Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2016

[drinkerofkoolaid]

It's truly amazing the way journalists are reporting on this BS.

1) A few websites stated the person who said Tesla was misleading people was named Maomao, (or something like that).
2) The driver admitted he didn't have his hands on the wheel and wasn't paying attention.
3) As I understand, it is extremely unusual for the entire name of a person making an accusation against a company operating in China to get mentioned. Usually on the persons surname is mentioned.

4) No-one was hurt.

5) As far as I'm aware, this isn't how accident claims work in China. Also, this guy must be very rich. Why is he going out of his way to ruin his name by making these claims?

6) The vehicle the Tesla hit was illegally parked on the left side of a highway.

It does (shouldn't) matter if the word AutoPilot, SelfDriving. Or whatever was mentioned on the website. What matters (should matter) is what was included in the manual, in the stores, and what was clearly stated by Tesla.

It seems the obvious sollutoon is for Tesla to implement a mandatory 3-4 hour course that makes it explicitly clear what AutoPilot does, and makes it explicitly clear that the driver is still expected to have their hands on the wheel and pay attention.

Idea for a Simple AutoPilot Test:

1) When AutoPilot is active, do I still need to pay attention to the road? Yes or no.

2) When AutoPilot is active, am I still required to keep my hands on the wheel? Yes or no.

3) Tesla has made it clear to me that I am expected to have both hands on the wheel and to pay attention the road even when AutoPilot is active.

4) While Operating your Tesla, under no circumstances is it acceptable to engage in any activity that impairs your ability to pay attention to the road.
(Understood)

Conclusion:

The person who was driving the Tesla is an idiot who should lose his license, receive a steep fine, and potentially face criminal charges.

I'm fairly sure all of these things are clearly spelled out in the TOS, and are made very clear to anyone who is buying a Tesla anywhere in the world.

 

[MitchJi]

The answer re: when the SEC will start reviewing is that the SEC will not start looking at the proxy statement until after the go shop provision expires.

Thanks!

I found this in the 8K filing related to Record Date. It is all very lawerly and I can barely read it. The key (only) take away I could find is that the record date will be into the future from the announcement date. Even that one bit I'm not entirely sure I got it right.

Section 5.4. Record Date. For the purpose of determining the stockholders entitled to notice of or to vote at any meeting of stockholders, or to receive payment of any dividend or other distribution or allotment of any rights or to exercise any rights in respect of any change, conversion or exchange of stock or for the purpose of any other lawful action, the Board may fix a record date, which record date shall not precede the date on which the resolution fixing the record date is adopted and which record date shall not be more than sixty (60) nor less than ten (10) days before the date of any meeting of stockholders, nor more than sixty (60) days prior to the time for such other action as hereinbefore described; provided, however, that if no record date is fixed by the...

Mid/Late October: Proxy statements mailed to Tesla and SolarCity shareholders with a record date pre-dating the mailing of the proxy (I'm not sure about this given the shorts, but seems likely so that they can speed up the process). They might pre-announce the record date, though.

Mid November: Shareholder meetings and hopefully receipt of HSR approval.

The key period is the time between the announcement of the record date and the actual record date.
Can they do that (completely eliminate it)?

If so why do you think Tesla would do that? Doing that would allow no time for anyone to recall shares in order to vote, and saves no time as compared to (for example) making the record date a few days before the announced shareholder meetings dates.

 

[Fallenone]

A new low for CNBC. Benzinga picked it up and passed it along to TD Ameritrade and its Thinkorswim clients.

Spiegel runs the tiny hedge fund Stanphyl Capital Management out of his apartment. Here's the fund's miniscule website: Home Page

I wouldn't be surprised if its assets are almost entirely Spiegel's. If so, it may be a tax dodge.

Spiegel has long been short Tesla. In the guise of "Logical Thought" he has been commenting negatively about Tesla at Seeking Alpha ever since the June 2010 IPO. He is fanatical in his ceaseless anti-Tesla rants on twitter.

