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

[AndreP]

Not only that, but the announcement that the SEC was accusing Musk of misleading investors immediately caused the price to fall more than anything Musk said. I am firmly in the camp that the SEC has harmed Tesla investors while Musk is the primary reason for most of our gains!

The whole idea that the SEC is "protecting" us from Musk is ludicrous on the face of it.

You guys are looking at this through the lens of people who fervently buy and hodl, and that's not all investors. People who bought in this window could have any number of motivations from short-term flips and day trading to algorithmic buying/selling to long-term buys. Either way, you could have been harmed if you bought during that run-up based on claims that were proven false. And you didn't need to sell in that window, you just could have bought in at a lower cost basis if the false claims weren't made and thus could have made even more money as the stock price continued increasing.

You can be sure the SEC litigation was initiated based on the complaints of people who were caught in this situation. I don't think there is any valid argument for the SEC harming these people more than the tweets themselves, because the people caught in this would have received zero compensation for the erroneous and chaotic price movements if not for the SEC.

Proving that the price movements were a result of Elon's tweets and not something else, I don't even know how that works but probably just comes down to evidence and judgment.

 

[jerry33]

You guys are looking at this through the lens of people who fervently buy and hodl, and that's not all investors.

Investors are by definition those who buy and hold. Day traders, Option buyers, and Short sellers are gamblers, not investors (of course some gambling categories are more risk-prone than others).

 

[Krugerrand]

You guys are looking at this through the lens of people who fervently buy and hodl, and that's not all investors. People who bought in this window could have any number of motivations from short-term flips and day trading to algorithmic buying/selling to long-term buys. Either way, you could have been harmed if you bought during that run-up based on claims that were proven false. And you didn't need to sell in that window, you just could have bought in at a lower cost basis if the false claims weren't made and thus could have made even more money as the stock price continued increasing.

You can be sure the SEC litigation was initiated based on the complaints of people who were caught in this situation. I don't think there is any valid argument for the SEC harming these people more than the tweets themselves, because the people caught in this would have received zero compensation for the erroneous and chaotic price movements if not for the SEC.

Proving that the price movements were a result of Elon's tweets and not something else, I don't even know how that works but probably just comes down to evidence and judgment.

Feel free to look back at the archives here to that time to familiarize yourself with what really happened.

In the meantime let me sum it up for you: big ole pile of lies and donkey poo being spouted by complainants and the SEC.

 

[StealthP3D]

This is really exaggerated, so much so that it diminishes the basic premise. That advertising-driven auto publications are biased towards their revenue sources is been a factual character of almost all news sources, not just auto. That those advertisers and others make convenient ways to offer non-exactly-bribe inducements is equally established fact. That applies to almost every business category. 'almost' only be cause there conceivably may be an exception. In this piece he barely alludes to advertising revenue itself, or explicitly sponsored stories.

However, it is now uncommon for a press vehicle to be much better than the consumer version. They are now just as likely to have been beat up and abused by previous press users. Still, there are the prototypes and early production versions. As often as not the early production versions are less well finished than are the alter production versions. That 'specially built' is an advantage is a major fallacy. In the industrialized world early production and specially built are lesser, not greater vehicles.

It is very sad to take a perfectly valid issue and so exaggerate it as to make it largely untrue. Sad and stupid. The reality itself tells the story perfectly.

The J D Power, Edmunds et al story is slightly different but equally fraught, as is the used car guide (US mostly NADA). Automotive News is in the same box, with all these almost exclusively depending on auto dealers for their revenues.

Then there are the Munro et al stories. Sandy Munro makes his process explicit and ensures his customers know. It is only by full disclosure of their potential or actual conflicts that they can do work with competitors without alienation. Some others, such as Consumers Union in the US do attest to independence, but still end out rewarding the status quo simply because their customer base is technologically and logically driven by very conservative (NOT political) economic views.

I good webcast would have describes these issues in equal time or even less, replete with short videos and pertinent quotations. It's all there, easy to get. Check Car and Driver, Autocar, Quattro Rodas and myriad others. Their own articles tell this story. Nobody hides it, they describe their most excellent road trips, wining and dining. Their long term tests invariably describe sending their vehicles back to their sources.

Did you consider that the YouTube algorithms create incentives for YouTube content creators to exaggerate the titles and the premise of their videos to get more views?

