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

[ggr]

MODS-
If there was a subscription option for this forum that allowed paid subscribers to a new service to Click To Hide selected posts so they never show again in that subscriber's account, that'd be great.

Other Click To Hide subscribers could either:
1- Use the system as described, or-

2- Choose the threshold number of Hide-Clicks by other Hide-Clickers to posts tp be likewise hidden from their view, or-

3- Or copy a favorite fellow forum member and see only their Un-Hide-Clicked posts (provided that member has approved that public transparency). Those who opt to allow others to duplicate their Hide-Selections might opt to show how many fellow Hide-Followers they have so that other subscribers could opt to duplicate the most popularly followed.

Finally paid my dime and bought my handsome little red S-shield (most expensive supporter option,
I might add!). I'd LOVE to pay as much again to become a TMC Hide Clicker to help pay for getting that software written.

Much simpler than I made it sound, and would save countless wasted forum member hours.

-EDITED way too many times, sorry, best I can do at 3:20 AM. With my suggestion we could all go to bed earlier.

Well, the moderators have very little say in how the forum works, and suggestions about how to make it better are off topic in this thread. So whether or not you have a good idea, don't post it here. There is a special subgroup for that, elsewhere in the forum.
Site Feedback
Mod hat on: take this discussion somewhere else. --ggr.

 

[lklundin]

Well, yes. But this time they are in a hurry and can't wait for a BMW factory to become for sale..

Also, unlike back then 42M Euro is now pocket change for Tesla - and they can reuse their already validated GF building plans.

 

[ammulder]

Could one of you explain to an options newbie how the percentage of selling tagged to shorts can be 60% day after day after day? On the face of it, it seems like they should run out of ammo after a certain number of days of that.

 

[Artful Dodger]

The Top 50 is market Cap based. #50 is ~$126 Billion

Thanks, mongo. That implies TSLA at ~$700/share to be #50 on the S&P 100 list, or 'middle of the pack'.

So, Q3?

Cheers!

 

[Tslynk67]

It looks like we have to wait a little bit longer to reach 500 and beyond.

How long you been following $TSLA?

 

[Artful Dodger]

Why?

Shortzes and Technical traders are fighting to hold SP at the Upper Bollinger Band (~$491 right now). That'll provide some capping effect momentarily, but the Upper-BB is being dragged up by about $5 per day right now. So by Friday (2 days) its likely the Upper-BB will exceed $500. Then a new flood of momentum buyers will rush in. Overall, Bad News for the Bears.

EDIT: 352,348 shares of TSLA traded @ ASP $489.89 in the Pre-market by 08:00 EST. Shortzes making their last stand today? Seems like PANNICK AT THE DISCO...

EDIT2: Pre-market SP up $9 in 30 min as a new class of Traders comes into the paddock: (can't keep up)

 

[ggr]

Mod: I moved 6 posts about exotic option trades to Advanced TSLA Options Trading . I would strongly request that such posts not be in this thread. Exuberance might cause harm. --ggr.

 

[Aeon]

Are we trending in the right direction RIGHT NOW?
Go baby!

 

[MABMAB]

Could one of you explain to an options newbie how the percentage of selling tagged to shorts can be 60% day after day after day? On the face of it, it seems like they should run out of ammo after a certain number of days of that.

And if the percent of selling tagged to shorts can be known, why is not also shared and known the percent of selling and buying attributed to other sources, such as retail longs, hedge fund longs, ETF longs, mutual fund longs, etc...

 

[printf42]

This is the news title I saw this morning:
“Investors nervous but more room for bull run”

Spoiler

Only noticed when reading it the third time, that’s a “but” not “about”...

 

[Tslynk67]

Note that Nasdaq futures are up 0.50%, so favourable macros for opening.

 

[Sancho]

Ben Kallo has been a rare bull on TSLA for years. Bucking the conventional wisdom of his investment community has seemingly taken its toll. He describes himself in this note as “battle weary”. So first, thank you Ben for your service. Take a break, you earned it.

While I have been doing some profit taking during this runup (as Ben now recommends) I don’t concur with Ben that TSLA is now fair valued. There are so many reasons for this, (and we all know them here), but the most immediate reason is China.

I’d like a dollar for every person that has said “demand for Tesla in China is uncertain.” A true statement of course, but we can all make a prediction, and mine is that demand will be through the roof. Like crazy big.