The LA Times has quoted Spiegel as a source several times. Now CNBC puts him on. That should give us cause to wonder even more about how CNBC vets its interviewees.

Or CNBC has really ran out of short side guys to say anything but FUD so they have to put him on the show...

 

[esk8mw]

Thanks!



The key period is the time between the announcement of the record date and the actual record date.
Can they do that?

If so why do you think Tesla would do that? Doing that would allow no time for anyone to recall shares in order to vote, and saves no time as compared to (for example) making the record date a few days before the shareholder meetings.

I posted an analysis on this about a month ago. I researched a number of companies' PRs re: the record date and it can be done either way: announcing a future or past record date. It was about evenly split in my sample. Setting the record date is totally within the discretion of the TSLA board. I'm pretty confident they will announce a future record date to ensure that their friendly holders (e.g., Fidelity) have enough time to recall shares so they can vote. It would make no sense at all for a highly shorted company to announce a past record date.

 

[MitchJi]

I posted an analysis on this about a month ago. I researched a number of companies' PRs re: the record date and it can be done either way: announcing a future or past record date. It was about evenly split in my sample. Setting the record date is totally within the discretion of the TSLA board. I'm pretty confident they will announce a future record date to ensure that their friendly holders (e.g., Fidelity) have enough time to recall shares so they can vote. It would make no sense at all for a highly shorted company to announce a past record date.

Thanks! That's what I thought too!

 

[rallykeeper]

I think the reason you put a prior record date in the proxy/registration statement is that you don't want share transactions to occur that will alter your expected voters because of some disclosure in the proxy statement (e.g., the major holders list or updates on insiders -- or even updates on financial information about Tesla and SolarCity since this is a registration statement too).

My bet is similar to esk8mw. They will pre-announce the record date once they have a handle on when the meeting will actually take place. (They are a little tight here since record needs to be within 60 days of the meeting).

However, that record date will likely pre-date the filing of the final S-4 (with all the juicy bits) and the mailing of the proxy materials.

I posted an analysis on this about a month ago. I researched a number of companies' PRs re: the record date and it can be done either way: announcing a future or past record date. It was about evenly split in my sample. Setting the record date is totally within the discretion of the TSLA board. I'm pretty confident they will announce a future record date to ensure that their friendly holders (e.g., Fidelity) have enough time to recall shares so they can vote. It would make no sense at all for a highly shorted company to announce a past record date.

 

[drinkerofkoolaid]

A new low for CNBC. Benzinga picked it up and passed it along to TD Ameritrade and its Thinkorswim clients.

Spiegel runs the tiny hedge fund Stanphyl Capital Management out of his apartment. Here's the fund's miniscule website: Home Page

I wouldn't be surprised if its assets are almost entirely Spiegel's. If so, it may be a tax dodge.

Spiegel has long been short Tesla. In the guise of "Logical Thought" he has been commenting negatively about Tesla at Seeking Alpha ever since the $17 June 2010 IPO. He is fanatical in his ceaseless anti-Tesla rants on twitter.

The LA Times has quoted Spiegel as a source several times. Now CNBC puts him on. That should give us cause to wonder even more about how CNBC vets its interviewees.

Seriously, folks. I suggest everyone contact CNBC with all the info we have about Mark Bernard Spiegel. CNBC basically just endorsed and gave airtime to person who has 0 financial qualifications, is probably managing some sort of fraudulent hedge fund, and is regularly harassing multiple online.
If CNBC is looking for clicks, they'd get many clicks by exposing Spiegel for the BS artist he is.

Hint: Check out the name of the institution that owns the apartment his BS hedge fund is registered to.

 

[dennis]

I think this is the first time I've seen a publication think the phrase "sources reckon" means the same thing as "according to sources". Let's hope this doesn't start a trend.

It is apparent from the multiple grammatical errors (misusing singular and plural, missing articles) that the author is not a native English speaker. So perhaps he thinks "reckon" is a commonly used word since he heard it so often picking up English in the South.

