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

[woodisgood]

That would be a nonsense statement in the Bay Area. Perhaps you bought in the wrong area.

All investments come down to timing and luck. Selling a Bay Area house that you had held for decades in order to buy TSLA at $180/sh would probably be a good move relative to keeping that house for another 5 years, lol.

 

[jkirkwood001]

Oh my god starting now, unless there is specific breaking Tesla-relevant Apple news, I am downvoting any post that mentions Apple.

And Apple would buy TSLA for its technology and resources, not for the fluctuating auto sales pipeline. So why would Apple wait until the SP has almost doubled in the last six months? If they were going to buy, they would have saved themselves $30B by buying in June. Apple (and its shareholders) aren't that stupid to buy after the price has regained mid 300s.

 

[Unpilot]

The secret is to get far enough ahead early in life such that any withdrawals are small enough that you can continue to grow your retirement at a healthy clip.

Reminds me of this clip

 

[adiggs]

The best financial decision I *ever* made was to sell a house to buy stock. The alternative was to rent it out but that would have been the costliest financial decision of my life.

The only good reason to ever buy a house is for the living situation security it provides (your "lease" always gets renewed). Economically, on average, it's a wash. I do not consider my two houses as investments. They are financial liabilities that I use and enjoy and hopefully I'll break even on them or make a small percent annual gain after taxes/expenses (which is a *huge* lost opportunity in terms of what those assets would have done had I invested them in stocks).

Given that you own your house outright, they also bring monthly lower living expenses (no rent, lease, or mortgage). That might represent an extraordinarily conservative use of financial resources, but it can also bring a pretty valuable peace of mind (not locked into a particular job, or jobs of a particular income level, or a particular business ownership; might be able to live at something approaching minimum wage due to very low monthly living expenses).

 

[SOULPEDL]

The secret is to get far enough ahead early in life such that any withdrawals are small enough that you can continue to grow your retirement at a healthy clip.

But in case you missed that train, you can make up the difference by trusting your instincts, I'm 59.
I don't know... should I rebalance?

Hell no! I believe in something really good, and if wrong we're all doomed.
Plus, if I do nothing, I continuously piss off the bad shorts.

 

[StealthP3D]

I'm holding for now (hard), but I don't know what I'm going to do when it hits $390. Meanwhile, in the back of my head I don't want to miss 420 and beyond. It's going to get harder to hold.

Do you always think this small? I learned a long time ago to not limit myself. It's the primary reason why I've ridden some very large waves without selling a single share until at or near the top. My most important takeaway is that a good stock will amaze you with the kind of multiples it can return in just a few years of growth. I laugh when I hear comments like "Oh, my, what will I do when it gets all the way up to $420"! $420 is nothing, barely above where it's at right now!

Edit: Oh, Lordy, I just saw you are 59 YO and 100% in Tesla! Sell half of it right now!

Yes, you would almost certainly be better off holding it all but when all your investable assets are in one stock you are vunerable to a lot of things. "Almost certainly" does not equal "certainly".

 

[ClimateOptimst]

I'm not much of a TA person but there's only one interpretation of this year's chart, V for victory. Thanks yet again to the many contributors on this forum that make longterm holding of TSLA through thick and thin a fun, sometimes trying, but ultimately rewarding and informative process.

 

[FrederickBound]

Panasonic is essentially just a contract manufacturer making the cells to Tesla's specs using Tesla's formula/IP. We really don't know how different the Tesla cells are from an industry standard cell. But Tesla isn't just buying off the shelf cells.

Yes, Panasonic and Tesla designed the cells together. But clearly Tesla needs Panasonic.

There is nothing going on with Tesla batteries that other car makers can't continue to improve upon. It is a very rare invention indeed that isn't more of a leapfrog where each company outdoes the other periodically. Look at Intel and AMD. At one time I was writing off AMD because they were a full process generation behind Intel creating a large enough financial gap that AMD would be hard pressed to catch up (and that is putting it mildly). And yet, I'm told the current AMD processors are faster than the current Intel processors once again.

Small technological leads are the easiest advantage to overcome really. Every company has lots of smart engineers working for them and can find better ways of doing things. Tesla is a great example of catching up technologically. They are still learning how to make cars, something others makers learned many decades ago.

