TSLA Market Action: 2018 Investor Roundtable

[Unpilot]

Boutta chow down on some hats

Did we say today...no no it was this week it closes over 340...actually more like 350

 

[CaliBear1]

Boutta chow down on some hats

Here ya go SpaceCash. We want you around for awhile, you've captured the spirit of TT007!

 

[Oil4AsphaultOnly]

You've provided the best evidence proving me wrong. Thank you!

Now, I need to search through my data to figure out why my info differs from yours.

Okay, last off-topic note, since I wasn't crazy afterall. I was just relying on old data, which was also relying on geostationary satellites (22k miles away), and not leo:
Satellite Internet faster than advertised, but latency still awful (latency times of 638ms)

@ everyone else, that also explains why the direct-tv receivers are huge (not just a difference in tech), as the satellites are 220x times further away than the intended orbit of starlink.

Anyway, I found the correct thread for this discussion if anyone wishes to correct me further: Some starlink/satellite stuff (out of MA)

Edit: DOH!! I can't keep up with this thread! @BioSehnsucht, thanks for the thread links! I just saw your post after posting this.

 

[vigleik]

Well, I believe the 'common knowledge' about S&P 500 inclusion rules in this thread is wrong.

I went straight to the source. The S&P committee doesn't define the inclusion criteria for the S&P 500, here's their latest indexing methodology document, dated September 2018:

https://us.spindices.com/documents/methodologies/methodology-sp-us-indices.pdf​

S&P Composite 1500.

The sum of the most recent four consecutive quarters’ Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) earnings (net income excluding discontinued operations) should be positive as should the most recent quarter.​

(emphasis added.)

Note that the 'financial viability' definition is for the S&P 1500 index, not the S&P 500 criteria.

For the S&P 500 they are only listing the following:

S&P 500, S&P MidCap 400 and S&P SmallCap 600

Index Universe.

The index universe consists of all securities that meet the eligibility criteria for these indices as detailed in Eligibility Criteria.

Constituent Selection.

Constituent selection is at the discretion of the Index Committee and is based on the eligibility criteria.​

So unless I missed some other statement in their document their S&P 500 inclusion 'financial viability' requirements don't appear to be defined, i.e. it's within the discretion of the committee. This is why I think that the various stricter definitions that can be found online might be more representative of the rules than the S&P 1500 inclusion rule. It stands to reason that any firm included in the S&P 500 would also meet the S&P 1500 inclusion criteria, so the S&P 1500 rules are very likely a superset of the S&P 500 rules.

As to your "the sum of the last four quarters, as well as the last quarter, 'should' be GAAP profitable" claim, could you please provide citation where the S&P Index Committee defines those rules?

Great, you found the original document. I’m not sure why we disagree. The S&P 500 is part of the S&P 1500. So you need to satisfy the eligibility criteria for S&P 1500 to be added to the S&P 500, and hence the sum of four quarters plus last quarter being GAAP profitable applies.

Tesla satisfies the other eligibility criteria, by a large margin, so the bit you quoted about the S&P 1500 is the only remaining hurdle. Or is your argument that there is another more strict rule for the S&P 500 which they didn’t bother to mention in that document?

Edit: I see that I was supposed to reply in a different thread. Moderators, feel free to move my post.

 

[M3Rider]

Boutta chow down on some hats

Vid or it didn't happen.

 

[dqd88]

It seems many bears are short sellers due to entrenched emotions; they have financial stakes in the ICE world. For ex, perhaps they are a car dealer. They hate Tesla's biz model and fear it will hurt their business.
Their approach is to damage Tesla, fight against it. It's a reasonable reaction; try to harm something you hate. While in reality what they should be doing is hedging their possible decline by investing in Tesla, the way the Saudi's did. Someone should write an article on SA, with this contrarian, yet logical, view. Maybe it would help some of these particular bears switch up their strategy and go long as a hedge.

 

[Carl Raymond]

Good vibes:

Just got approval to manage project to install Tesla chargers at work.

From project proposal to budgeted in less than 72 hours.

And about 30 people waiting to test drive my Model 3.

Attached initial request, I was busy it’s sloppy writing have mercy.