 

[Drax7]

Not surprised CNBC puts this cretin to spew nonsense.

Back when I bought Apple in 2008-9 they where doing
The same.

Frankly I never made a penny from anything I ever
Heard said on CNBC.

 

[MartinAustin]

Time to short Tesla?

That's the Mark Spiegel segment.

I didn't know the Chevy Bolt had the same interior room as the Model S. ><

 

[dha]

Time to short Tesla?

That's the Mark Spiegel segment.

I didn't know the Chevy Bolt had the same interior room as the Model S. ><

Standard Bear Nonsense:

1) Tesla has nothing sustainably proprietary

2) Competition is right around the corner

3) The company can't do anything but burn cash and there's no way they can produce Model 3 profitably



There is truly nothing left to debate at this point. All these items have been argued ad infinitum and the facts are out there for anybody who wants to dive in and take a look. At this point you either get it or you don't. Or, according to the bears, you've either drunk the kool aid or you haven't. I've placed my bets accordingly and will wait patiently as this story plays out.

 

[Drax7]

Time to short Tesla?

That's the Mark Spiegel segment.

I didn't know the Chevy Bolt had the same interior room as the Model S. ><

The Chevy volt is the answer , everybody knows that.

Chevy will soon have an ICE BMW and ICE Porsche killer, I just read
Cause they are good at that.

 

[austinEV]

Picking up on everyone's "why isn't the stock going up every day" whining. Have some patience. I am in TSLA because it's 2 year outlook is so rosy. This is pretty much my thesis in TSLA in graphical form:

Between now and then are question marks. I believe there is a "great lurch" upward coming as the valuation of TE and model 3 come home. When the lurch happens is a big question, but it could be as early as Nov if Q3 results are good. Otherwise there will be some other catalyst, timing of which is hard to predict.

Since I believe that the model 3 will be great, on time (maybe 1 qtr late--on time by TM standards), and profitable there is simply no way the valuation can remain the same by late 2017 or early 2018.

The last time in 2013 it was positive financial results due to a surge in model S sales, before expansion costs caught up with it. I think the next one will be financial too; there is just no record of product, feature or factory updates ever moving the needle very much. So it could be Q3 when/if they can surprise with model S/X deliveries or, when they deliver a bunch of model 3's in some qtr in 2018 or some time in between when the writing is on the wall and the valuation grows up in anticipation of this good news that can be increasingly priced in with safety. That is, there could not be a "great lurch" but a wide flatter rise.

I think it's that simple and the rest are details. I don't think I am smart enough to predict the timing so I have stock and J18 calls, and admittedly the J18 calls are risky based on my own thesis. J19's will be expensive when they come out but I will be looking to move them out early next year if we are still trading flat. If not my J18's were a fine choice anyway.

 

[SW2Fiddler]

Picking up on everyone's "why isn't the stock going up every day" whining.

I don't know about "everyone" ...
Since I put a mere two specific members on Ignore, I don't see their hourly "It's down!" "When do you think it's going to rise?" "Down by 3, Woe is Me" essentially content-free posts.
(I see replies to them still, but not so many, so I think others have pushed the Ignore button as well)

 

[150 kWh]

Seriously, folks. I suggest everyone contact CNBC with all the info we have about Mark Bernard Spiegel. CNBC basically just endorsed and gave airtime to person who has 0 financial qualifications, is probably managing some sort of fraudulent hedge fund, and is regularly harassing multiple online.
If CNBC is looking for clicks, they'd get many clicks by exposing Spiegel for the BS artist he is.

Hint: Check out the name of the institution that owns the apartment his BS hedge fund is registered to.

Isn't it so you can pay for your airtime on CNBC? That's how this interview looked like to me.

 

[Krugerrand]

Come one now. One station, you had to make an appointment and it cost a fairly hefty fee? That's like Volkswagen building one fast charger at their headquarters and then saying everyone is still buying diesel cars so there is no interest. It was a compliance move, pure and simple.

