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.
A few quick points:
  • Bezos sells a billion dollars of Amazon stock every year to fund Blue Origin (his rocket company). No one says anything about it.
  • Elon said yesterday that users keep increasing. So even though his competitors (sorry, I mean news media) say it's a disaster, the numbers seem to say otherwise.
Bezos sells even more for other personal consumption expenditures.
Elon selling should have no impact on the mkt cap of Tesla.
it’s mostly a weapon used by shorts to front run the sales.

actually it would be appropriate for other insiders to buy the stock
to show conviction.
 
Last edited:
There’s just a lot of fear, panic, and noise right now centered around Tesla. (Can’t blame the market for that).

It is a mystery to me that Elon’s stated life goals, sustainability and multi-planetary life, seem to have taken a back seat to his current project.

I make my living off the market and, even before I retired over 20 years ago, I made more money from the market than my earnings from working for around a decade before that. I don't blame the market for being disconnected from reality, I credit it for that. Because if the market reflected reality, I would have no particular advantage, I could only achieve market average returns and I would not have been able to retire early so easily. But the market's irrational focus on the short-term, and it's strong tendency to be affected by fake narratives driven by interests that are threatened by disrupters, turns the market into a reliable money-printing machine. All that's required is an ability to spot the fake narratives, some investment capital, and some time.

The financial press will always minimize the chances of success of the disruptors, in favor of the incumbents. For example, in the early 1990's Microsoft was recognized as a strong growth company with ever increasing revenues, and yet IBM was continually expected to take back their rightful throne from the scrappy upstart. Therefore, MSFT was "over-valued" (when, in fact, it's share price did not properly account for the size of expected future revenues or the degree of certainty those revenues had).

Other examples include Qualcomm in the mid-1990's (with a superior new, more efficient, method of encoding cellular data), and Apple (with a sleeker and more versatile form factor for a smart phone). The financial press said Motorola and Nokia, not Qualcomm, had the superior cellular technology (now all wireless uses Qualcomm's spread spectrum technology) and that Apple's device was novel but too expensive, had no physical buttons, and no one needed a computer in their pocket anyway. To profit from these disconnects from reality, one did not need to be early, they simply needed to see the disconnect between reality and the media stories that protected and championed the entrenched interests. This is exactly what is still going on today with Tesla. Even the Federal Government is in on it, trying to help out the entrenched interests at the expense of Tesla. EV subsidies had a place in the twenty-teens, no longer in the twenty-twenties.

This is why the press cannot drop their narrative that "the competition is coming" while simultaneously chiding Tesla for always being late. Anyone with their eye's half-open can see it's the competition that's late, not Tesla. There was supposed to be a steady stream of superior, high-volume EV's displacing Tesla by 2019 and 2020, but they never arrived. Instead, it was Tesla that continually increased production beyond that of the incumbents. This was 100% foreseeable, it was not a lucky guess. The competition will continue to show up with too little, too late. They cannot show up with high volume production until they figure out how to make EV's for less. Sure, eventually there will be meaningful competition but it's still a long way off and it will not be the incumbents who figure it out, it will be new disruptors. The incumbents only chance is massive Government life support.

People who trust and listen to the financial press and the MSM, deserve exactly what they have coming to them. Because the financial press/MSM is not owned by the disruptors but is beholden to both Wall Street and, even more importantly in the long-term, businesses that will become disrupted, the incumbents. Once that is understood, the media no longer holds a spell over you and the distorted reality they propagate, once identified, can be used to easily print large sums of money over time. The key ingredient to make this stream of profits reliable, is time. Those who view the market as a short-term casino will have results all over the board, with some losing everything, while others make out like a bandit. Others will break even with great relief. Luck plays a large roll so it's unwise to commit large sums to the casino, it's much better to play the long game which makes it possible for the odds to be strongly in your favor over a lifetime. Because luck can run out while disconnects from reality always trend back toward reality. One is reliable, one is not.
Who wins the race, the tortoise or the hare? Consistency is key, compounding returns over time wins the game.

