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

[wipster]

Spokane WA just authorized the purchase of 4 model Y's this week:
Spokane police to buy four electric Tesla Model Y 's under City Council's orders

Kinda almost makes you want to get arrested...

 

[Nocturnal]

I think the issue is liquidity. Many have argued for a mother of all squeeze to occur as not enough shares can be found to supply indexers. However, if big firms can bring their own shares to the pool and let market pricing sort it out, the above scenario won't happen. Additionally, assuming speculators can see this unfold in real time, they'll quickly figure out that they don't hold as much leverage as they thought they did, which means they'll more likely let go of their shares. The mere fact that this week has been uneventful so far must have spooked many into selling.

Right, but if I'm a shareholder in fund XYZ it's not serving my interests for the fund to sell TSLA just to help out a sister fund. That's sketchy AF. For instance I own some of Vanguard's Windsor fund. They don't hold Tesla but say they do. If that fund sells TSLA so that VFINX (their S&P500 fund) can buy those shares without a price spike, they are actively choosing to decrease my returns so that VFINX can "have a better price". That can't be legal. (of course they can pretend it was just standard trading but the incentive doesn't seem high enough to skirt the law)

 

[zeed]

With so much conjecture on the number of shares being front-runned, I thought I'd take a shot at it:

My guess is about 36M shares are being front-runned since S&P announcement, which I've estimated entirely and anecdotally from Dec.9 +$5B liquidity correlating to -7.5% drop in share price (opening price less closing price on Dec.9).

It would follow, subtracting $5B of liquidity = inverse 92.5% = 8.1% rise in SP.

Hence, SP on Nov.16 * (1+8.1%)^x = current SP (where x is the multiples of $5B needed to get to the current SP). Therefore, $408 *(1.081)^x = $620.

So, 5.38 multiples of $5B = $27B, or $44M shares at the current price. Adjusting for average SP since Nov.16 (linear method), ($408+$620)/2=0.83 of 44M = 36M shares front-runned since Nov.16.

I know this is overly simplistic so pease go ahead and shoot some holes.

 

[dww12]

So, I've been given some extra thought on recent news of solid state batteries, Tesla's structural batteries and everything that goes on, here is a note I came up with that I thought I'd share with the community.

Cybertruck's structural battery is just the first step.
We know that CT is incorporating a structural approach for batteries where the 4680 batteries just become a part of the structural integrity. I think this is just the first step. Where this design is going to shine is for Tesla Semi program.
I've always thought about why isn't Tesla incorporating their Semi's battery system into the trailer itself. And trailer can always be charging while being loaded/unloaded, providing minimal down time for the semi as they wait to be charged. And the answer has always come down to the fact that if we make the trailer too heavy, the possible load decreases, making it more expensive to run. But the trailer+truck itself is 35,000lbs worth of steel with a max. loaded weight at 80,000lbs. If Tesla can integrate batteries into forming the trailer bed itself, it could potentially create a trailer bed weighting not a whole lot more than 35,000lbs while retaining the same structural integrity to bear the 53,000lbs worth of load on top. This is further confirmed by Elon's comments on how he thinks about airplane design where the oil tank itself is just part of the structural integrity of the fuselage; allowing max amount of fuel loaded onto the plane while not planning for an extra part for fuel.

Solid state batteries are missing the point.
This week, we had news from Toyota that they plan to introduce an EV with solid-state batteries that's able to charge in 10min while providing decent amount of range. Similar approaches are shown by comments from QS technologies. But I think they are missing the point and put too much emphasis on EV and from a wrong POV. Tesla's battery formula program goes onto separating into 3 (or perhaps more) different type of formula depending on the need of each type of vehicle. This is not just for EV, but also the other battery programs that Tesla is currently running, namely the megapack designed for grid infrastructures. First on EV... Toyota and the others are still using the same mentality of ICE vehicles where people are used to "fill up" when they actually go into a gas station. However, as many of us with a Tesla or other EV knows, that's not the way we use EV. We charge at home when it's low and go out in the morning with a "full tank". And in long road trips or where the battery doesn't provide enough for us to get from point A to B, we charge just enough for us to get to the next charging point. This is similar to how we use cellphones. Even though we charge fully at night, if we know that given our usage, it's not going to last the day, we'd charge whenever there's a chance... just enough for us to keep going until we can fully charge it again. So, by focusing too much on charging speed, they actually forget that yes, fast charging is nice, but really what we need is many quick short burst of charges that can get us to the next point of charging. So, the need for extremely fast charging is not actually necessary. The focus should still be on the motor efficiency and longevity of the battery, which I think Tesla is right on track. Furthermore, it's always about economy of scale. The easier and more cost-efficient the manufacturing can be, whether it's the battery itself or the car as a whole, is what going to make a difference between becoming a giant in EV vs. a niche player.

