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.
For example over on
Near-future quarterly financial projections
there are estimates of 19Q4 results to the tune of 200M $,
which would mean that a relatively modest Q1 result is
needed to quality for S&P 500 inclusion after Q1 (given
that 19Q4 + Q1 result must reach ca. 266M $ - while Q1
itself must be positive as well).

Could the market be pricing in this possibility already now?

- just trying to wrap my head around the crazy run-up these past few days...
To understand current price action you would need to understand the drop to 52 week low
 
And what's interesting, is that Tesla is in a much better position now than it was in 2013. It has better cars, more models, expanding manufacturing capability, the SuC network, 5-10 years clear advantage over rivals, in fact there aren't any rivals and the competing products are being regulated out of existence, and these companies have to pay Tesla in order to survive.

This is the bonkers situation we find ourselves in, that all of us here have known about for years, but the rest of the investment word seems to have finally realised.
<3 works only once, I find.
 
  • Like
Reactions: capster
BMW’s head of Research and Development Klaus Froehlich:

"Most of the U.S. does not need BEVs. We could offer high-performance plug-in hybrids in the M space, providing a lot of fun to the driver as well as ZEV credits for us. We see BEVs mainly in the west coast and parts of the east coast, while the rest of the U.S. will continue with conventional gasoline engines,” he said.

Btw., BMW's Froehlich also seems to be challenged in U.S. geography: west coast and east coast have a population of about 180 million people - it's the majority of U.S. car buyers.

I.e. the regions he listed are "most of the U.S." only by territory, not by market size...

giphy (17).gif
 
Q1 Tesla will sell as many cars as they can produce.
2020 is just a murderers row of SP events. 1Q will probably break the algos relative to 1Q19 considering demand plus extra China production, then it's Battery Day, then S&P. By the 4th of July all shorts will be in a penal colony on Mars working off their debt.
 
You cannot make this up:

BMW to stand by combustion engines for at least 30 more years: 'Most of the US does not need BEVs'

BMW’s head of Research and Development Klaus Froehlich:

"On the diesel side, production of the 1.5-liter, three-cylinder entry engine will end and the 400-hp, six-cylinder won’t be replaced because it is too expensive and too complicated to build with its four turbos. However, our four- and six-cylinder diesels will remain for at least another 20 years and our gasoline units for at least 30 years,” he said.

....

"Most of the U.S. does not need BEVs. We could offer high-performance plug-in hybrids in the M space, providing a lot of fun to the driver as well as ZEV credits for us. We see BEVs mainly in the west coast and parts of the east coast, while the rest of the U.S. will continue with conventional gasoline engines,” he said.​

No, this is not from the Onion. (I double checked.)

Music to my ears. Elon, you have our permission to kill off BMW.
 
Starlink should be a great cash cow for SpaceX and absolutely will greatly help fund Mars colonization. But the costs to colonize Mars also depend on how fast the funders wish to get it well established. Elon wants a Mars colony to reach sustainability in his lifetime. That will take tens of billions more than Starlink will generate. IMO it's pretty certain Elon will choose to use some of his personal fortune to get there sooner.
Follow Dr. Robert Zubrin on Youtube. He says $2+Trillion to build a city on Mars. So The Boring Company will go a'space mining the asteroid belt. There's Sextillions of $$$ out there. Elon will use Model 3 motors for all the Next Gen Boring TBMs. :D
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: Lessmog and deffu
Despite claims of bats in the belfry and ants in the pants, it would appear that progress continues on GF4. Somehow I think they are managing the bio aspects as they are a known issue the same as the ordnance -- its a matter of identifying and dealing with each one. Nothing new.
GF4, 250 bomb craters have been found on the property and 25 unexploded units are assumed to be identified
Alex on Twitter
 
Relatedly, when I was looking at short interest I saw an article about how $TSLA was (at the time) trailing gains in the indexes. Looking at it that way would be your #4 -- buy all at once and no new investments. But what if you bought into it gradually -- not cherry picking your entry points, but at regular, consistent intervals. So I took the short interest data (which included closing price for mid-month and end of month) and assumed the same amount of money spent on shares at each point. Due to the volatility in the last year that simple mid/end stock buying plan had a better return rate than the indexes.

Furthermore, using the time interval of the data I had, holding at the beginning was about 9% loss instead of profit.

Which is to say, you missed #5, invest the money divided evenly over time. If a stock is volatile you will pick up lows as well as highs which should get you closer to "average" returns. I'm not saying its a good strategy, but I found it interesting that it performed better than buy-at-beginning for the arbitrary time interval I happened to use. Naturally it would perform worse if you picked your start date at $180 :cool:

Just a thought
That makes me feel a bit better about my buys. :)

By coincidence, I bought our initial shares at ~185 years ago, IIRC, and the latest shares this summer again at ~185. In between, I kept buying sporadically across the long "plateau" with the lowest purchase at ~143 and the highest at ~355.

