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

[Sancho]

Yes, it was manipulation. From Tue-Thu, FINRA reported there were 2,136,450 shares sold marked as "ShortExempt", which means they were not located before being sold.

This would be illegal naked short selling except for the Market Makers Exemption (the "Madoff Rule"), which allows MMs to artificially (and without limit) increase the float even during times of high volume (when there is plenty of liquidity). This is an abuse of the exemption, which was intended to 'provide liquidity' but is now being used by unscrupulous parties to crash the SP while they scoop huge profits.

On Wed-Thu this week (in the middle of this bear raid), FINRA reported "ShortExempt" sales reached 9% of total shares sold short: (during a period of huge trading volume when liquidity is NOT AN ISSUE).

View attachment 509185

This had the effect of killing the sustained rally of Tue afternoon, and causing widespread panic selling amongst real shareholders (sorry @Right_Said_Fred this is the illegal practice you got swept up in).

View attachment 509189

This is market manipulation, pure and simple. Your hand waving attempt to explain it away does not change the reality, nor deal with the underlying problem: Regulation SHO (see below).

Let's see if these anonymous MMs can locate all these naked short shares before they are legally required to report their activity in the Failure to Deliver (FTD) report after 13 days. If these MMs are able to locate shares post hoc, it simply means legitimate investors were duped into selling their shares by the panic created by the dumping of millions of non-existant shares. If they can't locate shares, there are no consequences, and the actors involved remain anonymous.

Tell me again how this isn't manipulation? Where is the SEC?

Paging @UncaNed @Hock1
Info: @Fact Checking @KarenRei @lklundin

More here about the Market Maker's Exemption (Regulation SHO):
Regulation SHO | FINRA.org
Key Points About Regulation SHO

A final note: FINRA-reported volume is just a fraction of total trading on NASDAQ. During this week for example, FINRA reported a total volume of just 94,702,898 (94.70M) shares, while we know that total NASDAQ volume was 208,823,482 (208.8M) during that time (FINRA only reports numbers for Pre-Market and the Main Session, does not include the After-Market Session).

We have ZERO visibility into how much the rest of NASDAQ trading is sold short, or conducted under the short selling exemption. We do know that last week, we have no short selling information on 54.65% of all TSLA trades done on NASDAQ.

Think about what that means for Investor confidence and the transparency of the Market.

I really appreciate your expertise in this, but don't we need to separate manipulation by market makers from manipulation by shorts and call sellers? If someone is a legitimate market maker (and we have no basis for asserting that some of these market makers are not legitimate) then they don't have a horse in the race. Market makers are completely indifferent as to whether the stock they are making a market for ultimately goes up or down. They make their money on the spread, period. But in order to function as market makers they are taking risks all the time, and in order to protect themselves from these risks, as well as maintain liquidity, they may have to buy or sell securities they don't have. You can call that manipulation if you like, but the intent of the manipulation is simply to enable market making to work.

That is completely different than someone who has an investment strategy to make money through manipulation, either by investing short or selling calls and then doing something to drive the price down (through trading or FUD).

When the SP shot way past Max Pain on Tuesday, market makers may have needed to "manipulate" the market in order for the price of the common to align with the market for the options. Otherwise the market makers might have been killed. I have no problem with that kind of manipulation. I'm not wishing for the bankruptcy of legitimate market makers.

The short term effect of that market maker manipulation on Tuesday/Wednesday is that I lost more money (on paper) than I ever have in my life. I'd be more than a little pissed about that, except that it was all money I had just made the few days before. If sentiment remains strong, I am hopeful that the SP will continue to rise soon. But whether it continues to rise or not this coming week or beyond will not be influenced by the market makers, whose only intent is to make money on the spread. Looking forward, the SP will only be influenced by people with intent to make money on the rise and fall of the stock.

 

[SageBrush]

I am pretty sure my highway numbers in the spreadsheet for the Model Y will be close to the actual value from the test. Has to be!

By the way, back in the day when I looked at the drag coefficients for the Model 3 I thought that the zero and 1st order terms could not be used to model specific forces but that the second order term was close to actual aero drag.

