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

[tslalala]

A maniac bear read when CPI numbers are cooling down when everything was +5% premarket seems to me the last attempt to grab every shares they could at the lowest possible price the day before the fed pivots and slows down the rate hikes. Just before the Christmas rally. That’s my theory. Because I really don’t want to see 140s

I pray none of us see's 140's or even 150. Really hoping that today is the low for the year for our boy TSLA.

 

[StarFoxisDown!]

The rainy day fund would be for the next year or two where the entire world is looking at a recession at the very least, a severe recession realistically, or a global depression at the bad end. All companies earnings and stock prices drop during recessions (and much worse during depressions). Not worth risking TSLA at an existential level.

At which point, Tesla already has 20 billion in reserves. Plenty of cash to weather a recession. Therefore, FCF surplus coming in every quarter AFTER capex/operating cost are factored in can easily go to a buyback.

This point has been discussed to death here on and Twitter. A buyback wouldn't and shouldn't draw down cash. It should be used from FCF surplus on a quarterly basis.

 

[Ogre]

Which is why I asked the question I did. I don't think it's clear if a buy back has to be officially announced or if the board just has to meet to approve it, at which point Tesla can start buying stock as soon as it wants, regardless of whether its' been officially announced or not.

Wasn't Musk late to his town hall/ Twitter spaces call due to an urgent Tesla board meeting just recently?

I'm skeptical Tesla is doing a buyback on a down day like this, but timing is curious.

 

[SebastienBonny]

A maniac bear read when CPI numbers are cooling down when everything was +5% premarket seems to me the last attempt to grab every shares they could at the lowest possible price the day before the fed pivots and slows down the rate hikes. Just before the Christmas rally. That’s my theory. Because I really don’t want to see 140s

I like this thinking. It isn’t making any sense what happened today, unless tomorrow will show your thinking was right.

 

[StarFoxisDown!]

Wasn't Musk late to his town hall/ Twitter spaces call due to an urgent Tesla board meeting just recently?

I'm skeptical Tesla is doing a buyback on a down day like this, but timing is curious.

It's easy to read into the timing of that board meeting but it could be anything.

But the more noticeable thing is the volume today. It's been a very long time since we've seen this level of volume.

 

[Max Plaid]

If someone could post a screengrab of the intraday Options volume chart, that'd be helpful. Over 110M shares of TSLA traded by half-time today. I highly doubt there's that much liquidity in TSLA stock, and that the majority of this volume is naked short selling from Options maker makers as a reflex to high Put options volume.

Link to TSLA Options charts: TSLA Open Interest, Volume and Max Pain

The midday Options volume chart is our only insight into this looming issue (which some of you may have heard of before). Note that Options aren't traded in the Pre-market, but as soon as the Main session began, the push was on:

View attachment 884496

 

[FSDtester#1]

Just signed a contract to sell my airplane. Guess what I'll be doing with the money?

Buying FTX or Honda stock?

 

[tslalala]

Time to take a few days break from this board. here are my parting words:
since 1998 i have invested in several companies including google, linked in, face book, VM ware, chipotle etc
missed out on apple- was going to buy in 2010 or so but made a wrong decision and never bought it
bought amazon briefly in 2002 but never held it
Tesla is far superior to all those companies
all these companies come back from periodic sell-offs of 50 to 60% every few years
this downturn in tesla stock price unlikely to last much longer, especially with extremely high volume today. high volume comes typically at end of moves, either up or down. this is no different than 2016, 2019, early 2020 etc
signing off for a while
good luck to all the longs

Thanks for sharing those encouraging words!

 

[MC3OZ]

I would have not thought it possible, but I am questioning my investment thesis on TSLA. I was right about the company, right about the timing, right about EVs and the tech. What I didn't anticipate was that Elon himself would be the black swan I was always worried about. Yes, TSLA would be down with the macro, but I would estimate we'd be around $225 if Elon had not got involved with Twitter/politics.

Engineering and the product are most important, but brand is also very important and it has objectively taken a hit. The pool of potential customers has been reduced, which I believe will show up in reduced demand. In short, I believe the growth curve has been altered. How much is the big question?

I'm not selling, but I'm not comfortable adding anymore.

In the long run the quality of the products determines the brand appeal.

In the long run revenues and margins determine the share price, dividends and buy backs.

Elon posting political stuff on Twitter could be toned down at snytime.

Elon may not be CEO and the public face of Tesla forever.

Focus on the short term negatives, you risk losing the long term positives.

 

[wipster]

Definitely OT, but we can all use a Wow!!!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1602710795233726465

 

[2daMoon]

The world famous perfume maker, Singed, has held off shipping their new fragrance "Burnt (short) Hair" until Q1.

Coincidence?

I don't think so.

