-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
mejojo
Active Member
Welcome to the Cone of Sock Puppets.
Chief: "Do you hear that echo?"
Max: "The what?"
Chief: "The echo! The echo!"
Max: "Now I hear it, Chief!"
That would be reasonable scenario. If Tesla only meet guidance 17K in Q2, then 1st half will deliver about 32K cars. It remains 48K in 2nd half to meet full year guidance. There will be some room to increase from 17K in Q3/Q4 because of X production improvement, say 20K for each quarter. I expect market will think it's bad news if Q2 guidance just met and we'll soon see full year guidance cut in Q2 ER. Around that time, it would provide perfect buying opportunity.
If you (like me) are wondering how on earth so many short sellers could still be clinging to their positions despite the avalanche of bad (for them) news over the past couple months, it turns out there is a recent study that shows that even very sophisticated institutional short sellers suffer from the same behavioral biases that plague individual investors, especially the tendency to hang on to losers too long and sell winners too quickly: https://www.federalreserve.gov/econresdata/ifdp/2015/files/ifdp1147.pdf. This is probably old news to investors who have been around the block but I thought it was interesting.
Here is the conclusion:
7. Conclusion We study whether traders traditionally considered to be rational, sophisticated and better informed – the short sellers – suffer from behavioral biases and whether this affects the stock market. We focus on the disposition effect (Shefrin and Statman (1985)). Using a new dataset on stock lending for all U.S. stocks from 2004 to 2010, we are able to examine the closing of short positions. We show that short sellers exhibit the disposition effect – i.e. they hold on to their losing positions too long and close their winning positions too early. We establish this by demonstrating two facts: first, the closing of short sale positions is strongly related to a proxy of Short Sale Capital Gains Overhang (SCGO). Second, SCGO is negatively related to future stock returns, which implies that short sellers are losing money by conditioning their closing of short positions on SCGO. The negative relationship between SCGO and future stock returns is consistent with the model of Grinblatt and Han (2005) adapted to short sellers. It suggests that short sellers, rather than arbitraging away the mispricing induced by the disposition effect, are biased to trade in the same direction as long investors. In this sense, short sellers’ disposition effect can be thought of as a limit to arbitrage.
Here is the conclusion:
7. Conclusion We study whether traders traditionally considered to be rational, sophisticated and better informed – the short sellers – suffer from behavioral biases and whether this affects the stock market. We focus on the disposition effect (Shefrin and Statman (1985)). Using a new dataset on stock lending for all U.S. stocks from 2004 to 2010, we are able to examine the closing of short positions. We show that short sellers exhibit the disposition effect – i.e. they hold on to their losing positions too long and close their winning positions too early. We establish this by demonstrating two facts: first, the closing of short sale positions is strongly related to a proxy of Short Sale Capital Gains Overhang (SCGO). Second, SCGO is negatively related to future stock returns, which implies that short sellers are losing money by conditioning their closing of short positions on SCGO. The negative relationship between SCGO and future stock returns is consistent with the model of Grinblatt and Han (2005) adapted to short sellers. It suggests that short sellers, rather than arbitraging away the mispricing induced by the disposition effect, are biased to trade in the same direction as long investors. In this sense, short sellers’ disposition effect can be thought of as a limit to arbitrage.
Causalien
Prime 8 ball Oracle
Can we move on from the demand issue since we will not get the proof until next Feb. I want to read something else the repeated debate a out the same thing is tuning me autistic.
BTW tftf, now that you appeared again. You lost the bet with me on Gigafactory. It is online now. 1 year early. You owe me steak dinner. I want a prime grade sirloin steak 3 inches thick, medium rare.
BTW tftf, now that you appeared again. You lost the bet with me on Gigafactory. It is online now. 1 year early. You owe me steak dinner. I want a prime grade sirloin steak 3 inches thick, medium rare.
I'm guessing tftf will never payup. Let me know if he does - I'll send you a bottle of red to go with for your public service in reducing nonsense on this board.
tesla now issued more than 8000 X production vins, more than 2900 X sig vins and around 100 X founder vins
lots lots US X holders, all asia and EU production X holders even don't have vins, and lots lots potential customers are waitting test driving
You said this year's X demand only 15000????!!!
Last edited:
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
OK, I've just created a new thread titled Demand Demand
I suggest any and all posts mentioning demand be placed there to unclutter the Short Term thread, unless there is some actual significant change in demand, backed up by data, that might actually influence the stock price. I also suggest alerting the Mods to move any "demand" related posts that appear in this thread over to that one. Thank you.
I suggest any and all posts mentioning demand be placed there to unclutter the Short Term thread, unless there is some actual significant change in demand, backed up by data, that might actually influence the stock price. I also suggest alerting the Mods to move any "demand" related posts that appear in this thread over to that one. Thank you.
MartinAustin
Active Member
Great idea JRP3. With the number of bears in this forum I know there will be demand for that thread.
The new thread would be appreciated. I visit less as it appears I can come back every other day, scroll through 10 pages and be at the same place in the 'demand debate'
Thanks JRRP
Thanks JRRP
When you say "alert the Mods" I assume you mean "report" the post, right?
Causalien
Prime 8 ball Oracle
It's not that. Your case has been presented and I acknowledge it. It is now in my mind and my future moves will have a check to see how much % chance of your reality happening.
It is just too repetitive and I come here for information I do not know about. So simply put, you are wasting my time. So you are less and less beneficial to me as you repeat it along with bringing the usefulness of this thread down for me with each repetition.
Nope, not at all. I certainly welcome alternative viewpoints. Are you bearish?
It is interesting that 2 recent mega posters whom I did not quote, reply to or name started protesting heavily after my post, replying to it and taking offence. Oh well. Facts are a b****.
Update:
Merrill reiterated their underperform rating (C-3-9: C=high volatility, 3=underperform; 9=no dividends).
Morningstar dropped TSLA to 3 stars (hold) from 4 (buy) yesterday.
S&P still sell.
OK, weekend now. Let the banter begin. Then afterwards maybe we could "report" ourselves into various sub-threads (like "Demand") to help keep this thread tidier. Thanks @Curt Renz for the excellent explanation!
not like that's really going to happen
Merrill reiterated their underperform rating (C-3-9: C=high volatility, 3=underperform; 9=no dividends).
Morningstar dropped TSLA to 3 stars (hold) from 4 (buy) yesterday.
S&P still sell.
OK, weekend now. Let the banter begin. Then afterwards maybe we could "report" ourselves into various sub-threads (like "Demand") to help keep this thread tidier. Thanks @Curt Renz for the excellent explanation!
not like that's really going to happen
No, bears and bulls. There's whole back and forth, pages and pages of arguments. They are usually great discussions but really clutter up this thread.
IMHO we could report various arguments (after the fact maybe) with a request for a title "Demand", "Julian vs. Jesse", etc.. Then beginning at the first post of that argument in this thread there will be a comment from the mod regarding movement of the argument/topic to new sub-thread. This would be linked.
Thus when we have time and inclination, we could read about said argument and potentially add to it without making this thread too unreadable.
just another pipe dream, ain't gonna happen
Me too, I also second the proposal.
In fact, I demand that such posts be moved to the new Demand Demand thread. (Oops.)
I have always welcomed all theories about how TM/TSLA will perform. Yes, I own their products but as an investor, I invest to grow, not shrink, my portfolio. I buy puts and sell stock when information I have at hand indicates that it will grow, protect or mitigate loss of money.
I agree that the sentiment, in general, here is bullish and some resent/try to shoot down any real or perception of bear arguments. I don't find this much different from other forums.
However, circular firing squads is not my idea of garnering information about investing.
So, bull or bear, keep posting.
I just feel the 'demand debate' has become really 'done'. Let us put a fork in it.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