Please keep us posted on how many of those 30 dive in. I suggested in another forum that the model 3 would go viral. Your situation is the best anecdotal evidence I've read.

Great stuff on the work based chargers. There should be some govt incentive for this - it reduces the total storage requirement if solar can be put directly into cars during the day time. (I treat it as a given that the grid is going 100% RE.)

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Great stuff on the work based chargers. There should be some govt incentive for this - it reduces the total storage requirement if solar can be put directly into cars during the day time. (I treat it as a given that the grid is going 100% RE.)

Just don't tax workplace charging, and reap the benefits of the benefit.

 

[Fact Checking]

Great, you found the original document. I’m not sure why we disagree. The S&P 500 is part of the S&P 1500. So you need to satisfy the eligibility criteria for S&P 1500 to be added to the S&P 500, and hence the sum of four quarters plus last quarter being GAAP profitable applies.

Tesla satisfies the other eligibility criteria, by a large margin, so the bit you quoted about the S&P 1500 is the only remaining hurdle. Or is your argument that there is another more strict rule for the S&P 500 which they didn’t bother to mention in that document?

Yes, that's the argument I made in my reply, you managed to quote it almost verbatim.

S&P 500 is their crown jewel, and selection is at their discretion, so they might have the kind of stricter criteria that various sites such as Investopedia mention.

I could (easily) be wrong. Was there any recent addition to the S&P 500 that didn't have 4 consecutive profitable quarters? Also, the addition of Tesla in May/June 2019 would falsify my claim too.

Edit: as @mongo pointed it out the recent addition of Twitter proves me wrong - so the rule is what you said.

 

[avoigt]

@jimmy_d gave a great interview with Rob Maurer on his speculation about Autopilot. An hour+ long informative interview. I learned a ton. Thanks Jimmy!

Tesla Daily Podcast

@jimmy_d

I want to thank you personally for this awesome podcast that was truly enlightening for me and I hope for many here as well.

Since I started to dig deeper into the whole autonomous driving approach and with it neutral networks years ago reading and listening to many people yours is by far the best explanation and insight I had the pleasure to listen to.

I said before that an amazing amount of smart people came here together to exchange and discuss thoughts and you are one of those that I was talking about.

Its now even more transparent to me why the EAP/FSD approach from Tesla is as I already with my half knowledge assumed and although still in the early S curve truly superior to other approaches in many aspects. Still a lot to learn on my side but you help me big time to point to the competitive edge and beauty of what Karpathy and team brought on the road.

Also understand yours and Elons excitement about what we can expect to come, a true game changer in FSD if all works out as experts believe it will. Needless to say that this creates another massive moat others do not really understand it even will exists. Also debunking nicely the Lidar paradigm that I was thinking about since a longer time.

I understand fully why some people believe Lidar is better and more safe but do consider this a dead end road for the points you made. It may coexists but will have limitations and may not be able to master situations Teslas approach will. Loved your point about that our roads that have been made for visual drivers from visual engineers to put it in my words which is very true.

The evolution did test for a few million years which is best for humans and they did not give us Lidar but Eyes. I believe there is a good reason for that. At the end of the day humans are able with their neural net and just a pair of eyes or cameras to master almost all situation so lets think about how it would be with 4 or 8 pairs.

The same is true for the data usage. Good reason why humans learn about 18 years before we let them kind of free on roads.

I believe more than ever that the stock evaluation triggered by autonomous driving should be alone already where we are today. ARK Invest has a similar bullish view and obviously has been educated well on that topic. Most people do not understand what is happening here and frankly its not easy to explain to friends and family although I love to.

Adding @ZachShahan here as I believe thats a topic that should be written about at CleanTechnica.

Thanks for taking the time to help all of us shed some light in the dark.

 

[Ellec]

Yes, that's the argument I made in my reply, you managed to quote it almost verbatim.

S&P 500 is their crown jewel, and selection is at their discretion, so they might have the kind of stricter criteria that various sites such as Investopedia mention.

I could (easily) be wrong. Was there any recent addition to the S&P 500 that didn't have 4 consecutive profitable quarters? Also, the addition of Tesla in May/June 2019 would falsify my claim too.

