Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Question for my enlightenment:

In the event that a large number of additional shares are approved (let's say Dodger's trillion), is the dilutive impact on existing shares accounted or adjusted for ?

Is there any adjustment to their intrinsic "weight", or do they just become of much smaller valuation and we move along ?

The reason behind my query is that if the number of new shares was significant, as in this example, a majority shareholder could conceivably lose that status even with the multiplicative effect of the split.
If they use all of them for a split it's not dilutive. If they use some of them for employee compensation that is dilutive. If they use some to issue new shares to bring in more cash that is dilutive.

So when we vote we are extending the rope (adding more shares), but we don't know until they use it if we are helped, harmed, or unaffected.
 
Didn't see this posted elsewhere:


Google "...says web searches for EVs and their associated costs are trending in the U.S., up this March by more than 400 per cent. Google’s data for American interest in EVs grafts nicely onto that of gas prices, but searches have passed all high-water marks even going back to 2008."

1648493495642.png
 
You're right! @WADan did post this story yesterday and it slipped by us! I know the 6am stock split news is a big deal (or not, I mean, it is the same size pizza after all 😉🐈) but this happened on Sunday and is 100% a BIG deal for Tesla possibly getting 'free money' from other Auto manufacturers. I highly suggest everyone to take a minute and read it over, a couple of juicy tidbits below

  • "The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) on Sunday reinstated a sharp increase in penalties for automakers whose vehicles do not meet fuel efficiency requirements for model years 2019 and beyond.".....
  • "President Donald Trump's administration in its final days in January 2021 delayed a 2016 regulation that more than doubled penalties for automakers failing to meet Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) requirements starting in the 2019 model year."
  • "The agency has not collected penalties for 2019 to 2021 model years while the issue was under review and is the subject of court challenges."
Tesla can save credits for future sales, right? Maybe one reason they've had declining credit sales is that they were holding back on selling credits for the US market to wait for this 2016 regulation to finally be enforce.
 
That was a good interaction on the positive for Tesla on CNBC which is soo rare. It was funny watching the CNBC clowns try to get the guest to shine negative light on Tesla. I was loling, and the hammer that he says that Ford and GM are pursuing obsolete IP in EV, lolzers.
CNBS def tries hard ... Just take a look at the banner "Breaking Down Tesla's Tumultuous 2022"

Really? That's the best they can do?

Bullish!!
 
Caution: Double Bump Ahead
I think we get two bumps out of this.
Since Tesla did not specify if the split would be 10-1, 5-1, x-1, we should see another bump when headlines report the Share Split count.

View attachment 787088
I think we’ll see a double pump just from the fact that it’s clear Wall St wasn’t positioned for this announcement. I expect there will be a ton of capping to prevent as much of a breakout as possible until they reverse their positions.
 
Wow! About as bullish as you can get. Do they save these for days where the stock is increasing?
Quick summary of their thoughts: Traditional auto says they can find a way around dealers to compete with Tesla, but they probably can't anytime soon. That dispute may wend through the courts all the way to the Supreme Court one day. Also, the downside of the long and possibly conflict-affected EV battery supply chain, if it can be improved, pretty much Elon is the only guy likely to figure out how to improve it.

Again, BAF.
This news made me think for the very first time:
Rather than Tesla being the one to bring to the courts the Interstate Commerce Clause regarding unfair dealership practices, we might see the traditional automakers themselves being the ones forced to carry water for Tesla!

What a fascinating modern world we’re living in.
 
Further, if Tesla is a forward thinking company they may well seek authorization for a large multiple fo what they actually want to do this time. That would make the next split a simple board vote.
That's what I'm thinking...
From my earlier post:
"Does the increase in quantity of shares held out of circulation benefit Tesla? Does that reserve make future executive and employee share awards more manageable? If so, the larger the share count increase the better, just in numerical quantity, as price valuation is not immediately affected.
Am I right?
It would make more sense to have a 20 to 1 split at this time, following Google and Apple, gaining an early multiplier value while almost half the stock remains out of circulation. Yes?"
 
Last edited: