Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

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

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
the private consortium (the Feds) can print as much money out of thin air - but they can't print TSLA shares out of thin air.

Yeah, the FED can't. That's the exclusive priviledge granted to Options Market Maker's, via the SEC's exemption to the prohibition against naked short selling (SEC Regulation SHO).

Because, you know, liquidity? Thanks, Bernie Maddoff. Thanks, SEC. Nothing to see here. /s

As a deep backgrounder, the following book is available as a PDF download:

Naked, Short and Greedy - Wall Street's Failure to Deliver | By Susanne Trimbath, Spiramus Press (Nov 1, 2019)
 
Last edited:
Such an extreme analogy, and inappropriate comparison.

It is not as if shares re-purchased by Tesla become cat litter--quite the contrary. They can be re-sold if needed. A portion of Tesla's cash hoard would be of much greater value if converted into TSLA shares as those shares will be worth so much more in the years ahead.

The status quo leaves Tesla with a HUGE cost--a massive cash balance in a high-inflation environment creates pure waste.

(Especially when at least one brave and smart person in Russia puts the entire globe out of Putin-induced misery.)
If buying shares back is such a great deal, take it to the limit, tesla
should then margin itself and buy back even more.
 
You call that an MMD???

rocky-face-punch.jpg
 
not-advice. my own observation has been that IV on the very long dated options moves more slowly than IV on next week options. That's probably not a surprise, but it is something to consider. I don't know that I have particularly seen a meaningful IV change in the before earnings, to after earnings transition.

Countering that - the value of those IV changes is also a lot higher on the long dated options (you can find that in the option chain as Vega).



Not arguing - I really don't know what will come and am completely on board with the idea that you may be completely correct. Even that there is a good chance you are correct.

HOWEVER - as fast as the Fed has been raising interest rates, and as low as interest rates have been for so long, its easy to lose track of the fact that if you agree with the stance that somewhere around 2 to 2.5% Fed target rate is neutral to the economy (neither stimulative, nor a drag; and I do agree with this view), then as high as inflation has been this year, the Fed has actually been STIMULATING the economy from the start of the year all the way through the end of July. When inflation broke 8%, the Fed was right in there with a strongly stimulative stance trying to goose the economy and make it even higher.

At the end of July the Fed achieved a neutral stance (2.25%) -- finally.

And with the last raise in late September (3-4 weeks ago), we FINALLY have a Fed and interest rate target that is actually designed to apply some brakes to the economy. For myself that is a primarily meaningful as a statement about just how aggressively stimulative the Fed has been and for how long. The Fed is now actually in a "slow the economy down" stance for less than 1 month.

It is absolutely the case that another .75 might overshoot. For my part I am more in the camp that the Fed has still been unable to get the investing class to grok that inflation is out of control and that no, the Fed put can't be relied on to cover a big market move down. I keep expecting a 1.00 rate increase when a .50 or .75 is expected as a slap to the face / punch to the gut type of attempt to get investors attention.

If I were betting, and to some degree I am, I expect the rate to keep going up this year and next to something more like 6% than the 4-5% I read people dreaming about. Because the current braking the Fed is applying is at best weak. A better mental model (again my opinion, which doesn't make me right) is somethign more like 4.5 to 5.0% at a minimum as that is about as much drag on the economy as the previous 0% target rate was stimulative. And it'll need to stay in place for more than a week or a month or two.



This dynamic, where I find myself increasingly of the belief that its the environmentalists (such as myself - I'd say that its my personal #1 issue) that are one of the biggest problems to actually accomplishing something about climate change and environmental problems.

Its one reason I am such an Elon and Tesla fan - they're doing something via a market mechanism rather than via regulations and politics. We have seen, and will continue to see, how thats playing out in Germany. I don't know the scale of the problem in California, but one benefit I do see about the big plant in Texas is some degree of protection from NIMBYism and the environmental lobby managing to shut down the #1 (MHO) entity actually doing something about climate change.

I spend more time worrying about where those mines in North America are going to come from that are essential to electrification of transportation.
not-advice. my own observation has been that IV on the very long dated options moves more slowly than IV on next week options. That's probably not a surprise, but it is something to consider. I don't know that I have particularly seen a meaningful IV change in the before earnings, to after earnings transition.

Countering that - the value of those IV changes is also a lot higher on the long dated options (you can find that in the option chain as Vega).



Not arguing - I really don't know what will come and am completely on board with the idea that you may be completely correct. Even that there is a good chance you are correct.

HOWEVER - as fast as the Fed has been raising interest rates, and as low as interest rates have been for so long, its easy to lose track of the fact that if you agree with the stance that somewhere around 2 to 2.5% Fed target rate is neutral to the economy (neither stimulative, nor a drag; and I do agree with this view), then as high as inflation has been this year, the Fed has actually been STIMULATING the economy from the start of the year all the way through the end of July. When inflation broke 8%, the Fed was right in there with a strongly stimulative stance trying to goose the economy and make it even higher.