 

[tslalala]

I'm not sure that will matter alot, unless get rid of madoff rule
Failures to deliver 2020 to mid november 2020
View attachment 884530

Failures to deliver, since 3:1 split to now. not sure but percent of FTD, lately never seems to get very high at all
perhaps say a few rapid 5:4 splits to throw a "wrench into the works"

View attachment 884535

The problem is that since the split, more liquidity has been created (just like for GME). Since FTD's can be cleared through CNS ("continuous net settlement"), there are hardly any more upside price effects to FTD's on TSLA anymore. The split actually harmed TSLA by making it easier to short with much greater liquidity now.

 

[Artful Dodger]

View attachment 884571

Wow, what an increase in Put volume over just 1 hour onf trading! c.f. the TSLA Options Volume chart posted by @Chenkers at 13:19 EST in Post #383,408

Thank-you.

 

[FSDtester#1]

The world famous perfume maker, Singed, has held off shipping their new fragrance "Burnt (short) Hair" until Q1.

Coincidence?

I don't think so.

Must have to do with the IRA and tax credits /s

 

[AudubonB]

Maybe a niave question, but how can Reuters continue this blatant manipulation and misinformation without consequence?

I do not think it overly naive, as it plays directly into answering one of the “What would I be promulgating were I to be sitting on Tesla’s BoD” questions with which I occupy a lot of my investment time.

Reuters, NYTimes, Bloomberg and all other responsible or heretofore responsible news organizations are accustomed to and, in my strongly deliberated opinion, justified in desiring, a corporation possessing a Public Relations department from which they can receive official information and to which they both can ask questions and request confirmation, clarification or denial of reports they have gathered from other sources. The more public a company - ie, a publicly-owned and -traded one being at the top of the spectrum - and the larger the company, the more essential and valuable such a department is.

I assert one of Mr Musk’s greatest and unforced blunders was to dismiss any nascent PR department Tesla may once have had. He either explicitly or at the least implicitly announced that he personally could function as PR. Of course, for now quite some years he compounded, in my opinion, what already was a terrible misjudgment by shifting essentially all public statements away from what traditionally are called Releases, or even the Tesla blog to which I refer below, toward tweets. I have had to sit on my hands for most of the past ten minutes to refrain from voicing my opinon about that platform; I will say nothing more than that shift coincided with my acknowledgeably tiresome mantra “I Hate Twitter.”

If we revisit the first large public relations problems with which Tesla had to contend - the ”Stalled out on Tesla’s Electric Highway” of February 8, 2013 by John Broder - Tesla responded. At least one response was on Feb 11 from Mr Musk’s Twitter account, and, although a cringing harbinger of what shortly would become that platform’s most infamous words “Fake News” (no, he did not use that specific combination, but it was close enough), it nevertheless was a useless denial of the article and its conclusions. HOWEVER, Tesla did follow up on Feb 19 with a cogent, appropriate rebuttal…BY Mr Musk, ON Tesla’s then active, useful and lamentably long-gone blog. It was effective, to an extent, in that other articles referring to range anxiety did use that communication in their own articles. That response, as well as others Mr Musk provided in those early years, demonstrated conclusively that he can write effectively; that he is not somehow limited by some much-broadcasted developmental impediment about which this thread, especially, has so lamentably often contained responses like "He is who he is. Deal with it."

Now and for many years prior, every responsible article or radio/television news story of importance regarding Tesla has contained a concluding line, almost invariable across each such article, that is - for Tesla and for each of us who cares deeply about the company - a 160dB long whistle blast across the bow of your yacht warning of impending danger: "Tesla did not respond when we reached out for clarification."

Are the news organizations nefarious in disseminating misinformation? Are they complicit with short-sellers? With high-frequency traders? With market makers? With their extant or possible or imaginary advertisers: other automotive companies, the petroleum industry, Wall St? It may or may not be so, but it almost does not matter. Were Tesla to be forthright in responding to news organizations' requests for information, there would be virtually no room for even a nefarious news service to manipulate.

 

[tslalala]

Don’t think Elon would be tweeting this while selling …

The problem is TSLA's straight decline and disconnect from the macro since November has absolutely nothing to do with macro - it's intentional short pressure, contrary to the macro environment, just like today which should have given TSLA a big boost, but the opposite happened thanks to institutional short sellers/short hedge funds.

 

[WattsHappening]

It's easy to read into the timing of that board meeting but it could be anything.

But the more noticeable thing is the volume today. It's been a very long time since we've seen this level of volume.

I would be much more optimistic if the heavy volume was on a day where TSLA was outperforming macros. Today’s heavy volume is based on selling pressure, which makes me think some combo of short selling, margin calls, whale(s) selling.

 

[winfield100]

Unclear, but over the past 3 yrs @mongo and I have discussed the following theory. For this S&P 500 rebalancing event, the following is at play:

• the S&P 500 index reference date for the Q4 rebalancing was the 3rd Fri of Nov,
• at that time (Nov 18, 2022), TSLA S&P 500 weight was about 1.439%
• TSLA's previous weight for the Q3 rebalance (as of Aug 18, 22) was ~2.096%

Now this next part is conjecture: S&P 500 index funds will rebalance by selling approx 2.096/1.439 = 45% percent of the TSLA holdings over 3-5 trading sessions centered around the rebalance date (Fri, Dec 16, 2022). That's on the order of 100M shares of TSLA.

