TSLA Market Action: 2018 Investor Roundtable

[mltv]

This is incorrect, as far as the big public cloud platforms go. AWS was first, in mid-2006. Google App Engine came in 2008, and Microsoft Azure in 2010.

if you put in the "big public". I am referring cloud computing is not invented by Amazon. And the market was always there, amazon just happen to know how to monetize it. Google has huge cloud farm running google search long before amazon.

 

[Esme Es Mejor]

11 million views on the Joe Rogan interview as of earlier today, demand high?

#1 podcast on iTunes. Probably has been for days, but I only checked today. Joe Rogan actually has 3 of the top 5 spots. Almost as good as Tesla, which has 3 of the top 3 spots (of US EV sales in August).

 

[Zaxxon]

if you put in the "big public". I am referring cloud computing is not invented by Amazon. And the market was always there, amazon just happen to know how to monetize it. Google has huge cloud farm running google search long before amazon.

What Google had--datacenters running Google's own loads--is not cloud computing. Cloud computing is a marketing term describing running your compute load on someone else's server infrastructure. Amazon was the first to provide this at any sort of scale.

 

[mltv]

What Google had--datacenters running Google's own loads--is not cloud computing. Cloud computing is a marketing term describing running your compute load on someone else's server infrastructure. Amazon was the first to provide this at any sort of scale.

It is a product. technically it is the same. Funny Eric Schmidt introduced it according to this article: Who Coined 'Cloud Computing'?

 

[neroden]

I'm wondering, how do market makers on these exchanges maintain their inventory of TSLA shares, do they immediately go over into the NASDAQ pre-market?

You do know about the lag time between trade date and delivery date, right?

Well, market makers are given *extra time* to straighten out their imbalances, generally. Sometimes they sell more stock than they have in inventory. They buy it on NASDAQ later in the day. The Frankfurt trade is supposed to settle before the NASDAQ trade, but (a) the NASDAQ trade may settle early and (b) the Frankfurt trade may settle *late* -- this is recorded as fail-to-deliver, but the market maker isn't seriously penalized if it only happens occasionally.

Normally, however, they would be trading among European customers and not having to go to NASDAQ, and they do have NASDAQ pre-market to work with too. But if that fails they can just end up with a timing mismatch and generally get away with it.

 

[Zaxxon]

It is a product. technically it is the same.

This is true. The Model S and Foreman Grill are both products, and are thus the same.

And with that, I shall bow out of this particular derail with apologies to all.

 

[scaesare]

The dimensions are included in the name:

• The 18:65.0 cells have a diameter of "18mm" and "65.0mm" height.
• The 21:70.0 cells are thicker as well the "21mm" is diameter and the "70.0mm" is height.

So given that the 2170 cells are not just thicker, but also denser, and the copper cooling channels with glycol circulating are wrapped around the cells tightly in the current Model S/X battery module design:

For this reason the battery modules probably need significant rework as well: the cooling channels probably need to become a bit wider, to be able to transport more heat away from the denser cells.

I believe this is why JB mentioned that both the modules and the pack need rework. I don't think it's just a 'cell drop-in' - the diameter and energy density differences force a different module design.

But the biggest deal is to be able to fit the 5mm taller 2170 cells into the existing S/X battery pack's vertical dimension, which would leave the rest of the car mostly unmodified.

Hehe, yeah I know what the form factor numbers mean.... the 2170s are 5mm taller than the 18650s.

And I agree that the module and cooling would likely be somewhat different. But that a minor internal rework task as compared to having to design an entirely new pack to fit into the existing skateboard chassis, much less re-engineer the entire car.

It's plausible that they might just need to just re-design the modules and they could fit in to the existing pack locations.

 

[TradingInvest]

Was it Technical indicator or was it Elon smoking weed live that caused tsla to hit your target?
And how much of a drop do your technical indicators predict now? Charts seem super bullish I’m thinking trend has reversed and we might speed pass $300 soon...not an advice.

#1 cause of the recent drop was CAO leaving, and HR head not coming back, both on the same day, that's alarming unless you truly understand what's going on with Tesla's business. Institutional investors hesitate to buy on that kind of news. The chart broke down too, so shorts shorted more, traders jumped on it with weekly options to push it lower. Unfortunately the weed news didn't help.

In my new post I was not predicting another fresh drop. Instead I was saying after you have bought the recent low, you can plan to sell the next top, this is referring to the Trading shares, (never sell the investment shares). I found the problem for some investors is that they get excited and load near the top with margin, then get painful at the bottom, they are selling when they really should "buy low". If every long investor learn the lesson, shorts can't do much. I hurt the shorts a lot every time they rig the stock like this.

