For this to be good for public use, the crash testing needs to be cut back. People often don't watch ads with intense interest. It's too easy to equate Teslas with crashing.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
hacer
Active Member
It goes like this: A market maker wants the price to be much lower. They submit short sales of say 250,000 shares using a waterfall approach: They will execute against all of the order books, gobbling up all the highest 250,000 shares of standing buy limit orders, but doing it over a period of a minute or two. The market makers generally also have insight into most of these buy limit orders, so they can estimate just how big a drop they will cause. Say it causes a $6 dollar drop in about two minutes. Now this huge drop has the potential to spook retail market participants, many of whom will be scrambling to figure out what news do big insiders have that they don't? Some of them will decide to sell too. Over the next several hours (or several days sometimes - market makers are allowed to have FTDs for many days too!) they buy back these naked shorts with many small ~500 share orders at the "new" lower prices they caused with their artificial mini-crash.
The buying back does have an upward effect on price, but it is smaller because it is drawn out over a long period of time. If the market maker sees actual strong buying interest before they have bought back their shares, then they can cap it with limit sell (naked short again) orders such that large buying volume does not raise the price much. If they do that, it will increase the size of their short so it's likely they will also extend the time over which they cover. The point is that this is done to control market psychology - that this stock is being dumped by big players, so now is not the time to buy and maybe it is the time to sell. Coordinating it with some bogus news, downgrade or such just adds to the psychological force.
The SEC rules allow them to do this for the supposed reason of providing orderly markets. I'm sure the MM would say that they are "adding liquidity" to the market, but there is no need for them to say anything because the SEC does not care what they do.
Last edited:
Sean Wagner
Member
That's fantastic feedback. I'm quite frankly elated. It would be great if you could keep us abreast of developments.
Tesla is going to reap massive benefits by word of mouth alone if it can deliver relatively problem free vehicles and right its servicalypse [mouthful], while conversely, the chances of successfully selling a European Gigafactory's output dim if this crucial part of car ownership gets overshadowed by seemingly more immediate concerns.
What happened to the e-Golf? It seems to sell pretty well, so simply doesn't make the top ten of the survey? Could it be that VAG dealers don't like EVs?
That's why the e-tron is so remarkably well insulated: it respectfully shields pedestrians from drivers' sobs aka range rage.
I couldn't resist.
The 25 year sentence part is clearly excessive, which is sadly common in the US justice system. A bunch of fairly minor crimes carry strangely heavy sentences when some surprisingly serious ones carry comparably light sentences.
With that said, sentences need to be severe enough to prevent mobs from obstructing someone else's legal rights.
There are almost invariably at least some people that get pissed off about the construction of almost any infrastructure. People protest roads, rail lines, subways, pipelines, wind farms, solar farms, mines, you name it... if every project was held hostage to the demands of the extreme fringe almost nothing would get built.
People have a right to protest all they want, but when that crosses the line to physically obstructing someone else's rights then it is time for law enforcement to get involved.
Mars ☰mperor
Member
No. The 480 km range for imported SR+ from Fremont is based on NEDC.
Such mindblowingly poor reporting.
I didn’t even consider the author could be that unawareThis is utter tripe. China rates cars on NEDC, a nonsensically range-inflating cycle. South Korea rates cars on a cycle that yields even lower ranges than the EPA 5-cycle. 480km is also not the rating for Chinese Model 3s (SR+) with some super new "LG cell", but rather their current production from Fremont.
View attachment 457414
Here's South Korea's rating for the exact same SR+ cars from Fremont:
View attachment 457415
The author of this article is grossly unaware of the difference between drivecycles. I expect better from this forum, however.
And LP didn't "convince Tesla" of the superiority of anything. They went with what they could get in the crazy-short-notice of GF3 construction that would yield acceptable performance. They'll be ditched as soon as Tesla switches to their own cell production.
