I don't see how that's possible, unless the CT is either far lighter than we think or the cost savings on building them is gigantic.
-
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
Looks like we established a new regular pattern in TSLA ticker graph, in addition to the good ol' MMD in the mornings.
Now we have a regular ATH in the afternoon!
I like it !
Now we have a regular ATH in the afternoon!
I like it !
Krugerrand
Meow
S
Sony was the first company to commercialize lithium-ion batteries -- beginning in the early 1990's. While they did sell that line of business in 2017 and they weren't able to compete on price very well, it wasn't that long ago and they likely have a lot of retained know-how and institutional knowledge (and likely even royalty-free licenses on their former battery technology to the extent that's worth anything).
Not in the same league as Panasonic or Tesla, but that's definitely a step above ICE companies.
And, Sony is also a world leader in imaging and seems to be taking a similar approach to Tesla in autonomy. Again, that's way ahead of ICE companies.
Like Apple, I don't think Sony necessarily will sell an actual car, but they are positioning to act as a supplier to other OEMs and could theoretically muscle their way into building an actual car if the OEMs don't bite. And again, like Apple, their core skillset of industrial and software design, along with their imaging and battery know-how, are more useful to the future of cars than anything ICE manufacturers can offer.
On the other hand, Apple hasn't succeeded yet (or even shown us anything) and they have a lot more money than Sony. And, Sony has definitely stumbled in the past.
(Btw, this is a welcome diversionary discussion from watching the stock price and interesting, I think, to the long-term competitive landscape for Tesla)
Sony was the first company to commercialize lithium-ion batteries -- beginning in the early 1990's. While they did sell that line of business in 2017 and they weren't able to compete on price very well, it wasn't that long ago and they likely have a lot of retained know-how and institutional knowledge (and likely even royalty-free licenses on their former battery technology to the extent that's worth anything).
Not in the same league as Panasonic or Tesla, but that's definitely a step above ICE companies.
And, Sony is also a world leader in imaging and seems to be taking a similar approach to Tesla in autonomy. Again, that's way ahead of ICE companies.
Like Apple, I don't think Sony necessarily will sell an actual car, but they are positioning to act as a supplier to other OEMs and could theoretically muscle their way into building an actual car if the OEMs don't bite. And again, like Apple, their core skillset of industrial and software design, along with their imaging and battery know-how, are more useful to the future of cars than anything ICE manufacturers can offer.
On the other hand, Apple hasn't succeeded yet (or even shown us anything) and they have a lot more money than Sony. And, Sony has definitely stumbled in the past.
(Btw, this is a welcome diversionary discussion from watching the stock price and interesting, I think, to the long-term competitive landscape for Tesla)
$4500 is for people in poverty level, regular people get $2000
ev-enthusiast
Active Member
Today surpassed 10/25/19 and took its place as the 8th highest volume day in TSLA history. Was there any news today? What is going to happen when there is an actual earnings report driving the stock?
Shorts aren't getting a brake in the aftermarket so far either. Up 1.76.
edit, 2.86 to a clean 495. wow.
edit, 2.86 to a clean 495. wow.
A mental exercise: if you have $10k to invest (that's all the money, no new money), stock XYZ is at $200. You know for a fact XYZ has 80% chance to go straight to $8k a share in 10 years. It also has 20% chance to drop to $140 temporarily, then rally to $8k.
Which of the following will give you the most return?
1. Wait for it to drop to $140, then get the max number of shares;
2. Invest half at $200, keep the other half in cash wait for the $140 entry;
3. Invest half at $200, keep the other half in cash, if stock goes to $500, invest the rest;
4. Invest them all at $200.
Which of the following will give you the most return?
1. Wait for it to drop to $140, then get the max number of shares;
2. Invest half at $200, keep the other half in cash wait for the $140 entry;
3. Invest half at $200, keep the other half in cash, if stock goes to $500, invest the rest;
4. Invest them all at $200.
I’m thinking about tomorrow. You guys are the BEST.
I also bought in relatively early (April 2013, ~$50), based mainly on two other points:
1. Reading about Elon's rebuttal to the NYT hit piece where the lying author desperately tried to brick a test car;
2. Reading Elon's rebuttal to the NYT hit piece where the lying author desperately tried to brick a test car -- in the process ripping not only that clown and his silly article but the entire paper to shreds. NYT apologized.
This opened my eyes to both the product and the driving personality behind it. I was lucky to get in so early but still a bit nervous, so I sold around the peak to regain my stake and my tranquillity. Later added, sometimes on dips.
Now my position is well over my house mortgage value, but I needed a little cash so sold one today @497. 499 did not go through.
Oh well, maybe a new day tomorrow, eh? GLTAL as we say it over här.
Since the bell has rung (and what a ring), let me just mention a curious exception to the above.
Like others, Robinhood allows retail investors to buy stock and use their long position as collateral for new trades.
Robinhood had however a bug that meant that the value of the long position that could be used as collateral forgot to take into account when the long position was already comprising shares bought via this mechanism. By buying over and over, a customer could leverage their initial trade by an unlimited factor. This loophole was aptly named 'infinite leverage'.
Incredibly, one redditor posted a detailed description of how he turned an initial deposit of 2k$ into a balance of 1 million dollars, i.e. a leverage of 500 times. He apparently hoped that no one would notice so that he could profit from this factor-500 leverage.
Naturally, the stock he bought fluctuated downwards by the tiniest amount, sending his portfolio into a negative that exceeded his total worth by far. Since this was in part Robinhood's fault, they made some kind of compromise, incl. him being indefinitely banned from there...
Since this sounds so incredible, I took a minute to find a reference:
The jig is up: Robinhood says it's closed the 'infinite leverage' loophole that allowed users to build positions worth millions | Markets Insider
Yes, software developers are not always as smart as they think...
And wealthy people get $0. There is an income cap too that isn't very hard to hit
Todd Burch
14-Year Member
We've pretty reliably seen drops in price when Tesla has concerns about demand, so that would be a warning sign. So far, no price drops in Q1...bullish so far.
I would invest the $200 all right now, and spend my time and energy trying to earn more money versus trying to predict the bottom.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