Also, on Friday when stock hit $255 in the morning, I posted "It has reached the lower end of the Bollinger band on weekly chart." That should be a major buy signal for trading or investing in TSLA. It seems most people don't care about this kind of info.

Predicting the next top is an ongoing effort, it depends on factors that continue to unfold, there is a small chance we retest the recent low, all depends on future events. But indicators will give us clue when is a good time to reduce, my best guess is in a few months. I will post when I see it.

In the long run, I think the stock will reach a few thousand dollars a shares. So all the talk about "top" is only talking about swing trading shares in near term.

 

[neroden]

I think we have to spend some more time down here. 290$ seems to be a new level of resistance. We’d have to get some real news to clear it and close significantly above 300$ to make a new run to 320$ which is the NEXT level of resistance.

Nobody wants to hear it but I think we’ll retest 269 before 32x

I actually sort of hope you're right, since I'd like another chance to buy cheap, but the next "real news" is 3Q deliveries on October 2nd or so, which is actually *very close now* -- is there really time to have another serious dip in two weeks? I'm looking at the Feb 2016 chart...

 

[neroden]

Write an article for SA and you will find out. You will get several emails from the fact-checking staff before the editors even get to look at the article. That will get you a second set of emails with questions if you are walking a fine line or in a grey area. "Newsy" type articles will get bounced too. You have to have an analytical perspective of the numbers or events affecting the company or stock.

No, you don't.

Lawrence Fossi proved that with his blatantly dishonest articles which contained readily verifiable falsehoods -- violated the site rules against personally disparaging remarks -- and were also printed under a fake name of "Montana Skeptic", just for kicks. When the factual errors were pointed out to SA, their official response was that they had a policy of not fact checking -- and they pointed to that policy. Not fact checking. is an official policy of theirs.

*Some* people get their calm, accurate articles vetted and rejected for apparently completely arbitrary reasons. Others, like Fossi, are allowed to write provable trade libel and immediately published.

This gives me less than no zero respect for Seeking Alpha management, who I can only conclude are crooks pushing dishonest narratives -- probably anyone who gets enough clicks is allowed to ignore the rules, while the "little people" get restricted with restrictions which aren't even in the rules.

This is the standard sort of corruption for corrupt clickbait sites.

 

[TrendTrader007]

For short term trading perspective this chart shows the breakout from several downtrend trendlines
I dunno if the gradient of trendlines is proportional to the subsequent rally
I’m studying all kinds of technicals closely to predict the next rally which is currently underway

 

[TradingInvest]

So people are wondering what the big overlap between Amazon and Elon Musk could be. I believe it's mainly the huge, over 10,000+ satellites large Starlink constellation SpaceX is planning to launch in the next couple of years:

Starlink (satellite constellation) - Wikipedia

Those satellites will be coveted co-location Internet resources, competing with Amazon S3 on a conceptual level:

• They are going to be physically very close to global customers, and they are going to be right next to the internet traffic of global customers. Space Internet capacity also scales so much better than fiber optics networks. (Plus space is propagating signals at the speed of light, while intercontinental fiber optic cables propagate signals at about 70% of the speed of light. So there's a significant latency advantage for global internet communications.)
  
• Unlimited free energy supply (the sun)
  
• Virtually unlimited expansion (space is huge), where real estate is for free in essence with a "first arrival owns it forever" rule for orbital space
  
• While space is also very hostile in terms of radiation environment, and cooling is also harder, if it's solved via shielding and/or computing redundancy then this disadvantage can be mitigated to a large degree.

SpaceX will be in full control of those satellites. In a decade SpaceX could end up owning much of the global Internet data delivery infrastructure. I think that's Jeff Bezos's main worry about SpaceX.

SpaceX/Elon should stop talking about the satellite/internet etc. Just quietly do it. The project needs $10~20B and a lot of effort. Just pretend it will take 20 years. They don't want to attract too much opposition in the process. Imagine if AT&T and Comcast learned they will die in 3 years, I'm sure they would not be happy about it.

 

[neroden]

You will never get to the editorial review if your article does not get past the fact-checking guys/gals.

Don't lie, Donn. Lawrence Fossi sure as hell was allowed to completely bypass all fact-checking, and he didn't get outed until very recently. Maybe *your* articles have to go through those guys, but some people's didn't.

