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

[Mokuzai]

It's that time again...updated racing bar charts with updated InsideEvs estimates:

Mase Goslin on Twitter

 

[Antares Nebula]

I believe the issue is that if you post a URL you should say something about the URL's content and why it's worthwhile clicking on the URL (or not worthwhile)--not just the title.

I don't know if I agree with this. Sometimes the title by itself is helpful enough to decide whether you should click on it. Sure if the user wants to add his/her two cents or has some truly insightful comment. Maybe helpful. But isn't the objective to minimize verbage? Folks here are always complaining about the enormous amount of posts and noise.

You can look at my post history. I'm not shy about speaking my mind. But many times, I just link articles without saying anything, because I don't feel I have anything valuable to add. Sure I have an opinion on the article. But opinions are dime a dozen. Does everyone really want to hear my opinion on every article I post? When I do feel I have something to share on the linked article, I do. But otherwise brevity is best.

Examples:

Nothing more to add, but I think nonetheless informative and of possible interest to TMC folks:

Tesla’s Stagnant Energy Reshuffles Executive Ranks
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

Added a quote and some thoughts:

Courtesy of @Solar Aussie (thanks!):

Brexit, cycle lanes and Saudi Arabia: CTF's Facebook campaigns

"Several of the Crosby-linked groups purported to be scrutinising activists who back regulation. One such site was GreenWatch, which, in addition to its Facebook page, had a standalone website and Twitter account which criticised environmental causes. On the page it attacked the BBC’s reporting on biomass by “everyone’s least favourite licence fee-charging broadcasting corporation” as “hot air”, mocked malfunctioning wind turbines, and repeatedly criticised electric car pioneer Elon Musk."

Interesting in the context of social media campaigns, a la Cambridge Analytica and Russian interference in US and British elections. Also, I think Tesla is mentioned in the Netflix documentary, The Great Hack, which also discusses some of the above issues.

Don't think for a second that there isn't a vast social media campaign on FB, Twitter, Seeking Alpha, and elsewhere targeting Tesla and Elon Musk. Who are the perpetrators? Take your pick: Big Oil (including Russia), anti-environmental groups, short hedge funds, and perhaps others too.

 

[ggr]

Sorry if this comes off as OT, but I feel like I frequently see Tesla attempt to make decisions that require shareholder approval and frequently fall short of the required votes to pass. My guess is that most of the people on this forum are not set up to vote in alignment with the board automatically or don't even know how. Anyone got a good resource on how to go about voting with the board automatically regardless of how you are holding shares that could be shared/added to some peoples signatures?

An interesting, and I believe sort-of incorrect, observation. I only remember a few such resolutions failing (I've been listening real time for at least 5 years). Two were this year. Resolution 4 was an amendment to the bylaws to eliminate the "supermajority voting requirement", which requres two-thirds of the outstanding shares to vote in favor of any change to the bylaws. Resolution 5 was to reduce the term of directors from 3 to 2 years, which would also require a change to the bylaws. Both failed, but (paraphrased) "99% of the votes cast were in favor of the resolutions, but less than 2/3rds of the outstanding shares voted on these resolutions", so they failed because of the bylaws (which they were trying to change...). I believe this has been the case for all of the failed resolutions proposed by Tesla.

So the voters are on Tesla's side, but not enough of them vote.

While researching this, I went to ir.tesla.com and re-listened to the relevant part of the 2019 AGM. The 2018 AGM is not listed there. The 2017 AGM is, but if you click the link to listen to the presentation, it takes you to 2019 again! I didn't go further back. (I submitted a comment, hahaha.) I guess this is another example of Tesla's internal communication not being done well. Thankfully the cars are much better.

 

[ggr]

I don't know if I agree with this. Sometimes the title by itself is helpful enough to decide whether you should click on it. Sure if the user wants to add his/her two cents or has some truly insightful comment. Maybe helpful. But isn't the objective to minimize verbage? Folks here are always complaining about the enormous amount of posts and noise.

