I call no way on this one (it's a family forum so that's my term). If Tesla thought they could tack on another 25% and all the buyers would still be there, they would have done some amount of that already. Another 25% ontop of the historical 15% is going to LOWER demand and/or cut into margins in China.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
-
Tomorrow at 1PM PDT we will be discussing the latest Tesla Shareholder Meeting on the TMC Podcast. You can watch live on YouTube or X and participate in the chat.
- Status
I call no way on this one (it's a family forum so that's my term). If Tesla thought they could tack on another 25% and all the buyers would still be there, they would have done some amount of that already. Another 25% ontop of the historical 15% is going to LOWER demand and/or cut into margins in China.
that Volkswagen number is nowhere NEAR accurate. you're off by either 2.5x or 10x depending the tracking stock. ADR or GER domestic.
Tesla has always gone with a cost + tax + currency difference basis when setting prices in non-US market. (Unlike other automakers that put huge mark-ups on their luxury products going to China.)
Yes, they could have marked them up even more, but that wouldn't be treating the customer fairly.
That is very hard to tell with just screen shots and reports. there are no watermarks in the UI. that we know of. COULD be, but having done that sort of thing before it's pretty hard to pull off across all the UI and many testers.
X Fan
Active Member
EVNow
Well-Known Member
May be I & you inhabit different parts of the twitter world.
Also, listen to the Weeds podcast on Tesla/EM. Vox is as neo-liberal as it gets.
The screenshots were claimed to be from dev cars, not early access program. Some EAP people were previously leaking details(and actual builds?) to some forum members. But those members have fairly recently claimed to have not seen anything on v9.
(Firstly: not advice, secondly if you get hooked on options you are going to lose everything eventually so never ever write options and don't buy them from margin, make sure your wife knows and approves of the worst-case loss beforehand or is of the forgiving type, etc., etc.)
So the problem with say the March 2019 calls is their huge implied volatility cost which comes mainly from their huge long-term time value - much of which time you'll spend waiting for no event you truly expect - i.e. between quarterly reports.
For example the $350 strike calls are $27 currently, so for a single contract you'd have to pay $2,700 cash, plus if you keep them until expiry the stock would have to hit at least $377 for it to be break-even.
So if your thesis is good Q3 results, the timing should match that: i.e. be as close after the Nov 1-2 Q3 report as possible, i.e. Nov 02 expiry or Nov 16 expiry:
In terms of ideal strike level: depends on many things, but with a lottery ticket kind of jackpot-or-total-loss bet I'd go for max leverage without assuming a ridiculous price spike: say a mild short squeeze could spike to $400. With such a scenario and cashing out at $400 the $350-$370 strike levels look the most efficient at a quick glance.
- Nov 02 is quite risky in that while the Q2 update letter was released on Aug 1, often Tesla delays their quarterly report to the 2nd or later day of the month and you might just miss it and the option expires without benefiting from any price action. This might explain why the total open interest is less than ~5,000 options and spreads are wide open.
- Nov 18 is much more crowded with 110K options and good liquidity, and say the $350 strike price trades at $10.
If you want maximum leverage then you have to observe that option pricing drops sharply once the strike price goes outside the all time high: that's the historic range that current pricing assumes, and the price bounced from the ATH a couple of times so it is expected to be strong resistance.
But that 'bounces at $380-$390' is an argument based on technical analysis, if the breakthrough is fundamentals driven or short squeeze accelerated then that takes precedence over technical analysis and the price won't significantly bounce and you could trade on that hypothesis: in this case I'd go for a strike price around $440.
If you think the short squeeze is going to be unstoppable due to the magnitude of exposed short interest, i.e. the "milk Chanos to the max" lottery ticket, then I'd go for the highest strike price where you are not paying ridiculous spread to the market maker yet: for example $480 strike with a spread of ~20% looks acceptable, and the $0.50 price offers ridiculous leverage. These will most likely be lost though so buy them as if you bought really expensive ice cream or other luxury consumables. Write them off as a total loss mentally, the day you bought them.
You could also do a mix: if the first tier triggers you probably are in the green already in the end, with a nice profit. If the second tier triggers it's payday, if the third tier it's "set for life" day.
Note that if you think that either Q3 or Q4 results are going to be the day then it might still make sense to buy two expiries: the March 2019 $350 strike is trading at 2.7x the 2018/Nov $350 strike price. So if you first buy the Nov strike price, and then if it does not work out buy the March strike price (btw., April would be better), you are still only at a ~2x cost point instead of ~2x.
