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

[petit_bateau]

Interactive Brokers (IBKR) allows voting on US securities from the UK and Europe. Don't believe it uses CREST although many UK based brokers do.

Revolut which uses IBKR for clearing allows voting too.

IBKR is an American brokerage firm. That is why it has the normal (US) direct access to TSLA shares, and can easily allow voting to its users wherever they are in the world.

In contrast most non-US brokerages hold TSLA (etc) shares via various sorts of nominee pools in USA. The difficulty seems to be in forming the connection through that intermediary pool. This is not just a UK thing, it also affects FR, GE, SWE, etc.

(I think the information about some UK-specific tax wrappers (ISA, SIPP, etc) is a red-herring. In a UK context one can vote shares whether held directly (personal CREST membership, does it still exist ?); or via UK nominees whether they be the brokerage's TRADING nominee pool, the ISA pool, or the SIPP pool. So nominee pools in themselves do not create the voting obstacle as I (for example) can vote any of my TRA, SIPP, ISA shares wrt UK (LSE) voting matters. The issue arises in an international context.).

(I suspect that the ADR information is also a red herring. These are TSLA shares the international folk are holding, with a 1:1 economic relationship. The issue is - I think - an administrative one of forming the voting link in a timely and cost-effective and scalable manner).

 

[petit_bateau]

These fires were a major subject in the NTSB hearings on Lithium Ion batteries in transportation. The 787 case resulted IIRC from numerous failing including zero coordination between Saft, the battery manufacturer, the next level supplier, another level,above that, then Boeing. The transcripts may still be available. This was one of the earliest cases of serious . 787 flaws. Others discussed then were freighter fires from battery cargo, US Navy submarine fires and several more.

The Tesla battery quality control guru testified and showed how to track every cell, establish quality control, etc.

Two days after that event, which I attended, I bought Tesla shares.

https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-recs/RecLetters/A-14-032-036.pdf

A year later I bought my first Tesla.

That was nine years ago, but some major players still have not learned.

BTW the 787 solution ended out weighing more than the lead acid and nicad predecessors.

Up until now you just circumstantially outed yourself. But with this post you explicitly outed yourself. Just saying .... and welcome back ...... j b c

 

[kbM3]

The more awareness there is for EVs, the more Tesla will sell. So I am looking for Ford to succeed; hope they make it.
But I did notice this in the press release:
". . . . targeting total company adjusted EBIT margins of 10% and 8% EBIT margins for EVs by 2026".

Tesla hit 22% EBIT margins in Q1 2022 and will likely reach 24% this Q4 2022 (and that's with Energy and Services dragging the number down).
In my opinion, I believe that Ford will reach 8% EBIT% in 2026 only with very high Average Selling Prices.
It makes you appreciate what Tesla has achieved . . .and as I have said before, "Tesla is only in the 2nd inning of a 9 inning game".

Tesla tripling Ford’s 2036 EBIT target already is impressive enough, but becomes far more so when accounting for growth,

As I’m sure most are aware, high growth inhibits profit through:

1. OpEx must be forward looking. So Tesla’s R&D and SG&A are scaled for the much larger company they will be next year and following.

2. Service revenue is lower because 50% growth means 80% of the fleet is always in warranty.

3. At any point in time, Half of the total production lines are in an inefficient state of ramping, Poor D&A absorption and under-utilized workers, inexperience..,

I’m sure there are more.

Suffice to say if Ford were to also try and grow 50% in 2026, the EBIT would be NEGATIVE!

 

[petit_bateau]

No, at least I think not.

As an example the Octopus (Kraken) setup also manages domestic (residential) storage in a VPP manner. However I am unsure whether Kraken does that natively, or whether they run a licenced Autobidder as a feed into the main Kraken. There is public domain evidence in both directions, so it is possible that Octopus has two different teams running parallel efforts.

There are also things going on in Japan, France, Germany, and China that don't get much reporting in the Anglosphere. And I have a lot of ex-colleagues doing interesting stuff.

Autobidder is not new, not ahead, just gets more column inches. It may however win the adoption game. But it is most definitely NOT a one-horse race.

@Tommy O - There are different realms. Different winners may emerge in each realm. And each country has those realms. And things change. This is not a new game - the various power companies are continuously playing in the power markets of the world, and they are not doing it with a slide rule and an abacus. It is fast and efficient software, and it also keeps the grid stable and balanced. I've seen people make $m just off playing poker carefully with game theory software and a 500kw diesel genset. Don't underestimate the others who are playing this game. Just as in the oil markets and the financial markets and so on, this is serious $$$.

I have just confirmed that Octopus (who are a UK utility) run a trading VPP that is interoperable with both the Tesla Powerwall battery storage, and with the GivEnergy battery storage. So either the Octopus Kraken software platform has two modules (one indigenous, and one a licenced Tesla Autobidder) or the Kraken platform has one indigenous module that can form a product-vendor-agnostic VPP.

