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

[Jovian]

Delete this misinformation. Who says nothing of the sort.

WHO Director-General's opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19 - 3 March 2020

"Globally, about 3.4% of reported COVID-19 cases have died. By comparison, seasonal flu generally kills far fewer than 1% of those infected."

 

[Tim S]

Future is down by another 2.5%

View attachment 517644

Futures are down less than 0.2%
Real-Time Stock Indices Futures

 

[KSilver2000]

Problem is that includes Wuhan where it was first discovered and where there were initial problems, Iran, South Korea, Washington State, and others which are either vastly underreported for cases or are composed of highly vulnerable age groups, special circumstances, or a combination. Another CNBC FUD story. Unless you have the correct denominator, you won't get the correct percentage.

Not disagreeing with you.
Just want to point out that the idea of a correct denominator depends on what you want to study.
And I wouldn’t necessarily say CNBC is running FUD when almost everyone is reporting statistics without context.

If you say the rate is misleading because it includes Wuhan in its early stages, it would also be biased to include Washington’s nursing home data in a mortality rate calculation for just the US. One statistic by itself of an active disease can’t give an accurate measure of anything.

 

[MC3OZ]

For showrooms, I would definitely clear out space to put Model Ys in showrooms at the start of Q2.
That is nothing to do with Model Y demand, simply a way of getting more people to visit showrooms.

I think there was some discussion on car colors earlier.
Tesla walked back from "Plain White" option as the base color earlier making it "Pearl White".
That was all to do with managing part inventories...
IMO 2 X white, 2 X Red or 2 X Blue choices will simply ensure the wrong colored part turns up often...

So more choice costs Tesla in terms of inventory and parts inventory, so that color choice will cost the customer more.
In addition to costing more it may take longer to get your car and parts may take longer to arrive...

But I do think Tesla can possibly support 2 additional color choices for the US and Canada, storing excess inventory and parts at Laythrop. I would choose Silver and Dark Green as the 2 new colors..

For Europe and China it will ultimately be a choice for the local factories as cars and parts will be painted by the local factories and inventory will be stored locally,... So I will not be surprised if Europe and China make different color choices.

For RHD markets, I can't see more color choice ever happening.... the logistics and additional costs in terms of parts and inventory are probably not justified by the demand.. Additional colour choice will simply push the cost of minority color cars too high.... or Tesla would need to absorb additional expenses just to give customers a choice.

 

[Zero CO2]

What are you saying? It seems to me if you were so bearish on Tesla that your buy limit was $650, you would have been buying under $650 (as I was doing) just two trading days ago!

With all the good news in the pipeline, there is a chance it might not ever go there again. Trying to time the market is not such a good idea, it's fraught with risk and uncertainty.

not bearish ... and I did buy at $680 ... $ 650 was ephemeral and i did not have a limit order set at $650 last week ..you are right we may never see $650 again .. but my modeling says we can be anywhere from just under $500 to about $1000 with my base case $750 in 2020 depending on the enterprise value assigned ... the difference between $650 and $680 is noise in the long run ... but i love a bargain

so i guess I should be buying shares under $750 ... which i believe i will be able to do through out this year... so no rush according to me

as we saw last week the market forces can overtake a stock and drive down to bargain prices ....after the capital raise i thought $726 was in the rear view mirror but that was short lived ... don't get me wrong i have enough shares now that i will be very happy not to see $650 again

 

[elasalle]

That source is not from WHO. Linking clickbait headlines doesn’t do any good for anyone. If you are interested in adding constructive info just quote directly from WHO or CDC.

Fire Away!
(It’s the batteries, Stupid!)

Let's not push aside anything that doesn't meet one's point of view. Also let's not try to Highbrow other's.
I was just sharing an article released at 4:20 around after market dip for TSLA and thought there might be a coincidence.

WHO Director-General's opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19 - 3 March 2020

 

[KarenRei]

Let's not push aside anything that doesn't meet one's point of view. Also let's not try to Highbrow other's.
I was just sharing an article released at 4:20 around after market dip for TSLA and thought there might be a coincidence.

View attachment 517664

WHO Director-General's opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19 - 3 March 2020

If one is going to link misleading clickbait about a topic that many people may not know better about - regardless of whether it's moving the stock - it should be put in context.

And here's the context from WHO, as of a couple weeks ago, when their global estimate was 3,8%, not 3,4%:

"As of 20 February, 2,114 of the 55,924 laboratory confirmed cases have died (crude fatality ratio [CFR: 3.8%) (note: at least some of whom were identified using a case definition that included pulmonary disease). The overall CFR varies by location and intensity of transmission (i.e. 5.8% in Wuhan vs. 0.7% in other areas in China). In China, the overall CFR was higher in the early stages of the outbreak (17.3% for cases with symptom onset from 1-10 January) and has reduced over time to 0.7% for patients with symptom onset after 1 February. " [12]

Wuhan is not representative of the outbreak anywhere else in the world. And indeed, early Wuhan numbers (the majority of them) are not representative of Wuhan today. Outside of Wuhan in China 0,7%, and outside of China, the data suggests even lower rates, esp. with more recent cases. Even in Wuhan, recent cases are now 0,7% These are the sort of numbers that most countries are facing. Playing up "3,4%" just because WHO's director general happened to mention it offhand in a speech (he did not focus on it) is grossly misleading to the general public.

So if you want to mention clickbait FUD because it's having an effect on the market, sure, go ahead. But be sure to mark it as clickbait FUD.

(As an addendum, this is not the first time that this has happened. See the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, which initially overloaded the medical system in Mexico and caused a widespread freakout, but by the time it had gone global pandemic ended up no more deadly than a typical seasonal flu)

 

[JRP3]

I would choose Silver and Dark Green as the 2 new colors

I can't imagine dark green being popular enough to bother with.

 

[flabellina]

Let's not push aside anything that doesn't meet one's point of view. Also let's not try to Highbrow other's.
I was just sharing an article released at 4:20 around after market dip for TSLA and thought there might be a coincidence.

View attachment 517664

WHO Director-General's opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19 - 3 March 2020

After all the false and misleading articles that we've seen about tesla, after all the out of contex info and quotations that have happened with elon and tesla, why wouldn't you be very careful to take *anything* that comes out of the media at face value?

What if that number was taken out of context to get maximum amount of clicks, as we have seen so many times with tesla?

We are good at catching media bs regarding tesla because we know a lot about the topic. But why assume the reliability of the media is anything better when it regards topics that we are not as informed about?

 

[ggr]

WHO Director-General's opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19 - 3 March 2020

"Globally, about 3.4% of reported COVID-19 cases have died. By comparison, seasonal flu generally kills far fewer than 1% of those infected."

Not putting my moderator hat on, but @KarenRei, it isn't a clickbait headline, it really was said and said today.

I don't disagree that it is being reported in a fear-mongering way, and maybe the result is a bit biased in the way the data was interpreted, but it is real news.

With moderator hat back on, I've just deleted a number of postings that had easily verifiable misinformation in them, for example claiming that that headline was fake, or include an old stock price table that was not relevant to today's market. All, please remember that posting misinformation is the #1 cause of temporary bans.

 

[willow_hiller]

Let's not push aside anything that doesn't meet one's point of view. Also let's not try to Highbrow other's.
I was just sharing an article released at 4:20 around after market dip for TSLA and thought there might be a coincidence.

View attachment 517664

WHO Director-General's opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19 - 3 March 2020

There's a massive difference between the percentage of reported cases that die and the "mortality rate". For every 1 reported case of Covid-19, there are likely dozens of unreported asymptomatic or mild-symptom cases.

If you want a like-for-like comparison with influenza, I would like to know the percentage of influenza patients who die after hospitalization. I would imagine that it's much higher than 0.1%.

EDIT:

Found a source: Flu shot better than last year, despite tough season for kids

4,800 influenza deaths, 87,000 hospitalizations. Now with that limited data about influenza (assuming only those who are hospitalized are infected), it makes the mortality rate appear to be about 5.5%. But of course after studying influenza for decades we know it's magnitudes lower.

 

[Ocelot]

If one is going to link misleading clickbait about a topic that many people may not know better about - regardless of whether it's moving the stock - it should be put in context.

And here's the context from WHO, as of a couple weeks ago, when their global estimate was 3,8%, not 3,4%:

"As of 20 February, 2,114 of the 55,924 laboratory confirmed cases have died (crude fatality ratio [CFR: 3.8%) (note: at least some of whom were identified using a case definition that included pulmonary disease). The overall CFR varies by location and intensity of transmission (i.e. 5.8% in Wuhan vs. 0.7% in other areas in China). In China, the overall CFR was higher in the early stages of the outbreak (17.3% for cases with symptom onset from 1-10 January) and has reduced over time to 0.7% for patients with symptom onset after 1 February. " [12]

Wuhan is not representative of the outbreak anywhere else in the world. And indeed, early Wuhan numbers (the majority of them) are not representative of Wuhan today. Outside of Wuhan in China 0,7%, and outside of China, the data suggests even lower rates, esp. with more recent cases. Even in Wuhan, recent cases are now 0,7% These are the sort of numbers that most countries are facing. Playing up "3,4%" just because WHO's director general happened to mention it offhand in a speech (he did not focus on it) is grossly misleading to the general public.

So if you want to mention clickbait FUD because it's having an effect on the market, sure, go ahead. But be sure to mark it as clickbait FUD.

(As an addendum, this is not the first time that this has happened. See the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, which initially overloaded the medical system in Mexico and caused a widespread freakout, but by the time it had gone global pandemic ended up no more deadly than a typical seasonal flu)

Personally, I find it all UD. While there is some fear being pushed, there is literal, uncertainty and doubt. For illnesses that we have known about for decades, we often know remarkably little. Where is the rapid test for Lyme? Kawaski's ? How come we can't treat Molloscum, it's seemingly on every 4th kid out there? The list goes on.

For either side to be pushing numbers as facts at this point, seems like 'best guessing'. The confidence intervals are huge, and the assumptions numerous. Time will help, delineate things, but never completely, as it is not a static picture.

The truth is, no one knows . It is all UD at this point.

 

[Artful Dodger]

After-action Report: Tue, Mar 03, 2020: (Full-Day's Trading)

VWAP: $764.07
Volume: 25,785,336
Traded: $19,701,900,317.92 ($19.70 B)

Closing SP / VWAP: 97.51%
(TSLA closed BELOW today's Avg SP)​

Comment: "JMP upgrade led to an early jump, followed by a macro-assisted clawback"

 

[Sudre]

Or frustrated Robinhood clients may be liquidating and closing their accounts.

I will admit that Robinhood is where I keep my trading money and today I sold off everything that brought me profits that I could. It required several attempts to get the orders in. In a highly volatile market I can not stay in a highly volatile APP. Some would go thru on the desktop site, others on the phone APP. I have other accounts with other vendors I can trade with but at higher fees (hard to beat free when it works). I am not disappointed. I knew Robinhood was not a top tier trading platform. If they come clean about what happened and how they secured the issue I will return.

Where this may concerns TSLA is I imagine many others are thinking the same thing and TSLA is included in the trading.

 

[Thumper]

Steel is produced by repeatedly tempering it in high temperatures and then quickly cooling. If done correctly it hardens the steel, if done incorrectly it becomes brittle and breaks.

Your description of Steel making and hardening/tempering is oversimplified and misleading. The field is rich with subtlety and varies by alloy ingredients. For a better description try https://www.brighthubengineering.com/manufacturing-technology/30476-what-is-heat-treatment/

Basically steel of about 1% carbon can be hardened which will result in brittleness this can be made tougher by tempering. If you are interested, read the link.

 

[Beltsbear]

WHO Director-General's opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19 - 3 March 2020

"Globally, about 3.4% of reported COVID-19 cases have died. By comparison, seasonal flu generally kills far fewer than 1% of those infected."

Not sure if this is a purposeful attempt at disinformation. The death rate for a disease is the percent of those who are infected that die, not the percent of those REPORTED that die. There is a huge difference. WHO did not say the death rate is 3.4%. That is a lie.

Also putting a comparison to the flu with inaccurate numbers there too. The death rate for the flu is .1% on average. While technically true that it is less then 1%, it is clearly inaccurate to say that when the true number is off by a factor of 10.

 

[StealthP3D]

Any ideas why we are dropping a lot AH? Down from 744 to 731 now. The opposite of yesterday’s movement.

Edit: 722

More sellers than buyers.

It looks like my skepticism of the strength of this rally was justified.

I think there are some nefarious traders out there that like to kill TSLA strength by accenting the normal buying pressure by buying aggressively early knowing this will cause a strong rally. Then, they stop buying and let the share price continue to rise. When they figure it's gone as high as it's going to go, they sell hard. This causes the price to decline rapidly. If they see buying pressure step in they buy hard, accenting the move up, then they dump hard (for a profit). The whiplash makes other buyers think twice about buying (too chaotic). They have retained some shares so they sell hard again to cause an exit stampede.

Overall, TSLA has buying pressure but these nefarious characters are able to kill what would have been a nice steady rise and profit at the same time. They can use their profits to create more fear by selling at lower prices (at a loss) to drive the price down further and create fear uncertainty and doubt.

 

[elasalle]

Not sure if this is a purposeful attempt at disinformation. The death rate for a disease is the percent of those who are infected that die, not the percent of those REPORTED that die. There is a huge difference. WHO did not say the death rate is 3.4%. That is a lie.

Also putting a comparison to the flu with inaccurate numbers there too. The death rate for the flu is .1% on average. While technically true that it is less then 1%, it is clearly inaccurate to say that when the true number is off by a factor of 10.

Globally, about 3.4% of reported COVID-19 cases have died.

What does "REPORTED" mean?

 

[flabellina]

Globally, about 3.4% of reported COVID-19 cases have died.

What does "REPORTED" mean?

That 3.4% is not the actual death rate. The actual death rate is lower than that as many cases, particularly the milder ones, are not reported.

That's also a big reason why you see the death rate change from country to country and in different periods of time in the same place.

 

[MC3OZ]

I can't imagine dark green being popular enough to bother with.

There may be a better option, 2 new colors is around the maximum I expect.

People sometimes want a car that looks a bit different to all the rest.... they can always get a wrap..