TSLA Market Action: 2018 Investor Roundtable

[sundaymorning]

View attachment 346284
Here’s the page. You decide.

Even your PC is spitting FUD

 

[steve3]

View attachment 346284
Here’s the page. You decide.

Scroll down on that same page, you’ll see today’s presser.
Edit: they just/still haven’t updated the top of the page you showed

 

[skitown]

View attachment 346284
Here’s the page. You decide.

Cache?

 

[EVNow]

Here’s the page. You decide.

Just means, they have not updated the ir.tesla page. Unprofessional, Yes. Conspiracy - No.

 

[MP3Mike]

View attachment 346284
Here’s the page. You decide.

Well it was never up there, so it wasn't removed...

 

[omarsultan]

Another indicator to consider is that when the vast majority here are feeling really good about an ER, the market often reacts differently. Sentiment here is very positive about this ER. We might not get what we expect even with a good ER. I am glad though that Tesla has given no indication about profits or cash flow since their comments at the Q2 ER. I like that silence.

Agreed. There is a lot of negative momentum around TSLA and a single positive qtr is not going to cause a massive pivot--its too easy to discount it as not sustainable, a result of accounting games, etc. However a solid qtr will spur some folks to push through the hype and noise and take a closer look at company fundamentals. I think a lot more will ride on the guidance Elon gives about Q4. At the end of the day, I think TSLA will need to string 2 or 3 more qtrs together to really turn the tide of negativity.

 

[MP3Mike]

ER Date disappeared from Tesla web site.

No it didn't. It was never listed as the top. It is listed below in the release section as well as in the email updates that they sent out to subscribers.

 

[AWDtsla]

Hopefully not spun to hard in the negative...
A car carrier with Teslas on it caught fire. Not sure why.

Tesla cars on semi fire

Ugh all these short trolls showed again. Clean up in aisle 5, please.

 

[MP3Mike]

Hopefully not spun to hard in the negative...
A car carrier with Teslas on it caught fire. Not sure why.

Tesla cars on semi fire

That looks like the Semi tractor caught fire. I can't tell if there was a Tesla over it or not. (It looks not to me.)

I would love to have more than just the pictures.

 

[dmckinstry]

ER Date disappeared from Tesla web site.

If so, it's back now. Did you scroll down to the bottom of the page?

 

[TDog]

The top 3 holders of Tesla shares (EM, fidelity and ARK) all increased their holdings in the prior qtr. follow the money.

I like ARK, but they are not a top 3 holder of TSLA. More like a top 50 holder.

 

[shootformoon]

According to Mark Speigal there wasn’t going to be a Q3 ER because of BK. So now it’s Q4 we have to be careful about?

To be fair Netflix was dropping a few of it shows, a sign their content isn’t doing well.

Yes, any current comparison between nflx and tsla makes my stomach turn. nflx is borrowing money to throw at tons of shows to hopefully hit some hit shows. tsla is printing money while innovating the new energy future. Please do not insult tsla.

 

[2virgule5]

Agreed. There is a lot of negative momentum around TSLA and a single positive qtr is not going to cause a massive pivot--its too easy to discount it as not sustainable, a result of accounting games, etc. However a solid qtr will spur some folks to push through the hype and noise and take a closer look at company fundamentals. I think a lot more will ride on the guidance Elon gives about Q4. At the end of the day, I think TSLA will need to string 2 or 3 more qtrs together to really turn the tide of negativity.

Agree. Integration to S&P500 will do it if it’s not coming sooner.

 

[tivoboy]

Same page:
View attachment 346285
View attachment 346286
This is a perfect example of how two different people can tell two different stories about the same thing. It all depends on how much you want to lie and be fake. The link obviously goes to what we've been saying all along.

Not sure if you're trying to indicate that I may be spreading FUD, but I was pretty clear to say - in response to ANOTHER poster who said the post was removed, that indeed the NEW POSTING about the ER date was still a link on the page, but that the top of the IR page was showing only "stay tuned". I don't see how that could possibly indicate trying to lie or be fake. It was a clear statement of facts.

People will see what they want to I guess.

Only price pays.

 

[Oil4AsphaultOnly]

Or perhaps your hubris is causing you to be willfully blind. I actually used to think like this for years. It's very text book and one-dimensional. A short is just a borrowed share, yada yada.
But when you hone in on the nuance, you start to see how it can be used as a weapon, used to manipulate SP.



Wrong. Fact Checking's illustration was perfect.

"shorting has diluted the pool of people who are long Tesla, and has put pressure on the price"

TSLA Market Action: 2018 Investor Roundtable
(please read fully and refute FC directly)

Both Fact Checking and Elon Musk believe that shorting has a "dilutive effect" (ie- not actual dilution, just the effect of dilution). I'll side with them. Much more logical. You're view is, with respect, naive, placates the bears, and does not recognize how shorting is used in the real world.



A simple thought experiment; indulge me for a moment.