Sam Alexander puts out good content and provides a lot of value but he is not immune to the pressures inherent in the way his content is monetized, much like what goes on in the auto industry. But I think you missed the basic premise of that particular video which is that Tesla doesn't participate in the industry's games and that is largely the source of the discrepancy between the way the media judges the quality of Tesla's cars vs. the rest. And this is not obvious to most people that are not following Tesla closely.

To me, the fact that he highlights this difference between Tesla and the rest is the real story - not that he has uncovered some unusual corruption. Basically, that their conclusions of low quality in Tesla products can't be trusted. I'm surprised you take offense that he has illuminated what is really going on in the industry.

 

[StealthP3D]

You guys are looking at this through the lens of people who fervently buy and hodl, and that's not all investors.

Your premise is wrong. I'm an outspoken advocate of investing without emotion, from a cold, calculated position. That an investor should watch the company's performance and execution like a hawk and dump the moment their original reason for investing in the company in the first place no longer exists.

That is the exact opposite of "fervently" buying and holding. Those who can't tell the difference between that which is material and that which is immaterial will fail miserably.

 

[AndreP]

Investors are by definition those who buy and hold. Day traders, Option buyers, and Short sellers are gamblers, not investors (of course some gambling categories are more risk-prone than others).

The SEC is there to protect everyone who is participating in the securities market, not just people that buy and hold.

People who bought during the run-up based on false claims of going private at a big premium on the current price would be harmed by the false claims, that's who the SEC is looking to protect here. If you bought at $379 and could have bought at $319, you should be going after compensation as well.

 

[Singuy]

I was curious of this too but was too afraid to ask I would have to guess that it means in a 30 day period just because they showed what looked like hundreds of batteries a year ago in the Battery Video of Jan 2021. But even if it wasn't I would think that the batteries made in Jan 2022 would be more than Jan-Dec 2021 as the yield rate increased over time so that the next million wont take nearly as long.

View attachment 771214

Seems like the leaked slide is saying 6k cells a day so it's most likely they hit their million cells cummulative since they started, not Jan.

However, hitting the yield of 92% is the engineering problem they had to solve which means now they just have to duplicate the process which is the easy part. Like what Rob said, 1H may look painfully slow but 2H we will see them x10 or x20 production.

 

[Hock1]

Well keeping in mind this would be about the SEC harming the harmed investors more than they were harmed by the tweet(s), and I'm not sure how we rationalize that. This isn't about the SEC harming or not harming all Tesla investors.

So the alternative here is someone being entitled to nothing additional after buying the stock at ~$379.57 following Elon's $420 tweet and before it dropped down to ~$319.44 when the claim was abandoned. I think reasonable people here would be perturbed if they were caught in this circumstance, a $60 price difference at that time could extrapolate to a massive $$$ impact for someone who bought a lot of shares in that window.

This isn't about just holding the stock through that window, this is about buying shares at an inflated price after false claims were made and then before the stock corrected by like 16%. People caught in this situation would receive nothing for compensation if not for the SEC's action here, so I don't think there would be an argument for the SEC harming these people more than the tweet(s).


If we talk about all Tesla investors, people buying into the stock with a cost basis of $379 would presumably be beneficial to everyone else rather than those same people buying in at $319.

Considering that all trades have two sides, the harm inflicted on the harmed investors would come from people benefitting by selling to them at $379 rather than $319.

This is what I am concerned about: A lot of us here are familiar with the problem (and "complexity)" of distributing assets to rightful shareholders due to rampant naked shorting (FTDs) and SP manipulation. In the SEC Act of 1938 the SEC, in order to "protect investors against manipulative short sellers", implemented the uptick rule. The explanation of this action clearly points out that holders of equities are investors and short sellers are not. Recently we have seen, more and more, the SEC using the term "market participants" (which would include short sellers). Are we going to see short-sellers be compensated for harm? Is this why the distribution is so "complex"? I hope I'm just having a bad dream.