No one knows when the markets will be riding high again but it's likely quite some time, many years, until the next market peak and not too terribly far from the market bottom. Those who invest in TSLA now, or are already invested, will have outsized returns over the next 5 years (and likely far beyond). Those who are taken in by the MSM's fear, uncertainty and doubt cannot properly assign risk/reward. Because fear. People imagine fear and let it grow into a monster they cannot escape from. By the time they tame the fear they will be paying $260 for a stock they could have had for $180-$190. There will be many right here that keep buying between $300-$600/share, because then the fear will be gone. That's not how you maximize returns.
 
Vehicles from Shanghai would be ineligible for the clean vehicle credits due to the battery and final assembly being done in China.
Yes, but assuming US demand outstrips China demand (for a specific price point without subsidy) for Shanghai built vehicles then exporting from Shanghai mitigates any China demand concerns.

US demand next year will be huge and Tesla can play tunes on where the margins are found.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gigapress
I use this chart put out by Nasdaq to view TSLA buying by the minute.

According to the chart, we saw only 4.9K shares trade during the 4pm closing cross. By comparison, we've seen 1M to 2M shares trade in that minute on other days when Elon was selling. Looking at the chart, it seems that around 3:06pm some selling pressure (I assume it was Elon) stopped and the stock price quickly drifted higher. If Elon was actively selling, you would think his agent would have been selling like mad during the 4pm closing cross. That didn't happen. Perhaps the desired number of shares for the day were sold on Wednesday and it was time to sit back and let the share price drift higher (which is good for Elon and us). Since 3 trading days can go by before a Form 4 needs to be filed, I'm hoping that the last of Elon's selling will take place on Thursday. When it's done, we may well see a rise such as we saw today at 3:06pm and beyond. Expecting Form 4s Thursday night.

Edit: The NASDAQ chart might be wrong. A buddy said 5.1M shares traded in final minute. Looking for other sources now and will report back.
Edit 2: All: please DM me a link to your source for TSLA by-the-minute volume and let me know what you saw at 4pm on Wednesday if different than my numbers. Gonna get some sleep zzzzzz

Looks like IB showed a chart with about 5M shares traded at 4:00pm minute
Nasdaq's real-time chart showed 4.9K shares traded in that minute, 3 orders of magnitude different

Of the two, I'd be more inclined to take the higher number and believe that NASDAQ somehow missed a big transaction that took place in a more obscure exchange
 
Yes I inverted the equation for the second chart.

I can see now that that was a confusing way of presenting the data. I’ll fix that if I put this stuff in a blog article.
Another clarification you should make is that the "prediction error" on the graph is Actual TSLA - Predicted TSLA. That's important because it could have been defined with the opposite sign. I think the name "prediction error" is even suggestive that it would have the opposite sign. e.g. 9/1/22 predicted is $246.53 while actual was $272.58, so the prediction was too low (thus implying negative error) by $26.04, while you plot it as positive. Once fully understood, your conclusions seem correct.
 
I make my living off the market and, even before I retired over 20 years ago, I made more money from the market than my earnings from working for around a decade before that. I don't blame the market for being disconnected from reality, I credit it for that. Because if the market reflected reality, I would have no particular advantage, I could only achieve market average returns and I would not have been able to retire early so easily. But the market's irrational focus on the short-term, and it's strong tendency to be affected by fake narratives driven by interests that are threatened by disrupters, turns the market into a reliable money-printing machine. All that's required is an ability to spot the fake narratives, some investment capital, and some time.

The financial press will always minimize the chances of success of the disruptors, in favor of the incumbents. For example, in the early 1990's Microsoft was recognized as a strong growth company with ever increasing revenues, and yet IBM was continually expected to take back their rightful throne from the scrappy upstart. Therefore, MSFT was "over-valued" (when, in fact, it's share price did not properly account for the size of expected future revenues or the degree of certainty those revenues had).

Other examples include Qualcomm in the mid-1990's (with a superior new, more efficient, method of encoding cellular data), and Apple (with a sleeker and more versatile form factor for a smart phone). The financial press said Motorola and Nokia, not Qualcomm, had the superior cellular technology (now all wireless uses Qualcomm's spread spectrum technology) and that Apple's device was novel but too expensive, had no physical buttons, and no one needed a computer in their pocket anyway. To profit from these disconnects from reality, one did not need to be early, they simply needed to see the disconnect between reality and the media stories that protected and championed the entrenched interests. This is exactly what is still going on today with Tesla. Even the Federal Government is in on it, trying to help out the entrenched interests at the expense of Tesla. EV subsidies had a place in the twenty-teens, no longer in the twenty-twenties.

