Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2016

[Perfectlogic]

The best weapon against a fool is to let him keep talking. Don't respond, just let him keep talking.

All my posts have been responses, and I haven't even responded to everyone since I'm so popular.

 

[Perfectlogic]

Maybe they will deliver 75k 2016, but that is not really important for long term investors, it is still over 50% growth.

Your message is also that the the demand curve growth rate has flattened out and they can only make it go up again with costly actions like advertisement, price reductions, more equipment in the car etc. This is just plain wrong. You are zooming in with a magnifying glass and work your brain to overheat over just a couple of quarters and are missing the big picture. Here are some big facts that you may have missed:

1. The general vehicle market has a high growth rate for BEV.

2. Tesla is the only serious maker of premium BEV and will remain the only one to at-least 2020. I and others have written about this before so please check post history. Not going to repeat it.

3. Other auto makers are committed to PHEV, which means consumer acceptance for BEV also will automatically increase in a big way. The main requested improvement for PHEV is more electric range. No one is doing BEV yet in a "bet the company" kind of commitment except Tesla and some Chinese manufacturers. They need to do that to be competitive with Tesla because they need to manufacturer in volumes, they need charging networks etc and they need to be prepared to kill ICE sales. This is not happening yet.

4. Several cities around the world are talking about banning diesel cars and introduce customs and fees in city centers. Some countries with severe pollution will be aggressive about this.

5. The premium SUV market is very large, several hundred of thousand of cars if not millions.

6. Countries like Sweden for example are amping up the tax incentives. The latest suggestion is probably going to mean a $12k tax difference between buying a Cayenne Turbo vs the Model X. Model X is not even on sale in Sweden yet.

7. In many European countries electricity is cheap compared to gasoline, under half the cost for comparable range.

8. Tesla has few or no stores in many potentially big markets, like South Korea.

9. Tesla has a very high percentage growth in many markets, but the absolute unit growth is not high yet because of low base numbers. This is because they prioritized US and California because of user acquisition costs and logistics. The smaller markets unit growth will be significant soon because the way exponential growth works.

10. The more Tesla cars on the road, the more people will consider them. Model 3 will make a big difference.

11. Global warming is not going to solve itself. Neither is city pollution.

Also, Amazon had plenty of quarters that were far from stellar with flat growth and disappointments. Even whole years. Apple had some too with their iPhone run but fewer than Amazon. And Tesla in previous years also had flat quarter over quarter growth. This is nothing new for large revenue growth companies so please don't make it sound like it is.

Above is all strong factors of growth for S and X. But you somehow think other things (what?) will offset this and make the growth rate come down to low or flat levels.

You really should stop posting about this until you have done more research and can come up with something new then your short term quarter wait time only data driven "analysis".

Many of your points are concerning long term demand and long term BEV adoption, I have already said I am long term bullish on Tesla, or perhaps neutral at this SP due to risk factors, not bearish anyway. You guys are exaggerating everything I say making me out to be some extreme hyper bear calling for Tesla to go bankrupt next week. The world isn't black and white, investing is all about understanding the nuances and not just jumping on either the bull hype train or the bear one and letting the confirmation bias do the rest.

If they do only deliver 75k that will be proof that the demand growth has flattened for the S, unless you expect the X to do extremely poorly. The X is earlier in its cycle so of course that demand curve is harder to predict, but I would say that having a higher order rate before the reveal than after is a pretty bad sign.

 

[lango]

Many of your points are concerning long term demand and long term BEV adoption, I have already said I am long term bullish on Tesla, or perhaps neutral at this SP due to risk factors, not bearish anyway. You guys are exaggerating everything I say making me out to be some extreme hyper bear calling for Tesla to go bankrupt next week. The world isn't black and white, investing is all about understanding the nuances and not just jumping on either the bull hype train or the bear one and letting the confirmation bias do the rest.

If they do only deliver 75k that will be proof that the demand growth has flattened for the S, unless you expect the X to do extremely poorly. The X is earlier in its cycle so of course that demand curve is harder to predict, but I would say that having a higher order rate before the reveal than after is a pretty bad sign.

But you are not bullish on S and X long term growth unless they do costly changes to the product or advertisement? If you are, then I have no idea what you are posting about.

