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

[Prunesquallor]

Yep, being direct. A Dutch trait

As for the current jubilant mood. I get it (I feel it too) and that means moderation had to become more lenient. I can’t delete 3/4 of all posts...

Having strong Dutch genes and being from an ethnically Dutch midwestern town, I can say this with love.

"You can always tell a Dutchman...
you just can’t tell him much."

 

[Mo City]

More @ReflexFunds predictions for Battery Day

https://twitter.com/reflexfunds/status/1294243466327842816?s=21

15) Kato road will likely benefit from ~4-5x reduced footprint (in square metres) and labour hours per GWh capacity, much lower capex vs GF1 cells and pack costs significantly below $100/kwh.

23) I expect Tesla to announce a roadmap to reach 2TWh of annual in-house battery cell+module+pack production capacity by 2030. Enough for ~20 million annual EV sales and ~750GWH annual stationary battery storage sales.

 

[mickificki]

found this bit from @ReflexFunds (is this the same reflexfunds as on twitter? If so, kudos for the great info) on twitter apologies if this takes up your entire page :
https://twitter.com/ReflexFunds/status/1294243466327842816?s=20

 

[elasalle]

2 companies did Splits recently. Cramer recently recommended 10 companies do so.
Imagine the chaos if many more companies did stock dividend split ...
Tesla would need to create a Giga Shorts Factory
Naked Shorts would need to get bailed out

 

[ggr]

Guys, I read on the day the split was announced that the reason for the wording "as a stock dividend" is simply because Tesla is a Delaware registered company (one of many in America like this) and that is the legal wording when you are registered there.

I'm still somewhat baffled we've made a meme out of this regarding shorts having to magically conjure up 4 shares. I mean, that's not how it works. Plenty of companies have had stock splits with a non-zero number of short sellers and none of caused a short squeeze just because of it. Just let this meme die, guys. There's plenty of reasons why TSLA may still squeeze the shorts but the fundamental routine mechanics of a stock split isn't one.

Sorry, but I disagree for reasons already posted before. Tesla issues the new shares to "shareholders of record", of whom there are about 186M. But there are another 10.6 million or so shares lent out to short sellers. Someone has to provide new shares to match those 10.6M, and it won't be Tesla. Who is it?

Maybe the reason no-one has paid much attention before is because Tesla is the most shorted stock (by $ value) in history, and it just hasn't mattered much before. Now, it may not cause a "short squeeze", but it does add about 5.6% of buying pressure over the next couple of weeks.

Edit: most posts talk about "naked shorts", but actually the problem exists for all short sellers, naked or not. It's just slightly worse for the market makers who have been able to be naked, and the thing is that we don't know how many of them there are. The 10.6M are the "covered shorts".

 

[TheTalkingMule]

CNBC basically going a 10 minute advertisement for DraftKings. Not sure why I thought there might be business news on there right now.

 

[joh01652]

yes but what i have trouble with in that scenario is that someone was on the buy side of that. so even if it wasn’t reported to tape, the buyer needs to receive the shares. that fail to receive is booked somewhere other than the buyers book. nscc tracks fails and either keeps them
net in house, or kicks them out broker to broker. or the short has to borrow from internal or 3rd party in order to fulfill the delivery

if the net gain on the short outpaces the borrow interest, then it’s a win.

if the stock price increases and/or becomes harder to borrow, liq dries up, the interest rate, cost to borrow increases, and the short contemplates covering

currently tesla is easy and cheap to borrow compared to past (solar city days)

If I read ArtfulDodger correctly, he's saying there doesn't necessarily have to be another entity on the buy side of all this.
Am I correct in understanding you, @ArtfulDodger? That these brokers can "sell" to themselves fake shares? This is happening internally, and multiple funds conspire together to pass the hot potato around the ring to avoid detection

 

[TheTalkingMule]

Lol @ this poorly timed MMD just as macros turn strongly positive. Yet ANOTHER $60+ mid-morning upswing?

 

[M|S|M MYP]

Yep, being direct. A Dutch trait

As for the current jubilant mood. I get it (I feel it too) and that means moderation had to become more lenient. I can hardly delete 3/4 of all posts...