This is why the press cannot drop their narrative that "the competition is coming" while simultaneously chiding Tesla for always being late. Anyone with their eye's half-open can see it's the competition that's late, not Tesla. There was supposed to be a steady stream of superior, high-volume EV's displacing Tesla by 2019 and 2020, but they never arrived. Instead, it was Tesla that continually increased production beyond that of the incumbents. This was 100% foreseeable, it was not a lucky guess. The competition will continue to show up with too little, too late. They cannot show up with high volume production until they figure out how to make EV's for less. Sure, eventually there will be meaningful competition but it's still a long way off and it will not be the incumbents who figure it out, it will be new disruptors. The incumbents only chance is massive Government life support.

People who trust and listen to the financial press and the MSM, deserve exactly what they have coming to them. Because the financial press/MSM is not owned by the disruptors but is beholden to both Wall Street and, even more importantly in the long-term, businesses that will become disrupted, the incumbents. Once that is understood, the media no longer holds a spell over you and the distorted reality they propagate, once identified, can be used to easily print large sums of money over time. The key ingredient to make this stream of profits reliable, is time. Those who view the market as a short-term casino will have results all over the board, with some losing everything, while others make out like a bandit. Others will break even with great relief. Luck plays a large roll so it's unwise to commit large sums to the casino, it's much better to play the long game which makes it possible for the odds to be strongly in your favor over a lifetime. Because luck can run out while disconnects from reality always trend back toward reality. One is reliable, one is not.
Who wins the race, the tortoise or the hare? Consistency is key, compounding returns over time wins the game.

No one knows when the markets will be riding high again but it's likely quite some time, many years, until the next market peak and not too terribly far from the market bottom. Those who invest in TSLA now, or are already invested, will have outsized returns over the next 5 years (and likely far beyond). Those who are taken in by the MSM's fear, uncertainty and doubt cannot properly assign risk/reward. Because fear. People imagine fear and let it grow into a monster they cannot escape from. By the time they tame the fear they will be paying $260 for a stock they could have had for $180-$190. There will be many right here that keep buying between $300-$600/share, because then the fear will be gone. That's not how you maximize returns.

@StealthP3D - Just an awesome summary and philosophy!!!

Matches what I've learned over the last 5+ years, especially with Tesla. In regards to the financial press/MSM (or analyst for that matter), it's always hard for them to see the future. Greatest interview ever was when they laughed how Amazon could be bigger than Sears and Roebucks. Ditto for Netflix/Blockbuster. They really do make the same mistake over and over and over...
 
Well, there we go.
1668181142798.png
 
Bezos sells even more for other personal consumption expenditures.
Elon selling should have no impact on the mkt cap of Tesla.
it’s mostly a weapon used by shorts to front run the sales.

actually it would be appropriate for other insiders to buy the stock
to show conviction.
Imagine if Elon created a brokerage house under the umbrella of X.com - it could be able to be widely used by retail investors like the Robinhood platform in a way that didn't give Hedgies the edge over retail and even the WSB crowd (such as Robinhood did with AMC and GME retail investors that Elon was so critical of)............and more importantly it could provide a conduit for Elon, for Tesla managers, and for any other corporation managers to sell their stock without Shorts and Hedgies being able to front run those shares. Selling behind the curtain, so to speak.

Many people are understandably asking what the share price might be if Elon hadn't sold shares this week. I am wondering what the share price would be if Elon could have sold his shares onto the market behind the mask of a truly independent brokerage that didn't require announcing to GS or JPM or others that he was going to be selling a few blocks of shares. Take that layer of Greed and potential bad behavior out of the sales equation and then we would have a more accurate indication of how any company is truly valued on the market IMO.

Edit - I would venture to guess that TSLA may have never fallen below the support level around 210ish if WS Shorts and Hedgies were never able to pile on because they would not have been able to see the playbook before the play was called
 
Last edited: