mblakele
FSD Beta (99)
The first four would be great for the targets, but not so good for Tesla. Possibly the last two could make good acquihires: lightyear for engineers and pininfarina for designers.
-
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
The first four would be great for the targets, but not so good for Tesla. Possibly the last two could make good acquihires: lightyear for engineers and pininfarina for designers.
Any1 has access to this article? Just curious to see what haterz say:
Firm That Called for Tesla Stock at $7,000 Recently Slashed Its Stake
Firm That Called for Tesla Stock at $7,000 Recently Slashed Its Stake
woodisgood
Optimustic Pessimist
It's probably just the usual FUD that always fails to point out that ARK has an internal policy to keep their funds balanced with no more than ~10% in a single stock.
bhtooefr
Active Member
Although ARK's actual policy is that they can only buy to increase stake to 10%, anything more is not allowed.
They're IIRC not forced to rebalance if the value rises above 10% (but sometimes they feel it's prudent to do so)
They're IIRC not forced to rebalance if the value rises above 10% (but sometimes they feel it's prudent to do so)
Sure, I would have liked to have improved my ‘buys’ using near term information and the knowledge I’ve gleaned here.
Still, I’ll stick to the advantages offered by being a retail shareholder not beholden to any quarterly goals and whatnot (advantages such as I can load up, not rebalance, and not have to do anything) and just hold. I’ll not be exposing my portfolio to the "pro’s" BS by trying to match the timing of their games.
Knock yourself out though and good luck with that timing thing.
To my mind, it is so not worth reacting to near term "news" when you know how contaminated the media feeds are and you just know someone is trying to pull your chain.
I would only consider selling if I:
a) came to the conclusion that my investment thesis was wrong and no longer applicable
or:
b) found a better investment
Since I think neither of these is likely, *I’ll* be the last one out:
Elon - After you.
Me - No, please, after you.
Elon - I insist. After you.
Me - I couldn’t possibly. After you.
...
Edit - BTW: By holding, I’m implementing “Bulls make money." By shorting, others are going for "Bears make money." Those are not mutually exclusive. Your strategy could be considered trying to play both directions and that is the one, as I understand things, where "Pigs get slaughtered." Just sayin’
Last edited:
@StealthP3D, thanks for correcting me!
Yesterday I was half sleeping and went through the video at high speed. I was wondering why Ron Baron declined if Tesla asked him to do that. Now it makes sense.
.
You have 2 lots. When selling you can assign which lot is being sold. My brokerage's web interface (Fidelity) allows this assignment after the sale but before the trade settles. I can also look up which lot was used, but the default in Fidelity is to sell the earliest one. It isn't always optimal. Say if all of the lots are short holding period, might make sense to sell the latest so that the next time you want to sell, you might have a long holding period lot available. Or say if everything is long holding period might makes sense to sell a lot with highest cost basis to delay paying taxes on lower basis/higher profit lots.
You have 2 lots. When selling you can assign which lot is being sold. My brokerage's web interface (Fidelity) allows this assignment after the sale but before the trade settles. I can also look up which lot was used, but the default in Fidelity is to sell the earliest one. It isn't always optimal. Say if all of the lots are short holding period, might make sense to sell the latest so that the next time you want to sell, you might have a long holding period lot available. Or say if everything is long holding period might makes sense to sell a lot with highest cost basis to delay paying taxes on lower basis/higher profit lots.
Media works for those that pay. Old media works cleverly for ad dollars vs new media works cleverly for clicks as I see it. Old media like CNBC is trolling EM for appearances and ad dollars and he does neither so they keep trolling. New media works off the need to have a discussion topic regularly to get click revenue. For EM, new media seems to work just fine for him since it is a relatively small audience he would like to reach and they will seek him out via their own effort and it is more fun for him. Interesting that StarLink potentially gives EM the possibility of a globally distributed media channel should he want it but that is for another day.
Ameliorate
Member
No doubt! sometimes we can get lucky, if you can consistently time big swings you should trade options! I have been but not for that reason. My account has suffered... including this one I think four 50%+ retraces during this run since august I must be a terrible trader to let that happen. Yet...still up 9x from when we hit 730 SP just this Monday. Think about that for a moment
. I could have been on the sidelines Monday, and bought today's dip Same stock price, and have an account value 11.5% of where I am now, in fact the options should be cheaper they've decayed 3 days.I managed this not by selling out, but deleveraging and hedging when things feel "high". Up leveraging when things feel oversold
I only know two things: TSLA is headed to 5 digits in the next decade and that I cannot predict short term moves. (say it with me)
My point is this. I expect the stock to move higher, eventually. I would have missed out on so much if I had tried to fully get out.
If you believe in the stock long term, hold shares and feel uneasy about the stock peaking, I would really recommend looking into protective puts. If you're correct, you get to sell the puts and add to your position on the dip. If you're wrong and it shoots higher, you reap those rewards too. If it stays flat the puts were a small price to pay for the downside protection. I think that would've worked out much better for those who bailed around around 450 etc.
This only applies to people with the long term horizon and beliefs in where TSLA is headed. Subject to change as Tesla does or does not execute on their goals. Good luck and HODL
I thought they said that they have the option to let it run as high as 15%, but if it goes past that they have to trim it down.
You're correct about the buying experience being way better, but there are still many people who think you have to go to another state, and some really want to ask questions while they place the order. So there's a great deal of misinformation in the general public mind that real stores would overcome.
woodisgood
Optimustic Pessimist
Really depends on your broker. Most of the big ones let you choose which lot (or share, in the above scenario) you want to sell, or let you set FIFO (first-in-first-out) or LIFO (last-in-first-out). It is important to know what the default setting for your account is - it's usually FIFO.
Robinhood and maybe some other platforms only let you do FIFO, in which case in the example you gave, your oldest share is being sold with long-term capital gains. This makes swing trading on top of a core position kind of fruitless from a tax perspective.
Sheeple! Wow... the powers that be, sure did manipulate, convince, and scare a lot of people into selling. Truly hard market manipulation to cause a selloff. I hope we can sling it back in their faces quickly and with gusto!
I gotta say, I'm pretty impressed with whoever engineered the drop before close yesterday. They certainly have hit the mark.
Overall, my current running theory is TSLA is simply the perfect stock to exploit human weakness by professionals with big money. It would be difficult to price given accurate information, and impossible to price looking at all the BS info out there. So stock moves can be played more on sentiment and therefore is easier to make go in specific direction or to a specific price target given some working capital and access to media. I'm starting to think that a smart retail investor might be able to sometimes read what is being done to the stock and play along with the "house". For example, yesterday's drop and the article was a clear signal to sell in the morning (or during the drop if one was at the terminal at the time).
Overall, my current running theory is TSLA is simply the perfect stock to exploit human weakness by professionals with big money. It would be difficult to price given accurate information, and impossible to price looking at all the BS info out there. So stock moves can be played more on sentiment and therefore is easier to make go in specific direction or to a specific price target given some working capital and access to media. I'm starting to think that a smart retail investor might be able to sometimes read what is being done to the stock and play along with the "house". For example, yesterday's drop and the article was a clear signal to sell in the morning (or during the drop if one was at the terminal at the time).
Ron talked about "going private" at 30:15. Hopefully this will clear the wrong post I made yesterday.
woodisgood
Optimustic Pessimist
Easier in hindsight, pretty darn tough in real-time. You'll be wrong more often than right, and cortisol levels will be through the roof, lol. Certainly not for me, when buy and hodl is so darn easy.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