These are the recent additions, someone with a bloomberg terminal could check their Q's before they were added.

List of S&P 500 companies - Wikipedia

 

[EVNow]

Please keep us posted on how many of those 30 dive in. I suggested in another forum that the model 3 would go viral. Your situation is the best anecdotal evidence I've read.

Everyone I talk to at work are interested and all of them can easily afford a $50k car. Several, BTW, know I've been driving an EV for years. Infact some even drive Leaf because of that.

People near my home have been commenting on my 3 too.

I've been saying this for years. Middle Class Americans who have a house and 2 cars can easily replace one of the ICE with an EV. That is a market of some 50 Million.

 

[shootformoon]

These are the recent additions, someone with a bloomberg terminal could check their Q's before they were added.

List of S&P 500 companies - Wikipedia

Apparently, twtr did not have 4 quarters profitable.

 

[Ellec]

Apparently, twtr did not have 4 quarters profitable.

Twitters EPS four quarter prior to being added in June 2018

March 31, 2018 0.08
Dec. 31, 2017 0.12
Sept. 30, 2017 -0.03
June 30, 2017 -0.16

So the sum is +0.01, so they made it just.


Teslas last 3 are

Sept. 30, 2018 1.75
June 30, 2018 -4.22
March 31, 2018 -4.19

So need another 2 positive quarters (dropping Q1 2018 out of the sum), adding up to 2.47

Twitter Inc EPS Diluted (Quarterly) (TWTR)

 

[humbaba]

Everyone I talk to at work are interested and all of them can easily afford a $50k car. Several, BTW, know I've been driving an EV for years. Infact some even drive Leaf because of that.

People near my home have been commenting on my 3 too.

I've been saying this for years. Middle Class Americans who have a house and 2 cars can easily replace one of the ICE with an EV. That is a market of some 50 Million.

ahem. I have a house and three vehicles. Still working on getting an M3 -- it certainly is not easy despite meeting your criteria. Naturally, my house is modest, as are the vehicles, but such a glib claim deserves a reply. Not sure where you pulled the 50 million figure from either.

[edited to add: owning a house really doesn't mean anything without knowing location. There's a huge variation in value for what amounts to the same property depending on where its at.]

 

[WarpedOne]

Model Y will have FWD.
Model Y will not have regular front doors.

This is Tesla!

 

[Fact Checking]

These are the recent additions, someone with a bloomberg terminal could check their Q's before they were added.

@mongo pointed out the recent addition of Twitter, which company only had two consecutive profitable quarters - which conclusively proves me wrong! Point conceded, sorry about the distraction. I've edited my previous reply.

 

[KSilver2000]

I've been saying this for years. Middle Class Americans who have a house and 2 cars can easily replace one of the ICE with an EV. That is a market of some 50 Million.

Market size of 50 million in the US? As much as most of us on here wish Tesla success....let's be realistic.
You do realize the US population is about 330 million.

 

[heltok]

Teslas last 3 are

Sept. 30, 2018 1.75
June 30, 2018 -4.22
March 31, 2018 -4.19

So need another 2 positive quarters (dropping Q1 2018 out of the sum), adding up to 2.47

Twitter Inc EPS Diluted (Quarterly) (TWTR)

Or one positive quarter of 6.66 (I kid you not).

 

[lascavarian]

BUT (re. starlink): I do think that this is pretty irrelevant to Tesla (esp. market action), except with respect to Musk's overall wealth. Musk has been pretty clear that he does not plan to - at least any time soon - put Starlink connections in Teslas. The receivers are just too bulky; you need something the size of a large pizza box on the roof.

I think one of the primary goals of Starlink is as a dry run for Mars. Seems much of Tesla/SpaceX/Boring Co tech is developmental work for Mars. Starlink will be great in a planet without large oceans where for a modest expense a global martian comm link plus GPS can be established. I do think that some of the Starlink tech can be used in the vehicles but perhaps more in conjunction with terrestrial or inter-vehicle linking. I wonder if starlink could be used as a private GPS system at greater precision?