I referred to this as a rare freak accident because hitting a tractor trailer exactly in the middle where the car passes under it and continues at speed is likely a statistically rare event, not because T-boning crossing traffic is rare.

 

[MitchJi]

As soon as there are strong indications, or definitive word, of the deal happening then for all intents and purposes SCTY and TSLA will trade in lock-step with the conversion factor decided upon in the deal. Otherwise there would be "free money" (arbitrage) to be had and the market won't allow it.

I don't think TSLA will necessarily follow SCTY. If SCTY spikes up due to shorts feeling forced to cover that means they'll get less TSLA stock than buying TSLA directly. I think what wil happen is that people will sell off their SCTY and those who want to own TSLA will buy TSLA at a discount which will tend to push TSLA up, but not necessarily in lock step.

 

[Johan]

I don't think TSLA will necessarily follow SCTY. If SCTY spikes up due to shorts feeling forced to cover that means they'll get less TSLA stock than buying TSLA directly. I think what wil happen is that people will sell off their SCTY and those who want to own TSLA will buy TSLA at a discount which will tend to push TSLA up, but not necessarily in lock step.

That's true. That was probably the reason my chain of thought seemed too good to be true.

 

[NOLA_Mike]

I don't think TSLA will necessarily follow SCTY. If SCTY spikes up due to shorts feeling forced to cover that means they'll get less TSLA stock than buying TSLA directly. I think what wil happen is that people will sell off their SCTY and those who want to own TSLA will buy TSLA at a discount which will tend to push TSLA up, but not necessarily in lock step.

This is true. And if SCTY enters some crazy short squeeze that artificially drives the price up significantly above the offering price I will happily provide liquidity to the covering shorts by selling them my shares.

Mike

 

[MitchJi]

That's true. That was probably the reason my chain of thought seemed too good to be true.

But if you are confident that the price of SCTY will be forced up you could still profit from the situation by buying SCTY calls assuming that they are still being sold. Two ways to profit, if TSLA goes up that will push SCTY up, plus the SCTY shorts pressure to cover. Am I missing anything?

 

[Johan]

But if you are confident that the price of SCTY will be forced up you could still profit from the situation by buying SCTY calls assuming that they are still being sold. Two ways to profit, if TSLA goes up that will push SCTY up, plus the SCTY shorts pressure to cover. Am I missing anything?

Yeah, I agree. I mean it must be that short interest in SCTY is increasing now primarily as a play on the deal falling through? I mean people are taking up short positions below the price where Tesla have offered to "buy" (swap against TSLA) all outstanding shares of SCTY.

I personally feel that the chances of the deal falling through are very, very slim.

 

[eloder]

Proven by whom? Please point me to some independent study, comparing apples to apples. Has the AP passed a DMV driving test yet, the very basic requirement to drive on public roads?
I saw Mobile Eye's response today. They stated, their system does not recognize perpendicular obstructions. We can have stopped traffic/train at any intersection. What then? It is not ready yet for self driving.

I'm all for smart cars to increase safety. Use it to limit excessive speeding, disable cars of frequent speeders, do emergency braking, blind spot warning, lane keeping, etc. In our city, we have fewer police patrol cars due to budget cuts. Young kids road racing in neighborhoods and other streets have already caused a few fatalities. Use tech to stop these, I'm all in on that. Letting someone drive at excessively high speeds on public roads on AP is not one of the features that increases safety on roads, IMHO.

Here's at least one probably fatal crash completely saved by Tesla autopilot, in a situation exactly like that of the fatality with the exception of the car being something AP is designed to sense versus something it is not designed to sense.

It doesn't matter that one person died in autopilot; it is most likely given current statistical information that far, far, far, FAR safer than having humans operating in conditions it is meant to operate under.

I don't understand your mentality in the slightest bit. Not one bit. Seatbelts are not 100% effective, but because fewer people die with seatbelts we use them. Airbags are not 100% effective, but because fewer people die with airbags we use them (even though airbags can explode and KILL passengers when they malfunction). Autopilot is not 100% effective, but because fewer people, but it most likely is--and will soon be proven to be--far safer than not using it.

Driver assist features do not have to be 100% safe to use, they just have to be safer than humans which is INCREDIBLY easy to do.

 

[pGo]

NYT article on the accident:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...-accident.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0

 

[Irishjugg]

LOL I am a long just looking for a rebuttal to the Bloomberg article. Feel free to ignore if you are that sensitive.

I like your handle btw

 

[postpast]

Here's at least one probably fatal crash completely saved by Tesla autopilot,

I think that is a bad example.

That accident was prevented by auto braking, a feature available on many cars including some Tesla that don't have autopilot. The ability for the car to "drive Itself" had no impact of the outcome of that video as a large percentage of cars that don;t have any type of AP would have acted to same.

Also I don't think the speed was enough for it to be near fatal and it seems likely a driver would have been able to avoid of at least migrate the damage from that accident easily.

 

[Irishjugg]

Look, I totally agree here and know a recall would be pointless. But what incentive does the director of the Center for Auto Safety have to say a recall is necessary? Chalk it up to total ignorance of autopilot? Either way I think on a short term movement thread it is important to discuss even if the chance of a recall is small.

I'm several pages behind, so someone may have answered you already, but this should help.