Acme, Inc IPO's with 10 Billion shares.
John buys the 10B shares.
Nancy borrows the 10B shares from John's broker without John's knowledge.
Nancy sells 10B shares (how will this affect SP?) to Mark.
Mark's broker loans said 10B shares to Larry.
Larry sells 10B shares (what is affect on SP?) to Kim.
Rinse and repeat. Now Acme, Inc is a penny stock.

An extreme example. But let's stick with the principle where you believe that there's nothing wrong with short selling. If that's the case then you should be able to go through with this thought experiment and then see why, in principle, short selling is bad. In theory, with no limit on short selling, an infinite number of sell orders could be created. Obviously the number of potential Longs is finite. You do the math.



I never said they were created from selling. I said for new shares to be created in the open market it requires trading/a transaction. Does it not?
On the flip side, there can be many trades with fixed/limited shares. But I could be wrong

** for the record, I don't think that benefitting on the downside of a stock is bad or wrong per se; I'm just trying to understand better the truth behind actual market dynamics

No. I have no misunderstanding about how shorting can be misused. You've misunderstood what I've written.

Also, Fact Checking's illustration does NOT disagree with what MP3Mike wrote. Fact Checking's point was about the dilution effect of shorting. Not the character of shorting, which is what MP3Mike's illustration was about. That's what I'm trying to point out to you. I never disputed the effect of shorting, only that it's within the hedge fund's control. ALL the retail investors on this forum do NOT have the collective buying NOR lending power to affect the stock price in any way. If you saw their two posts as contradictory, then you've misunderstood what was written.

You're right that you never said "they were created from selling", but neither did I. It's a difference that matters here. You've repeated your misunderstanding immediately following in italics. "Normal" shorting shares are NOT created from the act of trading. They have to be borrowed from a current shareholder. Yes, they can be re-loaned by the new shareholders repeatedly, but the buyer at the other end needs to make the shares available for shorting as well. Naked shorting is different, has no such requirement, and IS illegal. If an exchange permits naked shorting, they run a huge liability risk.

Now a pair of shorts (normal ones) can buy and re-loan shares back to each other to depress the stock price further, but there's a cost to borrowing those shares and executing those trades (the broker collects both a lending fee as well as a trading fee), so at some point the cost to borrow isn't worth the potential profit of short-selling a stock. And yes, those shorts could sell and buy back the shares at progressively lower prices amongst themselves, but that strategy runs the risk of having a long add to their position to interrupt the cycle. Much like what happened today, when the shorts tried to depress the SP only to have long investors "buy the dip" to halt the fall and forced them to cover their short throughout the morning. The shorts broke even, while the long profited.

The reason that Elon's pissed (he used to be agnostic as he understood their market function) with short sellers, is because the shorts (Chanos et al) had become aggressive and have resorted to FUD, lies, and even illegal methods (insider trading) to depress and manipulate the stock price. It is the degenerative ability of money to encourage short sellers to misbehave (essentially showing the worst of humanity) that is pissing him off.

 

[tivoboy]

Scroll down on that same page, you’ll see today’s presser.
Edit: they just/still haven’t updated the top of the page you showed

Indeed, exactly as I posted in post 51163

TSLA Market Action: 2018 Investor Roundtable

 

[bdy0627]

The stock is trading near its 52 week low. Tesla’s narrative is being run by shorts/media. I’d say things are looking rather bullish to me. Trade em well.

I really think it's mostly about the overall market right now and less about ER's. The market is reacting to future economic effects of higher interest rates and slowed/halted growth. That's why good current ER's aren't the solution. If the market stabilizes, game on. So far, a lot of uncertainty remains. So, TSLA could have a really nice ER but the market may not reward it very much because of the situation. That's what I'm worried about. However, I'm leveraged in TSLA and hope we get a nice bounce.

 

[bdy0627]

There is a LOT of institutional money on the sidelines. The tweet/short drama has clearly held back investment, but the M3 is moving now and profitability should be here. Even a moderate just in by institutional money should rationally squeeze us back up over the ATH. Seems logical to me.

Big money is pretty cautious on the market right now. Lots of uncertainty. I'm not sure a good TSLA Q3 ER will be enough to offset the overall market uncertainty. That's my concern, not the actual Q3 financials, which I think will be solid.

 

[omarsultan]

Any opportunity to spin...

FYI Jeremy Owens is the SF Bureau Chief/Tech Editor for MarketWatch

 

[defc0n]

I really think it's mostly about the overall market right now and less about ER's. The market is reacting to future economic effects of higher interest rates and slowed/halted growth. That's why good current ER's aren't the solution. If the market stabilizes, game on. So far, a lot of uncertainty remains. So, TSLA could have a really nice ER but the market may not reward it very much because of the situation. That's what I'm worried about. However, I'm leveraged in TSLA and hope we get a nice bounce.

My thesis is Trump, Mnuchin et al will step in and come together with a China deal if the market sentiment gets too low. China needs it even more than we do. There has already been about a 7% hit from market highs. A nafta deal came through.

Interest rates are finally coming about to where they should be, hopefully the market figures that one out too.