TSLA Market Action: 2018 Investor Roundtable

[Revhappy2]

I dont agree with the people here who think the stock price will take off after the Q3 deliveries/results. Stock price is not additive that way. If it was, then after the go private tweet and subsequent call off, the SP would have gone back to where it was after the Q2 ER.

It is not like only the longs on this thread know that the results will be awesome. If the longs know it, everyone knows it.

Also, you can argue that shorts spread FUD, media spread FUD, then you also argue that SEC is also is against TSLA. What next? The whole world is against TSLA, except for the longs in this thread. That sounds a bit like those anti establishment doomsayers, where they say everyone is wrong except themselves.

 

[KarenRei]

I dont agree with the people here who think the stock price will take off after the Q3 deliveries/results. Stock price is not additive that way. If it was, then after the go private tweet and subsequent call off, the SP would have gone back to where it was after the Q2 ER.

It is not like only the longs on this thread know that the results will be awesome. If the longs know it, everyone knows it.

Also, you can argue that shorts spread FUD, media spread FUD, then you also argue that SEC is also is against TSLA. What next? The whole world is against TSLA, except for the longs in this thread. In that scenario, I dont see how the longs can win.

I agree, and have pointed this out before. I expect a short-lived hop at Q3 deliveries, followed by it collapsing; a more durable jump at the Q3 report which only partly gets FUDded back; but much larger, sustainable movement on the Q4 deliveries/financial numbers.

 

[ACA Man]

I set a buy at below $200.

 

[davecolene0606]

Please tweet the SEC, there’s a lot of support for Elon and Tesla so far, but we need as much as we can get. Click on the link and tweet away.

What I said to SEC


“I own TSLA only damage to Tesla worse for its shareholders than blatant market manipulation executed by non stock holding short gamblers is the sack of 1 of most innovative CEO’s creating real wealth for shareholders while accelerating the worlds transition to sustainable energy”

Fire Away!

 

[KarenRei]

NYT usual hit piece. But even they could stop themselves from some comparisons:

Holmes of Theranos, banned for ten years for severe fraud in my eyes.

Mark Cuban threatened with two years for insider trading. Won in court.

Some hedge fund trader whose portfolio managers were insider trading (shocking!) got two years banned from managing money.

Musk, they go after for lifetime ban. This is personal as it always seems to be with Elon.

NYT finished it up by stating that hundreds of Model 3 have been seen in parking lot in CA! And that some need repairs and had misalignments and body gaps! Nice last paragraph.

Will admit am distressed by all this. The timing sucks.

Try to relax; it's a real - but not catastrophic - issue. Tesla's fundamentals remain the same regardless - and regardless of what FUD they spin.

Here, chill out to a song by Icelandic band Vök about Tesla's Autopilot system:

(Okay, not actually, but I like to pretend that's what the song's about "You're only going up tonight .... cruising on Autopilot ... loving the high life....")

 

[mongo]

Couldn't the SEC have gotten some more legal advice, or at least wait until the quarter was over, before filing a borderline frivolous lawsuit? The timing was entirely their decision and Elon could not have known that they'd rush to file the lawsuit almost immediately.

Usually the SEC is discouraging market manipulation - this time they actively engaged in it.

Referring to bold part: Perhaps, but the SEC would not file suit until after Elon turned down the deal, thus controlling the earliest they could do so.

 

[pyromatter]

CNBC reporting that:

• The settlement would have barred Musk as Chairman for 2 years
• Fined Musk and Co.
• Required company 2 new independent directors
• Required Musk neither admit nor deny culpability

 

[KarenRei]

CNBC reporting that:

• The settlement would have barred Musk as Chairman for 2 years
• Fined Musk and Co.
• Required company 2 new independent directors
• Required Musk neither admit nor deny culpability

Hmm, not nearly as bad as I was expecting.

 

[Fact Checking]

SCOTUS in Basic vs Levinson said:

In these early stages of the discussions between Combustion and Basic, Basic had no duty to speak, but once it spoke, it assumed the legal duty to be truthful.

But that's my point: Elon was truthful, not just in intent, but also in fact.

The suit alleges there was not even a verbal agreement to the extent represented by Musk (material elements named in the suit are $420 share price;

The SEC lawsuit is presenting a one-sided, self-serving, incomplete and mischaracterized list of facts, and uses a legal theory not supported by law in my opinion.

The SEC IMO misapplies the legal standard and then under that tenuous interpretation assumes meaning to Elon's tweets that isn't there and assigns an extensive list of duties to Elon that is not supported by law nor precedent. The only duty by the SC precedent Elon had was to be truthful, and that he was.

The SEC's complaint goes over an extensive list of obligations of Elon which he must apply to his speech, which even at a cursory glance only apply to much more advanced stages of buy-out negotiations. That is based on the flawed legal theory of the SEC - and I don't accept that theory, and I suppose Elon's lawyers are not accepting it either.

Furthermore, the SEC as a federal agency enjoining Elon from making factually true speech, just because they are not in the format they speculate is appropriate, is also in obvious conflict with the First Amendment.