If you look at the GivEnergy website ( GivEnergy ) you will see that it has a 'compatible with' logos that link to both the Octopus website, and another logo for E.ON (another major UK utility) and again this links to the EON website. However I am not sure which platform EON runs on now (I used to know but it may have changed) and it may be that EON migrated to Kraken. EDIT : Looking at the following link they [ i.e. EON] have indeed migrated to Kraken

Octopus Energy

Information about Octopus Energy Group

octopusenergy.group

 

[Mengy]

You forgot the /s ? That's post-hoc justification for naked criminality.

Well done, Wall St. Stockholm Syndrome is a thing.

I figured the /s was implied, my mistake for expecting too much from others I suppose.

/s


Pre-market looking very nice this morning!

 

[Nocturnal]

Well it's certainly in the ether. Just a reminder that the very public 120+ page Tesla 2021 Impact Report
is their official statement about governance and diversity/inclusion, which takes over a 1/3 of the report.

https://www.tesla.com/ns_videos/2021-tesla-impact-report.pdf

Re: ESG, there is voluminous detail of ethnic makeup by position (compared against industry) from
the factory floor to engineering management. They seem very much like Apple in terms of progressiveness.
Nonetheless there will be professional shareholder meeting "gadflies" thinking they can do a better
job than a forward-looking company, just as there were at Apple meetings for years.

That's why I voted with the board on that one (and the rest). The board/management either cares about this issue and has taken enough steps, or they don't. If it's the latter then reporting won't help anyway, if it's the former then it's just extra work and possible FUD points of attack.

 

[15Peter20]

Americans not letting UK get voting representation is payback 250+ years past due.

But we just fill in an W8BEN in order to avoid taxation in that case.

 

[jkirkwood001]

If Tesla want non-US retail to be able to vote then they need to put some effort into fixing the existing system which de facto disenfranchises non-US retail wrt US shares.

Personally my preference for solving this in the particular case of TSLA is a direct voting relationship with TSLA, i.e. not via my broker, and definitely not via some US-corporate entity such as SAY as the latter requires me to give a lot of info & permissions to some intermediary that I really do not care for.

EDIT : to be clear, I want (need) to be able to leave my shares in their UK tax wrappers. But voting would also be good. And if in due course other TSLA shareholder value-adds become available, then I naturally want them as well. Most especially SpaceX or Starlink share purchase opportunities - the former which coincidentally are also in practice not available to non-US folks.

For the record, I was easily able to vote my shares in Canada via my Canadian online broker, Questrade, who proactively emailed me a link to do so without me having to authenticate my shares. Same as last year IIRC.

 

[Mengy]

That's why I voted with the board on that one. The board/management either cares about this issue and has taken enough steps, or they don't. If it's the latter then reporting won't help anyway, if it's the former then it's just extra work and possible FUD points of attack.

I voted with the board across the line. I figure they know how to run the company better than I do, and the team has done a great job so far, I support them.

 

[Usain]

I'm sorry, did everyone catch that!?! She said they will install fast chargers that will charge in 10 minutes or less.....ummm, what chemistry is she smoking? That was a quite misleading....

I caught that too. But she also said there will be a charger every 50 miles. So maybe she means that you should stop every 50 miles and charge for 10 minutes.

 

[unk45]

Still meh. The Chinese are welcome to continue pumping out their mini EVs. Has no bearing on Tesla.

Please do a bit of research before letting your prejudice deceive In addition to Tesla you may first look at only the brands you know, because of course ones not known to you are, by definition, minEV’s, like these:

Production kicks off for the Mercedes EQE in China - electrive.com

www.electrive.com

Just to avoid ones not known to you check Volvo (despite PR, their EV run on a Chinese platform and half of them are built there.’)
check it for yourself. They’ve lots of Mini to be sure.
I don’t want to shock you with unknown names, but one was an early Warren Buffet choice and now even sells it’s batteries far and wide for vehicles and storage with a modular approach that is widely applauded. But, they make no mini-EV so can they be Chinese?

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwi5p4zazar5AhWIjZUCHTG2DqEQFnoECCEQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnbc.com%2F2022%2F06%2F14%2Fbyd-sold-so-many-evs-its-one-of-the-top-three-automakers-in-china.html&usg=AOvVaw1HhWClli8wJs9akKdms1kJ

Please do some of your own research. Please! I respect you too much to give up on you.
Check out some Chinese OEM that make large SUV and do so globally. Chery, building in Brazil and with highest quality rating in country, making conquest of Mercedes, BMW owners and now building Tesla model 3 sized BEV in Brazil. Of note, they are, as BYD is, moving from ICE to BEV, building new factories and…both are LK customers.