 

[AndreP]

This is what I am concerned about: A lot of us here are familiar with the problem (and "complexity)" of distributing assets to rightful shareholders due to rampant naked shorting (FTDs) and SP manipulation. In the SEC Act of 1938 the SEC, in order to "protect investors against manipulative short sellers", implemented the uptick rule. The explanation of this action clearly points out that holders of equities are investors and short sellers are not. Recently we have seen, more and more, the SEC using the term "market participants" (which would include short sellers). Are we going to see short-sellers be compensated for harm? Is this why the distribution is so "complex"? I hope I'm just having a bad dream.

I don't think that short-sellers would be compensated in this scheme, pretty certain it would be limited to people who bought during the chaotic price movements and before clarification of the claims resulted in a big drop in the stock price.

The distribution would be extremely complex though regardless, it would be onerous just to prove that you bought during this run-up and missed out on more gains or lost money if you sold when the stock price declined.

 

[JRP3]

So the alternative here is someone being entitled to nothing additional after buying the stock at ~$379.57 following Elon's $420 tweet and before it dropped down to ~$319.44 when the claim was abandoned. I think reasonable people here would be perturbed if they were caught in this circumstance, a $60 price difference at that time could extrapolate to a massive $$$ impact for someone who bought a lot of shares in that window.

Yes, impacted by making a lot of money. Short term fluctuations in a volatile stock such as Tesla should be expected.

This isn't about just holding the stock through that window, this is about buying shares at an inflated price after false claims were made and then before the stock corrected by like 16%. People caught in this situation would receive nothing for compensation if not for the SEC's action here, so I don't think there would be an argument for the SEC harming these people more than the tweet(s).

No false claims were made. He "considered" taking Tesla private which is not a definitive statement of fact, and if he chose to follow through he had the funding lined up to do it.

 

[mongo]

The SEC is there to protect everyone who is participating in the securities market, not just people that buy and hold.

People who bought during the run-up based on false claims of going private at a big premium on the current price would be harmed by the false claims, that's who the SEC is looking to protect here. If you bought at $379 and could have bought at $319, you should be going after compensation as well.

Protecting? SEC? Really?
September 28, 2018 called. It wants its 14% back.
Really SEC???, filling a suit after market close on Thursday? Couldn't wait a day? Closed at $264.77
SEC effectively lost the case, Tesla and Musk settled to remove the cloud. What would the stock price have been if the SEC did nothing?
I see you joined TMC April of last year, if you were not lurking during this period, I suggest reading the archives...

 

[AndreP]

Yes, impacted by making a lot of money. Short term fluctuations in a volatile stock such as Tesla should be expected.

No false claims were made. He "considered" taking Tesla private which is not a definitive statement of fact, and if he chose to follow through he had the funding lined up to do it.

Proving that short-term fluctuations are the result of any one thing is obviously not clear-cut, but the $40m is there for people who go to the SEC and can prove they were harmed by the price movements in this window. And you can be sure the SEC was acting on claims exactly like that.

If the SEC sat on the money and wasn't acting in those people's best interests, they should be held accountable as well.

 

[Ipcress]

I hear this criticism a lot but it misses the mark. No one is trying to silence your opinions, they are saying they disagree with your analysis, or they don't think Elon's controversial comments carry as much importance as those who endlessly bellyache about Elon's public comments do. This forum is for discussing our investments in Tesla and gaining additional insight. My problem is not with the fact that you disagree with some of Elon's tweets, it's that you act as if they are so important to the performance of your investment. This always happens when Tesla share price is depressed and some investors get emotional and want to blame Elon, but Elon's tweets are not the cause of the depressed price, and you can't do anything about them either.

I guarantee that Elon could Tweet like the most woke person that ever lived and the share price would still be in the crapper right now. Tesla would not build or sell one more car, not one analyst would increase their price estimates and Moody's or S&P would not raise their ratings to investment grade one day sooner. The endless complaining about Elon's tweets is simply not productive. Hence my comments that no one is forcing anyone to invest, no one is forcing anyone to buy Tesla products. Take them or leave them but you're not going to change Elon and you shouldn't waste a minute of your time (or this threads time) thinking you might. Get it? Sell your shares if you don't like it but don't clog up this thread with your endless bellyaching that you disagree with his comments and don't believe he should say them while simultaneously complaining that people are trying to silence YOU!

I trust you see the problem here.

