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

[SPadival]

Then you missed the point..that in rural America there were no other players.

Other companies have learned to compete with Amazon. If you only look at Amazon you will pay significantly more....

As I leared this last December when William and Senoma sold me the exact same ice cream maker that I could have bought from Amazon for about 15% less with free shipping and delivered in 3 days after the order.

Just google “amazon pee in bottles” to see how that 15% discount is achieved & you got your etron in 3 days.

 

[AudubonB]

Defective sensor can cause their transmission to downshift into first gear at highway speeds! Yikes.

Saves on brake pads I guess.

Does the brake pad savings outweigh the Depends pads consumption?

 

[Dennisj00]

OT Funny story, I ordered Ashlee Vance’s biography of “Elon Musk” from Amazon (of course) and it arrived.

In a few minutes Alexa announced, “Elon Musk has arrived!”

 

[dc_h]

For what it's worth: there's no evidence Einstein ever actually said that.

He said it over and over, mostly to himself while riding around on that silly bicycle.

 

[dddaaa0]

 

[Krugerrand]

I let the head of Tesla global comms know about this.

Maybe they should know about this ‘book’ of crap too.

 

[elasalle]

YTD, 694 pages on this thread and SP is basically the same ...

 

[AlexS]

View attachment 377060

Translation of strategically undervalued:

The business case for sustainability is (shockingly) still either not recognised strategically (i.e. it is understood as an additive factor for operational efficiency or marketing/PR but not as a strategic value creation/destruction factor), or in many cases it is little understood at all.

 

[Unpilot]

Thanks. I guess.
Other than that, there is really not much point in trying to respond in a meaningful way.
But I actually have thrown exactly one pottery bowl, under intense instructions from a talented relative, and it survived the kiln. Actually came out quite nice with his glazing.

Good, patient instruction can be essential. let me tell you, Professor!

Mankind is made of clay, as the Eurythmics song goes. Just don't get thrown.

Actually star dust.

 

[Duffer]

Gali? or this guy?

The guy in the YouTube video you posted. I didn't open it, it previewed on my phone. Please tell me it's a shorts parody.

 

[Artful Dodger]

The guy in the YouTube video you posted. I didn't open it, it previewed on my phone. Please tell me it's a shorts parody.

Haha, no he's serious, but not to be taken seriously.

He sold his entire stake in TSLA near $280 after the SEC lawsuit announcement, then bought back a few days later at $320. Calls himself a "value investor".

Cheers!

 

[tinm]

Maybe they should know about this ‘book’ of crap too.

They know about it; I told them about it last November when I met with Tesla execs.

 

[Fact Checking]

IIRC, when Tesla issued that debt, they bought financial instruments that largely hedged the dilution potential of a conversion outcome. That is, they have already spent money several years ago to very substantially minimize the diluting effect of the bond being repaid with shares. It would have been advantageous to make use of that already purchased hedge, repay the debt with shares, but, with far less dilution than without the hedge.

No, that's wrong, in two important ways:

• Firstly, while Tesla indeed purchased 'hedges' (glorified options contracts with a $360 strike price), those only cover dilution beyond the $360 default conversion price. The dilution caused by the $360 base portion was fully intact in case of a conversion event.
• But even for the dilution beyond $360, it wasn't fully offset: to a long term shareholder 1% dilution is for a longer time period, reducing valuation and potential total income by a lot more than 1%. Giving Tesla 1% cash doesn't offset that.

What's more, I think it far more likely that Tesla repaying with cash will increase media false narratives about cash concerns, not lower them. Likely we'll hear ~Now, with this massive outflow of a billion dollars, Tesla is really in a corner. They have to raise cash now, and they have over a billion more in debt due later this year.~

Tesla generated as much free cash flow (FCF) in Q4 alone as the March bond repayments, and their cash levels at the end of Q4 were 3.7 billion dollars. At the end of Q1 they'll still be comfortably above 3 billion dollars, increased by another quarter worth of ~1-1.5 billion dollars of cash from operations.

Think about the headlines if Tesla had paid in shares: "Tesla didn't have the cash but was saved by diluting existing shareholders". Liars gonna lie, any outcome would have been spun negatively for Tesla.

 

[AudubonB]

Thunder From Down Under:

My sister in NZ reports she has just put her deposit in for a Model 3.

Good news: √
Bad news: That's the first time we've convinced a family member to buy a Tesla
Good news: That leaves so many more to convince!
Bad news: Whyin****** did she not reserve prior to 2 Feb!?!?!?!
Good news: She's mentoned there may be more than one Model 3 in the family's near future.

