-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
had a whole reply... deleted it... there's no reason to debate people nit picking at statistics... and making generalized headlines with the buzz word "Disruption" out of them.
"And BTW, what makes you believe that Krugerrand is a man?"
good point... nothing.
Technically if you wanted to do the "arbitrage" you would have needed to sell TSLA at the same time as buying SCTY therefore guaranteeing that profit as long as the sale closed.
Like you however I also only did half the transaction knowing that Tesla will eventually be at 250+ again and my profit would be 100/covered share instead of a measly 50
Here here!Doubt he'll come up with anything, but I can name one
With regards to myusername, I think you guys bash him a bit too much. Yes he has a clear point that he thinks the discounting of future earnings should be at a higher percentage due to execution risk. We all here differ on the % we use. I'd for example use something like 5-7% to do the DCF calculation, he most likely uses 20-30% because of the extreme execution risk. So we end up with different present value for TSLA and our thesis differ. However the good part is that as the future earnings turn into present earnings the obfuscation of discounting % disappears and we both will converge on the actual price. He's just tons more conservative than we are and doesn't believe in the full growth plan as we do. But he's one of the most reasonable short representatives I've seen here.
I'd also like to point out that it was him who pointed our attention to the recent step-ladder behaviour that was actually something you could trade on (and I have making very nice gains in options). So he can be bullish as well and while not all his predictions have panned out a fair number have been reasonably close and technically articulated. So I'd say he does provide a valuable counterpoint to the generic enthusiasm and is far less trolling than most shorts we've had come through here.
who's the "they" you're referring to?... i'm wondering that myself... but I see it as "it".
there is one line in a chart for the last 20 days that has completely dominated the trading... unless you guys have a Bat Phone where every time it approaches that line... it calls out "Buy"... then you guys jump in and buy at the same time...
then it's one bot... one algo... one institution that has literally moved this stock 22% from $180 to $220.
or it's multiple institutions with a bat phone... but you either believe in a bat phone... or you believe in massive stock manipulation by ONE entity.
TSLA is owned... and the owner decided to move it to $220... that's it... it's not Panasonic... Trump... or even Tesla.
It was you wasn't it? You are wielding billions of $$$ and just toying with us, aren't you?
(Could you let us know when you're done, please... in advance... thx)
Just curious, but what would your sane world price be for Tesla today roughly? That is if Tesla was valued by the market the same way your thesis values it, about where do you think the price would be?
Not going to troll you or argue just trying to get myself a good lower bound for reasonable negative sentiment. Will help in my mid term valuation.
Wonder how much longer your magic chart pattern will hold up, been rather profitable for many of us here, I assume you included.
I'm considering selling a few shares on Dec 31 or whatever the last trading day is before New year's. Seems to be a trend of December climbs and Jan falls to Tesla that I may try capatilize on.
And shorts lying about APPL made huge swings in the SP fairly frequently so it was never a steady rise up. I still keep expecting to see some fake article about the impending death of Steve Jobs, though they proved that after a few hundred times it lost its umph so that when Jobs actually died there was not much effect on APPL. Once TSLA gets to the point where they can no longer attack it based on facetious arguments about product and markets they will switch to EM being the weak point.
I
The large market on close orders that correspond to the up days only seem to support the idea.
think the institution/hedgies not wanting to show a loss on it theory is pretty reasonable. Could be Implicit collusion. No actual contact but they all want the same thing and a few started the pattern, the rest just jump in.
The large market on close orders that correspond to the up days only seem to support the idea.
eh... my lower bound is really low... but if there were a similar drop equal to last year I wouldn't rule out $120.
Last edited:
sundaymorning
Active Member
Can't wait for delivery numbers could be fireworks in the making. Holding onto everything pat and firm.
Mario Kadastik
Active Member
The drop in early 2016 was because everyone and their uncle was touting that TSLA will run out of cash within a few months and is likely to go belly up. The math was done extensively on when they need to raise a secondary and what the implications are etc etc so that pre ER the thing had gotten so bad on various analysis and news sites, that most people believed the worst case scenario. That's what sold it to 140 and as the ER showed a decent cash situation and plans for moving forward the shareprice quickly recovered to 200+ region. This is no longer the case now, we know what their cash cushion is, we know they have good lines to keep it flowing and they are showing operational cash flow that dampens the need for external funds. Such a huge drop is unlikely to just happen again early 2017.
racer26
Active Member
I sure hope the fireworks come - I've got some J17@370 calls that were bought back in the summer (on the share recall-short squeeze theory) that have been so far underwater they couldn't even pay for the commission to sell them for the last 4 months or so. Be nice if I could at least get some of my money back out of them.
I wonder though, if this rise we've seen isn't simply the market pricing in a high chance of success on meeting guidance? Will the news itself maybe fizzle instead of bang?
racer26
Active Member
Premarket hitting 222 a few minutes before open is starting to look like a climb above the upper trendline on @myusername's graphs. Today's also the first day we open after a close above SMA(200) since the summer. Could be interesting.
then why did it happen before the Feb ER with blowout 4Q15 sales numbers?... it was a general market sell off... it wasn't related to Tesla.
MitchJi
Trying to learn kindness, patience & forgiveness
My wish too! Many thanks to the shorts and fudster's!
Up over $4!
That didn't last long!
Last edited:
98k shares were borrowed for shorting at Fidelity starting at 8:18am before open, another 236k available. It seems that there is less appetite for shorting than yesterday.
Mario Kadastik
Active Member
As I said, cashflow. It wasn't related to the actual sold cars etc, the main question on everyones mind was TSLA-s cash pile and cash burn rate. So all tied together with the market downturn seriously magnified the drop to 140. The ER if I remember alleviated most of the burn issues + showed new ABL-s etc so the big cashflow burn rate issue was resolved and things recovered fast. One would have to go and start digging through old SA etc articles on what the main scaremongering was, but it wasn't far from people re-implementing the TSLA death watch
racer26
Active Member
Did the short action pick up since the open, or was that $2+ drop weak longs taking profit?
$2 is noise... if THE thing that's supporting these $10 weekly jumps wasn't continuing to support it... it would crater... 75 RSI... 20%+ in a month...
ever hear anyone say "the stock market is rigged"?... think they ever actually saw evidence?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