And as for supply to fulfil demand, if Tesla can miraculously build a GF3 in a year, what prevents them from tripling that capacity the following year? Including battery production. Until I see evidence of raw material shortages or other limiting factors, I’m going to predict that Tesla will increase supply in China at unprecedented speed.

Hence, no change to my outperform rating.

 

[KarenRei]

The $130 per year fee to offset road tax loss from lack of fuel purchase, while slightly high, isn't unreasonable

Yes it is. Ignoring the fact that EVs should be significantly subsidized right now in order to accelerate the transition (the faster the scaleup, the sooner prices drop).... ICE vehicles pollute the commons by burning their weight in fuel every year into our breathing air, emitting the toxic mix at ground level, primarily in densely populated areas. Seriously, EVs should have no operating cost advantages over ICEs?

Once ICEs are extinct or rapidly en route to becoming extinct, then of course EVs should bear the costs of their share of the infrastructure. Until then, however, EVs should have favourable terms in relation to ICEs.

IMHO.

 

[Tslynk67]

Now some better-than-expected US job figures which usually boosts macro

 

[Pezpunk]

stock price swings about $10 in 15 minutes pre-market for no reason. okay.

 

[KarenRei]

Managers can beat the market. It’s rare but doable. My grandfather-in-law Seth Glickenhaus did it for many years. Not a lot of players out there like he was. He passed away a few years back at 103. One of our last conversations was him asking me what I thought about Tesla. My answer was dead wrong.

There's somewhat of a "scheme" involved in "funds that beat the market". A company may offer multiple actively-managed investment funds, and wow, on average, most of them beat the market! But how it works is... every year, the funds with the worst performance are eliminated, and new funds are added in their place. Now, statistically, even if stocks are chosen at random, some funds will perform better than the market over the course of several years, and some will perform worse. By eliminating the worse ones, you're left with the ones that have a record of beating the market, plus some new random funds. Viola! You have a mix of funds that on average performs better than the market, even if the stocks they chose were at random. And there's no predictive value on the funds going forward ("past performance is not indicative of future returns")

The same applies to individuals. Millions and millions of people invest. Statistically, some minority - still representing a huge number of people - will end up starting with a tiny bit of money and ending up with a fortune. Even if every investor chose at random.

It's important to not misinterpret luck as skill.

 

[jerry33]

Yes it is. Ignoring the fact that EVs should be significantly subsidized right now in order to accelerate the transition (the faster the scaleup, the sooner prices drop).... ICE vehicles pollute the commons by burning their weight in fuel every year into our breathing air, emitting the toxic mix at ground level, primarily in densely populated areas. Seriously, EVs should have no operating cost advantages over ICEs?

Once ICEs are extinct or rapidly en route to becoming extinct, then of course EVs should bear the costs of their share of the infrastructure. Until then, however, EVs should have favourable terms in relation to ICEs.

IMHO.

It would also be nice if trucks (18 wheel) paid their fair share too.

 

[KarenRei]

Fremont is already operating at maximum capacity, so no production growth is expected from there. Elon has stated cars will not be made in Reno, so once Fremont and Shanghai are both fully operating, that's it for production capacity increase until Berlin is online.

*cough* Model Y *cough*?

Also, Tesla has managed to keep squeezing more and more out of Model 3 production every quarter. I do expect that there's limits to how high they can - or want to - go, of course. They can also up S/X production.

The wild card is I guess the other stuff. Solar and FSD being the big ones.

Everyone always forgets storage.... storage is going to be one of Tesla's biggest markets in the long term, particularly grid-scale. Probably nearly as big as automotive in the long run.

But yes, Tesla Energy (incl. solar) should, on average, have significant growth each quarter, higher on average than automotive.

 

[Artful Dodger]

stock price swings about $10 in 15 minutes pre-market for no reason. okay.

There's a reason. Only certain priviledged classes of traders are allowed into the Pre-market before 08:00 hrs EST. Those are the bigger hedge funds for example, who were dragging the SP down into the ~488 region.

When more classes of traders are allowed into the Pre-market at 08:00 hrs, look what happened: POP!

Pre-Market High: $498.40 (08:25:42 EST)
Previous day Hi: $498.49

There's also a reason (it's just TA-based trading...)

View attachment 498206

Cheers!

 

[Singuy]

stock price swings about $10 in 15 minutes pre-market for no reason. okay.

Probably after the bots read the headlines, and now humans took over and noticed a downgrade with an increase of $170 in pt with more upside.