Unfortunately, my lower SP purchases tended to be much smaller than those at higher prices :confused:, so my average isn’t much to write home about (yet).

No, no intention to sell. I keep saying those shares are golden tickets. Oh, and I have an approximate roadmap looking forward through the coming decades. ;)
 
You mean like where 80% of the people live. Kinda limits BMW's market because they'll likely have to exempt Dallas, Houston, and Chicago as well. So basically, they'll sell to a few farmers.
Sooner or later governments will realize that PHEVs shouldn't qualify for credits because there is zero guarantee that they will be used in that manner. IIRC, the data we have shows that 30% of owners don't ever plug in.

Despite claims of bats in the belfry and ants in the pants, it would appear that progress continues on GF4. Somehow I think they are managing the bio aspects as they are a known issue the same as the ordnance -- its a matter of identifying and dealing with each one. Nothing new.

Alex on Twitter
You just destroyed the new short thesis. Bats will prevent GF4.
 
You cannot make this up:

BMW to stand by combustion engines for at least 30 more years: 'Most of the US does not need BEVs'

BMW’s head of Research and Development Klaus Froehlich:

"On the diesel side, production of the 1.5-liter, three-cylinder entry engine will end and the 400-hp, six-cylinder won’t be replaced because it is too expensive and too complicated to build with its four turbos. However, our four- and six-cylinder diesels will remain for at least another 20 years and our gasoline units for at least 30 years,” he said.

....

"Most of the U.S. does not need BEVs. We could offer high-performance plug-in hybrids in the M space, providing a lot of fun to the driver as well as ZEV credits for us. We see BEVs mainly in the west coast and parts of the east coast, while the rest of the U.S. will continue with conventional gasoline engines,” he said.​

No, this is not from the Onion. (I double checked.)

The second part re the US market is interesting in that it reaffirms point #1 of what I had posted after Thanksgiving related to an encounter with an auto group executive in post #108570. Must be group-think at work.

"1. He expressed several times that Tesla is only popular on the coasts and that the middle of the country has much less interest. He seemed to see this as a substantial problem for Tesla but never volunteered any details."
 
Btw., BMW's Froehlich also seems to be challenged in U.S. geography: west coast and east coast have a population of about 180 million people - it's the majority of U.S. car buyers.

I.e. the regions he listed are "most of the U.S." only by territory, not by market size...

Furthermore, even away from the coasts, cities/suburbs are still where most people live. All of the Midwestern/Southern/Mountain cities are all extremely livable with EVs. Even people that don't live in cities are likely to live along primary highway arteries etc. which is where superchargers are located.

The % of US population that leaves within 20 miles of a supercharger has to be extremely high. Kansas City is better than some, but it's extremely easy to live with on here. (not including third party)

Perhaps somebody could overlay some maps.

Light pollution (easy visual approximation of pop density)
light map.jpg


SC map
sc map.JPG



Population density
density1.png


US households have an average of 1.8 vehicles, so even IF somebody needs/wants an ICE for flexible travel to rural areas most could easily own 1 EV and 1 ICE car.

Former BMW owner here. Loved that car. Also was very close to buying an M3 when I received the email that the Performance 3 was ready to order. I don't regret that choice for a second.
 
Last edited:
Profit taking going on?

I now see that that push downward that commenced around 2:45 pm EST coincided with news hitting the wires that CFRA had downgraded TSLA to a Sell from a Hold. That also likely triggered stop limits of weak longs, especially day-traders. That was not long lasting, as the share price began recovering 15 minutes later and that has continued after-hours.

I'm quite familiar with CFRA, as their chief strategist is a friend who was a regular guest of mine on my old TV show. They regularly email updates to me. I also listen and ask questions during their webinars. Their sector analysts are very old school in their stock evaluation methodology. Accounting figures of a recently completed quarter and estimates for the next one are what matter to their sector analysts. Consideration of long-term disruptive innovation and its related R&D investments is beyond their pay grades. Or at least is not justification that their bosses want to hear. Hence they frequently upgrade or downgrade TSLA. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
There isn't a strategy listed that definitively gets you the best return given the scenario, it's all about probability. You do state that the stock eventually goes to $8k regardless, it's just whether it's a straight line, or via a drop.

Option 1 has a 20% chance of the highest return, but if the price never drops then there is 0 return
Option 4 has an 80% chance of the highest return
Option 3 has 100% chance of the lowest return whatever happens - option 2 and 3 need to be combined for either to make sense.

I agree with you. I simplified the cases to illustrate a point. It's all about the expected returns, there is a mathematical correct answer once we assign the probability to each scenario. I remember tivoboy said it would drop to 140 first. Some people got out to wait for the "best entry". Now they probably missed the train.