 

[scaesare]

So people are wondering what the big overlap between Amazon and Elon Musk could be. I believe it's mainly the huge, over 10,000+ satellites large Starlink constellation SpaceX is planning to launch in the next couple of years:

Starlink (satellite constellation) - Wikipedia

Those satellites will be coveted co-location Internet resources, competing with Amazon S3 on a conceptual level:

• They are going to be physically very close to global customers, and they are going to be right next to the internet traffic of global customers. Space Internet capacity also scales so much better than fiber optics networks. (Plus space is propagating signals at the speed of light, while intercontinental fiber optic cables propagate signals at about 70% of the speed of light. So there's a significant latency advantage for global internet communications.)
  
• Unlimited free energy supply (the sun)
  
• Virtually unlimited expansion (space is huge), where real estate is for free in essence with a "first arrival owns it forever" rule for orbital space
  
• While space is also very hostile in terms of radiation environment, and cooling is also harder, if it's solved via shielding and/or computing redundancy then this disadvantage can be mitigated to a large degree.

SpaceX will be in full control of those satellites. In a decade SpaceX could end up owning much of the global Internet data delivery infrastructure. I think that's Jeff Bezos's main worry about SpaceX.

Hmmm... not so sure about that.

Latency for geosync satellites is atrocious...at about 750ms for the bounce to the bird 24K miles up. Of course Starlink sats are supposed to be very low-earth-orbit, at somewhere in the neighborhood of 750 miles up, but that implies a round trip distance of more than 1500 miles added to the packet latency in the best case. Even if it's a coast-to-coast session, that's going to be something like 40% of the duration. If your session is to the nearest cache point 10-1000 miles away the latency will be far worse than fiber.

I suppose trans oceanic or really long haul sessions might start to show some advantage, which might help the developing countries scenario.

 

[neroden]

As an investor (if indeed you are one) you always need to be reading any available information on your stocks or options.

Funny thing to say, Donn, since you just said you ignore "unpaid blog posts" in response to a comment about the dishonest postings from (confessed securities fraudster) Anton Wahlmann. (Which apparently he actually does get paid for -- so I made a correction there.)

The sort of garbage Anton Wahlmann posts, like the trash Lawrence Fossi used to post, is not information. It's better referred to as "disinformation", actually. It's important not to waste tie reading deliberate disinformation from securities fraudsters.

What you post isn't information either. You've posted some interesting questions which are entertaining to respond to, but I've never seen you post information.

 

[neroden]

Unpilot. If you really felt that way and could document your position you should have challenged the article.

Donn, I challenged "Montana Skeptic" on one of his disinformation pieces when I had him dead to rights lying about verifiable numbers.

Seeking Alpha's response was that they don't do fact checking and that they refused to read my reference which I sent them.

So. That's Seeking Alpha for you. "Seeking Clicks" is a more accurate name.

 

[Fact Checking]

The bandwidth in the fiber in the ground is essentially unlimited.

But so is the bandwidth in space essentially unlimited between satellites, with the difference that establishing a new (laser) link between two satellites is essentially free and expansion is fast - while intercontinental fiber optic cables cost billions to lay down on a point to point basis and take years to plan.

Space has its disadvantages, but it also has a couple of strategic advantages ground infrastructure cannot match, and growth of computing infrastructure in space is going to be exponential for a long time.

But that is a 20 years project, global Internet connectivity will be the first step, to fund the rest.

 

[neroden]

The bullish Tesla authors will be sorry to hear that.

Donn, ValueAnalyst *was* sorry to hear it. But I don't want to spend time on a site which allowed someone like Lawrence Fossi to repeatedly publish verifiable false claims of fact and trade libels under an assumed name. Despite being reported repeatedly.

Seeking Clicks showed their true character in that case, and I'm not going to support their corrupt platform. If ValueAnalyst goes to another platform, I might read her stuff there.

 

[neroden]

Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2018 Earnings Conference Call Transcript -- The Motley Fool

Motley Fool is a pretty bad source of information too (my Dad subscribed for a short period but dumped them because their stuff was all sensationalist and useless) but I can't say that I've caught them out with the kind of blatant corruption I've seen from Seeking Clicks.

Tesla should publish their own conf. call transcripts.

 

[neroden]

I'm short the TSLA stock (well, I'm long the stock but continue to sell ITM calls against it month after month ((sometimes twice a month))

That's not really a directional trade, is it? That's harvesting of time decay, right?

I'm too afraid of a big breakout to do that against my long-term stockholding but given the crazy high option pricing, it's a pretty comfy position to buy stock and sell near-ITM calls against it. You're basically just betting that the stock won't go down *too much*, and even if you do, you still get the premium. Theoretically you could let the stock get called away and open a new position every month and make money. But I'm guessing you just buy back the options as the time decay evaporates.