-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
-
- Tags
- elon is an ass
StealthP3D
Well-Known Member
March 2023!
At least that makes some sense based on the fact that it's a regular Model S with no margin boosting options.
I was serious actually!! No idea about Superman II or Zog. Hopelessly clueless. Oh well, thank you for explaining!
Only the Monday sales (two pages) of <50% of the shares from his option execution to cover taxes from the exercise were part of the September 10b5-1 plan.
The Tuesday (5 pages) and Wednesday (3 pages) sales of indirectly held stock were not part of a preset sales plan.
Twitter poll outcome may have been impactful.
There could be more sales on those dates if there were a different transaction on those dates (like another option exercise).
The Tuesday (5 pages) and Wednesday (3 pages) sales of indirectly held stock were not part of a preset sales plan.
Twitter poll outcome may have been impactful.
Based on the wording in the filings, there were no more indirectly held shares sold on the 9th or 10th.
There could be more sales on those dates if there were a different transaction on those dates (like another option exercise).
at home drunk tonight ... you guys are the best 
I love all this cloak and dagger digging for clues. If a 11:1 split is announced tomorrow, everyone gets a pat on the back...and gets even richer.
That’s it, there is a secret message on Musk’s 11th SEC filing.
I think there may be some kind of people who will cry manipulation foul if there's a stock split announcement prior to Musk finish selling his shares.
Don’t be so hard on yourself - i would estimate most people under 30 wouldn’t have any idea either.
My spreadsheet ran out of cells trying to figure this out, and my brain ran out of cells also. I was surprised to see sales reported today in the Form 4 along with the runup in price we saw. Who's buying these shares ? To my tired brain, I'm going to rely on the brilliant forum members here for advice. seems like good support around 1000-1012, but with massive share dumps, i.e. the possibility of further large sales, we may have more opportunity to buy at lower prices, for long term gains. I never knew I could issue extended hours (pre-market) limit orders the night before, but the downside is catching the falling knife like I did Monday. Oh well, long term !
So I didn't expect Elon to sell 10% of his shares on the open market. A 3 million share sale crashed the entire tech sector. Perhaps this led to them letting off the gas today. Why not be small and steady? 100-200k shares sold a day will go unnoticed and he'll be done before the year end.
Hard to be unnoticed when you are filing a bunch of Form 4s every 1-3 days...
There's also the second follow up tweet below that would seem to suggest a 2 for 1 split:
I haven't done the math, but what if Tesla did a secondary, buying back Elon's extra 12+ Million shares and thereby freeing up the available share float to do a full 2:1 split?
I mean you know he is selling, but him selling at a steady rate with Tsla's volume is not disruptive to the market unlike what we have seen this Tuesday. Large dumps just cause margin calls and trigger stop losses. You amplify the problem when you dump like that.
chiller
Member
mars_or_bust
Member
OK, I realize this is probably taken care of by the experts and analysts, but just to make sure, as I have not seen it explicitly addressed:
When evaluating a realistic PE ratio, shouldn't one take into account the percentage of shares that are not REALLY on the market? For example, in case of Tesla, probably 25% (probably more) are in practice not tradable - Musk shares primarily, but also likely Ellison etc. Thus one has a smaller effective pool of tradable shares.
So when one calculates the PE of Tesla at say 100, and with say 25% effectively locked shares, should the "true" PE be really 75?
Of course, PE is PE, it is well defined, but for experts to be able to gauge the correct value of the stock, would the PE modified downwards to account for the effectively locked shares be a much more useful metric?
I am not an economist by any stretch, so apologies if this is something trivial.
When evaluating a realistic PE ratio, shouldn't one take into account the percentage of shares that are not REALLY on the market? For example, in case of Tesla, probably 25% (probably more) are in practice not tradable - Musk shares primarily, but also likely Ellison etc. Thus one has a smaller effective pool of tradable shares.
So when one calculates the PE of Tesla at say 100, and with say 25% effectively locked shares, should the "true" PE be really 75?
Of course, PE is PE, it is well defined, but for experts to be able to gauge the correct value of the stock, would the PE modified downwards to account for the effectively locked shares be a much more useful metric?
I am not an economist by any stretch, so apologies if this is something trivial.
The shares allear to be sold on the open market given the prices and recent volume.
Even if locked, those shares represent ownership of the company and would recieve dividends. In the financials, they do give earnings in terms of outstanding and fully diluted (all outstanding compensation options granted and convertabke nonds redeemed) which is in line with your thought.
It is indeed trivial but not in a way of your thinking. There is no single correct way of determining the correct price. PE is just one way used by some people and laughed at by others. You can modify the methodology to render a better result ... better according to who and why?
Current SP is the only real objective truth. Everything else are just concoctions.
There is some value of PE in the "meta-PE". It is not about what PE is, it is about what most people think of it.
If it looks to low to many, that might be a strong indicator for future SP rise. But people can't even agree what a low/high PE of Tesla looks like.
So just buy and go away... everySingleDay of the last decade was a great buying opportunity. The SP was not overvalued even after a 10% rise in a day in 2013.
This will not change until Tesla reaches its peak in some 10 or 20 years time.
"Buy the dip" is just a "chicken soup for the gentle souls" who have trouble zooming out, the correct mantra is "Buy whenever you can".
StealthP3D
Well-Known Member
No. It's irrelevant whether the shares are available to trade or not because P/E is a metric that compares the valuation of the entire company relative to it's earning power. Another way to look at it is those same shares (the ones not actively traded) are also included when dividing the earnings of a company by the total number of shares to come up with earnings per share. It doesn't matter whether the shares are actively traded, they still represent a fractional ownership of the company.
Investors tend to rely far too much on the price to earnings ratio because earning power changes over time and the rate of growth of earnings has various degrees of certainty depending upon the specific situation. It's just one yardstick of many but it's probably the one that is at the root of more investors missing out on a fantastic opportunity than any other misunderstood metric. Similarly, it's often at the root of investors buying a poor company because it seems to be such a good value, only to watch the earning shrivel up and die. Earnings are not static and the value of a stock is forward looking. Even if you estimate earning power in, say, five years, you can't apply an appropriate price to those earnings because even knowing (or assuming) the earnings in 5 years does not inform as to where the earnings might be in 5 more years (and thus what an appropriate p/e might be).
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
