A rich relative and inheritance powder?anyone any ideas for levering up "cheaply"?
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
A rich relative and inheritance powder?anyone any ideas for levering up "cheaply"?
IMO. It is just as likely that there are WS biggies that believe (or perhaps know) that the SP inclusion is not over and we are seeing the mother of all manipulations to front-run the S&P funds.Yeah so......sorry but it seems very apparent to me based on the news of the offering being sold, that Tesla got played in this scenario. If they're announcing it has closed, it means they've been issuing shares at these lower prices. It seems obvious to me that they thought they were going to get inclusion and wanted to ride that....but the rug got pulled out from under them by the S&P. Should have just done a regular offerring at 480
Also not to ge a Debbie downer, but those Aug china sales are quite a bit lower than I was hoping for
YES! Buy. Hold. Live life. Be happy. Drive a Tesla.Honestly I’m done with all of this. I’m now in the “whatever happens, happens” camp.
Just saying "they got played" isn't really backing up your statement. Again, where is the downside? They basically got $5B cash for free.Thats a lot of what if's. And as the days go by with no S&P annoucement, it will be more and more obvious they got played. I do not think S&P happens this quarter and I hope Elon takes it personally and Tesla goes for a billion in profits for Q3 to shove it up the S&P committee's *as.
Again guys, I'm not saying Tesla was wrong for raising cash or that they were played just because they raised cash. It's the terms of the offering that make it obvious to me that they got played/screwed with
I'm totally fine with getting many disagrees with my thoughts on this btw I dont expect a lot of people here to agree with my take on this
Lol, you're Tripping. SP intraday low on Thursday was $402.00Yup, but the stock was trading in mid to upper 300's on Thursday and Friday of last week. I'd put money on the average being around 400 for all the shares issued throughout the week
Just saying "they got played" isn't really backing up your statement. Again, where is the downside? They basically got $5B cash for free.
I take this raise as a compromise between the board(who wants rainy day cash when it's free) and Elon(who wants things lean). It appeases the S&P folks a bit so that's probably a deciding factor as well.
If you're saying today's drop is how they"got played"....who cares? I'm not selling, Elon's not selling, and inclusion is STILL out there likely to cause an even worse bubble when announced.
To be honest there're a lot of holes at this point, but I can argue that, assuming the SPGC still has some common sense:Why would they raise cash to fund something that can be funded using internally generated cash flow? Over the next few quarters Tesla may have $1B in cash flow each quarter. Obviously the credit ratings will improve in the next few months again.
This argument (Raise tons of cash and build build build) makes no sense. Tesla is already growing at 40%.
I dont think Tesla got played by SP into raising. I think Tesla raised because they have info that we don't.
Thats a lot of what if's. And as the days go by with no S&P annoucement, it will be more and more obvious they got played. I do not think S&P happens this quarter and I hope Elon takes it personally and Tesla goes for a billion in profits for Q3 to shove it up the S&P committee's *as.
Again guys, I'm not saying Tesla was wrong for raising cash or that they were played just because they raised cash. It's the terms of the offering that make it obvious to me that they got played/screwed with
I'm totally fine with getting many disagrees with my thoughts on this btw I dont expect a lot of people here to agree with my take on this
Lol, you're Tripping. SP intraday low on Thursday was $402.00
On Friday, the intraday low was 372.02 but the VWAP during the main session was $402.97 and Tesla had the right to choose when to sell and for how much per share.
You've past the point where facts support your argument, and entering the point where facts debunk your argument.
Word.
S&P must be thinking Tesla is in a speculative bubble, and would rather include
After the bubble burst. And /or that gaap earning need further confirmation
Without the benefit of tax credits .
Link?I think it's over for tsla and s&p for near term
An S&P Global (SPGI) spokesperson declined to comment of the reasons Tesla wasn’t included, saying, “the committee takes into account several factors such as sector balance and size representation.”
And if Tesla hadn't done the groundwork of building BEVs that people actually want to buy, they wouldn't be getting any regulatory credits. It's just as much a legitimate income stream as making the cars.Regulatory credits are a viable source of income, as they are a cost on GM, Ford and FCAU's balance sheet, if they were to say "these aren't real profits" then they're rewriting accounting rules, which would be a very dangerous precedent.
That statement doesn't really mean anything....would you rather him have said "The committee is going to admit Tesla...we are just waiting for the speculative idiots that drove the SP up to sell so we can let our friends buy at a lower level"I think it's over for tsla and s&p for near term
An S&P Global (SPGI) spokesperson declined to comment of the reasons Tesla wasn’t included, saying, “the committee takes into account several factors such as sector balance and size representation.”
Yup. It would be just like saying that Amazon's profits this year are temporary because more people are buying online due to covid. That's an investment thesis, not a measure of profit. All sources of revenue and profits are ephemeral, the only question is the timeline.Regulatory credits are a viable source of income, as they are a cost on GM, Ford and FCAU's balance sheet, if they were to say "these aren't real profits" then they're rewriting accounting rules, which would be a very dangerous precedent.
No. SP global has their list and they can add whoever they want. Here at TMC we could make our own list.Can TSLA refuse to be in the index? At this point I would like to see Elon start giving out new meaings to "S&P." I got A LOT of ideas.
The S&P is getting dangerously close to the point where TSLA doesn't need anybody's approval.
Like Elon said, "Q3 and Q4 will be incredible."
There's a website that posts the definative status of the Uptick Rule for every single Equity traded in New York. Shouldn't be too hard to find, or maybe somebody here as a link handy?
TIA.