My 11 points was factors that show why S and X will have long term growth. I am not interested in discussing how demand changes on a weekly or monthly basis and you should make it clear then that your posts are about that.

 

[Perfectlogic]

But you are not bullish on S and X long term growth unless they do costly changes to the product or advertisement? If you are, then I have no idea what you are posting about.

I haven't said much about the long term growth of the S and X besides that I do believe they will hit 100k at some point. If you don't know what I am posting about I would advice you to read my posts. In summary I started out arguing that the profitability on the S is much worse than many seem to think. Since then I have argued that the S demand growth is much lower than what many people here seem to think. Not sure how this has managed to confuse you. I'm guessing you made the mistake of listening to the bull mafia here lying about what I have said. Honest mistake, the echo in here can be very enticing if you aren't careful.

 

[Yuri_G]

I haven't said much about the long term growth of the S and X besides that I do believe they will hit 100k at some point. If you don't know what I am posting about I would advice you to read my posts. In summary I started out arguing that the profitability on the S is much worse than many seem to think. Since then I have argued that the S demand growth is much lower than what many people here seem to think. Not sure how this has managed to confuse you.

You're spamming the thread at this point. No one has time to read your posts.

 

[lango]

I haven't said much about the long term growth of the S and X besides that I do believe they will hit 100k at some point. If you don't know what I am posting about I would advice you to read my posts. In summary I started out arguing that the profitability on the S is much worse than many seem to think. Since then I have argued that the S demand growth is much lower than what many people here seem to think. Not sure how this has managed to confuse you. I'm guessing you made the mistake of listening to the bull mafia here lying about what I have said. Honest mistake, the echo in here can be very enticing if you aren't careful.

If you use statements like "demand growth has flattened" in an investment thread most people will assume you don't mean quarter over quarter or the current year projections. Flattened means flat, not just slowing down it means approaching 0. It is a serious statement with big implications for a growth company and I called you out on it and presented loads of facts that points in another direction. It is on you to express yourself clearly and use terminology that is accepted.

But since you seem to agree - or have no interest in presenting facts to the contrary - that S and X long term growth and prospects looks great then I have nothing more to say.

 

[Zhelko Dimic]

No ifs. Recorded fact. Records are all here on TMC and # tagged. This includes the analysis and yes anyone that followed closely enough with enough money behind each trade will have made not hundreds but many thousands of percent. I am not aware of any source of forecasting and forward prediction that has out performed this.

Here again is the chart,
snip ...

Funny, I seem to remember listening to individual called Julian begging of this year, and regretting deeply that. I allowed his convictions to reinforce my own beliefs deep, deep into the hole. That cost me serious emotional drama, and peek to through loss of 87% (Dec 31st - Mar 9) on my whole portfolio.

And I'm good now, thank you very much, back to black. Luckily I had enough emotional stamina to survive and play right moves. But, never, ever again...

Anyhow, It's just... My memories reconcile soooo poorly with this narrative of Julian's omnipotence, and yeah, I know. I was there, every minute, of, every day...

 

[Perfectlogic]

You're spamming the thread at this point. No one has time to read your posts.

My posts doesn't fill more than those I'm responding too. Good contribution though.

 

[Perfectlogic]

If you use statements like "demand growth has flattened" in an investment thread most people will assume you don't mean quarter over quarter or the current year projections. Flattened means flat, not just slowing down it means approaching 0. It is a serious statement with big implications for a growth company and I called you out on it and presented loads of facts that points in another direction. It is on you to express yourself clearly and use terminology that is accepted.

But since you seem to agree - or have no interest in presenting facts to the contrary - that S and X long term growth and prospects looks great then I have nothing more to say.

I have made it very clear in my posts that I believe S demand to be around 55k this year, 10% above last year. If you haven't caught that then you should try actually reading my posts before criticising them.

 

[CButterK]

Yeah I will probably soon take a break from the thread, the one thing I do agree with people on is that we are starting to beat a dead horse here so to say.

All my posts have been responses, and I haven't even responded to everyone since I'm so popular.

