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

[EVMeister]

Keep on dreamin'...

Better than being glum and having nightmares, huh? The stock is clearly getting to you. Perhaps affecting your mental health. That's not good. If you truly believe what you're writing, I suggest you sell up and forget about the stock and company.

 

[dww12]

What is the premarket volume? Down 8, ouch. Back to looking for more money to buy more.

 

[nursebee]

There are those here that seem to bash negative sentiments and bears as if they only show up after bad times. But the price has been dropping for at least 6 months, the bearish action is the only that can be known.

If "Only price pays" Brian Shannon is correct, TSLA has been a bad trade and a bad investment for anyone involved over the past several years, unless you have been a bear.


https://digest.bps.org.uk/2017/04/2...-know-whether-bad-things-are-going-to-happen/

 

[Leo9]

What is the premarket volume? Down 8, ouch. Back to looking for more money to buy more.

120k shares.
Pretty heavy volume for PM.
I'm looking to re-enter if we touch 180-190.

 

[nursebee]

I have bought more pre market with gaps like this before only to be BURNT. Price recovery type trades oh so difficult when the movement has been down for oh so long.

Sit on hands, wait for longer term recovery before getting ones hands chopped up with such trades again. No more money to market makers! ALL averages moving down.

Fear Uncertainty Doubt must really be setting in for weak hands, the tree is shaking

 

[anon]

Webush cut price target to $230 this morning, according to various articles. They used to be bullish, so the market won't like that. There aren't many quotes, but their main concern was apparently Model 3 demand in the US! I'm a bit puzzled by this, as I'd have thought that the focus would be on S/X demand at the moment...

 

[sunny-value]

All demand matters. S/X for margin and 3 for revenue. There is a limit to how much inventory can be financed before suppliers start getting very nervous. 3 inventory can't build up too much or we won't last even 10 months. if demand picks up for the 3 in the next month or two, we will be fine. if it stays the same or even goes down because we enter a global recession, all bets are off.

 

[SPadival]

Sunny day for trolls... amazing first post

 

[Bunky]

Market sending a message to the orange troll that it doesn’t like this China nonsense. Going to be ugly across the board, not just TSLA. Holding firm, this too shall pass.

 

[anthonyj]

Market sending a message to the orange troll that it doesn’t like this China nonsense. Going to be ugly across the board, not just TSLA. Holding firm, this too shall pass.

Yes, this is all Trump’s fault. Every stock is near ATH but Tesla keeps dumping

 

[Fact Checking]

Yes, this is all Trump’s fault. Every stock is near ATH but Tesla keeps dumping

What? NASDAQ futures recent early May highs were 7857, it's already down ~6% from those peaks today.

Certain Tesla's drop has been steeper and macros aren't a primary factor, but to claim that the China trade escalation has no effect on the overall market is both false and silly...

 

[ReflexFunds]

2019 Q1
We ended the quarter with $2.2 billion of cash and cash equivalents, a $1.5 billion reduction from the end of 2018
Outlook
Our 2019 capex, the vast majority of which will be to grow our capacity and develop new vehicles, is expected to be about $2.0 to $2.5 billion

May 02, 2019 :Tesla Announces Offerings of Common Stock and Convertible Senior Notes
The aggregate gross proceeds of the offerings, assuming full exercise by the underwriters of their option to purchase additional securities, would be approximately $2.3 billion

based on the above, cash equivalents end of 2019 would be $2 billion

(So the letter on cost savings must have been to avoid barnacles and flufferbots)

Tesla's guidance in the Q1 report was positive free cash flow for every quarter remaining this year. So you are assuming here they have downgraded their expectations by over $2.5bn in just one month.

 

[anthonyj]

What? NASDAQ futures recent early May highs were 7857, it's already down ~6% from those peaks today.

Certain Tesla's drop has been steeper and macros aren't a primary factor, but to claim that the China trade escalation has no effect on the overall market is both false and silly...

Or maybe Elon’s carefully crafted email to employees pissed off/scared away institutional investors. Amazing that he or Tesla doesn’t come out with a statement, saying that Q2 won’t have near the same cash burn rate as Q1. It’s like he wants the stock to keep dropping. Maybe someone close to him is buying these shares, no idea

 

[generalenthu]

243 seemed like a bad deal for Tesla. No more.