That can all change in an instant....once a certain type of doctor's visit or self exam is mentioned

 

[Lessmog]

OT but I highly recommend Bosch dishwashers. Not an advise.

Doubly off-topic, and also outdated:
We have a Siemens, which is just a badged Bosch (or vice-versa) but I heard Miele used to be a good brand in appliances. And twice as expensive (as if that matters here ). No recent update.

 

[Nocturnal]

If we close above $1700.00 I will gladly post a 3 minute video of myself dancing ballet in short shorts on YouTube. Keep in mind my YouTube channel has over 600 subscribers, so they will get a treat. (I never post anything there anymore and don't even think I have any public videos anymore, but they are leftover from my ~1M views Autopilot video back from 2016 and those old saps must never clear out their Youtube subscription list.)

Anyway, short shorts. Ballet. >$1700.00.

Disclaimer: I am not always a man of my word.

I think this is the first time I've wanted the SP to go down.

 

[Boomer19]

If I read ArtfulDodger correctly, he's saying there doesn't necessarily have to be another entity on the buy side of all this.
Am I correct in understanding you, @ArtfulDodger? That these brokers can "sell" to themselves fake shares? This is happening internally, and multiple funds conspire together to pass the hot potato around the ring to avoid detection

i don’t buy it. unless there is some giant outright fraud going on it just doesn’t work that way.

 

[humbaba]

I think your disagreement comes down to a matter of timing:

No, Tesla is not going to wake up tomorrow with a surplus of batteries to sell to others at a profit.

Yes, after three or four years of ramping battery production at their three or four main production facilities they may very well have more batteries than cars.

maybe. But I'm thinking of the 20 million vehicles per year, then the powerwalls, gigawalls, grid storage, etc. Those are not small -- grid storage is huge -- and there is a life span.

Sure, eventually, Tesla may have surplus production. But I don't see it next year or within five years. There's just way too much growth.

 

[StealthP3D]

Remember short sellers are sure that the stock will go down. Through actions of the company, actions of the market or their forcing it down with naked shorts. They will not use naked shorts for stocks that they KNOW they don't have the muscle to screw with. Therefore, they would not naked short an Apple or any stock paying a cash dividend.

I had a little brain fart when I typed that. I didn't mean "naked shorts" I meant selling shares that don't exist.

 

[Gilesmiles]

Yep, being direct. A Dutch trait

As for the current jubilant mood. I get it (I feel it too) and that means moderation had to become more lenient. I can hardly delete 3/4 of all posts...

fred, you’re doing it just right!

To quote Frank Underwood: we get the Mod we deserve

 

[Tslynk67]

i don’t buy it. unless there is some giant outright fraud going on it just doesn’t work that way.

 

[ZsoZso]

View attachment 576108



133”? That’s all?

Excuse me while I whip out this picture of my 144” screen that I’m surfing TMC on at the moment after catching an old episode of The West Wing.

OK, you guys made me take a selfie beside my 160" screen (sorry could not fit the whole screen on picture, would need a selfi-stick for that...):

 

[M|S|M MYP]

OK, you guys made me take a selfie beside my 160" screen (sorry could not fit the whole screen on picture, would need a selfi-stick for that...):

Tried that once on my projection screen....couldn't see the text...granted it was a 1080p and not a 4k projector.

 

[mongo]

Sorry, but I disagree for reasons already posted before. Tesla issues the new shares to "shareholders of record", of whom there are about 186M. But there are another 10.6 million or so shares lent out to short sellers. Someone has to provide new shares to match those 10.6M, and it won't be Tesla. Who is it?

For every share lent pre-event the lender ends up with 5 shares lent post event (same total dollar value). Shares do not need to be provided until sold/ recalled, at which point the lent shares have also increased in volume 5x. No real change.

 

[StealthP3D]

i don’t buy it. unless there is some giant outright fraud going on it just doesn’t work that way.

When money or power is involved, some people will do whatever it takes to get it for themselves. This isn't fraud in the normal sense that someone ends up feeling burned - it's fraud on the whole system, like an invisible monkey on the back of a stock. The people who do it probably look at it like it's just "a little white lie".