 

[mongo]

So does trading halt if the stock falls 10%? I remember Facebook fell 25% on the day of its results, didnt it?

When trading has stopped today and we are below $250, we'll see a statement about Elon remaining as CTO/head of design and resigning as CEO.

The uptick rule #201 kicks in if the price during normal market trading drops 10% below the previous day's close. This prevent short selling at the big price and driving the SP down for that that the following trading day. No way for shorting to push the SP below $276 or so today.

The circuit breakers pause trading on large swings, percentage is based on stock type, and ranges are doubled pre-9:45 am and post 3:35 pm.

 

[Yggdrasill]

Hmm, not nearly as bad as I was expecting.

Agree. Musk and his lawyers must be fairly confident they can get a better deal or get cleared of the charges when rejecting that settlement.

 

[Fact Checking]

CNBC reporting that:

• The settlement would have barred Musk as Chairman for 2 years
• Fined Musk and Co.
• Required company 2 new independent directors
• Required Musk neither admit nor deny culpability

Incredible, so essentially the SEC wanted to implement the kind of nonsensical coup of 'independent' directors that shorts tried to get passed at the shareholder meeting to interfere with Elon's ability to lead Tesla? Who dictated the settlement terms to the SEC - was it Chanos, Spiegel or Left?

SEC stands for Short-seller Enrichment Commission, right?

 

[Fact Checking]

Referring to bold part: Perhaps, but the SEC would not file suit until after Elon turned down the deal, thus controlling the earliest they could do so.

It's unclear what Thursday was about: maybe that was a SEC deadline that Elon had to respond to.

 

[ggr]

Closed: Sep. 28, 4:55 a.m. EDT
Pre-market 276.50 −31.02 (10.09%)​

Notice the % drop vs Thursday's close? They'll stay just over the -10% trigger for the Short selling rule. They don't want to repeat their mistake from 2 weeks ago when they were restricted from shorting for 2 days.

(Bitches)

Ah, yes, but... not all the people who will trade are smart shorts. Some stop losses will be triggered, some margin calls issued, some squishy longs freaked...

 

[avoigt]

Lets think about this for second:

Here is a person that feels committed to the truth and does not sign a deal because it would create the impression he did wrong but he is convinced he did not.

The SEC is suing him because they believe he did not tell the truth at the time of his tweet. They tell him "either you sign here and leave the position for 2 years or we will make sure you will never be a CEO of a public company again"

His answer is that signing would be like telling not the truth. The SEC turns around and sues him for sticking for what he believes is the truth.

Also the SEC makes the claim to protect shareholders. If Elon believed at the time of the tweet that it was correct even if maybe it was not then he did tell the truth and not mislead anybody. He was maybe not right with his assumption but acted according to the truth.

When the SEC sues Elon and the SP falls 10% and later it turns out that the SEC believe they have been right to do so but did not win would that mean the did damage to the shareholders as they claim Elon did to them?

"Under the terms of the deal, Musk and Tesla would have had to pay a nominal fine, and he would not have had to admit any guilt. However, the settlement would have barred Musk as chairman for two years and would require Tesla to appoint two new independent directors, reported CNBC's David Faber, citing sources.

Musk reportedly refused to sign the deal because he felt that by settling he would not be truthful to himself, and he wouldn't have been able to live with the idea that he agreed to accept a settlement and any blemish associated with that, the sources said."

Apologize for posting a CBNC link: Tesla's Musk pulled plug on settlement with SEC at last minute

I would be surprised if Elon did not do a thorough review of the situation and a clear statement of his lawyers after they reviewed his evidence. Lawyers are paranoid if it comes to that situations. Elons replied after the news broke was carefully and well written from lawyers and I guess prepared up front. So this did not came with surprise.

They will have played out their options in a war room meeting and came to the conclusion with the backing from the board that its better for Teslas mission if they don't sign the agreement and go through the lawsuit to win it.

So all signs are pointing in the direction that this is a well thought through strategy and we should trust them that its the right thing to do.

They way this plays out here should give us confidence that there is more evidence than the SEC believes.

Its been a coincides decision and not a desperate and ill thought action from one person.

 

[azaz]

Elon is being a damn fool. That settlement was nothing. Now there’s a 50/50 chance he gets ousted smh.

This is exactly like the diver thing where Elon is convinced he’s right and keeps doubling down.

 

[Earlian]

No.

„I don‘t ever give up.“ E.Musk

 

[Todd Burch]

Elon is being a damn fool. That settlement was nothing. Now there’s a 50/50 chance he gets ousted smh.

This is exactly like the diver thing where Elon is convinced he’s right and keeps doubling down.

Also known as integrity.

Even if he were ousted in the worst-case scenario, he could still have major influence on Tesla's future. Just not as CEO.

 

[pyromatter]

 

[Intl Professor]

Semi-mod: @ggr is also traveling and about to pick up performance M3. Will do what I can to enforce the anti-gloating rule.

Does ggr stand for gloat goating rule?