You can look at my post history. I'm not shy about speaking my mind. But many times, I just link articles without saying anything, because I don't feel I have anything valuable to add. Sure I have an opinion on the article. But opinions are dime a dozen. Does everyone really want to hear my opinion on every article I post? When I do feel I have something to share on the linked article, I do. But otherwise brevity is best.

Examples:

Nothing more to add, but I think nonetheless informative and of possible interest to TMC folks:


Added a quote and some thoughts:

You seem to be disagreeing with the people who are asking others to do exactly what you're doing!

 

[willw64]

It's that time again...updated racing bar charts with updated InsideEvs estimates:

Mase Goslin on Twitter

I can pretty much guarantee that chart will never make Seeking Alpha. Every company deserves to be shorted at some point for a whole host of reasons, but the bear case of basically equating Tesla and Elon Musk to Theranos and Elizabeth Holmes is laughable, but it is the constant theme there and to a large degree on CNBC.

 

[StealthP3D]

at some point you have to decide what to do with your cash when you are wildly successful

BTW i really love that this thread is now focusing on investing vs trading and other issues

The TSLA short-sellers and bears want the longs and the bulls to not be "investors" but for us to be "traders". It's much easier to control the narrative and the share price if you can keep the longs finger on the "sell" button and make them afraid to buy when the price is falling. The primary tool of their craft is to use other peoples fear to drive their profit.

Resolute longs who are secure in their conviction that the true value of Tesla lies well into four digits are of no use to them. Nervous Nellies are their best friends.

 

[elasalle]

I'd love to see 300, before thinking about 600, 1400, 4000 & 6000

 

[Antares Nebula]

You seem to be disagreeing with the people who are asking others to do exactly what you're doing!

What?

The poster is suggesting users post context on every article link.

But I don't post context on every article link. See my above examples. And also look at my content history. Some article links, I do post my thoughts. Some I don't -- only the link and title. I think most TMC folk also follow a similar pattern.

 

[Green Pete]

So the voters are on Tesla's side, but not enough of them vote.

This what I was trying to rectify. Although I am sure you are correct about the frequency of the problem.

 

[ggr]

This what I was trying to rectify. Although I am sure you are correct about the frequency of the problem.

So is Tesla. That was exactly resolution #4 this year, which got 99% of votes, but still failed...

 

[ggr]

What?

The poster is suggesting users post context on every article link.

But I don't post context on every article link. See my above examples. And also look at my content history. Some article links, I do post my thoughts. Some I don't -- only the link and title.

Sometimes the title of the webpage is sufficient context, on that I agree with you. But "Bloomberg: are you a robot?" is clearly insufficient. No-one is complaining about you...

 

[StealthP3D]

I'd love to see 300, before thinking about 600, 1400, 4000 & 6000

A real investor doesn't say "If it can make it to $300, then maybe it can make it to $600" (and so forth).

A true investor knows what the true potential value of a business is and takes action on that knowledge. They don't look to the market to confirm their thesis while taking baby steps each time the market seems to agree, they make bold moves based on solid and informed convictions. No one ever became wealthy who needed the market to continually reaffirm their beliefs.

 

[Antares Nebula]

Sometimes the title of the webpage is sufficient context, on that I agree with you. But "Bloomberg: are you a robot?" is clearly insufficient. No-one is complaining about you...

I agree with you. My point was that I don't think it's necessarily laziness or intentional. There's a bug in the software that doesn't work with Bloomberg for whatever reason, and it trips up people from time to time.

For example, I'm relatively active on Seeking Alpha, and their software is not as nice as TMC. You have to always cut and paste the title in addition to the link (if you want to be informative and not annoying, but most SA folks don't bother). So this is a regular habit for me. But whenever, I'm posting on TMC, I repeat this habit, and have to keep deleting the title I cut and pasted, after I see that it is duplicated in the link.

