Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

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

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
An observation. Gordon Johnson has no listening skills whatsoever. He talks and talks and repeats his same (incorrect) rhetoric over and over again. He is an insufferable fool.

GJ is an arrogant prick who thinks talking over and interrupting his counterpart is winning.

Drinking game: any time he says 'thats a fact - you can't dispute it' and its not actually NOT a fact and CAN be disputed

Rob is way too nice to debate like this. Rob lets him finish his statements and GJ does not provide the same courtesy.
 
I didn’t call you any names so I’d appreciate you not making it seem as if I did.

Clearly I disagree with your position on the topic. It’s super easy to lock code a phone screen and/or not purposely sit on a phone knowing full well butt dialing et al can be a thing. Those are the actual common sense procedures here.

You’d think cellphone manufacturers would make you punch in a password before you can proceed with dialing, huh?
I didn't say you called me a name. I found your post to be insulting with a mocking tone. You also took my very pragmatic comment (that Tesla should have foreseen this issue) and said that I didn't believe in personal responsibility etc.

I live in the real world. Talking about what should be is fine, but that is rarely what is. Just like with Amazon, if I'm dumb and let my kids buy a bunch of movies that's my fault of course. Amazon has decided that it's not worth the hassle of dealing with angry customers. Bonus round, they can call you out if you just lie. "oh, I didn't order that." "Well sir, it requires entering your pin so it must have been you". I very much think this was that guy's fault BTW.

GJ is an arrogant prick who thinks talking over and
interrupting his counterpart is winning.

Drinking game: any time he says 'thats a fact - you can't dispute it' and its not actually NOT a fact and CAN be disputed

Rob is way too nice to debate like this. Rob lets him finish his statements and GJ does not provide the same courtesy.
It's the Ben Shapiro method of debating. Talk fast and say things like "objectively" and "basic fact" whenever you can.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: Krugerrand
Do we know what % of float gets traded on a day with strong volume? Is there a way to figure that out?

Sure, its easy. Look at a day's volume and divide it by the float -- that's the percent of float that was traded. You want "strong"? Okay, assume its at least 150% of the 65 day moving average and you get about 100M shares. With a float of about 740M that is 13.5% of the float. But I don't think that measures anything particularly useful.

Consider this: a lot of the trading volume is high frequency traders and day traders. If one share is traded every minute then it could account for 330 trades through the day. Naturally "one share" doesn't really exist for these trades (mostly its numbers that get shuffled with eventual settlement and its the net that really matters) but the point is there is noise obscuring how many "shares" are in the daily pool of back-and-forth.

Given the question it sounds like you are contemplating how easily the S&P 500 can add. This is similar to short covering and one of the stats given is "days to cover" which simply takes the number of shares shorted and divides it by the average number of shares traded each day. This ranges from 1 to 6 trading days[1] and the short interest has been at least ball parkish to the number of shares that would be soaked up by S&P inclusion. A week, much less two, is (in principle) plenty of time.

But the devil is always in the details. If 100% of the shorts tried to cover in one day the stock price would rocket because it isn't a back-and-forth of buying and selling, it is just buying. The S&P has the same problem, but lots of time (a week or two) in order to complete the purchasing. That's still a lot of buying and bound to push the price up.

1) Tesla, Inc. Common Stock (TSLA) Short Interest
 
  • Like
Reactions: StealthP3D
So... in theory, no most shorting until after a potential s and p annoucement?

Yeah I was quite surprised they let it dip momentarily to a 10% loss and trigger that ultock rule. Figured they would want one last shot at the stock tomorrow morning.

Wouldn't be surprised by a naked short barrage in the last hour to drop it as much as possible since it's passed 10% now, similar to yesterday
 
  • Like
Reactions: vikings123
I saw -9.99% on the ticker. Did we just trigger the circuit breaker again?

Edit: Now below -10%, so yes.

Yeah, while we've al been distracted by Gordo...

upload_2020-9-3_21-6-29.png
 
So... in theory, no most shorting until after a potential s and p annoucement?
Plenty of shorting is allowed. The "up tick" rule just means they are only supposed to short sell on "up ticks" which prevents the shorting from immediately pushing the price down. Of course, the market makers get an exception to the "up tick" rule which is why the "naked shorting" stat @Artful Dodger reports goes up on days when the up tick rule is in place.