At the end of July the Fed achieved a neutral stance (2.25%) -- finally.

And with the last raise in late September (3-4 weeks ago), we FINALLY have a Fed and interest rate target that is actually designed to apply some brakes to the economy. For myself that is a primarily meaningful as a statement about just how aggressively stimulative the Fed has been and for how long. The Fed is now actually in a "slow the economy down" stance for less than 1 month.

It is absolutely the case that another .75 might overshoot. For my part I am more in the camp that the Fed has still been unable to get the investing class to grok that inflation is out of control and that no, the Fed put can't be relied on to cover a big market move down. I keep expecting a 1.00 rate increase when a .50 or .75 is expected as a slap to the face / punch to the gut type of attempt to get investors attention.

If I were betting, and to some degree I am, I expect the rate to keep going up this year and next to something more like 6% than the 4-5% I read people dreaming about. Because the current braking the Fed is applying is at best weak. A better mental model (again my opinion, which doesn't make me right) is somethign more like 4.5 to 5.0% at a minimum as that is about as much drag on the economy as the previous 0% target rate was stimulative. And it'll need to stay in place for more than a week or a month or two.



This dynamic, where I find myself increasingly of the belief that its the environmentalists (such as myself - I'd say that its my personal #1 issue) that are one of the biggest problems to actually accomplishing something about climate change and environmental problems.

Its one reason I am such an Elon and Tesla fan - they're doing something via a market mechanism rather than via regulations and politics. We have seen, and will continue to see, how thats playing out in Germany. I don't know the scale of the problem in California, but one benefit I do see about the big plant in Texas is some degree of protection from NIMBYism and the environmental lobby managing to shut down the #1 (MHO) entity actually doing something about climate change.

I spend more time worrying about where those mines in North America are going to come from that are essential to electrification of transportation.
How can I make the question more simple? Does the U.S. Government pay interest to the Federal Reserve (or its member banks) on money it borrows from them? Not owe; pay.

Not looking for a link to an endless warren of Federal Reserve documents. Rather, a line-item in the Federal Budget for the interest expense would be informative. If the U.S. Goverment truly owns the FED, how is that interest expense / int. income shown in their financial reports?

Creating a separate thread for this topic would be worthwhile, and would become an instant archive on the topic. Thanks.



Mod: yes, please start a separate thread. This subject is too much of a tangent.
My replies will be posted here:
Does the velocity of the rate increase acts more of a damper on the economy than the actual rates? Seems like the velocity of rate increases has fueled speculatory rates which results in 30 year mortgage rates at 7% today.
Good question. Answer is yes, but...it is more influence by long-dated security trading patterns, thoseinlfuenced strongly by FOMC long-dated Treasury trading. The easy way to know is to watch the yield curves.


... A portion of Tesla's cash hoard would be of much greater value if converted into TSLA shares as those shares will be worth so much more in the years ahead.

The status quo leaves Tesla with a HUGE cost--a massive cash balance in a high-inflation environment creates pure waste...

(Especially when at least one brave and smart person in Russia puts the entire globe out of Putin-induced misery.)
I must disagree. The analogy is apt, in part because almost nobody thinks Tesla needs all that cash. They probably don't, unless... I have been around long enough to have, as a pilot, had one of those nearly impossible failures, of course, due to a maintenance error. With Tesla we have a history of surviving against long odds. Tesla is so conservative precisely because there are chances of catastrophe great enough to justify extraordinary caution financially.

They also earn from the cash, above all because that cushion enables operating choices that would otherwise be foolhardy. Gigapress is a perfect example of making a huge investment with numerous technical hurdles that had never been done before. Would they make that if they did not have a healthy cushion? How about Model 3, Model Y, 4690 and so on. The people arguing for share buybacks ignore the operating risks Tesla faces, precisely because they are so very very good at it.

The same people who choose high risk investment options want higher risk in Tesla operations. Luckily, Tesla is financially conservative just so they can continue successful innovation.
 
Last edited:
I don't see this NASDAQ headfake/MMD holding, sentiment seems positive today. Shorts still feel short to me, time for more covering.

Oil down on the rumblings of big repercussions for Saudis trying to cut supply even further. Good to see!
Doesn’t matter what the macros do, TSLA has underperformed for 10 straight days now, sometimes massively. There’s not even remotely enough genuine buying in TSLA to counter the bear raid since the P/D numbers.

At this point, I doubt earnings will do much of anything to stop this. Shorts/beard have been waiting over 2 years for a moment like this. They’re going to pummel this stock into oblivion causing another breakout at some point next year.