It is probably the opposite for TMC folks who mostly only post on TMC (or other cites that act similarly). They're habituated to just cut and paste the link, realizing only later that the Bloomberg link didn't format the title into it. Yes, people should be vigilant and double check things, but most are in a hurry and don't bother. And honestly, even on SA or other cites, most folks DON'T bother to cut and paste the title, where only the link shows up (super annoying, I agree). Not excusing it. Just saying that there is a slight software/interface issue between TMC and Bloomberg that will trip up some of the less vigilant and detail oriented folks.

 

[Green Pete]

So is Tesla. That was exactly resolution #4 this year, which got 99% of votes, but still failed...

So... would providing informational resources here, a place that represents many investors, not help get more of the outstanding shares voting and thus help? I feel like either I’m missing something very basic. But I don’t think I’m that dumb.

Not enough people voted. Preemptively educating a forum of shareholders who largely support musk/the board seems like a productive idea no?

 

[kengchang]

Just dropped by my local service center in Pomona to order Model 3 cabin filter and there was no one sitting/waiting around for service. Quality must have been trending up just like Jerome said

Autoline TV :

47:25

Kona catches fire no one give a crap, Tesla catches fire -> world news. Why is Tesla being singled out?!

 

[j6Lpi429@3j]

So people still valuing their tesla stock based on...the fact that someone else may value their tesla stock higher in the future...presumably because those 'someone else' types think that a third person values them higher in the future future because.... what?
Share buybacks achieve nothing, but reducing the number of people entitled to DIVIDENDS. Being taken over is only something that happens because another company thinks the target company will boost profits enabling them to... drumroll... pay out DIVIDENDS.

This is not a matter of opinion, but mathematical fact. There is NO way to get your money back that you invested in a company other than through
a) DIVIDENDS or
b) Selling the right to future dividends to somebody else.

Anyone who honestly thinks that a company has any value whatsoever, on any planet, in any universe, if it will never pay out its profits to its owners.... well you should get the hell out of the stock market now because you have ZERO idea what you are doing.

This has *absolutely nothing* to do with your personal trading strategy, which may be to speculate on SP rises due to far off potential dividends (which you don't want to wait for), or may be a more traditional dividend based strategy.
How is this so complex? Its scary to me that people have no idea what a share is, or what it represents, and yet they trade them.

 

[j6Lpi429@3j]

It's so cute when people confuse their models for reality.

Things have value because people will give you something for them. Check out the pieces of paper in your wallet. Consider the dividends they pay.

its so cute when people have no idea what they are replying to.
I have not said the stock has no value, it has value BECAUSE IT ENTITLES YOU TO DIVIDENDS. The reason why people will give me something for them? BECAUSE THAT ENTITLES THEM TO THE DIVIDENDS. For crying out loud, why is this so complicated to grasp? They dont have value because the certificates have a shiny logo on them.

 

[SpaceCash]

So people still valuing their tesla stock based on...the fact that someone else may value their tesla stock higher in the future...presumably because those 'someone else' types think that a third person values them higher in the future future because.... what?
Share buybacks achieve nothing, but reducing the number of people entitled to DIVIDENDS. Being taken over is only something that happens because another company thinks the target company will boost profits enabling them to... drumroll... pay out DIVIDENDS.

This is not a matter of opinion, but mathematical fact. There is NO way to get your money back that you invested in a company other than through
a) DIVIDENDS or
b) Selling the right to future dividends to somebody else.

Anyone who honestly thinks that a company has any value whatsoever, on any planet, in any universe, if it will never pay out its profits to its owners.... well you should get the hell out of the stock market now because you have ZERO idea what you are doing.

This has *absolutely nothing* to do with your personal trading strategy, which may be to speculate on SP rises due to far off potential dividends (which you don't want to wait for), or may be a more traditional dividend based strategy.
How is this so complex? Its scary to me that people have no idea what a share is, or what it represents, and yet they trade them.

I hear you and you're right. But also completely wrong.

 

[StealthP3D]

I hear you and you're right. But also completely wrong.

I'm declaring SpaceCash the winner of this argument. I would provide a logical reason for this but then someone would argue with me.

 

[AlMc]

Can we have one of you make a thread about 'Dividends/buybacks..which is better, what are their definitions'.