 

[KarenRei]

Actually star dust.

Well.....

By a molar-percentage, humans are 62% hydrogen (by a mass perspective, only 10%), and by far, most hydrogen in the universe comes from Big Bang nucleosynthesis, not stellar fusion reactions. That doesn't mean that our hydrogen has never been in a star - most of it has surely passed through multiple stars - but little** of it was "born" in a star.

** Some hydrogen is produced in stars (although the original source is other hydrogen) - for example, via 3He + 3He -> 2 p + 4He (3He comes from D-p fusion). But that's a significant minority of the hydrogen in the universe.

 

[Unpilot]

Well.....

By a molar-percentage, humans are 62% hydrogen (by a mass perspective, only 10%), and by far, most hydrogen in the universe comes from Big Bang nucleosynthesis, not stellar fusion reactions. That doesn't mean that our hydrogen has never been in a star - most of it has surely passed through multiple stars - but little** of it was "born" in a star.

** Some hydrogen is produced in stars (although the original source is other hydrogen) - for example, via 3He + 3He -> 2 p + 4He (3He comes from D-p fusion). But that's a significant minority of the hydrogen in the universe.

You can be whatever you want....I am made of star dust pppfffttt,

 

[KarenRei]

You can be whatever you want....I am made of star dust pppfffttt,

 

[Joe F]

Where is all this alleged competition?

No clue, but after all these years of saying they’re coming, I guess they have to keep up the facade.

Really tough to be on the wrong side of history.

 

[SteveG3]

No, that's wrong, in two important ways:

• Firstly, while Tesla indeed purchased 'hedges' (glorified options contracts with a $360 strike price), those only cover dilution beyond the $360 default conversion price. The dilution caused by the $360 base portion was fully intact in case of a conversion event.
• But even for the dilution beyond $360, it wasn't fully offset: to a long term shareholder 1% dilution is for a longer time period, reducing valuation and potential total income by a lot more than 1%. Giving Tesla 1% cash doesn't offset that.

Your point re the strike price makes sense as a "border for any detrimental impact to Tesla" so to speak, and that is helpful FC. That is, this means the portion that the FUD campaign has put the price from $360 to $310 (to the extent it has contributed to the undervaluation) does not make any difference to Tesla... just the portion that brought the price from fair value (~$500) to $360, has been disadvantageous to Tesla in regards to these convertibles (again, to the extent the FUD campaign has contributed to the undervaluation).

Tesla generated as much free cash flow (FCF) in Q4 alone as the March bond repayments, and their cash levels at the end of Q4 were 3.7 billion dollars. At the end of Q1 they'll still be comfortably above 3 billion dollars, increased by another quarter worth of ~1-1.5 billion dollars of cash from operations.

Of course we here already know what has actually happened, and what Q1 is roughly going to be, as do the bulk of those screaming false narratives in my opinion.

Think about the headlines if Tesla had paid in shares: "Tesla didn't have the cash but was saved by diluting existing shareholders". Liars gonna lie, any outcome would have been spun negatively for Tesla.

Bold part largely agree. The point I made in response to your comment was not that paying back in stock would have led to less negative press for Tesla (never made any comparison of the scenarios re press coverage whatsoever). My point was that Tesla paying back in cash is not going to demonstrate Tesla's cash strength in any particular way (a point your original post asserted)... it's been a false narrative that Tesla is in a cash crunch now, and, whether Tesla repays in cash or stock, those who've been influenced to believe that false narrative through the media, etc vs. examining on their own are still vulnerable to the misinformation that will likely be spun re Tesla paying in cash.

The larger point is that it is not about the media simply being 'stupid' and needing to see the evidence, and that will bring them around, but, rather that the media is being largely used as a tool to try to sell the public on 'stupid' ideas. I'm glad to see from the bolded part of your comment, that, in fact, you are quite aware that Tesla paying in cash will very very likely be spun negatively (same as likely if they pay with stock). The extent the public is influenced by misinformation pumped out through the media is not likely to go through any measurable change if Tesla repays the convertible in cash.

 

[Carl Raymond]

Wow! That graph along with the corresponding share price movement (brownian motion without any net effect change) pretty much settles the whole "Short Squeeze" theory. As in places it in the same category as tales about flying unicorns...

If over 1/3 of the shorts can close without any lifting effect on the share price, I do not see any realistic chance of a squeeze.

Yes, when they exit slowly over the course of 8 months, there is no squeeze. For a squeeze to occur there would need to be a sudden, substantial and sustained jump.