TSLA Market Action: 2018 Investor Roundtable

[gora321]

"Long means what he achieved in 5-10 years and not yesterday."

Please don't minimize investor concerns by labeling it as some sort of short-sighted rent-seeking. The fact is that the stock hasn't done anything in nearly five years, while NASDAQ doubled. Per your definition, with which I agree, that's long-term.

SP is not always right metric. Value is.
I'm trying to understand where we are in which phase of growth and than Tesla and Nasdaq growth is not parallel story. Therefor I'm looking much longer with expectation for 10-20x growth.

No more faith?

 

[ValueAnalyst]

TSLA five years ago today: $183,40
TSLA today: $271,78
Annualized return: 8%

And it's only that small because October 2013 was a local peak; the stock lost a third of its value by late November. But sorry that you find this to be some sort of disaster. BTW, try extending your horizon to six years, when the stock was $28...

First, is an 8% annualized return what justifies Tesla's insane volatility?

Second, my post says "nearly five years;" the high price on February 24, 2014: $265 per share.

Third, the point of the post was to show that even mid-term and long-term investors have suffered, not just short-term speculators, so one, two, three, four, and nearly five-year investors.

 

[mongo]

Please don't minimize investor concerns by labeling it as some sort of short-sighted rent-seeking. The fact is that the stock hasn't done anything in nearly five years, while NASDAQ doubled. Per your definition, with which I agree, that's long-term. This has nothing to do with FUD or living in fear; I'm stating facts. This habit of mislabeling any concerned bull as short/bear/FUD is not helpful.

Outside the Sept-Oct 2013 bump, TSLA is 2x over the last 5 years, ~15% annual return.
Going from the peak of that bump to the current low, it is up 35%, a ~6% annual return.
Returns when looking at recent highs, of course, is even better, and mongo expects to be back at those levels within a quarter or two.

NASDAQ was also not in startup mode creating 2+ new vehicles, so not sure why TSLA would be judged against that measure...

 

[KarenRei]

First, is 8% annualized return what justifies the insane volatility?

Volatility is the point. If you want guaranteed returns that track NASDAQ, then you shouldn't be buying individual volatile stocks. Volatile stocks may give you a crazy return sometimes, then none or a negative return other times. That's their very nature.

Second, my post says "nearly five years;" February 24, 2014: $265 per share.

Oh hey, we're custom picking the worst possible date range, now are we?

 

[EVNow]

TSLA five years ago today: $183,40
TSLA today: $271,78
Annualized return: 8%

And it's only that small because October 2013 was a local peak; the stock lost a third of its value by late November. But sorry that you find this to be some sort of disaster. BTW, try extending your horizon to six years:

TSLA six years ago today: $28,04
TSLA today: $271,78
Annualized return: 46%

ED: Yeah, go on, "disagree" with facts.

I bought stock in 2011 @26. It’s done quite well going 10x in 7 years.

 

[KarenRei]

−3.53 (1.30%)
Doesn't look like anyone is expecting a major Tesla announcement today.

But what about the lemur??? Won't someone think about the lemur???

 

[ValueAnalyst]

Volatility is the point. If you want guaranteed returns that track NASDAQ, then you shouldn't be buying individual volatile stocks. Volatile stocks may give you a crazy return sometimes, then none or a negative return other times. That's their very nature.

Oh hey, we're custom picking the worst possible date range, now are we? Great plan!

Again, you are missing the essence of my post, which is that many more than just short-term speculators have been hurt by the stock's long-term performance. Four years is a very, very long time for retail investors. Failing to acknowledge this is denying important facts... for what purpose?

It's important that we acknowledge why investors are frustrated: 8 out of 10 have not seen *any* return on their capital: ValueAnalyst on Twitter

 

[Chickenlittle]

"Short burn of the century" wasn't so coded, and we know how that turned into long burn of the century. There are many examples like that, but can you think of one example when any of the tweets turned out well for longs?

Stormy in shortsville comes to mind

 

[HG Wells]

−3.53 (1.30%)
Doesn't look like anyone is expecting a major Tesla announcement today.

But we are. Thats why its down.

Chief Editor
Shortsville Times

 

[brian45011]

Do you mean 'Q3 profit effect'?

GAAP requires costs be recognized when they are incurred. Since the settlement was agreed to in Q3, I expect Tesla's accountants will reflect the $20M cost in Q3. I don't see any wiggle room here on the timing under GAAP. Do you?

The settlement required court approval to be "final" and accrued under GAAP. It will be in Q4's Operating Statement.

 

[Joe F]

But what about the lemur??? Won't someone think about the lemur???

I do: Lemur's taste like chicken, which is what the shorts are doing playing with $TSLA.

Eat more Lemur.

 

[Heimdallr]

But what about the lemur??? Won't someone think about the lemur???

Limbed Excursion Mechanical Utility Robots?

 

[gora321]

Please. I'm focusing on Elon. He is so special, so different so unique. He need space to develop what he thinks it is good for all of us. We should not put him in chains. Failure is always an option but he is learning and upgrading.
I'm trying to understand that. Not easy always but that is our Elon

 

[Cohiba]

First, is an 8% annualized return what justifies Tesla's insane volatility?