But until then, this is dead money
 
Macro: the European collapse in their terms of trade continues unabated.


Not only is their energy import bill skyrocketing, but having the highest energy costs in the world on top of the highest regulatory and tax burden in the world has made the competitiveness of their non-oil sector collapse as well.

Reminds me of Japan pre-WWII. Economy entirely dependent upon outsiders for reasonably-priced energy. That's a nightmare recipe for not just economic recession/depression, but political instability and civil unrest. It's a problem that has to be addressed in short order (and be beholden to the USA for LNG instead of Russia for NG is not a viable, long-term solution).
 
Nice Pre-Market head fake.

It's an artifact of the 'Call-Wall' that existed this morning at the $225 strike price. Early in the session, options day traders who hold 225 Calls expiring today bid up the SP so they could execute those calls. That was the quick spike after the Open.

Then, once those day traders 'sell-to-close' those Call contracts, Options Market Makers reflexively sell shares they had purchased previously to delta hedge those options. Whenever you see a monotonous, linear down trend in the SP, it's somebodies automated trading system selling program. Today, it's likely Market Makers, but triggered by day trading of Options contracts.

TSLA.2022-10-14.10-27.Lo2.png


TL;dr Unless you want to become a day trader, don't worry about it. It's noise in the long run, and dentistry* costs real money in the present.

Cheers to the Longs!
*repairs needed due to gnashing of teeth
 
Last edited:
Reminds me of Japan pre-WWII. Economy entirely dependent upon outsiders for reasonably-priced energy. That's a nightmare recipe for not just economic recession/depression, but political instability and civil unrest. It's a problem that has to be addressed in short order (and be beholden to the USA for LNG instead of Russia for NG is not a viable, long-term solution).

Japan now is actually much worse than pre-WWII Japan in terms of energy security. Pre WWII Japan got most of its energy (~2/3) from domestically sourced coal, and the rest from imperial holdings in Manchuria. Oil was important, but still a small part of the overall energy mix. Industry ran on coal, and most transport was coal powered trains.

Fun fact, in 1940 the US produced 2/3rds of the world’s oil, and oil powered transport was still kinda in its infancy. The US also produced ~3/4s of the worlds motor vehicles at this time as well. This is why the Axis was doomed as soon as the US entered on the allied side.

Today, Japan imports a whopping 90% of their energy and over half their food. 😳

The same problems happening in the Euro area are happening in Japan as well. Last month the Japanese trade deficit was equal to ~7% of GDP.
 
How much truth?

My guess is “technical issues” is lack of natural gas for industrial processes. Germany is rightly prioritizing natural gas for home heating and is curtailing its use for manufacturing. Also, natural gas and energy is now very expensive in Germany. It could very well be cheaper to import batteries now into Germany rather than make them there. Honestly, I am wondering when the next shoe will drop and Tela has to curtail car manufacturing due to local manufactured inputs being hard to get.
 
My guess is “technical issues” is lack of natural gas for industrial processes. Germany is rightly prioritizing natural gas for home heating and is curtailing its use for manufacturing. Also, natural gas and energy is now very expensive in Germany. It could very well be cheaper to import batteries now into Germany rather than make them there. Honestly, I am wondering when the next shoe will drop and Tela has to curtail car manufacturing due to local manufactured inputs being hard to get.
Germany, along with other European countries, reached their goal for natural gas stockpiles. The stockpiles are intended to be distributed to a number of different aspects of Germany's economy, including their manufacturing.

I have no clue where you're getting Germany is curtailing the stockpile for manufacturing.

Reporting on Berlin by the media, especially Rueters, has been wrong every step of the way. There was just a public workers meeting where information was disclosed that directly contradicts this FUD. German officials have also stated the opposite of this FUD......but sure go ahead and believe it :rolleyes:
 
Shorties plan a bear raid, paste FUD all over the net. SP dips, TSLA buys a bit of the shares.

True, but if you're going to 'buy the dip' as a policy, that policy needs to include 'selling the peaks' or else you run out of cash. Not sure how that affects a publicly listed company in terms of the regulatory environment. Plus, starting Jan 2nd, 2023 there will be 1% 'friction' added to any corporate swing-trading via the excise tax on share buybacks.

For Tesla, I think its best just to keep the purchases modest when cash allows and shortzes circle. Keep the shares in the Treasury, hand them out for employee incentives or used as a cash alternative with M&A deals.
 
Germany, along with other European countries, reached their goal for natural gas stockpiles. The stockpiles are intended to be distributed to a number of different aspects of Germany's economy, including their manufacturing.

I have no clue where you're getting Germany is curtailing the stockpile for manufacturing.

Sorry, I am probably behind there … still nat gas and energy are expensive…