-
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
Carl Raymond
Active Member
I WOULD like to see it become a dividend stock, but just for one quarter, to force a short squeeze
I used to think I wanted a short squeeze, but now not so sure. As things stand, the shorts are kind of nobbled. There’s a limit to how deep they will go. If they short too high a percentage they expose themselves too much to the risk of squeeze.
If there was a squeeze and the stock shoots past 350 we have to each pick the zen moment to sell and decide how much to sell. Then the whole merry go round starts again. I don’t like my odds of making those decisions accurately.
Krugerrand
Meow
$350 is a zen moment? Been there, done that. My idea of zen is clearly more aspirational. I’m not getting out of my lounging pajamas for a lousy $350, never mind walking hot coals which any drunk can do. Zen is at least walking on water.
Carl Raymond
Active Member
Well that’s the thing. Zen, as in zenith, lies somewhere north of 350 should a squeeze occur. Who knows where it reverses course. I can’t imagine too many on this forum resisting a sell order if it reached 400. The waters are infested with traders.
Krugerrand
Meow
Meh. Perhaps those who only bought at SP highs and I don’t believe their total share count is going to make much of a dent.
The pack is extremely good at containing single cell fires. It probably takes 70mph into a pole to get that far in. I think you will see small fires from crashes like that here and there but at 1/5 the rate of the S/X.I'm starting to think that Model 3 packs simply cannot be burned.
テスカス on Twitter
I mean, any car can have an upholstery fire or whatnot. But if the pack doesn't ignite from damage like this, what does it take?
Buckminster
Well-Known Member
Dividends are so 20th century. Tesla = martian landlord.
I wish my brain thought this was a joke.
I wish my brain thought this was a joke.
Buckminster
Well-Known Member
Some unwinding. Do we have any evidence of Tesla rushing through June deliveries at the expense of customer experience?
The usual. Keeping customers on hold for hours, miscommunication about where cars are, cancelled appointments right before they were scheduled to happen, conflicting messages about what is included with which trim, late night home deliveries, parts not available, customer agents flown in from abroad not able to understand Dutch, difficulties in getting refunds, incorrectly priced invoices and software options locked when they shouldn't etc... But it was already quite a bit better than Q1 at least, in my opinion : we had some testimonials about relaxed deliveries that went right too.
Antares Nebula
Active Member
Another reason Model S,X need battery pack upgrades. It's not just V3 charging speed improvements but the fact that M3 appears thus far to be significantly less susceptible to battery fires. The Tesla flagships should also share these very significant features. Downvote me all you want, but how can I in all honesty advice friends and family to buy an S or X, while these important features are lacking.I'm starting to think that Model 3 packs simply cannot be burned.
テスカス on Twitter
I mean, any car can have an upholstery fire or whatnot. But if the pack doesn't ignite from damage like this, what does it take?
I expect Tesla will deliver these improvements soon, as they must be cognizant of these drawbacks. But it was a painful unforced error that has caused (and is continuing to cause) lost revenue in their high margin cars. Raven was a good step forward, but battery pack upgrade is vital.
I don't disagree, but they have juicier fish to fry.
In their best year (2017) the S+X did approximately 2.2B gross profit over 9.6B revenue. Model 3 will probably do close to 3B gross profit over 15Bish revenue this year, and something like 5B gross profit over 25B revenue next year.
Then there's the Model Y which is supposedly going to sell even more than the 3, the pick-up truck which presumably will sell much more than S+X, and the Semi. Kinda like it'll be nice to launch the new Roadster, it'd be nice to upgrade the S+X, but it just doesn't make financial sense to prioritize S+X upgrade/refresh prior to further expanding 3, and launching Y + Truck + Semi.
Antares Nebula
Active Member
Antares Nebula
Active Member
I see your point, but I think there is a halo effect associated with S,X. As that is their flagships. It's not a good look when the flagship has inferior battery tech. A flagship should be superior in almost every way, especially when it comes to the battery. I agree that Roadster can be put off, but even there there is a halo effect (but Roadster already has 2170 cells).
Many investors have pointed out how the 3 and Y are more important, both in terms of overall volume and revenue, and also in terms of Tesla's mission. Therefore it is okay to "neglect" S,X in favor of 3, Y, and pickup. But I think this is mere rationalizing. I don't think any top brand company, whether Mercedes or Apple, would allow their flagships, no matter how much smaller the market, to be inferior in significant aspects. It is not good marketing and leads to brand deterioration. Better to then discontinue those inferior flagship products.
Last edited:
anthonyj
Stonks
Antares Nebula
Active Member
Needs to really hold 231/232 or at least the recent low of 222 after the ER gap down. Otherwise, I expect 180-200 to be re-visited. Ideal scenario would be for a double bottom there.
Premarket not looking good, but have to see what happens in the regular session.
anthonyj
Stonks
Only 20k shares traded premarket, which makes me think market makers are adjusting bid/ask spread aggressively to create a bear trap and sell them some useless puts at the open. No other reason to drop 5x as much as the market on a measly 20k shares
For my core position, I wish the SP to go up, for some accumulation I'm happy for it to go down.
One day it will go up and keep going, just don't know exactly when.
One day it will go up and keep going, just don't know exactly when.
j6Lpi429@3j
Closed
Christ...people still claiming dividends are optional. This is just not correct economic theory. if you buy shares in a stock not because it will EVER (before the heat death of the universe) pay a dividend back to the stockholders, but PURELY because you think the value will go up and you can then sell it eventually to someone who will pay more...
thats a ponzi scheme. Literally. it *is* the absolute definition of it. Its like tulipmania,
Whats the rationale for the person who buys the stock from you when you want to 'cash in'? that they can offload it to another...and another... this is musical chairs, and not stock investment.
I think TSLA is an awesome investment and I don't want dividends before 2030, but I value the stock highly BECAUSE I believe they will be able to pay staggeringly high dividends in 2030. I'm an investor, not a 'trader' or a gambler.
thats a ponzi scheme. Literally. it *is* the absolute definition of it. Its like tulipmania,
Whats the rationale for the person who buys the stock from you when you want to 'cash in'? that they can offload it to another...and another... this is musical chairs, and not stock investment.
I think TSLA is an awesome investment and I don't want dividends before 2030, but I value the stock highly BECAUSE I believe they will be able to pay staggeringly high dividends in 2030. I'm an investor, not a 'trader' or a gambler.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