There is cash in the bank. An order book full of 3s. About a thousand more new owners every day. Yeah the share price is a drag on demand, thanks to the FUD. But If they deliver 80-85k and make 90k, all will be good. The cashflow will be positive and puts elons cash burn story to bed.

The pivot from fat gross margin to all monies going to AP development was unexpected. We can blame shorts all day, but this change in strategy felt abrupt and some longs didn't want that ride.

Of course this is the right path for the long term. When the cost curve bends little more and Tesla scales up, it will be untouchable.

 

[anthonyj]

I’m selling 100 shares and SLOWLY buying 2021 calls $300 strike. We are nearing capitulation, maybe bottom is $143 or $179 idk.

 

[SteveG3]

“Code Red,” Dan Ives will not be accused of not knowing how to use alarmist language. His prior note was the one with the “one of the worst debacles [in over 20 years covering companies]” language re Q1 that fed so many headlines.

It’s as if key phrases in his recent posts have been hand crafted to fit in with the underlying falsehood messaging of the massive notTesla media blitz, ie, “Tesla and its products are toxic... don’t even think about owning the cars or the stock.”

ps the media campaign is not simply clickbait. Beyond the general experience of the past several years, there is one particular example that blows such an interpretation out of the water.

 

[mongo]

Can't disprove a theoretical. We don't know if all the modifications that were made can be done in steel.

Many people believe aluminum in automobile fabrication by its very nature is significantly more expensive to repair.

Ford's experience proves otherwise.

Not sure why you are saying theoretical, from the article you posted:

The front apron tubes, for example, were pulled out farther for easier access. Repairing them on the previous-generation F-150 involved a time-consuming teardown of the vehicle's A-pillar and removal of the instrument panel.

The Highway Loss Data Institute also cited changes to the front fenders that cut replacement time by six or seven hours.

...
"The key thing was that we had the involvement from the early engineering meetings," he said. "The designers were able to engineer it around those specific points."

Johnson noted that meetings on the modular design started as much as two years before the F-150's debut.

"You can't overstate the value of having the truck engineered upfront in a way [that] it's less susceptible to damage," he said.

And the parts are cheaper:

Ford also has priced replacement parts for the aluminum pickup lower.

The Highway Loss Data Institute found that total parts costs for the 2015-16 aluminum F-150s are 16 percent less than those for the 2014 steel pickups.

That includes a 43 percent drop for hoods and taillights and a 37 percent decrease for front bumpers. Rear bumpers and bedside replacement parts cost more, though.

Pretty much anything you can do in aluminum, you can do it steel. The opposite is not true. That is why dealers needed to invest upwards of $50k on new tooling to work on the trucks (also from article). You can pop dents out of a steel panel, but an aluminum one will tear and requires replacement. Thus the increase in bedside replacement parts. Apples to apples, aluminium is either the same or more work to repair than steel.

All Ford proved was that the F-150 was not efficient to repair.

Gerry Bonanni, a Ford senior engineer for paint and body repair, said the automaker made those changes based on frustrating experiences with the steel pickup.

Ford officials said that, from the earliest meetings around the F-150's aluminum-heavy redesign, they focused on engineering it to be as repair-friendly as possible with a new, modular architecture.

"You can't overstate the value of having the truck engineered upfront in a way [that] it's less susceptible to damage," he said.

 

[j6Lpi429@3j]

this is just alarmist bullshit. the market has gone collectively insane. Big oil and their shameless shills trying to kill off the only car company that gives a damn about the environment. its shameful.

 

[Fact Checking]

they're reporting what happened in terms of car safety recalls and media bias against automakers who don't advertise with a given media outlet.

Yes: automakers who advertise get favorable treatment in the reporting of negative news. While the study only measured the reporting of 'car safety negative stories', because it's an objective news category, it would be naive to believe that favorable treatment of advertisers would only happen for car safety recall news, right?

In the U.S. automotive is the largest advertiser - even larger than the retail sector:

You're implying that the findings in that study can be applied to other situations like media vs. Tesla.

Yes, obviously media coverage is comparative - so if they are treating every other carmaker but Tesla favorably, because Tesla is the only automaker who doesn't advertise, this by mathematical necessity means that Tesla is treated highly unfairly on relative terms.

 

[mongo]

On the cloud/ lining side of things:

If Tesla is below everyone's price targets, does that mean they will soon be putting out buy ratings? Or instead lowering their targets further?
(Retorical, I don't want to know the answer)