Looks like there is about 2000lbs attributed to a semi frame. If Tesla could replace that with structural batteries that may be the missing weight that makes it possible.

Fact #620: April 26, 2010 Class 8 Truck Tractor Weight by Component

 

[EV forever]

I am watching the closing cross right now - no clue what I am looking at, but price went up by about $0.5 since I started watching. I think we need a tutorial on what we are supposed to be looking at here

 

[dl003]

Right, but if I'm a shareholder in fund XYZ it's not serving my interests for the fund to sell TSLA just to help out a sister fund. That's sketchy AF. For instance I own some of Vanguard's Windsor fund. They don't hold Tesla but say they do. If that fund sells TSLA so that VFINX (their S&P500 fund) can buy those shares without a price spike, they are actively choosing to decrease my returns so that VFINX can "have a better price". That can't be legal. (of course they can pretend it was just standard trading but the incentive doesn't seem high enough to skirt the law)

I agree, but TSLA has run up 800% this year and over 50% just from the announcement, compared to just the usual 10-20%, I don't think it will be difficult for them to say they trimmed TSLA after having done their due diligence. What if TSLA drops next week and they can buy it back at a lower price since speculators are forced to exit? Win win for Vanguard.

 

[Favguy]

Well that was dull... Now to see if anything much happens after hours!

 

[UnknownSoldier]

Interesting read about the shorting business

The Dark Money Secretly Bankrolling Activist Short-Sellers — and the Insiders Trying to Expose It

Short sellers being largely hypocritical douchebags who think they are the sanctimonious market police is something we already know as Tesla investors but the sheer degree of blatantly illegal market manipulation the SEC turns a blind eye to is somewhat disheartening to say the least.

 

[Johan]

I am watching the closing cross right now - no clue what I am looking at, but price went up by about $0.5 since I started watching. I think we need a tutorial on what we are supposed to be looking at here

I think your eyes are pointed in the right direction. A good start.

 

[chrsk]

One mill shares traded at the moment after marked opened

 

[Johan]

I agree, but TSLA has run up 800% this year and over 50% just from the announcement, compared to just the usual 10-20%, I don't think it will be difficult for them to say they trimmed TSLA after having done their due diligence. What if TSLA drops next week and they can buy it back at a lower price since speculators are forced to exit? Win win for Vanguard.

Exactly. Some of these players are so big that they can somewhat predictably move the market with their trades, or lack of predicted trades (on the open market). Which could be a very effective way of shaking the tree, in other words profit on both sides of the "missing inclusion peak".

 

[CHGolferJim]

tl;dr version for people on the other side of the paywall?

Sorry don’t know how to do that. Generally if you search for an article by title and outlet you can find the full article.

 

[EnzoXYZ]

Toyota had the same press release in 2017 for 2020. Pay no attention until you see it.

So, I've been given some extra thought on recent news of solid state batteries, Tesla's structural batteries and everything that goes on, here is a note I came up with that I thought I'd share with the community.

Cybertruck's structural battery is just the first step.
We know that CT is incorporating a structural approach for batteries where the 4680 batteries just become a part of the structural integrity. I think this is just the first step. Where this design is going to shine is for Tesla Semi program.
I've always thought about why isn't Tesla incorporating their Semi's battery system into the trailer itself. And trailer can always be charging while being loaded/unloaded, providing minimal down time for the semi as they wait to be charged. And the answer has always come down to the fact that if we make the trailer too heavy, the possible load decreases, making it more expensive to run. But the trailer+truck itself is 35,000lbs worth of steel with a max. loaded weight at 80,000lbs. If Tesla can integrate batteries into forming the trailer bed itself, it could potentially create a trailer bed weighting not a whole lot more than 35,000lbs while retaining the same structural integrity to bear the 53,000lbs worth of load on top. This is further confirmed by Elon's comments on how he thinks about airplane design where the oil tank itself is just part of the structural integrity of the fuselage; allowing max amount of fuel loaded onto the plane while not planning for an extra part for fuel.