 

[JustMe]

Do you always think this small? I learned a long time ago to not limit myself. It's the primary reason why I've ridden some very large waves without selling a single share until at or near the top. My most important takeaway is that a good stock will amaze you with the kind of multiples it can return in just a few years of growth. I laugh when I hear comments like "Oh, my, what will I do when it gets all the way up to $420"! $420 is nothing, barely above where it's at right now!

Edit: Oh, Lordy, I just saw you are 59 YO and 100% in Tesla! Sell half of it right now!

Indeed - would you believe $6,000 per share within five years? That’s Ark investments price target: One of Tesla's most optimistic backers explains why it's doubling down as other investors rush for the exits (TSLA) | Markets Insider

I can wait 5 years for that kind of return

 

[Pezpunk]

That would be a nonsense statement in the Bay Area. Perhaps you bought in the wrong area.

it's easy to look at your buy price and sale price and come to the conclusion that home ownership is a phenomenal investment, but that's super naive. try running the numbers once you've factored in all the bills, maintenance, insurance, taxes, upkeep, interest, and other expenses, and you will find a simple index fund generally outpaces home ownership in overall rate of return in practically all cases. certainly there are outliers, but it's not the norm.

 

[Swampgator]

Yes, Panasonic and Tesla designed the cells together. But clearly Tesla needs Panasonic.

There is nothing going on with Tesla batteries that other car makers can't continue to improve upon. It is a very rare invention indeed that isn't more of a leapfrog where each company outdoes the other periodically. Look at Intel and AMD. At one time I was writing off AMD because they were a full process generation behind Intel creating a large enough financial gap that AMD would be hard pressed to catch up (and that is putting it mildly). And yet, I'm told the current AMD processors are faster than the current Intel processors once again.

Small technological leads are the easiest advantage to overcome really. Every company has lots of smart engineers working for them and can find better ways of doing things. Tesla is a great example of catching up technologically. They are still learning how to make cars, something others makers learned many decades ago.

You are living in a fantasy world.

 

[Nocturnal]

Can you imagine if somebody had a price target of $10 a few months ago? Man, that would be so embarrassing.

The best financial decision I *ever* made was to sell

a house to buy stock. The alternative was to rent it out but that would have been the costliest financial decision of my life.

The only good reason to ever buy a house is for the living situation security it provides (your "lease" always gets renewed). Economically, on average, it's a wash. I do not consider my two houses as investments. They are financial liabilities that I use and enjoy and hopefully I'll break even on them or make a small percent annual gain after taxes/expenses (which is a *huge* lost opportunity in terms of what those assets would have done had I invested them in stocks).

Yeah, houses are only good investments if you get lucky and buy before a boom. There are also major emotional benefits to "owning" (even if your bank technically does). I tell people to buy if they want their own spot to change and be stable, not for nonsense like "not wasting money on rent".

Given that you own your house outright, they also bring monthly lower living expenses (no rent, lease, or mortgage). That might represent an extraordinarily conservative use of financial resources, but it can also bring a pretty valuable peace of mind (not locked into a particular job, or jobs of a particular income level, or a particular business ownership; might be able to live at something approaching minimum wage due to very low monthly living expenses).

That's offset by opportunity cost. If you didn't own you would have that cash sitting in the bank.

Actually, owning a home has a major correlation to unemployment. When you own you are less able to move for work. ​

 

[Unpilot]

Yes, Panasonic and Tesla designed the cells together. But clearly Tesla needs Panasonic.

There is nothing going on with Tesla batteries that other car makers can't continue to improve upon. It is a very rare invention indeed that isn't more of a leapfrog where each company outdoes the other periodically. Look at Intel and AMD. At one time I was writing off AMD because they were a full process generation behind Intel creating a large enough financial gap that AMD would be hard pressed to catch up (and that is putting it mildly). And yet, I'm told the current AMD processors are faster than the current Intel processors once again.

Small technological leads are the easiest advantage to overcome really. Every company has lots of smart engineers working for them and can find better ways of doing things. Tesla is a great example of catching up technologically. They are still learning how to make cars, something others makers learned many decades ago.

So in about 2 years or so them dem big boy's are gunna rush and kill little old Tesla?/S
Not sure but I believe I have heard this before.

 

[SpaceCash]

Yes, Panasonic and Tesla designed the cells together. But clearly Tesla needs Panasonic.

