That quote is somewhat misquoted from the Intelligent Investor by Benjamin Graham. You are using it incorrectly though. The 2nd part is that it acts as a scale ...in relation to fundamentals. This is actually what is happening with Tesla as the price adjust downwards to where the fundamentals lie (non profitable). I would argue that it has been acting as the irrational voting machine until recently where the correction has come in the last few months. You really shouldn't use a value investment quote to defend a decision to buy Tesla stock....it's about 180 opposite of that advice by Graham. Obviously I'm currently bearish on Tesla.
-
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
hacer
Active Member
There are quite a few other newspapers you forgot to mention e.g. Washington Post and Business Insider but many others as well. Can you explain why they intentionally misreport the facts with such glee then? I mean if they just have trouble understanding you'd think they could at least report the facts correctly (keeping quotes in context, not altering quotes and claiming that they are verbatim quotes, getting factual numbers wrong etc. etc.) but they very often don't. At the same time there are a significant number of examples where the reporters go on to brag about dinging TSLA on twitter or other forums. I really don't think @tinm 's was able to explain that level of hatred which is pervasive in MSM. It goes deeper and it really seems like a personal fear of loss (of personal livelihood or similar) is better able to explain that sort of tribalism.
shrspeedblade
Rideshare Monkey
CAN YOU PLEASE TAKE ALL THE LEAF TALK TO AN APPROPRIATE SECTION PLEASE!!!
Mod: Agree! --ggr.
Last edited by a moderator:
Not saying that it is going to be easy but they did put up a tent and had a line running in no time last year...
⚡️ELECTROMAN⚡️
Village Idiot
IMO, the turning point was when Musk (rightly) criticized Reveal and Linette Lopez(with reveal clearly acting as propaganda for the UAW and Lopez for TSLAQ) and then suggested Pravduh. Reporters circled the wagons around them and developed a personal hatred for Elon similar to that of Trump, and for similar reasons.
I mean, they managed with a tent in the Fremont factory parking lot...
dc_h
Active Member
I agree that the media bias is there. Reasons vary from clickbait, fear of change, lobbying and PR by competitors (from oil, to cars and defense). All that said, knowing that any miscommunication will be run with by shorts who are owning the media, Tesla and Elon need to get control of the message. Saying Tesla needs to remain focused on capital efficiency and drive to be the most productive auto manufacturing company in the world.
As part of our continued drive to improved capital efficiency I (Elon) will be reviewing all of our expenses with Zach. Tesla needs to maintain our current strong cash position to fund continued growth and to do this we need to continue our drive to increase our margins. Monitoring all expenses and treating every company dollar as if it were your own money in]s imperative to our drive to profitability. Our commitment to spending discipline will lead to greater strength in the long run, which is critical to our growth in sales as well as appreciation of our stock.
dqd88
Member
Correct, he claimed a million cars that will be fully equipped to be a robotaxi. They will just need to be "turned on" by an OTA update. And it of course depends on regulators. He believes there will be at least one locality next year that approves it.
Mod: No more discussion here about 3 vs. Leaf. --ggr
Buckminster
Well-Known Member
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Florida. Just needs governor's signature. Passed both senate and house unanimously, so don't see a governor's veto happening.
House Bill 311 (2019) - The Florida Senate
Gators, Sun and… Self-Driving Cars? Yes, Florida Just Legalized Driverless Vehicles
The Pravduh tweets got a lot of pushback, but, I think things had already jumped the shark years before.
Been following the company quite closely since 2012.
At that time, about 10-15% of the media seemed to have some very intense bias to talk down Tesla (Corey Johnson, a Bloomberg regular at the time, for example). The general media coverage was pretty typical superficial fare, with no intense bias... to the point that the 10-15% that I mentioned stood out like a sore thumb.
Shortly after Tesla's stock price shot up in the Spring of 2013 I noticed Jim Cramer pounding a few phrases- "cult stock," "you can't value the darn thing," "no way to justify price on fundamentals" with an ad campaign level of repetition. It was so striking that I remember thinking at the time that it seemed like he was trying to sow the seeds for creating the false impression over time that these falsehoods were all 'givens.' I still suspect that is what he was doing, and with some considerable success over years of repetition.
The first sign I saw of a sharp change was after Elon Musk's Spring 2013 "5 part trilogy," during which his tweets got the media to breathlessly build up interest and report on a series of 5 Tesla announcements. Some were pretty interesting announcements, some quite anti-climactic, like introducing a pretty uninspiring leasing offer for the Model S. I suspect a fair amount of the media felt 'used' by this...