After some research tell me again how the Chinese just make mini EV. You might want to find out why Mercedes Benz has it’s BEV built and engineered largely in China. Hint: it is NOT cheap labor. That concept is sooo 1980’s.

Again, please, please don’t believe me. Do your own research.

disclosure: I own a Chinese origin BEV. I prefer my Plaid, but the Volvo does work.

 

[unk45]

Wasn’t there even bigger issues with those that had options and couldn’t trade them in a timely fashion?

I also thought that we had several people who waited more than a week post split for things to get sorted.

That was true IIRC. All derivative accounting is not so simple as simple splits would seem to be. From long ago I recall regular delays coping with margin accounts and options. I don’t know if it’s still that way but the root cause historically was that derivative accounting, including margin and securities lending, all began with the number of shares rather than a monetary value. Splits were a headache decades ago, and seem to remain so. Fundamentally it traces back to share count rather than financial value.

You’d think after a few thousand splits that the solutions would have long since been resolved.

 

[jw934]

That was true IIRC. All derivative accounting is not so simple as simple splits would seem to be. From long ago I recall regular delays coping with margin accounts and options. I don’t know if it’s still that way but the root cause historically was that derivative accounting, including margin and securities lending, all began with the number of shares rather than a monetary value. Splits were a headache decades ago, and seem to remain so. Fundamentally it traces back to share count rather than financial value.

You’d think after a few thousand splits that the solutions would have long since been resolved.

Back then some were "unable" to close short options due to the option market pricing being erratic. Several here reported OTM calls and puts at minutes before 4PM still value way above nominal possibly due to volatility after market hours betting on either S&P inclusion announcement, or lack thereof. Examples below were posted after Friday market closed. Closing price was $416. I suppose any naked short would be able to buy the OTM calls and execute them to deliver the shares owed from the split.

Also this is another reason why there was no pinning today. The market makers and the other big guys were gobbling up the straddles. Even something like the 430 calls were trading pretty high in the last minute and they should have been worthless normally.

The 410 put that I sold also should have been worthless but it was trading for 3$.

Thanks for this. I had sold 436s expiring today but couldn’t even buy them back for $0.50 each. I was scared about the 15 minutes between 5:15 (S&P announcement) and 5:30, but it sounds like they won’t really have the chance to exercise them, hopefully.

 

[The Accountant]

Haha. According to Gary, Institutions didn't want to ride TSLA stock from $30 to $900 because of weak board, key man risk, capital allocation (read Twitter), high valuation and CEO time split. I added one more reason to his tweet.

 

[thx1139]

Haha. According to Gary, Institutions didn't want to ride TSLA stock from $30 to $900 because of weak board, key man risk, capital allocation (read Twitter), high valuation and CEO time split. I added one more reason to his tweet.

View attachment 836067

Is he saying that or is he saying Bloomberg?

 

[The Accountant]

Is he saying that or is he saying Bloomberg?

I believe he is using the Bloomberg terminal for his source on the percentages and then adds his commentary as to why Tesla is underinvested by institutions.

 

[Mengy]

Haha. According to Gary, Institutions didn't want to ride TSLA stock from $30 to $900 because of weak board, key man risk, capital allocation (read Twitter), high valuation and CEO time split. I added one more reason to his tweet.

View attachment 836067

This means it's very likely at some point in the future institutions will begin to pour into TSLA like a flood. Probably once the credit rating gets upgraded. That's bullish as frack for us longs.

 

[CitizenKane]

Slightly concerned about the China / US tension, although I 100% support Taiwan's right to be a sovereign democracy.

Haha. According to Gary, Institutions didn't want to ride TSLA stock from $30 to $900 because of weak board, key man risk, capital allocation (read Twitter), high valuation and CEO time split. I added one more reason to his tweet.

View attachment 836067

At least for Swedish institutions that I know a lot of people from - herd mentality. Anyone believing in TSLA has been scorned and accused for not being analytical by people who have not made any analysis... Officers of institutions are afraid of being ridiculed. And if every smart person around you say it is a bubble, then surely it must be a bubble?

 

[unk45]

Up until now you just circumstantially outed yourself. But with this post you explicitly outed yourself. Just saying .... and welcome back ...... j b c

Thanks, IIRC both of us were at that event, and both bought Tesla just after. It was a memorable event, not only because we met Robert Sumwalt, whose work tended to center on airline safety, since he'd been a political for US Airways/Piedmont and ran their safety program. He hadn't a clue about batteries, but the entire board disgust with Boeing was palpable. Had he still been around I'm confident the Bolt fires and other pouch issues would have had more robust investigation.

FWIW, I am much older than that other person.

 

[ZachF]

緑