There is nothing going on with Tesla batteries that other car makers can't continue to improve upon. It is a very rare invention indeed that isn't more of a leapfrog where each company outdoes the other periodically. Look at Intel and AMD. At one time I was writing off AMD because they were a full process generation behind Intel creating a large enough financial gap that AMD would be hard pressed to catch up (and that is putting it mildly). And yet, I'm told the current AMD processors are faster than the current Intel processors once again.

Small technological leads are the easiest advantage to overcome really. Every company has lots of smart engineers working for them and can find better ways of doing things. Tesla is a great example of catching up technologically. They are still learning how to make cars, something others makers learned many decades ago.

Dude there is no competitor.
Nobody is about to leapfrog anyone.
Seek alternate means of enrichment.

 

[StealthP3D]

That would be a nonsense statement in the Bay Area. Perhaps you bought in the wrong area.

So, you are saying a two-bedroom fixer-upper on a small lot in the Bay Area for $1,200,000 is a good investment? How much would the annual taxes on that be?

OK, then. I would be more likely to put the money into TSLA.

 

[JustMe]

Yes, Panasonic and Tesla designed the cells together. But clearly Tesla needs Panasonic.

There is nothing going on with Tesla batteries that other car makers can't continue to improve upon.

True enough. And that’s why Musk says Tesla’s success is tied to innovating faster than the competition.

One interesting point about their batteries. I recently read somewhere that Tesla chose a battery with the highest energy density but they are relatively unstable and are prone to rapid degradation. So other automakers are using lower energy density batteries with better stability. Tesla was able to make these batteries work with deft battery management and effective cooling.

Tesla (and their competitors) surely have multiple advanced batteries at various stages development. The winner will get there first.

 

[Vines]

While you cannot expect real estate to be more profitable than a Tesla rocket, it is a much safer bet.
Houses in my old neighborhood appreciated 12-24% per year. Granted there are upkeep expenses, but still quite a safe investment when properly insured.

 

[woodisgood]

While you cannot expect real estate to be more profitable than a Tesla rocket, it is a much safer bet.
Houses in my old neighborhood appreciated 12-24% per year. Granted there are upkeep expenses, but still quite a safe investment when properly insured.

Exactly this. Real estate ends up being the preferred investment for the risk-averse. I can try to convince my wife of my very deep conviction in Tesla's upcoming successes, but there's no way in hell she'll call me anything other than reckless for the amount of money I'd be willing to put in (to TSLA, not interested in playing stock market in general). She WOULD much rather buy that 1.2M fixer-upper on the tiny lot and get passive income through rental. Different strokes for different folks.

It's a safe investment EXCEPT for the potential of the Big One, with so many homeowners without earthquake insurance...

 

[FrederickBound]

You are living in a fantasy world.

Is that the sort of technical analysis I should use when buying stock?

True enough. And that’s why Musk says Tesla’s success is tied to innovating faster than the competition.

One interesting point about their batteries. I recently read somewhere that Tesla chose a battery with the highest energy density but they are relatively unstable and are prone to rapid degradation. So other automakers are using lower energy density batteries with better stability. Tesla was able to make these batteries work with deft battery management and effective cooling.

Tesla (and their competitors) surely have multiple advanced batteries at various stages development. The winner will get there first.

I've not seen any numbers on how much better Tesla batteries are than other brands. A lot of that stuff we will never know. It's not like GM, Audi, VW, etc. are using batteries in their cars that you can buy for your flashlight. In reality there is no "winner". The various battery features are tradeoffs and optimizing the choices for EV use is important. Car buyers won't know this car has a better kWh/kg battery. What matters is the end product which we will know about when other car makers come out with their new models.

Tesla does seem to have a handle on managing the batteries. Kia, for example I'm told doesn't protect their batteries as well and so they degrade faster. This is an aspect of battery design that can be observed much like a car's engine or transmission wearing out too early.

 

[StealthP3D]

While you cannot expect real estate to be more profitable than a Tesla rocket, it is a much safer bet.
Houses in my old neighborhood appreciated 12-24% per year. Granted there are upkeep expenses, but still quite a safe investment when properly insured.

That's what the real estate industry sells. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against home ownership (I own two in addition to other undeveloped lands) but it's not a good financial investment and it's certainly not a "safe" investment. There's really no such thing.

How much is your earthquake insurance? Oh, you don't have any? Neither do I - it's too expensive so I take the risk.