Solid state batteries are missing the point.
This week, we had news from Toyota that they plan to introduce an EV with solid-state batteries that's able to charge in 10min while providing decent amount of range. Similar approaches are shown by comments from QS technologies. But I think they are missing the point and put too much emphasis on EV and from a wrong POV. Tesla's battery formula program goes onto separating into 3 (or perhaps more) different type of formula depending on the need of each type of vehicle. This is not just for EV, but also the other battery programs that Tesla is currently running, namely the megapack designed for grid infrastructures. First on EV... Toyota and the others are still using the same mentality of ICE vehicles where people are used to "fill up" when they actually go into a gas station. However, as many of us with a Tesla or other EV knows, that's not the way we use EV. We charge at home when it's low and go out in the morning with a "full tank". And in long road trips or where the battery doesn't provide enough for us to get from point A to B, we charge just enough for us to get to the next charging point. This is similar to how we use cellphones. Even though we charge fully at night, if we know that given our usage, it's not going to last the day, we'd charge whenever there's a chance... just enough for us to keep going until we can fully charge it again. So, by focusing too much on charging speed, they actually forget that yes, fast charging is nice, but really what we need is many quick short burst of charges that can get us to the next point of charging. So, the need for extremely fast charging is not actually necessary. The focus should still be on the motor efficiency and longevity of the battery, which I think Tesla is right on track. Furthermore, it's always about economy of scale. The easier and more cost-efficient the manufacturing can be, whether it's the battery itself or the car as a whole, is what going to make a difference between becoming a giant in EV vs. a niche player.

 

[generalenthu]

As I was watching the closing cross about 850K shares traded, it started with a buy imbalance of ~190k and this got chipped away as the price was mostly flat, and QQQs were drifting lower.

Anyhow, super low volume day, Pretty rudderless except for a drop and bounce on some volume around 10:20 AM probably from some macro moves. There seemed to be a tiny bit of volume pickup in broader market then.

Not much to takeaway, though not sure what i was looking for. Everyone just seems to have got their fill and waiting to sell it to indexes. Nobody seems to have any appetite to pick up more despite the weak action and obvious buying.

More interesting to me is, who are the sellers after next week? Everyone who is intent on selling will likely sell to the inclusion trade. on the buy side though, not sure index funds will wrap up buying Friday. And the pistol goes off for any SP 500 benchmarked funds who want to stay neutral, but didn't buy yet.

 

[wipster]

Hey, any ideas about when the P/D figures will be announced? Premarket on 1/4/21?

 

[StarFoxisDown!]

Hey, any ideas about when the P/D figures will be announced? Premarket on 1/4/21?

Definitely pre market Jan 4th or in the evening of Jan 3rd. I really doubt we get the numbers anytime on Jan 1st

 

[dww12]

So it’s all going to be on Friday.... or will it? This all starting to stink like bad snake dinner.

 

[ZeApelido]

Kinda almost makes you want to get arrested...

It would be sweet justice to see Gordon Johnson carried away in the back of a Model Y.

 

[Tslynk67]

I am watching the closing cross right now - no clue what I am looking at, but price went up by about $0.5 since I started watching. I think we need a tutorial on what we are supposed to be looking at here

Yes, I'm completely lost with this closing cross - I don't recall it EVER being discussed on this thread in the last four years up until a few weeks ago, and all of a sudden it's a panacea to deliver 120m shares at 16:00:05 to the index funds.

Can someone smarter than me - which is anyone reading this, basically - explain this in idiot terms?

I've read that this magical cross matches all the sell and buy orders - which sell and buy orders? Don't all the ones from main market get traded or cancelled at close and then we're in AH? What then happens to AH, are these magic-cross trades making the AH price go up (or down)?

And how can I participate? Do I need a limit order in main market, or do I need to introduce an after-hours trade, which incidentally I cannot perform until 15 minutes into the session (don't know if this is a limit of my broker, or a general thing). BTW, my broker is KeyTrade (in Belgium), as someone was asking earlier.

Many questions and TBH it just makes my brain hurt.

 

[EVMeister]

So it’s all going to be on Friday.... or will it? This all starting to stink like bad snake dinner.

Pardon my ignorance. But what?