Most Index Funds will trade (rebalance) at the Closing Cross on Fri, Dec 16, 2022. That makes today's volume (already 136M shares by 2:15 pm) the 'jockeying' before the main event.

Note that I do not KNOW this, and that @mongo has made a strong case that the daily change in index weights due to SP movements naturally rebalances the index. He may well be right, and there is no issue this week.

However, I persist because the available evidence has lead to successful predictions of strong volume on rebalancing days (typically, extreme volume at the Closing Cross on the rebalance date). So again, I don't know, I'm just following the evidence.

So what is the financial motivation for large hedge funds to beat down TSLA ahead of the S&P 500 rebalancing? They know that a large number of shares will change hands in the week of the rebalancing. If they can drive down the SP before the rebalance date, then they create their own bargain price on a large number of shares. All they have to do afterward is take their boot off the throat of TSLA, selling into the rising SP for a tidy and risk-free profit.

Anyway, I predicted this months ago now, so we'll see if events match the theory. But the puppeteers will not be exposed by this little drama, since they pull all the strings (and they own the theatre).

November 1, 2021 to January 31st, 2022 (3 months around last years rebalancing?)

its a bit tough to get these to line up vertically, apologies, could the FTD's in december, 2021 be vaguely relateted to rebalancing?
(i am but a newbie and an adhd dillatante)

 

[tslalala]

I do not think it overly naive, as it plays directly into answering one of the “What would I be promulgating were I to be sitting on Tesla’s BoD” questions with which I occupy a lot of my investment time.

Reuters, NYTimes, Bloomberg and all other responsible or heretofore responsible news organizations are accustomed to and, in my strongly deliberated opinion, justified in desiring, a corporation possessing a Public Relations department from which they can receive official information and to which they both can ask questions and request confirmation, clarification or denial of reports they have gathered from other sources. The more public a company - ie, a publicly-owned and -traded one being at the top of the spectrum - and the larger the company, the more essential and valuable such a department is.

I assert one of Mr Musk’s greatest and unforced blunders was to dismiss any nascent PR department Tesla may once have had. He either explicitly or at the least implicitly announced that he personally could function as PR. Of course, for now quite some years he compounded, in my opinion, what already was a terrible misjudgment by shifting essentially all public statements away from what traditionally are called Releases, or even the Tesla blog to which I refer below, to tweets. I have had to sit on my hands for most of the past ten minutes to refrain from voicing my opinon about that platform; I will say nothing more than that shift coincided with my acknowledgeably tiresome mantra “I Hate Twitter.”

If we revisit the first large public relations problems with which Tesla had to contend - the ”Stalled out on Tesla’s Electric Highway” of February 8, 2013 by John Broder - Tesla responded. At least one response was on Feb 11 from Mr Musk’s Twitter account, and, though a cringing harbinger of what shortly would become that platform’s most infamous words “Fake News” (no, he did use that specific combination, but it was close enough), it nevertheless was a useless denial of the article and its conclusions. HOWEVER, Tesla did follow up on Feb 19 with a cogent, appropriate rebuttal…BY Mr Musk, ON Tesla’s then active, useful and lamentably long-gone blog. It was effective, to an extent, in that other articles referring to range anxiety did use the communications in their own articles. That response, as well as others Mr Musk provided in those early years, demonstrated conclusively that he can write effectively; he is not somehow limited by some broadcasted developmental impediment about which this thread, especially, has so lamentably often contained responses like "He is who he is. Deal with it."

Now and for many years prior, every responsible article or radio/television news story of importance regarding Tesla has contained a line, almost invariable across each such article, that is - for Tesla and for each of us who cares deeply about the company - a 160dB long whistle blast across the bow of your yacht warning of impending danger: "Tesla did not respond when we reached out for clarification."

Are the news organizations in disseminating misinformation? Are they complicit with short-sellers? With high-frequency traders? With market makers? With the extant or possible or imaginary advertisers - other automotive companies, the petroleum industry, Wall St? It may or may not be so, but it almost does not matter. Were Tesla to be forthright in responding to news organizations' requests for information, there would be virtually no room for even a nefarious news service to manipulate.

Totally agree with you, brother. Tesla needs to grow up and create an effective PR department. This is simply the cost of doing business for one of the biggest companies in the world. Elon does need to learn to delegate this function out. It would help to separate Tesla's corporate personality and identity from Elon Musk's.

 

[tslalala]

At which point, Tesla already has 20 billion in reserves. Plenty of cash to weather a recession. Therefore, FCF surplus coming in every quarter AFTER capex/operating cost are factored in can easily go to a buyback.

This point has been discussed to death here on and Twitter. A buyback wouldn't and shouldn't draw down cash. It should be used from FCF surplus on a quarterly basis.

I wouldn't complain if Tesla did a share buyback, even if it was a minimal one they did selectively when the shorts attack hard. It seems the Tesla board is good at doing absolutely nothing. They should be defending the company and brand in the world arena, yet are silent and actionless.