I've been in Tesla since $30/sh. I could care less about the daily/weekly/monthly share price swings. I'm not aware of anyone on this forum trying to silence me. As an investor, ant to the investor discussions we are engaged with I think you are completely wrong. Elon is trying to change society by introducing completely new technologies such as electric cars, carbon replacement with alternative energy sources and storage, autonomous self-driving vehicles. To do this will require more than developing and offering the best, proven technologies, but equally difficult is to convince people to leave what they know and make an (expensive) investment in completely (to them) novel technologies. This is true of individuals, municipalities, local and federal goverments. Winning hearts and minds. I don't need Elon's views to be in allignment with mine. I have no idea what the personal political views of any of the leaders of the companies I invest in are. Unless, like Musk, they are constantly tweeted. Then we all know.

Are you seriously saying in our polarized political times, that Elon's tweets, especially the latest have not damaged the mission, and are not a threat to investors moving forward? I and other posters are not attributing the current share price to his tweets--you're either willfully misunderstanding or making a false position. I and others are saying that people are not buying Tesla cars, solar roofs, etc and will wait for other offerings so that they can avoid supporting Elon Musk's company. Or, keep buying ICE cars. The success of Tesla as a company, and the mission are being harmed. What will the long-term impact be of the latest tweet on the success of Giga-Berlin? Germany is a pretty important market. Such tweets are making it easy for the legions of FUD makers to do their dirty work. The job Elon is trying to do is difficult enough without playing into the hands of the entrenched powers ranged against him.

 

[Krugerrand]

The SEC is there to protect everyone who is participating in the securities market, not just people that buy and hold.

Right. And I’m getting ready to send out party invites to the mountain to everyone, starting with he who shall not be named.

 

[ggr]

Mod: DO NOT reiterate the arguments about whether or not the $420 tweet harmed shareholders, or about the SEC actions at the time; they are all past history. If it isn't relevant to current TSLA activity it is off topic and will be treated as such. --ggr

 

[Krugerrand]

Are you seriously saying in our polarized political times, that Elon's tweets, especially the latest have not damaged the mission, and are not a threat to investors moving forward?

Are you seriously blaming his tweet of this week for every obstacle from vested interests against Tesla for the past decade+? Because you didn’t actually name one NEW obstacle that has occurred since this latest tweet. Get back to us when you can. In the meantime, stop lying to yourself about what’s happening because you don’t like what he tweeted.

Also invested since $30 and can quite clearly see what’s truly happened in the world because of Elon Musk and his companies. I, for one, refuse to be pulled down the politicized trash can and blame Elon because mankind can’t pull its head out of its butt.

 

[jbcarioca]

Did you consider that the YouTube algorithms create incentives for YouTube content creators to exaggerate the titles and the premise of their videos to get more views?

Sam Alexander puts out good content and provides a lot of value but he is not immune to the pressures inherent in the way his content is monetized, much like what goes on in the auto industry. But I think you missed the basic premise of that particular video which is that Tesla doesn't participate in the industry's games and that is largely the source of the discrepancy between the way the media judges the quality of Tesla's cars vs. the rest. And this is not obvious to most people that are not following Tesla closely.

To me, the fact that he highlights this difference between Tesla and the rest is the real story - not that he has uncovered some unusual corruption. Basically, that their conclusions of low quality in Tesla products can't be trusted. I'm surprised you take offense that he has illuminated what is really going on in the industry.

Obviously you're correct! I did not because that was not part of his pitch. That was WRONG! Your point is especially valid because the more dramatic anything can be made to be the more clicks happen. Of obvious relevance to your point is the events of today, otherwise OT, wherein the Ukrainian President, a former comedian, has proven to be perfectly suited to generate clicks and support. That, of course, is more consequential than is Tesla FUD and fan hyperbole.

All of this helps explain how volatility can be increased, stability decreased and rational thought diminished.

By the very structure of Tesla as an outlier in many respects we will perhaps never have a traditionally stable basis to evaluate TSLA fair value. My personal perspective on HODL is that the TSLA volatility itself is not susceptible to traditional QA even though daily cycles such as the MMD do happen habitually. Even so the slope, velocity, tenor and volumes associated by those moves are only correlated to unpredictable outbursts from one source or another.

 

[jbcarioca]

Are you seriously blaming his tweet of this week for every obstacle from vested interests against Tesla for the past decade+? Because you didn’t actually name one NEW obstacle that has occurred since this latest tweet. Get back to us when you can. In the meantime, stop lying to yourself about what’s happening because you don’t like what he tweeted.