MODs- Why can't there be a way for logged-in users to select all the top-end, relevant, informative posts like this and de-select all the political, African vs. European swallow, S and X upgrade guesses and advertising discussions, leaving only the useful investing stuff we like this when we review our forums?
Many thanks to @Causalien and others who answered this so well for us.
(Edited to remove my accidental stupid double reply)
Last edited:
In a legal sense, you are correct. No one should expect to have zero legal consequences for disrupting operations or engaging in civil disobedience. It’s best for the vast majority of grievances to be addressed through legal and democratic processes.
However, there can at times be a place for civil disobedience in addressing a given society’s very worst sins. The longstanding denial of basic civil rights to a substantial segment of the population would qualify here, for example. I can’t blame climate protesters, landowners, and other affected stakeholders for feeling that civil disobedience is justified in their pipeline protests. Personally, though, I would rather focus on the demand side by advocating for EVs and sustainable energy, and on the funding side by divesting from fossil fuels.
NMC and NCA really aren't all that different anyway. The whole point of both is just to use as much nickel as you can, as it's (proportionally) cheap and stores a lot of lithium. But you can't use pure nickel oxide because it evolves oxygen. You have to use some sort of a mix with alumium, manganese, and/or cobalt - and the goal is to get rid of the cobalt.
The chemistries aren't identical, but they're in the same high-nickel "family" of li-ion chemistries.
The chemistries aren't identical, but they're in the same high-nickel "family" of li-ion chemistries.
Because some of us already know this stuff and the "OT" topics make the thread fun and engaging
What I think is neat about Tesla going to the high-end with the Roadster is that it gives them more of an excuse to experiment around with high-end options - some of which might ultimately trickle down to the lower end. Automated factory wraps, for example, or robotic custom paint jobs. Or custom 3d printed / milled / etched / etc parts. They could really charge sizeable premiums for that sort of thing.
One may think that it would be incompatible with the notion of inventory (not a problem for low-volume vehicles like Roadsters, but a problem for higher-volume vehicles). But Tesla could try creative solutions, like shipping some vehicles as partial knockdowns (with easy-to-attach customizeable pieces of trim missing) which can be airmailed where needed and attached in a matter of minutes (per customized piece) before delivery. Surely the extra margins on factory-customized trim would easily pay for the added costs.
Regardless.. I don't know exactly what sort of options they'll try for with the Roadster, but at its price point, I'm excited to find out
JusRelax
Active Member
Led by California, States Sue DOT Over Tailpipe-Emissions Dispute
Move comes a day after the Trump administration announced new regulations to strip away California’s authority
Led by California, States Sue DOT Over Tailpipe-Emissions Dispute
Move comes a day after the Trump administration announced new regulations to strip away California’s authority
Led by California, States Sue DOT Over Tailpipe-Emissions Dispute
dc_h
Active Member
I couldn’t listen to the whole thing. The fed is not a monolith. The fed is generally nonpartisan. Some fed governors are less so, but as a whole it’s pretty good. After 2007, they learned a lot and adjusted their models and have accepted a bigger role in prodding the economy. They did not respond to Trump. They may have responded to the echo of Trump, in that his policies are leading to a downturn, but not to his prodding.
Personally I think we need a demand side policy response to Arthur Laffer. The policies favoring capital, which I think worked well in the 1980’s are less effective and counterproductive now. The tax system in balance at that point favored the consumer versus the capitalist, in general terms. By that I mean people who save versus people who spend and generally people who live off of deep pockets. Investors and investments are important. Regardless of politics, we all need money, from work or from investing. The problem I see is that we aren’t creating enough demand in the economy. Consumers borrow for college and borrow for cancer and borrow for cars and homes. Income outside the upper quartile has lagged for 50 years. Much is due to globalization, which pays off long term, but much is due to Arthur Laffer. Reducing marginal tax rates from 75-80% to 40% improved investment logic. It reduced shrimp farming subsidies and encouraged the tech boom. Reducing marginal rates from 40 to whatever don’t have any impact on moving investments from fake tax havens. Removing Corp taxes does encourage investments, but not so much investment in people. Changing Corp tax rates without eliminating bogus breaks like for oil drilling, creates new imbalances and tomorrow’s trapped dead money and the seeds of potential crises.
