Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2016

[TSLADream]

I was one of those shareholder who was pessimistic about the SCTY deal. I think I'll vote yes. Most of Elon's move with Tesla since 2010 does not follow a conventional wisdom. It's unpredictable but he has created value for shareholders who have been patient. I think it will start to make sense in the long run.

 

[drinkerofkoolaid]

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

Not sure what the point of this fragment article was. It doesn't provide any new information, besides the graphic showing what is believed to have happened. Also, it's a bit irresponsible for the NYTimes to say "some experts believe a LIDAR based system could have prevented this type of accident" without naming one "expert".

 

[MikeC]

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.

But I think you are actually describing the mechanism by which they will move in lock-step. Obviously there will be some lag, but high-frequency trading algos and bots will arbitrage so quickly that it will be imperceptible to retail investors.

I've been buying SCTY LEAPs which if the deal goes through, which I think it will, should turn into TSLA LEAPs at a significant discount.

 

[Spidy]

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.

For me that's just a good version of Automatic Emergency Braking.

Yes, I know Tesla put everything under the umbrella of Autopilot as Autopilot safety feature, but let's be honest in the eye of the public Autopilot=Autosteer+TACC.

And this accident could have easily been prevented by a system with good AEB, without any Autosteer or TACC active.

 

[ggr]

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.

No, it's a lobby group against the major brands. They have been very active against Ford in the past, and GM and Toyota more recently.

 

[ggr]

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

Certainly it's camera wasn't...

 

[MitchJi]

I've been buying SCTY LEAPs which if the deal goes through, which I think it will, should turn into TSLA LEAPs at a significant discount.

Sounds like a great idea!

I might do that myself.

Thanks!

 

[pGo]

I don't own a Tesla yet (M3 reservation holder) but have experienced autopilot for a few miles. What I see happening here is that the driver potentially didn't see the trailer for a few seconds where he should have acted which would have resulted into no accident and a honk to the trailer.

My question for the group is that if the current autopilot system makes user pay less attention on road, specially on highways by knowing that Tesla handles most of all scenarios on highways. Is it possible that drivers start having trust into the system that they are safer on highways and that constant attention is no longer required? If this is possible even for a small number of users, I would recommend Tesla to add an alert every some seconds or some acknowledgement to the user that they must pay attention.

For any other car, the exact issue happens all the time. So, I don't believe autopilot is the reason for this accident, but Tesla may add bells and whistles to keep user attention on the road if autopilot contributes to users not paying attention on road.

 

[SR22pilot]

For me that's just a good version of Automatic Emergency Braking.

Yes, I know Tesla put everything under the umbrella of Autopilot as Autopilot safety feature, but let's be honest in the eye of the public Autopilot=Autosteer+TACC.

And this accident could have easily been prevented by a system with good AEB, without any Autosteer or TACC active.

I agree except probably the last statement. I don't know the speed the car was traveling so I can't say AEB would have prevented it. Also, please define good AEB. I doubt any current system on the market would have helped here. Distronic doesn't recognize still objects according to the manual and also, again according to the manual, only uses 40% braking at the max. This accident is all about the limitations of AEB since the systems out there are designed to prevent rear end accidents and not T-bone accidents and certainly not ones where most of the radar energy passes under the object line it almost certainly did in this case.

 

[SR22pilot]

If this is possible even for a small number of users, I would recommend Tesla to add an alert every some seconds or some acknowledgement to the user that they must pay attention.

For any other car, the exact issue happens all the time. So, I don't believe autopilot is the reason for this accident, but Tesla may add bells and whistles to keep user attention on the road if autopilot contributes to users not paying attention on road.

I wouldn't be surprised to see an increase in nagware. Tesla has been great about having less than most. You'll go through 10 pages of legal stuff before driving your car and every minute have the car asking if you are really sure you know what you are doing and if you still promise to be a safe driver. Yuck!!!

 

[MitchJi]

But I think you are actually describing the mechanism by which they will move in lock-step. Obviously there will be some lag, but high-frequency trading algos and bots will arbitrage so quickly that it will be imperceptible to retail investors.

It will take 2-3 months for the deal to be consummated. Which means for most of that interval it's not exactly arbitrage, but a medium term bet on TSLA,with a discount.

Definitely a good deal if you are bullish on Tesla,, or buying LEAPS or shares regardless but not everyone is in those camps. Check the short interest in TSLA, which the prospect of the deal going through will probably exacerbate.

 

[AlMc]

But I think you are actually describing the mechanism by which they will move in lock-step. Obviously there will be some lag, but high-frequency trading algos and bots will arbitrage so quickly that it will be imperceptible to retail investors.