Also invested since $30 and can quite clearly see what’s truly happened in the world because of Elon Musk and his companies. I, for one, refuse to be pulled down the politicized trash can and blame Elon because mankind can’t pull its head out of its butt.

Crude, maybe a little too crude, but very sound approach IMO.

 

[TheTalkingMule]

The SEC is there to protect everyone who is participating in the securities market, not just people that buy and hold.

People who bought during the run-up based on false claims of going private at a big premium on the current price would be harmed by the false claims, that's who the SEC is looking to protect here. If you bought at $379 and could have bought at $319, you should be going after compensation as well.

Nonsense.

By definition, investors are:

a person or organization that puts money into financial plans, property, etc. with the expectation of achieving a profit.

Buying shares of stock purely on the rumor of potential sale is trading stock on that information with the hope of profiting on the deal.

Anyone buying shares in that windows for the purposes of investment have quite clearly not been harmed.

Now there certainly could have been harm if they decided to sell just after the SEV action, but that was their decision. A decision any investor should be making in light of the definition above, not a single SEC action.

 

[Lance Boyle]

I've been in Tesla since $30/sh. I could care less about the daily/weekly/monthly share price swings. I'm not aware of anyone on this forum trying to silence me. As an investor, ant to the investor discussions we are engaged with I think you are completely wrong. Elon is trying to change society by introducing completely new technologies such as electric cars, carbon replacement with alternative energy sources and storage, autonomous self-driving vehicles. To do this will require more than developing and offering the best, proven technologies, but equally difficult is to convince people to leave what they know and make an (expensive) investment in completely (to them) novel technologies. This is true of individuals, municipalities, local and federal goverments. Winning hearts and minds. I don't need Elon's views to be in allignment with mine. I have no idea what the personal political views of any of the leaders of the companies I invest in are. Unless, like Musk, they are constantly tweeted. Then we all know.

Are you seriously saying in our polarized political times, that Elon's tweets, especially the latest have not damaged the mission, and are not a threat to investors moving forward? I and other posters are not attributing the current share price to his tweets--you're either willfully misunderstanding or making a false position. I and others are saying that people are not buying Tesla cars, solar roofs, etc and will wait for other offerings so that they can avoid supporting Elon Musk's company. Or, keep buying ICE cars. The success of Tesla as a company, and the mission are being harmed. What will the long-term impact be of the latest tweet on the success of Giga-Berlin? Germany is a pretty important market. Such tweets are making it easy for the legions of FUD makers to do their dirty work. The job Elon is trying to do is difficult enough without playing into the hands of the entrenched powers enraged

I've been in Tesla since $30/sh. I could care less about the daily/weekly/monthly share price swings. I'm not aware of anyone on this forum trying to silence me. As an investor, ant to the investor discussions we are engaged with I think you are completely wrong. Elon is trying to change society by introducing completely new technologies such as electric cars, carbon replacement with alternative energy sources and storage, autonomous self-driving vehicles. To do this will require more than developing and offering the best, proven technologies, but equally difficult is to convince people to leave what they know and make an (expensive) investment in completely (to them) novel technologies. This is true of individuals, municipalities, local and federal goverments. Winning hearts and minds. I don't need Elon's views to be in allignment with mine. I have no idea what the personal political views of any of the leaders of the companies I invest in are. Unless, like Musk, they are constantly tweeted. Then we all know.

Are you seriously saying in our polarized political times, that Elon's tweets, especially the latest have not damaged the mission, and are not a threat to investors moving forward? I and other posters are not attributing the current share price to his tweets--you're either willfully misunderstanding or making a false position. I and others are saying that people are not buying Tesla cars, solar roofs, etc and will wait for other offerings so that they can avoid supporting Elon Musk's company. Or, keep buying ICE cars. The success of Tesla as a company, and the mission are being harmed. What will the long-term impact be of the latest tweet on the success of Giga-Berlin? Germany is a pretty important market. Such tweets are making it easy for the legions of FUD makers to do their dirty work. The job Elon is trying to do is difficult enough without playing into the hands of the entrenched powers ranged against him.

I Felt This Should Read, " The Entrenched Powers ENRAGED Against Him."