FOMOing to find the next TSLA.
-
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
Gigapress
Trying to be less wrong
A market cap of 1 Quadrillion? That's 10x the entire global GDP.
It seems that the responses are reactions based on 1000 being a relatively large number and the implications that Tesla would be a large, if not majority, chunk of the world economy.
First of all, GDP is not the proper basis of comparison for stock market valuation. This is essentially comparing income (capital creation per unit time) with wealth (accumulated capital).
Secondly, in the Tesla hyperbull scenarios, Tesla will have been responsible for profoundly altering the human economy. The projections include massive increases in production relative to today's GDP.
For Mr. Justice's projection in particular, the TSLA 1000x scenario was dependent on Tesla "succeeding as much as they want to" which specifically included domination of:
> Autonomous vehicles, including eventually heavy machinery
> Energy
> Cryptocurrency (Bitcoin and Doge)
> Benefits from the success of SpaceX and Neuralink
> Teslabot
I do not personally agree with all the rationale he presented but I think 100x is actually pretty likely. So does Warren Redlich and some other hyperbulls. One aspect I did not fully understand was why Joe included SpaceX and Neuralink in this valuation. Also I still think cryptocurrency is a bad idea in general and projecting it to be the dominant medium of exchange in the future is questionable in my opinion.
Furthermore, essentially everyone I've ever met, including myself, has at times adopted nonsensical, ludricrous beliefs. I think it would be a mistake to assume that one silly opinion invalidates everything else that individual has to say. Having started to listen to his Agile handbook on audio, I've been blown away by how well-designed and rational the recommendations are. I can't say that about any other consultants I've ever encountered. I could do without the name-dropping and puffery but that seems to be necessary to establish credibility to average people, unfortunately.
Tesla automated robotics could easily lead to a $100T+ market cap IF they are successful on a level no one else manages to challenge. Roughly speaking, an autonomous robotaxi is worth around $100k in value add in the long run, or even more if combined with a large-scale Boring company tunnel network because they'll spend less time sitting in traffic and wasting energy starting and stopping. Every 10 million of them in annual production is $1T in annual profit potential.
The Teslabot scenario takes this concept to the extreme. IF it works and everyone else fails to make a competitive product on the same level, then where does that take us? Presumably its smaller, simpler body and tiny battery will enable it to be mass-produced for approximately $10k. Like the cars, these too are probably worth at least $100k in the value they can provide, but the overall market for them is massive compared to transport alone. What could 100 million of these per year be worth? $10T in annual income. This alone would be sufficient for 100X from today's share price.
There's also a reasonably likely scenario in which the $100/kg Starship launches from Earth combined with Teslabots and other machinery could realize the asteroid mining dream. Many elements are worth far more than $100/kg.
For those who believe this is all inconceivable, consider the comments from the Tesla Technoking as of 2 months ago:
"The Teslabot will be real...Basically, if you think about what we're doing right now with the cars, Tesla is arguably the world's biggest robotics company because our cars are like semi-sentient robots on wheels, and with the full self-driving computer essentially the inference engine on the car, which will keep evolving obviously, and Dojo, and all the neural nets recognizing the world, understanding how to navigate through the world, it kind of makes sense to put that onto a humanoid form. We're also quite good at sensors and batteries and actuators...[goes over specs of the bot]...This I think will be quite quite profound because if you think, like, what is the economy? It is at the foundation, it is labor. So what happens when there is, you know, no shortage of labor? That's why I think long term there will need to be a universal basic income...I think in the future, physical work will be a choice...I think it obviously has profound implications for the economy because...capital equipment is just distilled labor. Then, is there any actual limit to the economy? Maybe not."
In conclusion, Tesla's official company guidance is that they intend to so radically revolutionize life as we know it that a UBI will become necessary and that physical labor will become optional. Whether they will actually achieve this ambition remains to be seen. The physics of the robot and its potential are already established. So the primary unvalidated assumptions are 1) That the control software eventually will work usefully, and 2) That the competition will not catch up, and 3) That humanity will allow one organization to amass this much power without a Luddite rebellion.
If anyone wants to disagree with this I welcome the criticism but I hope further responses will be more thoughtful.
(Mods, if you want to move this to the hyperbull thread I will not be offended.)
Last edited by a moderator:
LightngMcQueen
Aspirationally Rational
Wow, that post from Ocelot in 2019 was hilarious. Thanks for the reminder. Every single thing in there was wrong. Congrats to all of us who disagreed and made fortunes since then!
Is there a gents room or even a tree where this type of very personal competition would fit better?
Stretch2727
Engineer and Car Nut
I just read the JP Morgan complaint for the $162M.
These are basically call options with a strike price that they adjusted to make them more valuable. Theoretically they became less valuable after the Infamous 420 tweet.
$560.6388 - Prior to Aug 7, 2018 420 tweet
$424.66 - 1 Week after the tweet
$484.34 - Aug 29 2018 go private possibility called off
$96.87 - Aug 30, 2020 adjusted for 5:1 Split
I get why they were able to adjust based on the go private tweet.
What I don't understand is why they did not go back to the original strike once the "deal" was clearly not happening.
It does not appear they were transacting these (buying/selling) so any loss was a paper/accounting loss during the Aug 7-29 period and they basically adjusted the strike to zero out this loss.
Anyone have any idea why they would not have been adjusted back to the original strike? To me this would have been the common sense and fair thing to do rather than trying to use the adjust price (424.66) and recalculating based on the current implied volatility.