"The Center for Auto Safety was founded in 1970 by Consumers Union and Ralph Nader as a Washington, D.C.-based lobbying group focused on the United States automotive industry."

So, the Center for Auto Safety sounds official, but it's just a lobbying group or think tank. More importantly its a lobbying group for the major automotive brands. They are actively fighting to prevent Tesla from extending their lead in several ways, the most obvious of which being preventing them from selling cars in many states. You asked why the director of the Center for Auto Safety would say a recall is necessary? It would allow the other brands some semblance of hope to catch up in auto driving technology where they are currently behind to a massive degree.

 

[MitchJi]

Yeah, I agree. I mean it must be that short interest in SCTY is increasing now primarily as a play on the deal falling through? I mean people are taking up short positions below the price where Tesla have offered to "buy" (swap against TSLA) all outstanding shares of SCTY.

I don't understand that either.

I personally feel that the chances of the deal falling through are very, very slim.

I agree that the chances of the deal falling through are slim, but I would wait until the terms are finalized before making any large trades.

 

[SR22pilot]

I think that is a bad example.

That accident was prevented by auto braking, a feature available on many cars including some Tesla that don't have autopilot. The ability for the car to "drive Itself" had no impact of the outcome of that video as a large percentage of cars that don;t have any type of AP would have acted to same.

Also I don't think the speed was enough for it to be near fatal and it seems likely a driver would have been able to avoid of at least migrate the damage from that accident easily.

But this accident is about why didn't auto braking engage. The video where it does work has an object coming towards it that veers in front. This is very different from the Tesla fatal in question. In the video here the radar Doppler shift of the car will be different from the surrounding background. Only after the Tesla has stopped is the movement of the offending car completely lateral i.e. where the distance to the tesla changes at the same rate as a spot on the road. From an engineering point of view these cases are very different. The semi accident is a much tougher one to handle considering the limited hardware on the Tesla.

 

[JRP3]

From the NYT article:

The Tesla then ran off the road, hitting a fence and a power pole before coming to a stop.

The text from the graphic actually says it hit 2 fences, so it may have hit a total of 3 objects after the crash. Not exactly a car on autopilot "steering around objects".

 

[postpast]

But this accident is about why didn't auto braking engage. The video where it does work has an object coming towards it that veers in front. This is very different from the Tesla fatal in question. In the video here the radar Doppler shift of the car will be different from the surrounding background. Only after the Tesla has stopped is the movement of the offending car completely lateral i.e. where the distance to the tesla changes at the same rate as a spot on the road. From an engineering point of view these cases are very different. The semi accident is a much tougher one to handle considering the limited hardware on the Tesla.

Ok.. The comment I replied to, had the position that using AP was safer then not using AP and used a video of auto braking preventing a accident as proof. My comment was saying that auto braking is not proof that Auto pilot is safer than not, as they are unrelated.

 

[dc_h]

I'm several pages behind, so someone may have answered you already, but this should help.

"The Center for Auto Safety was founded in 1970 by Consumers Union and Ralph Nader as a Washington, D.C.-based lobbying group focused on the United States automotive industry."

So, the Center for Auto Safety sounds official, but it's just a lobbying group or think tank. More importantly its a lobbying group for the major automotive brands. They are actively fighting to prevent Tesla from extending their lead in several ways, the most obvious of which being preventing them from selling cars in many states. You asked why the director of the Center for Auto Safety would say a recall is necessary? It would allow the other brands some semblance of hope to catch up in auto driving technology where they are currently behind to a massive degree.

It's not always Tesla vs the world. Nadar is no crony. Ruined the Corvair and probably gave Japan an entry after ruining the most innovative small American car.

 

[techmaven]

From the NYT article:



The text from the graphic actually says it hit 2 fences, so it may have hit a total of 3 objects after the crash. Not exactly a car on autopilot "steering around objects".

Well, also not clear that the autopilot itself was even physically onboard anymore at that point.

 

[SR22pilot]

Ok.. The comment I replied to, had the position that using AP was safer then not using AP and used a video of auto braking preventing a accident as proof. My comment was saying that auto braking is not proof that Auto pilot is safer than not, as they are unrelated.

I wish people driving Atlanta's connector had AP and would use it. The speeds are high and the lanes narrow and people routinely stray into adjacent lanes. My Hyundai Genesis got hit by a dualie truck that couldn't stay in it's lane. Fortunately it was just rubber tire marks down the side of my car from the outer rear right side tire.

 

[EinSV]

I wish people driving Atlanta's connector had AP and would use it. The speeds are high and the lanes narrow and people routinely stray into adjacent lanes. My Hyundai Genesis got hit by a dualie truck that couldn't stay in it's lane. Fortunately it was just rubber tire marks down the side of my car from the outer rear right side tire.

Yikes! No "cringe" button here, but if there were it would be a good fit for this post

 

[Irishjugg]

It's not always Tesla vs the world. Nadar is no crony. Ruined the Corvair and probably gave Japan an entry after ruining the most innovative small American car.

I didn't say Nadar is a crony. I do think it is unlikely he still runs it, and that it hasn't changed how it operates in order to stay useful.

It may just be that they always call for recalls and immediate fixes to any perceived issue. I just wanted to make things clear that it wasn't some government agency or some agency that actually matters or makes decisions, but a think tank/lobbying group, despite the somewhat official sounding name.