I.e. the best thing in the case of Tesla is to only pay the minimum time premium: which in this case would be to buy the options shortly before the delivery letter, and ride it through to shortly after the quarterly report. Note that at that point if the positive surprise happened as you expected it to, but you think the improved fundamentals have not yet fully been realized, or the short squeeze has not yet run to completion, you can still roll forward your calls week by week, with as much time value paid by your existing profits as you think is justified. (As long as you are certain that there won't be strong corrections, i.e. the fundamentals truly improved and it's not a so-so quarter with some question marks.)
But I could be wrong about any of this - maybe others want to chime in?
I agree, however, I bought mine during take private and got them for less than a dollar as any strike above $420 dropped to almost zero. I had a hunch Elon would change his mind and loaded up on calls above $420 for March. Now I fully realize the price may never get there by March, however, I thought it was a calculated risk, based on the Q3 and Q4 results showing profitability and the Model 3 ramp finally hitting its stride. I see the 250-380 range over the last 18 months as the market unsure about the Model 3 success. Similar to 2013 when the Model S was ramping. When they had a good quarter the share price rose 5 fold. Not saying that will happen but if Tesla is still below $400 by March then it will be because something unforseen has happened.
RobStark
Well-Known Member
According to Consumer Reports Porsche has placed between 3rd and 13th most reliable brands in the last 10 years.
And Tesla has placed between last and 3rd to last out of approximately 25 brands sold in the US. *
*Sometimes brand come into the market and sometimes they leave. Some small brands sometimes have difficulty generating enough survey responses to get a scientific sample and thus qualify for CR brand reliability report
Esme Es Mejor
Member
I think you’re right about the number being, off but you’re wrong about the magnitude. Like I said, it was a quick look, and this is what came up when I googled Volkswagen stock:
When you said it was inaccurate, I looked further and found this:
If that second chart is correct, Volkswagen is only down 26% for the year.
Joe F
Disruption is hard.
Is BMW on fire, or just their cars?
Didn't some Toyota plants have their own non-UAW union? Or are they just straight non-union?
No it won't.
EV sales grow by 50% per year and total auto sales are more or less flat worldwide. World car sales == 70 million/year. World EV sales in 2017 == 1.281 million. Conclusion: EVs are 100% of new car sales circa 2027.
Average car lifetime == 12 years. Conclusion: over half the installed base of ICE cars is off the road circa 2039. At this point it will be difficult to get gasoline and the disappearance of ICE cars will accelerate. Very few people drive 25-year-old cars, so by 2051 at the latest ICE cars will be essentially gone.
That's 21 years to majority BEV, 33 years to disappearance of ICE
I think your vision of the future has a better chance of happening than Woo's but predicting the future has always been a fertile ground for mistakes and wrong assumption's.
I for one was happy to loudly announce that there was no way a orange haired ape would be elected POTUS.
Check any of the hundreds of books and articles written about the migration of people over the land bridge between Siberia and Alaska. The same for books on the last ice age. And no I don’t doubt climate change, but I think we should consider all relevant data.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Horse to ICE was a much greater leap than ICE to EV and these photos are 13 years apart
Be careful though, market cap is much higher than it was back then...would be harder to get a 5x increase now.
Well, the economic trends are nice and clear, and everything points in the same direction, so I can be quite confident in my predictions relating to EVs vs. ICE cars.
In politics, we're screwing around with a dysfunctional, archaic system involving first-past-the-post voting, gerrymandering, malapportioned districts, the "Electoral College", "winner-take-all states". What I know of mathematical election theory *says* that this is unstable and prone to bizarre results. (I'm a big supporter of election reform. A National Popular Vote with Approval Voting would really solve the problem. We can get National Popular Vote through the Interstate Compact, but Approval Voting would be harder.)
In politics, we're screwing around with a dysfunctional, archaic system involving first-past-the-post voting, gerrymandering, malapportioned districts, the "Electoral College", "winner-take-all states". What I know of mathematical election theory *says* that this is unstable and prone to bizarre results. (I'm a big supporter of election reform. A National Popular Vote with Approval Voting would really solve the problem. We can get National Popular Vote through the Interstate Compact, but Approval Voting would be harder.)
that is totally NOT the volkswagen tracking stock, that's some unsecured OTC ADR. VLKAY is the international ADR and VOW.DE or VOW3.DE are the german domestic trading units.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Poll