They are claiming they are entitled to 2 re-valuations rather than just a cancelation of the first re-valuation. One when the tweet occurred and the other when it was communicated "go private" was not happening. Keep in mind the above were the only adjustments in the strike prices to these warrants. They are only allow to adjust on major merger/ownership announcements. The multiple re-valuations is the core of the disagreement.
These are basically call options with a strike price that they adjusted to make them more valuable. Theoretically they became less valuable after the Infamous 420 tweet.
$560.6388 - Prior to Aug 7, 2018 420 tweet
$424.66 - 1 Week after the tweet
$484.34 - Aug 29 2018 go private possibility called off
$96.87 - Aug 30, 2020 adjusted for 5:1 Split
I get why they were able to adjust based on the go private tweet.
What I don't understand is why they did not go back to the original strike once the "deal" was clearly not happening.
It does not appear they were transacting these (buying/selling) so any loss was a paper/accounting loss during the Aug 7-29 period and they basically adjusted the strike to zero out this loss.
Anyone have any idea why they would not have been adjusted back to the original strike? To me this would have been the common sense and fair thing to do rather than trying to use the adjust price (424.66) and recalculating based on the current implied volatility.
They are claiming they are entitled to 2 re-valuations rather than just a cancelation of the first re-valuation. One when the tweet occurred and the other when it was communicated "go private" was not happening. Keep in mind the above were the only adjustments in the strike prices to these warrants. They are only allow to adjust on major merger/ownership announcements. The multiple re-valuations is the core of the disagreement.
Last edited:
woodisgood
Optimustic Pessimist
The most problematic assumption is that they will become as capital efficient as Tesla.
The backstops as well as generous initial valuations will ensure they will never learn to be as lean. There is a reason Elon loves to talk about how Tesla almost died…it’s how the near-death experience changes you that matters, not the near-death itself.
Look how tightly Tesla has learned to guard its “bandwidth.” Meanwhile Rivian over there thinks it can start off with three production lines while planning a second factory.
Considering Musk would have funned money from SpaceX into Tesla and unlimited money from outside investors, being solvent wasn't number 1 on the list. The list of worries were listed as
1. Make cars at volume production
2. Demand
3. Hitting profitability without EX credit
Unlimited amount of money doesn't buy you those things. Hardcore engineering/cost reduction and driving desirability for the brand does. Tesla has the highest engagement for a car ever. People who owns one can't stop thinking about it because the company constantly flood the car with crazy wacky things, or announce crazy wacky things. Honestly I went on the Jag forum once after I bought the car and then never again...there's nothing new to talk about after the first week. The emotional connection Tesla as build between car and driver is the strongest I have ever seen. So many people just become obsessed.
Lucid and Rivian's current competition is just a lack of convenience. There's only so much demand you can generate with 4 service stations in the entire U.S. A friend of mine pre-ordered a Rivian. I asked him where he's going to pick it up consider the nearest service center is 2k miles away. He had no idea
hacer
Active Member
I thought it was obvious that I was being sarcastic. The original post said Ford must not have paid the publication, but the claim of better handling surely proves that they did pay. It's just that the acceleration sucked so bad they couldn't lie about that without losing subscribers, so they made up whatever BS they thought they could get away with to keep the Ford money coming.
Trouble is, often times these people are all dead. ;-(
Rather looks like the 75-year-old driver hit the accelerator when he thought he was hitting the brakes; the more the car didn't do what he wanted, the harder the pedal was pressed, leading to the observed results.
Unfortunately, this kind of thing happens from time to time. A shop downtown near me had its front stove in by an elderly gentleman in just this fashion. In that case, lots of damage, but luckily no actual injuries or death.
You are almost certainly right. I suppose that's because I was thinking the same thing.
However, I'm 75 and fiercely resent your implying that's elderly.
BTW, my avatar photo was taken Christmas 1947, shortly after I turned 2.
Before we grab the torches and pitchforks, Edmunds is testing the Mach-E GT, a performance trim not previously reviewed.
With that said, I’m still skeptical.
RobDickinson
Active Member
They tested the GT PE which has "MagneRide® Damping System, an adaptive suspension technology that lets drivers hug the road while delivering an exciting and comfortable ride."
lafrisbee
Active Member
Dude!!!!Where are all the short sellers these days
Citron- Lefty
Hindenberg
Kynikos
Spiegel power point
They have so much practice in this
I don't care about money guys.
Where's The Johnson?!
thesmokingman
Active Member
They're getting taken apart in the comments on youtube. It's pretty hilarious...
Words of HABIT
Active Member
Rivian and Lucid are priced not for what they have done, but for what Tesla has done. Full Stop.
thesmokingman
Active Member
thesmokingman
Active Member
This! Lucid's price atm is really rich. Rivian is just ludicrous, bonkers, insane... and they haven't even delivered a customer car.
Matt is happy to give you the lowdown.
JPMorgan Fights Tesla Over Warrants
Also Ohio v. Meta, Elon Musk’s options, stock-market nonsense and NFT nonsense.
www.bloomberg.com
Edit: That JP Morgan lawsuit is a bunch of horse manure. While Matt always gently pokes at Tesla, he makes it clear that JPM doesn't have much of a leg to stand on
Last edited:
Well, I'm trailing you by some seven years. I still have reaction time, but it's not what it was when I was 21.You are almost certainly right. I suppose that's because I was thinking the same thing.
However, I'm 75 and fiercely resent your implying that's elderly.
BTW, my avatar photo was taken Christmas 1947, shortly after I turned 2.
My avatar dates back to when I was servicing naval airborne radars, back in the day.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