Do you agree ?

 

[rsm287]

Are you saying we won't hit 790 next week?
Because Ross Ross Gerber on Twitter ?

I thought Ross Gerber was meant to be a long term investor. Seems to be thinking more like a short term trader!

 

[hobbes]

According to one of the local twitter accounts, on Monday (Feb 10) the first harvesters for cutting the trees for GF 4 Berlin are scheduled to arrive at the site. However, they don´t yet have the go from bomb clearing team. I don´t know if this implies that the animal protection issues have been resolved.

Also, they have started deploying an electrical connection for the factory and a glas fibre cable for data (see other pictures in the twitter feed).

@GF4Tesla..️️.build #GigaBerlin. on Twitter

 

[Late2theGame]

Yes, it was manipulation. From Tue-Thu, FINRA reported there were 2,136,450 shares sold marked as "ShortExempt", which means they were not located before being sold.

This would be illegal naked short selling except for the Market Makers Exemption (the "Madoff Rule"), which allows MMs to artificially (and without limit) increase the float even during times of high volume (when there is plenty of liquidity). This is an abuse of the exemption, which was intended to 'provide liquidity' but is now being used by unscrupulous parties to crash the SP while they scoop huge profits.

On Wed-Thu this week (in the middle of this bear raid), FINRA reported "ShortExempt" sales reached 9% of total shares sold short: (during a period of huge trading volume when liquidity is NOT AN ISSUE).

View attachment 509185

This had the effect of killing the sustained rally of Tue afternoon, and causing widespread panic selling amongst real shareholders (sorry @Right_Said_Fred this is the illegal practice you got swept up in).

View attachment 509189

This is market manipulation, pure and simple. Your hand waving attempt to explain it away does not change the reality, nor deal with the underlying problem: Regulation SHO (see below).

Let's see if these anonymous MMs can locate all these naked short shares before they are legally required to report their activity in the Failure to Deliver (FTD) report after 13 days. If these MMs are able to locate shares post hoc, it simply means legitimate investors were duped into selling their shares by the panic created by the dumping of millions of non-existant shares. If they can't locate shares, there are no consequences, and the actors involved remain anonymous.

Tell me again how this isn't manipulation? Where is the SEC?

Paging @UncaNed @Hock1
Info: @Fact Checking @KarenRei @lklundin

More here about the Market Maker's Exemption (Regulation SHO):
Regulation SHO | FINRA.org
Key Points About Regulation SHO

A final note: FINRA-reported volume is just a fraction of total trading on NASDAQ. During this week for example, FINRA reported a total volume of just 94,702,898 (94.70M) shares, while we know that total NASDAQ volume was 208,823,482 (208.8M) during that time (FINRA only reports numbers for Pre-Market and the Main Session, does not include the After-Market Session).

We have ZERO visibility into how much the rest of NASDAQ trading is sold short, or conducted under the short selling exemption. We do know that last week, we have no short selling information on 54.65% of all TSLA trades done on NASDAQ.

Think about what that means for Investor confidence and the transparency of the Market.

What I find interesting is, that the majority of the short exempt volume happened Wed/Thu - not Tuesday!

Tuesday's ExemptVolume was up too but most of it was used to prevent TSLA from recovering/rallying back on Wed/Thu!
Even if somebody constructs a "legally defensible reason" for doing this on Tuesday, I can't imagine how one would justify these actions on Wed/Thu?

Anybody knows a lawyer or firm knowledgeable in these things?

 

[Hock1]

Yes, it was manipulation. From Tue-Thu, FINRA reported there were 2,136,450 shares sold marked as "ShortExempt", which means they were not located before being sold.

This would be illegal naked short selling except for the Market Makers Exemption (the "Madoff Rule"), which allows MMs to artificially (and without limit) increase the float even during times of high volume (when there is plenty of liquidity). This is an abuse of the exemption, which was intended to 'provide liquidity' but is now being used by unscrupulous parties to crash the SP while they scoop huge profits.

On Wed-Thu this week (in the middle of this bear raid), FINRA reported "ShortExempt" sales reached 9% of total shares sold short: (during a period of huge trading volume when liquidity is NOT AN ISSUE).