By the Fall of 2013 the media generally speaking was intensely irrational and inflammatory in their coverage of 3 Model S fires in a very short period of time. After Tesla weathered that storm, the media as a whole seemed to have some FUD bias, but, generally not blatant.
From 2013 through 2015, there was a growing move towards a general attitude of skepticism about Musk, the company, and the stock.
c. 2015-16 as the Model X ramp struggled things seemed to kick into a much stronger gear. This was also the time Jim Chanos was making the rounds about his short position, and Bob Lutz was saying the Model X attempted ramp would fail and bankrupt the company. Very basic distortions and falsehoods would go unquestioned in nearly all the media. An attitude of intense skepticism and some distaste for Tesla, and the view that the stock was wildly overpriced were pretty much taken as givens in most media discussions. There was an enormous amount of, "Is this a company headed for bankruptcy" chatter, that seemed designed to create a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Since 2016, things have only gotten more intense.
I think fundamentally, one of key ingredients in this drift from some sprinkled in bias, to, near universal distaste and talking down of Tesla, is that virtually no one in the media calls it out. If the NY Times called out when the WSJ engaged in this with utter falsehoods, or vice versa, the potential hit to the author/publication's reputation would act as something of a brake to the distortion and falsification pedals. But, with virtually all actors in the media seeing that no one gets called out for extraordinarily tilted coverage, the miscoverage has been more and more emboldened. Doing a review of the new Leaf (test car sticker $38K)? Adamantly say the Model 3 is not in its class because there is no $35K Model 3, it is a $55k car, period. See excerpts of Elon's email Thursday, write headline, "Elon Musk: Tesla Broke in 10 Months WIthout 'Hardcore' Cost Reduction." Both of these are from the last week... the headline is an exact quote on the top of my TSLA Google search.
When none of the other media companies call out the BS re Tesla coverage by any of their peers, it's like a "police escort" for as much twisting and falsifying re Tesla's reality as you'd like.
Tesla could really use some major public figures who cannot simply be tarred as "cultists" to get curious about Tesla and use their platforms that actually can be heard amid the rest of the media, to talk about the nature and extent of the misinformation.
Last edited:
JohnDinger
Member
Re: negative stories about Tesla.
My theory is more benign and challenging:
It's all clicks.
People who consume online media are generally more technologically savvy and generally more intrigued by Tesla.
Positive headlines don't get clicks. Negative headlines do. That's just the way the internet works.
Journalists have always been compensated by their ability to cover news that readers care about.
Online media measures that by clicks.
It's hard to fight that trend.
My theory is more benign and challenging:
It's all clicks.
People who consume online media are generally more technologically savvy and generally more intrigued by Tesla.
Positive headlines don't get clicks. Negative headlines do. That's just the way the internet works.
Journalists have always been compensated by their ability to cover news that readers care about.
Online media measures that by clicks.
It's hard to fight that trend.
bdy0627
Active Member
I could understand if you posted this a month ago, but right now, AFTER all of the carnage?
Are you game for having the, re negative Tesla stories, "it's all about clicks" narrative, utterly obliterated?
Krugerrand
Meow
No. All of these media people are not benign. Many are outright lying, like with this latest email fiasco.
They are consciously lying and turning as much as they can into a negative stance.
@SteveG3 outlined perfectly what has transpired the last 7 years.
The bigger and more successful Tesla has become, the bigger and more concentrated the media/WS negativity and lies.
anthonyj
Stonks
I think it’s a mixture of both. We see negative headlines from Fred on Electrek, those are for clicks. Then we have negative headlines from Jabba the Hutt Linette, who actually wants to move the stock. The only thing she can move faster is a Big Mac... and the way the stock is moving, I’ll be flipping burgers soon
Carl Raymond
Active Member
Exactly. The doing-it-for-clicks explanation cannot explain the crescendo where FUD is proportional to Tesla car sales.
And it’s easy to write a balanced article and lead it with a click bait headline. They don’t. They write misleading articles and lead with misleading headlines. Fear is the driver.
The word you never read is ‘disruption’. The louder the FUD, the more certain we can be that this is disruption. Say it, post it, often. Somebody has to.
Once the word gets out that BMW and Audi are more likely to bankrupt than Tesla, the FUD factor reverses.
Probably pushed by lawyers envisioning their cut of $500 million jury awards when a drug addict racing across the street to rob someone is run over.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
