-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
Expected residual value on leases is probably the best way to gain insights on what OEMs really think they EV transition will be like in terms of asset values. Reducing RV makers current offerings less competitive so the only reason they will drop it is because they believe that the RV is as high as it can be while still absorbing expected losses.
Lower RVs should also translate into lower new car prices in the future as the price differential will shift purchaser behaviour towards used vehicles.
Lower RVs should also translate into lower new car prices in the future as the price differential will shift purchaser behaviour towards used vehicles.
Subtle but important point. The deflating asset bubble does not cause a recession *unless* the asset values have been transformed into liquid money in some fashion. If it has, the drop in asset values translates to a drop in circulating money. If it hasn't, it doesn't.
In the housing crisis, the (faked) asset values of the houses --> the valuation of the mortgages --> the valuation of the mortgage-backed securities --> the valuation of the "collateralized debt obligations" made up of slices of MBS --> the valuation of the money market funds which put their money in the CDOs. The revelation that the mortgages were no good meant the money market funds were no good.
In 1929, the inflated values of stocks --> inflated values for overnight loans from banks to brokerages --> inflated values for bank balance sheets. So when the stocks crashed, the loans from banks to brokerages went bad, and the banks became insolvent, so there was a bank run.
For an asset bubble bursting to trigger a recession, there has to be a transmission mechanism between the asset value and the money markets. There are a lot of these. It's good when government OUTLAWS the transmission mechanisms, because it makes for a much more stable economy.
Right now, it might be people borrowing against stocks, like it was in 1929. Stocks drop -> margin loans are called in -> people have less money. But I don't see signs of big overextension there, though I may have missed them.
There is a feel rich and overspend (less savings balance) at the consumer level...
True.
Most people do not comprehend that the acceleration of EV production at Tesla will outpace the attempt of the incumbent industry by an order of magnitude. The VWs of this world will further fall behind and will not be able to catch up because they need to do first what Tesla did already and go through a learning curve building experience, know how and facilities as well as demand. The last year alone has been a prove that they do it slower. If thats true how can they then possibly catch up?!
Many still believe that their current ICE production facilities as well as capital strength are the factors that make the difference but this is not about how much resources you have. Its a new technology that you won't be able to compete with the tools of an old technology.
bhtooefr
Active Member
Only if the market is willing to buy cheaper new cars.
Another effect that can happen instead is that sales instead slow down, if used vehicles are perceived as superior to similarly priced new vehicles, and the automakers are unable to cut costs enough on a product that has the minimum desirable features to compete.
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Nasdaq 100 Futures - Dec 18
Real-time CFD
6,632.50 +101.50 +1.55%
07:59:39 EST Nov 25, 2018
TSLA running with the pack in pre-market action at 08:00 EST on the NASDAQ-100:
Have a great day, everybody.
CH3ERS!
Real-time CFD
6,632.50 +101.50 +1.55%
07:59:39 EST Nov 25, 2018
TSLA running with the pack in pre-market action at 08:00 EST on the NASDAQ-100:
Have a great day, everybody.
CH3ERS!
OK, I clearly got some of it wrong.
The trick is basically to lose as little as possible on the rollout. Rolling out a long option, you're paying for extra time value, and you want to pay as little as possible for the extra time value. That much I am sure of.
Working out exactly how to do this is not obvious to me -- it really looks like the time-value is higher near the money, and lower further from the money, so you should want to roll out when far from the money. However, the time value in out-of-the-money calls tends to be a lot higher than in-the-money calls, so I think you also want to roll the calls while they're in the money. So deep-in-the-money is the best place to roll them, I think.
On the other hand, with my short puts, I'm harvesting time value; I believe I want to roll them right at the money.
Schwab will let you invest your Roth IRA in whatever you want. (I believe Fidelity will too, but I haven't checked.)
Hmmm. I sell puts. This implies to me that I should roll my short puts out to the longest dates I feel comfortable with, to harvest the higher volatility present now, if volatility will decline...
But Tesla has a history of implied volatility spikes, so I'm kind of waiting for another one.
It will not be a supply issue but a demand issue. Lets see what happens after the US rebates are reduced and the Europe demand is filled in a quarter or two. Lower fuel prices will also have a big effect on reducing demand.
Let's also see what happens as Tesla's margins keep growing and thus it keeps introducing lower-cost versions, representing a more dramatic price reduction than the rebate reduction entails.
Let's also not get ahead of ourselves in assuming that the rebate will actually go away, or at least for that long. GM also wants it renewed / reformulated. Pretty much nobody likes it the way it is, at the very least.
Let's watch what happens when Tesla introduces leases. And new features. And more Tesla stores, service centre, and expands supercharger coverage. And entires entirely new markets.
Even if the above wasn't true, assuming that "steady-state" US + EU + China + everyone else demand is below 7k seems laughable to me. Even in a recession. Most of what Tesla has been filling in the past several months hasn't been reservations, but new orders.
Basically just allows for the removal of complex paperwork contracts between the companies.
Partly. For after-tax investments, the long-term capital gains rate is only achieved if you hold for a year.
But this is the bigger issue: For *after-tax* investments, you are taxed at the moment of transaction, when you close a position (sell your stock). But for *retirement accounts*, you're only taxed when you take the money out. (And for Roths, you're never taxed at all.)
So the result is that there's no tax penalty for excessive trading in retirement accounts -- none of it incurs tax at the time of trading. But there are major tax penalties for excessive trading in after-tax accounts. So if you're going to do frequent, speculative trading you want to do it in a retirement account.
This used to not be so much of an issue, because frequent trading would incur such high commissions that it was a terrible idea in any account. But commissions have dropped so much that it's viable now.
I think you should be able to get a TDAmeritrade account that lets you do everything you want.
I've found the IV, theta, and vega measurements to be useful for TSLA trading. I tend to ignore delta and gamma, which don't work for TSLA.
I believe the outcome would be that Panasonic would own a large share of Tesla, and Panasonic's battery bsuiness would be part of Tesla, but that Panasonic would remain independent (with their manufactured housing and consumer electronics businesses, etc.) Japan seems to love these cross-shareholding things.
But if they want to keep "Japanese ownership" of the battery business, then yes, they'd prevent it.
Over the past hour, TSLA has really dropped premarket, while the macros have remained largely unchanged or improved. TSLA now down nearly 1 1/2% vs. NASDAQ. TSLA premarket is now roughly breakeven.
Not showing strength today...
Not showing strength today...
It's negative now.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Poll