I believe he is asking us to kindly leave him alone and not engage him any further, so that he can take a well deserved break away from having to respond to us "hyper bulls"... I think we should all accommodate his wishes to help him out. Poor guy must be so stressed out from his sudden rise to popularity and his need to grant us all a response. Of course I'm sure he will need to respond to this though

 

[JamesTSLA]

My posts doesn't fill more than those I'm responding too. Good contribution though.

Perfectlogic, I think your arguements will benefit a lot of people not in hype-bull camp. But you'd better stop out there. Mark your posts and revisit in July/Oct and January after each quarterly report. I think the truth will be in your side. Elon Musk claimed that Q2 will exit 2K/week production rate. So what will prevent Tesla not to deliver 50K in 2nd half of 2016 and thus miss full year guidance? Surely those permabulls won't confess "D" issue as usual. But you'd better protect your own investment and watch those "irrational" gamblers' portfolio stays in the same place for years even without interest gain. LoL

 

[MitchJi]

The best weapon against a fool is to let him keep talking. Don't respond, just let him keep talking.

And add them to your ignore list. First I had to read all of the responses to the nonsensical posts. That eventually gave way (mostly) to posts about ignoring the nonsense.

Please can everyone just completely stop responding to the foolish trolls!

 

[dc_h]

curious about the slow down in Model S deliveries, but seeming consistent 1000 VIN's assigned a week since March. Seems like model X deliveries are taking precedence over S and foreign orders seem higher as a percentage than other quarters. S lead times definitely increasing according to the delivery thread.

 

[skljsd329832]

Funny, I seem to remember listening to individual called Julian begging of this year, and regretting deeply that. I allowed his convictions to reinforce my own beliefs deep, deep into the hole. That cost me serious emotional drama, and peek to through loss of 87% (Dec 31st - Mar 9) on my whole portfolio.

And I'm good now, thank you very much, back to black. Luckily I had enough emotional stamina to survive and play right moves. But, never, ever again...

Anyhow, It's just... My memories reconcile soooo poorly with this narrative of Julian's omnipotence, and yeah, I know. I was there, every minute, of, every day...

Your first ever post was to come on to me guns blazing that you knew better, and you got it wrong. Then and now

Your mistake was and is to imagine that I value my opinion higher than yours. Nothing could be further from the truth. To me your opinion is a known data point. My opinion is an internal warning of confirmation bias! Every time I have written IMO (in my opinion) it means insufficient data - i.e. don't take this too literally. The exact opposite of a fact or a "claim to omnipotence" as you so disparagingly - and unfairly - put it.

Your initial mistake was to imagine disagreeing with another poster that had got it wrong was a battle of egos. You thought I was rude instead of right and you lost money: Not by listening every minute but by arguing the toss from an irrelevant ego frame of reference! Easy mistake to make.

Analysis is not ego. Very often they reach opposing conclusions. Do you think I enjoyed calling the down legs or shutting down an entire thesis after Q1 ER? (No I didn't). The trick is to do it anyway. It does not matter that the prognosis of the whole year thesis will most likely prove to be essentially correct, the opinion-independent reasons to believe it changed.

There is nothing to debate between your recollection of the facts and recorded fact. I have posted the facts and I don't have a stronger counterargument to your memories.

 

[Stretch2727]

Fairly decent article from USA today. Interesting quotes from Toyota North American CEO. Good summary of future "Tesla fighters".

I believe the main thing standing between them and success is a charging network. Sure the designs may not be sexy. The dealers may not push electric cars, but I just don't see how they can be successful without a decent charging network for long distance travel.

Tesla fighters: GM, Toyota strategies diverge

 

[SPadival]

Sure the designs may not be sexy.

At some point, you should see through the reason why every single electric/hybrid car made by an ICE car maker is positively unsexy. It is not a coincidence, but a deliberate marketing strategy. They know there is a market segment out there who will buy electric no matter how ugly the car looks. But they don't want anyone outside of this segment to buy electric/hybrids. They want the cool kids to remain ICE.

 

[Johan]

Fairly decent article from USA today. Interesting quotes from Toyota North American CEO. Good summary of future "Tesla fighters".

I believe the main thing standing between them and success is a charging network. Sure the designs may not be sexy. The dealers may not push electric cars, but I just don't see how they can be successful without a decent charging network for long distance travel.