I've been buying SCTY LEAPs which if the deal goes through, which I think it will, should turn into TSLA LEAPs at a significant discount.

Mike..,,Is that how a merger/acquisition works with options. If TM buys Solar City do SCTY options become TSLA options automatically at the same ratio as share exchange??
I don't know so that is why I ask....,

 

[MikeC]

Mike..,,Is that how a merger/acquisition works with options. If TM buys Solar City do SCTY options become TSLA options automatically at the same ratio as share exchange??
I don't know so that is why I ask....,

Not 100% sure, but here is what Neroden explains in this thread: What happens to SCTY options?

 

[MitchJi]

Not 100% sure, but here is what Neroden explains in this thread: What happens to SCTY options?

You better be 100% sure before you make the trade.

 

[MikeC]

You better be 100% sure before you make the trade.

I'm reasonably sure enough to risk my own money, I just don't want to advise someone else with absolute certainty since I'm no expert.

 

[FredTMC]

I agree except probably the last statement. I don't know the speed the car was traveling so I can't say AEB would have prevented it. Also, please define good AEB. I doubt any current system on the market would have helped here. Distronic doesn't recognize still objects according to the manual and also, again according to the manual, only uses 40% braking at the max. This accident is all about the limitations of AEB since the systems out there are designed to prevent rear end accidents and not T-bone accidents and certainly not ones where most of the radar energy passes under the object line it almost certainly did in this case.

I agree largely with both your statements regarding AEB. I doubt the tesla would have been able to completely stop in time given the rate of closure.

Does anyone with AP recall these:

1). what is the shortest distance that AEB activates in front of the car?

2). It's ALWAYS on, right?

3). With Teslas TACC, the tesla "follow distance" is settable but I don't think AEB is adjustable.

Clearly the radar just saw the empty space under the trailer (~4 ft tall) and ignored the 'overhead' area as Elon indicated. I wonder what the min height or angle above the radar is enough to trigger AEB.

Seems that the car needs to account for going up hill while there is a bridge or overhead sign ahead. Therefore the radar scan height is apparently less than 4 ft off the ground.

Just curious how far ahead it looks.


Thanks

 

[MitchJi]

Mike is correct.

What happens to options in a merger?

choice, “the stock option remains intact”, is correct.

How does this play itself out? Let’s think through the situation. As a call owner you have the right to buy 100 shares by paying the strike price per share – and the put owner has the right to sell. Even post-merger, you still have the same rights.

Let’s say you owned a WYE Aug 45 call and the stock was bought out by Pfizer. Nothing really changes for you, except that if the stock gapped higher, you have a nice profit (or loss if the price gapped lower). You still have exactly the same rights you had before the merger: the right to pay $4,500 to receive whatever it is that the owner of 100 shares of WYE receives. The specifics of that deal are negotiated as part of the merger agreement.

A WYE shareholder may receive shares of the acquiring company, or they may receive cash or convertible preferred stock. It could even wind up being a combination of items. It doesn’t matter. The WYE shareholder will receive something for each 100 shares of WYE after the merger, and that same “something” is what the call owner has the right to buy (and the put owner has the right to sell) – each at the respective strike price of the option they own.

Your job as the option owner is to decide how much that package of Pfizer “goodies” is worth and decide if you want to pay $4,500 to receive it. And you don’t even have to go to the trouble of doing that; the efficient market does that for you. The price at which the option is trading gives you a good idea of what that option is worth. It’s unlikely you will want to exercise your option to buy that package because the right thing to do (almost all the time) is to sell the option when you no longer want to own it.

 

[JRP3]

I was one of those shareholder who was pessimistic about the SCTY deal. I think I'll vote yes. Most of Elon's move with Tesla since 2010 does not follow a conventional wisdom. It's unpredictable but he has created value for shareholders who have been patient. I think it will start to make sense in the long run.

Kenliles posted a nice overview in the long term thread that is good reading for anyone on the fence about the merger.

Long-Term Fundamentals of Tesla Motors (TSLA)

 

[FredTMC]

Automatic emergency braking (AEB) on tesla model S does NOT engage if the car is traveling faster than 85mph

This is per the tesla firmware notes:

Note: Automatic Emergency Braking operates when you are driving at speeds between 5 mph (8 km/h) and 85 mph (140 km/h)

 

[GoTslaGo]

Kenliles posted a nice overview in the long term thread that is good reading for anyone on the fence about the merger.

Long-Term Fundamentals of Tesla Motors (TSLA)

Yes, Excellent post. Long, but worth the read.