Nobody says it is justified. The volatility and the low valuation are caused by sh*t thrown at the stock price through Twitter, general media and bullsh*t blogs such as SA. If it's undervalued it's because of those factors, not fundamentals or vision. No reason to b*itch about it here, go fight FUD if you have time to spare.

 

[Wooloomooloo]

Ask me that after 5-10 years. I just want that Elon be Elon and not someone else. If you are worried what SP will be after his coding than you are probably not long. Long means what he achieved in 5-10 years and not yesterday.

I see that FUD affecting you. Please do not live in fear what negative people will say. They will say it anyway.

I think his point is that any long investment made in the last 12 months or so in TSLA won't have made much, if any money right now.

Outside the Sept-Oct 2013 bump, TSLA is 2x over the last 5 years, ~15% annual return.
Going from the peak of that bump to the current low, it is up 35%, a ~6% annual return.
Returns when looking at recent highs, of course, is even better, and mongo expects to be back at those levels within a quarter or two.

NASDAQ was also not in startup mode creating 2+ new vehicles, so not sure why TSLA would be judged against that measure...

TSLA is not being judged against that measure by anyone sane or with real market or trading experience - it's simply a response to folks arguing TSLA is a good long stock to hold. If you're interested in continuous returns/growth and want to avoid volatility, it isn't.

There are 3 very distinct trading ranges in the life of TSLA. Pre April 2013. April 2013 to Jan '17 and Jan '17 to today. It has been possible to trade in and out of the stock (long) during each of those periods and make money, and if you bought in Jan 2013... well you're probably very happy.

For shorts, the volatility would also mean lot of return within those periods, as long as you didn't get caught between the steps.

The long thesis is that these steps will continue, so increasing your position anywhere within the trading range will bring a long term return - but it's hard to ignore than the S&P or Russell 1000 over the last 5 years have beaten TSLA with far less volatility. The question for the investor is, how long will that remain true.

 

[ValueAnalyst]

Nobody says it is justified. The volatility and the low valuation are caused by sh*t thrown at the stock price through Twitter, general media and bullsh*t blogs such as SA. If it's undervalued it's because of those factors, not fundamentals or vision. No reason to b*itch about it here, go fight FUD if you have time to spare.

Most everyone knows I fight FUD on SA/Twitter/other just like many others, but minimizing and labeling multi-year investor concerns as "bitching about it" is not helpful. SA articles likely do not have a significant negative effect on the stock in the longer term, defined as nearly five years. Twitter bulls have done an excellent job a neutralizing FUD in recent months, but the stock is now lower... why? The vast majority of customers don't care about FUD either; they are aware of the game. So it's not general media or blogs... but maybe repeatedly missed forecasts causing market participants to apply an extreme annual discount rate (pre-revenue venture capital investment type 25-30%) on management guidance?

 

[KarenRei]

Again, you are missing the essence of my post, which is that many more than just short-term speculators have been hurt by the stock's long-term performance. Four years is a very, very long time for retail investors. Failing to acknowledge this is denying important facts... for what purpose?

It's important that we acknowledge why investors are frustrated: 8 out of 10 have not seen *any* return on their capital: ValueAnalyst on Twitter

I'll repeat: if you wanted guaranteed returns that roughly match NASDAQ, a highly volatile stock like TSLA is not the stock for you.
If you want a stock that over the *long term* (> 5 years) has huge annualized returns but advances in stops and starts in the shorter term (< 5 years), TSLA is the stock for you.

That's all there is to this. Sounds like you poorly analyzed the risk profile when deciding what sort of stocks you were interested in. There is no guarantee that TSLA will perform well in any given year, or even multi-year period. The question is whether you believe in the long-term thesis or not.

 

[Ellec]

Looking at the stock price today or this week is not helpful in determining the value of the stock. Tesla is just exiting the hardest growth period so far with the ramp of the Model 3, which if failed could have easily meant it went under. Once we see the figures from Q3/Q4 signalling that it has been a success and the risks are minimised the share price will relocate to its intrinsic value, which should be somewhere between $600-$1000

 

[ValueAnalyst]

I'll repeat: if you wanted guaranteed returns that roughly match NASDAQ, a highly volatile stock like TSLA is not the stock for you.
If you want a stock that over the *long term* has huge annualized returns but advances in stops and starts in the shorter term, TSLA is the stock for you.

That's all there is to this. Sounds like you poorly analyzed the risk profile when deciding what sort of stocks you were interested in.

Yep, it's my fault. Everyone else predicted that we'd be flat for nearly five years, while I miscalculated the risks. I wonder what caused that?

Elon Musk on Twitter
Elon Musk on Twitter
Elon Musk on Twitter
Elon Musk on Twitter
Elon Musk on Twitter
Musk: This Is the 'Best I’ve Felt' About Tesla

My fault...

I'm done. Taking a break from TMC echo chamber. Going to go to YouTube.

 

[gringotuanis]

I bought stock in 2011 @26. It’s done quite well going 10x in 7 years.

Yes,but the point is it was up about 15x in 2014. Now you're down to 10x...some of us who bought in later might be up, but not nearly as much as without the Tweets.