Tesla fighters: GM, Toyota strategies diverge

Meta observation: this is my first notice of the term "Tesla fighters" as opposed to "Tesla killers" when referring to supposedly competing cars in the pipeline from competitors. Small stuff like this can be interesting to notice since it signals a slight shift in sentiment; Tesla has gone from a company that can be "killed" to one that must be "fought" .

 

[skljsd329832]

Anyone remember top ranked analyst Ronnie Moas of Standpoint Research? #13578 (claims Number 1 ranking on some lists).

Moas went on CNBC with TSLA at $251 and called sell to $180. He was so "right" that CNBC invited him back recently at circa $212 Goldman upgrades Tesla; Analyst disagree where he reiterated his $180 call as a contrarian to GS calling for $250.

At $251 Moas published an elegant piece of Tesla / TSLA research that showed he was right for the wrong reasons. We read it and noted compounding known factual errors and errors of perception and concluded he would struggle to detect or pull up in the event of an inflection catalyst (like the one that just happened) and hence he would lose his shirt: #13617

Excerpt: "The fact is that he is basing a short term price target on longer term stuff that he's going to have a hard time explaining away when it turns out not to be true. Not sure how he's not going to be blind sided if this is his base thesis."

The market is a harsh mistress, most intolerant of that kind of thing.

Remember how TSLA chewed up and spat out Aswath Damodaran, NYU's legendary finance professor who predicted the top in Apple? That's another story (the guy did two passes of his own 2024 DCF valuation model months apart and the results did not match - just proved itself to be a trailing indicator). Called him too: #119

CNBC has indicated it could be interested in a story about how we beat the top ranked analyst on TMC.

 

[Perfectlogic]

Your first ever post was to come on to me guns blazing that you knew better, and you got it wrong. Then and now

Your mistake was and is to imagine that I value my opinion higher than yours. Nothing could be further from the truth. To me your opinion is a known data point. My opinion is an internal warning of confirmation bias! Every time I have written IMO (in my opinion) it means insufficient data - i.e. don't take this too literally. The exact opposite of a fact or a "claim to omnipotence" as you so disparagingly - and unfairly - put it.

Your initial mistake was to imagine disagreeing with another poster that had got it wrong was a battle of egos. You thought I was rude instead of right and you lost money: Not by listening every minute but by arguing the toss from an irrelevant ego frame of reference! Easy mistake to make.

Analysis is not ego. Very often they reach opposing conclusions. Do you think I enjoyed calling the down legs or shutting down an entire thesis after Q1 ER? (No I didn't). The trick is to do it anyway. It does not matter that the prognosis of the whole year thesis will most likely prove to be essentially correct, the opinion-independent reasons to believe it changed.

There is nothing to debate between your recollection of the facts and recorded fact. I have posted the facts and I don't have a stronger counterargument to your memories.

I couldn't help myself and went back to see what kind of predictions you have actually made. First I went back to December of last year and found this post Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2015

"Upsetting the shorts on the other hand is where the big bucks is at and there will be tears in Shortsville to rival the Mississippi for the coming 6-9 months and around about now would be the time to anticipate that."

2 months later the stock had fallen a third and today, 5 months later, the stock is almost exactly the same price compared to the date of your post. You also speculated that Tesla would deliver 19k cars in Q4, that didn't happen either, at all.

Fast forward to Jan 4th Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2016

"$400 by July. That would be my call."

Just awful.

This post is great (from last month) Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2016

"My interest in the matter ever since November last year is a laser focus on Tesla unveiling profits and positive cash flows later this year in the context of an insane narrative where I think it will be on the cards to spot a solid $100 of SP gains with certainty levels in three 9's territory that makes my sock guarantee look like guesswork."

If we don't see $300 before the end of this year, which I think is very unlikely, that will be the nail in the coffin of your reputation here. Not that you ought to have a good reputation at this point with your history. And the fact that you are shilling for your website even though I'm not sure why when you are making 1000% yearly gains from your trades.

 

[Johan]

CNBC has indicated it could be interested in a story about how we beat the top ranked analys

Not sure it's a good idea to attract that kind of attention.