The demand side economist might be Yang, but I think something more like earned income tax credits, FICA supplements in the first 20,000 income, tax credits for new hires. Recent policy initiatives to balance stockholders with stakeholders and including employees in the stakeholders is also helpful.
Sorry for the OT Saturday post. I’ve recently been giving some thought to this demand side economics and hope the dems have some good policy ideas to help consumers, that can help the economy as a whole. The hegemony that sacrificing the lower quartile is needed for a fast growing economy is wrong, I hope. I’d like to see someone prove it and soon.
I’m fairly old and settled, so neither party is likely going to have an impact on my finances. They might on the air I breathe and the water I drink, but they will impact what kind of world my son lives in and I hope we get our act together for the next generation.
I cannot find the full list anywhere. But in this article
Dette er de mest fornøyde elbilkjøperne
they have this in the last paragraph:
Of the two electric cars we have most of on Norwegian roads, namely the Nissan Leaf and Volkswagen e-Golf, e-Golf gets a slightly better average score than the Leaf, with 4.61 against 4.5. About 69 percent of e-Golf owners say they are very satisfied with their car, compared to less than 61 percent for Leaf.
Edit: New list
Tesla Model 3 (81.99)
Tesla Model S (81.94)
Tesla Model X (81.53)
Kia e-Niro (79.27)
Hyundai Kona (78.14)
Jaguar I-Pace (77.96)
BMW i3 (74.15)
Hyundai Ioniq (73.98)
Opel Ampera-e (73.11)
Audi e-tron (71.43)
...
VW e-Golf (69)
Nissan Leaf (61)
dc_h
Active Member
Sure, but what if we swap "climate protestors" and "pipeline" with ... "wind farms?"
https://earther.gizmodo.com/anti-wind-farm-activism-is-sweeping-europe-and-the-us-c-1829627812
Dutch fishermen to sail fleet into Amsterdam in wind turbine protest
Proposal for 24 wind turbines whips up controversy in rural Wisconsin | MinnPost
Or solar?
Virginia residents protest proposed solar farm in Spotsylvania
Victorian Government approves plans for three controversial solar farms
Or high-speed rail?
A DAY IN AUSTIN TO PROTEST THE HIGH SPEED RAIL
My obvious point is that principles can't change based on which side of the specific debate you are on, otherwise they aren't actually "principles." There is a proper legal process for challenging development and of course people always have a right to voice their concerns.
It is impossible to build any big infrastructure without creating at least some losers in the process. The losers inevitably feel justified in protesting and of course they have the right to protest, just not to engage in illegal activity to obstruct progress. If we are going to build a new generation of infrastructure we are going to have to do it in the face of protests. All progress can't stop because every individual landowner/etc feels their spot is special and must remain unchanged.
Last edited:
It always appeared to only be an issue until criticism was high enough to make addressing it was a priority. It's not a difficult problem to solve compared to the other issues Tesla / Elon have tackled.
I'd expect this to continue as Tesla scales. Service issues will probably resume when there are 10x the number of vehicles on the road and Tesla will have to ramp service again.
I'd be amazed if LG had 36% higher energy density cells and no-one on this board had pointed it out previously. Surely Tesla would have already switched suppliers if the difference was that substantial.
Tesla has always said that they monitor all battery developments and would invest if someone could send them a working cell.
If true, competitor drivetrains are truly *sugar*. They still couldn't match Tesla with a huge energy density advantage.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
You probably should have listened, because she said that this was not the Fed reacting to Trump. Rather it's the Fed reacting to unusual activity in the overnight lending market which she claims is unprecedented and concerning. The New York Fed spends $53 billion to rescue the overnight lending market - CNN
Exactly. It's illegal if a few people do it, the laws change if a lot of people do it.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