One station on a very busy Model S route that suffered from SuperCharger lines at times, as well as a few power outages/issues. I also understood that 'invitations' were sent out to Model S owners.

Was not a compliance move, pure and simple.

 

[dmckinstry]

"Brilliant" reporting by this "well established southern country publication". Y'all reckon?.

I think this is the first time I've seen a publication think the phrase "sources reckon" means the same thing as "according to sources". Let's hope this doesn't start a trend lol.

Tesla Motors Inc (TSLA) Is Under SEC's Scrutiny Once Again

Also, I wasn't aware "recent events" were capable of having opinions.

What a joke about recall. Worst case scenario would be if they were forced to disable AP. That would cost Tesla practically nothing, unlike airbags having to be replaced.

 

[vgrinshpun]

So in Q2 four of the five largest institutional shareholders all increased their TSLA position, for a rather significant total of 6.4M shares. The Price T. Rowe did not report yet (the deadline is 45 calendar days after the end of the quarter)

Wow! Apparently in Q2 Fidelity upped their stake in TSLA not by 9% as was reported in an article (do not recall which one), but by a whopping 26.7% or 4.37M shares. This makes it crystal clear (if there was any doubt) where they stand on the Solar City acquisition. I am wondering if this is the reason we are seeing the uptick.

WOW! (Take #2). Price T. Rowe upped their stake in TSLA by 42.6%, or 3,139,231 shares! So just five largest institutional shareowners collectively increased their TSLA position in Q2 by 9.5M shares!

 

[Fallenone]

Picking up on everyone's "why isn't the stock going up every day" whining. Have some patience. I am in TSLA because it's 2 year outlook is so rosy. This is pretty much my thesis in TSLA in graphical form:


View attachment 190233

Between now and then are question marks. I believe there is a "great lurch" upward coming as the valuation of TE and model 3 come home. When the lurch happens is a big question, but it could be as early as Nov if Q3 results are good. Otherwise there will be some other catalyst, timing of which is hard to predict.

Since I believe that the model 3 will be great, on time (maybe 1 qtr late--on time by TM standards), and profitable there is simply no way the valuation can remain the same by late 2017 or early 2018.

The last time in 2013 it was positive financial results due to a surge in model S sales, before expansion costs caught up with it. I think the next one will be financial too; there is just no record of product, feature or factory updates ever moving the needle very much. So it could be Q3 when/if they can surprise with model S/X deliveries or, when they deliver a bunch of model 3's in some qtr in 2018 or some time in between when the writing is on the wall and the valuation grows up in anticipation of this good news that can be increasingly priced in with safety. That is, there could not be a "great lurch" but a wide flatter rise.

I think it's that simple and the rest are details. I don't think I am smart enough to predict the timing so I have stock and J18 calls, and admittedly the J18 calls are risky based on my own thesis. J19's will be expensive when they come out but I will be looking to move them out early next year if we are still trading flat. If not my J18's were a fine choice anyway.

I doubt the "great lurch" can happen this year. It's not powerful enough in face of the big CapEx and increasing OpEx in the coming months.

 

[MikeC]

Time to short Tesla?

That's the Mark Spiegel segment.

I didn't know the Chevy Bolt had the same interior room as the Model S. ><

That's the second troll I've seen on camera now, after Keef a couple months ago. They must be scraping the bottom of the barrel because they couldn't get Kass or Left.

Other than looking more nervous, he seemed to have similar talking points about Tesla and Elon as Cory Johnson over at Bloomberg. Reminds me of DaveT's Andrea James interview talking about how 90% of New Yorkers were short TSLA (vs. 90% long in CA).

It's hard for me to wrap my head around how people can be so blatantly wrong. I can only surmise that someone like Spiegel is either paid to troll, or he has just developed a hatred for Tesla from past financial bets against the company and he is unwilling to cut his losses.