View attachment 509185

This had the effect of killing the sustained rally of Tue afternoon, and causing widespread panic selling amongst real shareholders (sorry @Right_Said_Fred this is the illegal practice you got swept up in).

View attachment 509189

This is market manipulation, pure and simple. Your hand waving attempt to explain it away does not change the reality, nor deal with the underlying problem: Regulation SHO (see below).

Let's see if these anonymous MMs can locate all these naked short shares before they are legally required to report their activity in the Failure to Deliver (FTD) report after 13 days. If these MMs are able to locate shares post hoc, it simply means legitimate investors were duped into selling their shares by the panic created by the dumping of millions of non-existant shares. If they can't locate shares, there are no consequences, and the actors involved remain anonymous.

Tell me again how this isn't manipulation? Where is the SEC?

Paging @UncaNed @Hock1
Info: @Fact Checking @KarenRei @lklundin

More here about the Market Maker's Exemption (Regulation SHO):
Regulation SHO | FINRA.org
Key Points About Regulation SHO

A final note: FINRA-reported volume is just a fraction of total trading on NASDAQ. During this week for example, FINRA reported a total volume of just 94,702,898 (94.70M) shares, while we know that total NASDAQ volume was 208,823,482 (208.8M) during that time (FINRA only reports numbers for Pre-Market and the Main Session, does not include the After-Market Session).

We have ZERO visibility into how much the rest of NASDAQ trading is sold short, or conducted under the short selling exemption. We do know that last week, we have no short selling information on 54.65% of all TSLA trades done on NASDAQ.

Think about what that means for Investor confidence and the transparency of the Market.

This whole issue of Madoff Exemption, uptick rule and their connection to market manipulation is a very large topic. I have been railing about it all since 2007, when the uptick rule was eliminated. I was so outraged by the surreptitious capture of our markets (enabled by the Madoff Exemption and uptick removal) that I prematurely retired from the brokerage industry in 2008. Knowing what I knew/know, I could not, in good faith, put my clients' money into such a market. The SEC is a large part of the problem. Think about it: The SEC approved the Madoff exemption and they approved the removal of the uptick rule. It is so patently obvious what these changes would mean to free and fair markets, that the only conclusion to draw is that the SEC is okay with ripping off the general population on a daily basis and, by extension, will not be investigating any situations such as what we have had going on in TSLA stock for years.

All this being said, the ability to sell shares that don't exist, at prices lower than the market at any given time, and to not have to deliver these non-existent shares by T+2 would seem such an insurmountable advantage that it would be a foolish endeavor for anyone to take the opposite side (i. e., go long). And yet, here we are. After years of manipulative capping of the stock price, we are now witnessing true price discovery. IMO, this $750 area is a pretty fair value at this time, all things considered.

Yes. I am still pissed about the state of our markets but the Tesla cat is now out of the bag. The tipping point has been reached. Congratulations to all investors.

 

[bigsmooth125]

Dumb question that I couldn't find the answer to: What does SHO stand for?

Yes, it was manipulation. From Tue-Thu, FINRA reported there were 2,136,450 shares sold marked as "ShortExempt", which means they were not located before being sold.

This would be illegal naked short selling except for the Market Makers Exemption (the "Madoff Rule"), which allows MMs to artificially (and without limit) increase the float even during times of high volume (when there is plenty of liquidity). This is an abuse of the exemption, which was intended to 'provide liquidity' but is now being used by unscrupulous parties to crash the SP while they scoop huge profits.

On Wed-Thu this week (in the middle of this bear raid), FINRA reported "ShortExempt" sales reached 9% of total shares sold short: (during a period of huge trading volume when liquidity is NOT AN ISSUE).

View attachment 509185

This had the effect of killing the sustained rally of Tue afternoon, and causing widespread panic selling amongst real shareholders (sorry @Right_Said_Fred this is the illegal practice you got swept up in).

View attachment 509189

This is market manipulation, pure and simple. Your hand waving attempt to explain it away does not change the reality, nor deal with the underlying problem: Regulation SHO (see below).

