So I have asked myself the same question that you are asking: Who is actually shorting the almost 30 million shares that are shorted?
I am going to jump in here with my shorting conspiracy theory. I won't be offended by scoffing, or pointing out something basic I'm ignorant about.
it is very possible to me that the shorting has been done by a group entrenched in the existing oil/ICE standard.
as one possible example, the 6 supermajor oil companies are said to have earned $1 trillion dollars over the last decade. earned, not revenues.
there are other possible groups (OPEC, or more generally, oil producers, sovereign wealth funds of these countries, even individuals worth billions from these industries... in places like the middle east, Russia, south america..., even the behemoth automakers).
taking the 6 supermajors as an example. if you earn something like a $1 trillion in a decade, what is there really to lose in shorting say 20 million shares of Tesla. if you lose $15 per share shorting, that's $300 million... or 0.3% of a year's profits, 0.03% of a decades profits.
clearly they have an economic interest in ICE not giving way to an alternative tech, and clearly such a loss is nominal... but how would shorting be an effective way of protecting turf for these companies?
consider the past couple of months for Tesla. Everyone knew they might have enough cash to get to profitability, but it was close. Elon even allowed that a secondary was in consideration during the last quarterly call (though I think he emphasized this was more about optimizing investment in Model X and G3 than fear of running out of cash in Model S launch).
anyway, we all know the fact is there has been a secondary.
by shorting and putting downward pressure on the stock price, the offering price of the secondary was lower than it might otherwise have been.
that cost Tesla some cash on hand, but it could have been worse.
Fisker Karma has had their government loan frozen for not meeting milestones. beyond lowering the secondary price, shorting could have made it difficult to get a secondary at any kind of palatable price, or perhaps not even at all. consider the clear Tesla bashing we have seen in various reporting, blog posts, and even from the Republican nominee (though in his case bashing might be too extreme a word). My point is if the tandem of a low stock price from shorting and attempts to paint Tesla as "Solyndra on Wheels" had a large enough impact, Tesla's DOE loan could have been frozen as well (by blocking the path to a secondary). Tesla's loans has covenants, which include financial ratios... I imagine ratios of cash and loans outstanding are part of these covenants.
so even if it was unlikely for all the dominoes to fall your way, if you're prime goal was protecting your profits, and you make $100 billion a year, wouldn't you risk several hundred million dollars to potentially pull out the lifeline of the $450 million loan Tesla has? doing so could end Tesla, or certainly put any kind of Gen3 considerably further out into the future. even falling short of such a direct hit, such a short position investment to hurt Tesla and negative press could put major clouds over the company in public and slow down the opening of public consciousness to their coming product (if "swiftboating" works in politics why not business... it's really about tarring public perception).
another piece. even short of the loan being frozen on Tesla, an interested party would have another payout based on shorting combined with negative press. it could be part of a broader push to characterize battery powered cars as liberal, fantasy fluff. this could pave an easier path to a new administration revoking the $7500 EV credit. again, while this wouldn't necessarily kill Tesla, it would certainly slow down the adoption of EVs. this last pathway of a conspiracy is consistant with Romney calling Tesla a loser, and criticizing the government supporting the fostering of new technologies by direct assistance to companies (the loans which he called an investment).
I'll give one final reason for the idea of a conspiracy. shorting a stock is risky. when you go long you can lose your investment. when you short, there's no limit to your potential losses (I guess as much rope as your broker offers to hang yourself). I understand that Tesla could fail, and that draws the attention of shorts. at the same time, if Tesla does succeed, it could be spectacular success- a tremendous disincentive to short (think Elon's "Tsunami of pain," "very unwise" comments). based on normal motivations and risks regarding shorting it just doesn't make sense that Tesla would be the most shorted company in the market. this would be consistant with an abnormal motivation for shorting.
anyway, I realize this is a super long post, but I just thought I'd throw this out here as we eagerly look forward to Monday's call... and, oh yeah, an election too.