Let's see if these anonymous MMs can locate all these naked short shares before they are legally required to report their activity in the Failure to Deliver (FTD) report after 13 days. If these MMs are able to locate shares post hoc, it simply means legitimate investors were duped into selling their shares by the panic created by the dumping of millions of non-existant shares. If they can't locate shares, there are no consequences, and the actors involved remain anonymous.

Tell me again how this isn't manipulation? Where is the SEC?

Paging @UncaNed @Hock1
Info: @Fact Checking @KarenRei @lklundin

More here about the Market Maker's Exemption (Regulation SHO):
Regulation SHO | FINRA.org
Key Points About Regulation SHO

A final note: FINRA-reported volume is just a fraction of total trading on NASDAQ. During this week for example, FINRA reported a total volume of just 94,702,898 (94.70M) shares, while we know that total NASDAQ volume was 208,823,482 (208.8M) during that time (FINRA only reports numbers for Pre-Market and the Main Session, does not include the After-Market Session).

We have ZERO visibility into how much the rest of NASDAQ trading is sold short, or conducted under the short selling exemption. We do know that last week, we have no short selling information on 54.65% of all TSLA trades done on NASDAQ.

Think about what that means for Investor confidence and the transparency of the Market.

 

[LST]

TSLA thoughts since 2016.

I bought in 2016, part of what I look at as the 2nd wave.

1st wave - initial nose cone buyers. Very brave both in stock and car (very few superchargers for trips)
2nd wave - new S design and X buyers. (stock starting to look plausible, supercharger network now valid,)
3rd wave - model 3 buyers (stock dipped back to 2016 levels around this time, maybe just for them to get on board, how nice!)

I disagree, let me explain:

You just forgot the very first wave:

Buyers at IPO, us first gen Roadster owners. If you go back into the history of TMC, you will see that a lot of Roadster owners accepted the offer from Tesla to participate at the IPO at a price of 17 USD. At that time that was super risky move for a small investor. I got 500 shares allocated and I was super happy then, even more so now. The gains we can reap in the future is proportional to the risk we took back then. So please don‘t omit Roadster owners in the history books

 

[FreqFlyer]

View attachment 509179

View attachment 509178

2020 Porsche Taycan Turbo S vs. 2020 Tesla Model S Performance

"And what a vessel it is. Judged from the driver's seat alone, the Taycan is the better car. It meets the high expectations of this storied brand, proves its real-world range, and moves the EV bar on a couple fronts. But price is always a factor; in this case, an insurmountable one."

This, Porsche has been stating this from the get go, it did not build a Model S clone but a Porsche with different metric goals. As regards price, there is a reason Porsche is the most profitable car company.

The Porsche 911 is the most profitable car of 2019

And I find this statement encouraging to the group think sometimes found here.

"As we set up the Model S for a max-charging session, Tesla employees mobbed the Taycan. Sizing it up on a granular level, they were visibly impressed by the build quality on the preproduction Porsche and genuinely excited about a new EV contender. Their level of open-mindedness—far exceeding what we've come to expect from Tesla owners and fanatics—is no doubt one of Tesla's strengths."

In the end, a BIG congrats to Tesla for winning the comparo against the Taycan. I was totally wrong on this one. I respect C&D tests.

 

[phantasms]

Hopefully they give Roadster 2 owners the opportunity to buy SpaceX so I can sell the argument to my wife.

 

[Late2theGame]

Yes, it was manipulation. From Tue-Thu, FINRA reported there were 2,136,450 shares sold marked as "ShortExempt", which means they were not located before being sold.

This would be illegal naked short selling except for the Market Makers Exemption (the "Madoff Rule"), which allows MMs to artificially (and without limit) increase the float even during times of high volume (when there is plenty of liquidity). This is an abuse of the exemption, which was intended to 'provide liquidity' but is now being used by unscrupulous parties to crash the SP while they scoop huge profits.

On Wed-Thu this week (in the middle of this bear raid), FINRA reported "ShortExempt" sales reached 9% of total shares sold short: (during a period of huge trading volume when liquidity is NOT AN ISSUE).

View attachment 509185

This had the effect of killing the sustained rally of Tue afternoon, and causing widespread panic selling amongst real shareholders (sorry @Right_Said_Fred this is the illegal practice you got swept up in).

View attachment 509189

This is market manipulation, pure and simple. Your hand waving attempt to explain it away does not change the reality, nor deal with the underlying problem: Regulation SHO (see below).

Let's see if these anonymous MMs can locate all these naked short shares before they are legally required to report their activity in the Failure to Deliver (FTD) report after 13 days. If these MMs are able to locate shares post hoc, it simply means legitimate investors were duped into selling their shares by the panic created by the dumping of millions of non-existant shares. If they can't locate shares, there are no consequences, and the actors involved remain anonymous.

Tell me again how this isn't manipulation? Where is the SEC?

Paging @UncaNed @Hock1
Info: @Fact Checking @KarenRei @lklundin

More here about the Market Maker's Exemption (Regulation SHO):
Regulation SHO | FINRA.org
Key Points About Regulation SHO

A final note: FINRA-reported volume is just a fraction of total trading on NASDAQ. During this week for example, FINRA reported a total volume of just 94,702,898 (94.70M) shares, while we know that total NASDAQ volume was 208,823,482 (208.8M) during that time (FINRA only reports numbers for Pre-Market and the Main Session, does not include the After-Market Session).

We have ZERO visibility into how much the rest of NASDAQ trading is sold short, or conducted under the short selling exemption. We do know that last week, we have no short selling information on 54.65% of all TSLA trades done on NASDAQ.

Think about what that means for Investor confidence and the transparency of the Market.

Following the link to the Key Points About Regulation SHO I found the following two sections relevant - emphasis is mine:

[6] Under the rule, an order can be marked “long” when the seller owns the security being sold and the security either is in the physical possession or control of the broker-dealer, or it is reasonably expected that the security will be in the physical possession or control of the broker or dealer no later than settlement. However, if a person does not own the security, or owns the security sold but it is not reasonably expected that the security will be in the possession or control of the broker-dealer prior to settlement, the sale should be marked “short.” The sale could be marked “short exempt” if the seller is entitled to rely on an exception from the short sale price test circuit breaker.


[7] Broker-dealers engaged in bona fide market making are excepted from having to borrow or arrange to borrow shares due to their potential need to facilitate customer orders in fast-moving markets without possible delays associated with complying with Regulation SHO. For instance, as explained above, they may be required by their market making obligations to sell short in situations where it may be difficult to quickly locate and borrow securities. However, this exception is limited. For example, bona fide market making does not include activity that is related to speculative selling strategies or investment purposes of the broker-dealer or that is disproportionate to the usual market making patterns or practices of the broker-dealer in that security. Further, bona fide market making does not include transactions whereby a market maker enters into an arrangement with another broker-dealer or customer in an attempt to use the market maker’s exception for the purpose of avoiding compliance with the locate requirement in Regulation SHO by the other broker-dealer or customer.

So what confuses me is how one would ever successfully argue/prove that a market maker did not engage in "bona fide market making"? - Unless an insider spills the beans?

And the exempt volume is so high on Wednesday and Thursday as they use it to go around the circuit breaker rules which were in effect those two days! So in effect the uptick rule does not apply to them either.

 

[Yuri_G]

This comes from authors where 25 mpg is the norm.

70 MPGe or 100 MPGe is in the "astronomically high" category and not relevant from a cost perspective.

In their test,extrapolated from 100 miles drives, Model S has 10 miles more range. Which they consider to be not meaningful.

Something is up with their range test. Bjorn was 20% more efficient in a 2018 P100D.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPneKSCbSG0

 

[ZsoZso]

March 2020 start of deliveries according to tesla.com

They will deliver a small number of Model Y in March, which will not make a noticable impact on Q1 financials. However, what it will do is to destroy the market for the infamous Tesla killers: iPace, eTron, EQC.
Those posers were pretending to be Model X competitors but the only feature they went head-to-head on was price. With Model Y on the market, they can no longer pretend. It will be crystal clear, they have inferior vehicles in every aspect and they are waaay overpriced.

 

[Artful Dodger]

You mention me as a victim of this illegal manipulation, but it only gave me a bruised ego (and I actually made 15k during my involuntary absence). But people with huge option wins that evaporated, like @pz1975 who lost half a million or more compared to his planned exit point, really have a reason to be annoyed, to put it mildly. Maybe someone who ‘lost’ a lot should start a class action suit to go after this illegal naked short selling.

Not to single you out, but all long shareholders were harmed by this illegal stock manipulation scheme. TLSA should be in the $900 neighborhood. Instead, we're between $150 - $200 / share below that fair value. And not by the normal means of "price discovery" by the Market; this was an unlawful manipulation of the SP.

On a thousand shares, that's $150K to $200K. You are fortunate to have the support of this forum and the native intelligence to concur the fear the bears tried to create in you. It worked on you for a while, until you saw through it. Jedi mind tricks don't always work.

But you weren't alone. Ask yourself, how many other investors with less native resilience than yourself survived this assault with their holdings intact? Do they deserve less protection from the SEC? How many investors had years of future gains snatched away from them so that certain criminal short sellers could profit by initiating this event?

Further, the effect of this bear raid was to scare away new money, delaying TSLA's rise, and inevitably delaying inclusion into the S&P 500 due to the perceived risks seen by the S&P selection committee.

There is both current harm and future harm in this week's events. The circumstances should be investigated by the SEC, which is the body tasked and empowered by the U.S. Congress to investigate these complaints. They have authority and access to records that we as retain investors do not have. It is their actual job.

If you're an Investor and a US Citizen, and you feel wronged by the events of this week, please take the time to file a complaint with the SEC. Would not hurt to contact your Senator either. Thank-you.

Kind regards,
Lodger

 

[dww12]

So I have never made an options trade but had it added to my account two weeks ago. I was wanting to buy some mid 2020 or 2021 $800 calls. I missed my buy day when I got too busy at work and now it seems the call options are very expensive and everyone and their grandmother are buying them because of the instant millionaire stories.

So now what I am thinking is to sell some weekly call options that are $50 or so OTM to at least make the margin interest I have on about 100sh.

Comparing having a sell limit on 100sh at $800 what is the upside vs selling a call option at $800?

Selling the call gets you the premium plus the sale price whereas having a sell order only gets you the sale price. Is the only down side if you get left behind because of a gap up (if you had a $800 sell order and it gapped you could cancel it before the open)?

 

[Fact Checking]

Come on tho. There was upside manipulation too. Tuesday we saw a $120 jump in premarket on just 4m of volume. That’s freaking absurd. The manipulation is going both ways this time, that way BagholderQuotes can make fun of both sides on Twitter. It’s great

Sorry, but your accusation of "upside manipulation" based on Tuesday pre-market trading is absurd.

The Tuesday rise in premarket on 4m volume was what I warned about previously: margin squeezed shorts covering or being bought in by their brokers, with a fair amount of delta-hedging buying too I suspect.

I called it several times before it happened, you can read one of my posts here, with a supporting chart:

BTW., yesterday TSLA closed at an ATH, and as a result there were elevated volumes of after-market trading of 600k shares, presumably quite a few from margin calls turning into forced covering after an ATH day, but unlike in previous instances this liquidity didn't push up the price significantly, it was soaked up in the $570-$572 range.

This morning's early trading at 4am ET started with 57k shares traded already, and a push down to around $562 was executed, against overall calm macro trends as you noted:

View attachment 503427​

This is relatively high volume early-early-market trading if I may coin the 4am-8am phase that way. Usual volumes are just a few thousand shares, normally.

We'll see. If we indeed have options writers anxious to set an example for a favorable closing price tomorrow, then they might expend some (comparatively cheaper) firepower in early trading to signal that they control the price.

Not advice in any case.

Tuesday's pre-market rise was entirely predictable based on the previous day's ATH closing price and the increasingly constrained float.

Also, it was a sustained, organic rise, not a low volume but targeted 'ambush' like what the shorts were doing via Xetra and the Nasdaq pre-market trading.

The incentives are also highly asymmetrical, as @ReflexFunds has pointed it out before:

• There is no need for bulls to manipulate, their thesis is that the value of Tesla goes up with time. Whether it's today, next week, in a month, in a year or in 3 years - doesn't really matter to most bulls.
• Shorts have time working against them: over long stretches of history stocks rose by about 7% annually on average, due to growing economies and increasing prosperity (with a bit of inflation as well). Shorting is against a fixed value with both economic growth and inflation working against them, tick-tock, tick-tock. They need quick results, and if they don't come naturally they'll stack the cards. Andrew Left is an example: he started shorting Tesla again despite being overall bullish on Tesla.

This is also why birds were flooding Tesla investor forums when the stock was near multi-year lows - while we don't really see Tesla bulls flooding various investor forums with dishonest pump-and-dump talk now that we are near ATHs, do we? Twitter banter and taunting sure isn't equivalent, especially since the TSLAQ block-list insulates most of the TSLAQ believers from contrarian voices anyway.

This is why dishonest shorts filed what I consider a fraudulent NHTSA filing, to depress the stock price.

So yes, I believe that shorts like Jim Chanos, Andrew Left and David Einhorn are dishonest scumbags who'll do everything, possibly including illegal market manipulation, to depress the prices of stock they are shorting within short periods of time, because they know that in an honest fight of Tesla bulls vs. bears everything is stacked against them.

What we saw last week was a rather blatant example of open price manipulation IMO.

 

[myt-e-s-l-a]

Are you saying we won't hit 790 next week?
Because Ross Ross Gerber on Twitter ?

Ha. I am saying that it won't (hope) go below 690 next week. If it hits 790, great! The option will prob expire worthless and I get to keep the 5k premium.

 

[Maitri982]

This has previously been posted:

It's a must watch if you haven't already. Fridman got owned!

This is the best promotion of Elon I have ever seen/read. Coming from Keller means a lot. Why? - he is top of his game, has worked in different industries and crucially has left Tesla and is free to say what he wants. He wouldn't hold back if he thought otherwise, as Fridman found out.

Lots of chat about stripping out layers of assumptions (1st principles) and how good Elon is at it.

FSD is gonna be easy he reckons.

Now I need to become a craftsman in something....

Friedmen did not get owned. The interview was great. FSD is not easy. If it was it would be done already and it’s nowhere near done.

really liked much of this guys insights, but like most people, he’s not 100% right on everything.

 

[printf42]

I did see then what was unfair advantage for some buyers at this time:

If you were a software developer.

This!!!

If you are a programmer:

• You understand it’s all about software these days. Software dictates the overall user experience.
• You understand there’s no competition coming
• You understand how GAAP under-values real core assets (talent and code/data) of a software company.
• You understand what was being told at the Autonomous investor day.
• You know how Waymo had been progressing after Sebastian Thrun left.
• You know how Cruise and Uber was burning money even though there is no hope.
• Real winner is so obvious and you are just astonished why no one else is seeing it(well, except TMC)
• It makes TSLA a good buy anywhere below 1T market cap.

If you are not a programmer, find a geek relative who happens to be a Tesla fanboy(not necessarily CS major) and ask about autonomous day presentations.

Have a nice weekend folks!

 

[Chickenlittle]

So I have never made an options trade but had it added to my account two weeks ago. I was wanting to buy some mid 2020 or 2021 $800 calls. I missed my buy day when I got too busy at work and now it seems the call options are very expensive and everyone and their grandmother are buying them because of the instant millionaire stories.

So now what I am thinking is to sell some weekly call options that are $50 or so OTM to at least make the margin interest I have on about 100sh.

Comparing having a sell limit on 100sh at $800 what is the upside vs selling a call option at $800?

Selling the call gets you the premium plus the sale price whereas having a sell order only gets you the sale price. Is the only down side if you get left behind because of a gap up (if you had a $800 sell order and it gapped you could cancel it before the open)?

I also sell calls but recognize the risk that just happened. Rapid rise than fall before expiration. You may miss a very attractive price to sell at