-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
Are you certain he didnt get a new “nom de plume” on SA? There is a poster there whose style is strikingly similar although he denies being one and the same, tho quiet recently.
Has the WaPo been better with anti Tesla since Warren Brown the auto editor passed away?
MartinAustin
Active Member
Respected Mr. Neroden, if I might humbly offer a suggestion on how to deal with that dilemma... please refrain from posting stuff that has nothing to do with TSLA short-term... and the problem will go away by itself.
TSLA down but still outperforming Nasdaq so far.
Dan Ives (Wedbush analyst) currently on CNBC. “Does not think capital raise on the horizon. This has been a dark cloud on the stock.” Regarding a question on production of Model 3 - “In all of our checks, it is about 6,500-7,000 per week.” “As an auto, it is overvalued. But, we view this as a disruptive company.” Overall, of course, he was very positive.
OT
Musk was going to do franchised dealerships until one of the other VC investors told him not to and pushed him heavily not to. It's mentioned, indirectly, in an interview (he doesn't say it's aobut franchised dealerships but describes it as a one-way trap where once you go in you can't get out, which is obviously franchised dealerships). I think most people missed that interview.
He listens to other people already, at least sometimes. So you're out of Tesla before it went to IPO, I guess...
Musk was going to do franchised dealerships until one of the other VC investors told him not to and pushed him heavily not to. It's mentioned, indirectly, in an interview (he doesn't say it's aobut franchised dealerships but describes it as a one-way trap where once you go in you can't get out, which is obviously franchised dealerships). I think most people missed that interview.
He listens to other people already, at least sometimes. So you're out of Tesla before it went to IPO, I guess...
Efficient market theory is not always true from what I've heard. Some big name investors have disagreed with it. From what I understand it was big back in the 60s and 70s and 80s whenwhen compu began to take over and be used in trading especially. I think there is some truth to it, but more truth to the markets being manic depressives. Efficient market theory seems to assume there is no psychology involved with the ppl buying and selling so for me it leaves out too much for valuation perspectives. To me it just means bearishness or bullishness just shows up faster...but not that it's correct or not to be a bull or bear that day or as to how far it should go.Well, of course it does.That's how you make money in stocks. Read the efficient markets theorem... the only way to make money is to have better information.
Not always. Sometimes retail investors here at TMC know more than institutional investors like Chanos.
There are stocks I've held where I've gone "Huh. I haven't been able to pay enough attention. I don't feel like I really have an in-depth knowledge of this company any more." And I sold, because I knew I'd lost any informational advantage I once had.
OT
I don't know. I have a similar problem to Mr. Musk. I actually want to help people. In my case, I want to help people be well-informed and make sensible decisions. But people don't *like* that. I should just let people stew in their own bubble of self-reinforcing self-delusion. I really should.
And Musk should let humanity die off; they don't deserve saving.
(PS I don't usually feel that way, only when I'm in a bad mood)
OK.
I don't know. I have a similar problem to Mr. Musk. I actually want to help people. In my case, I want to help people be well-informed and make sensible decisions. But people don't *like* that. I should just let people stew in their own bubble of self-reinforcing self-delusion. I really should.
And Musk should let humanity die off; they don't deserve saving.
(PS I don't usually feel that way, only when I'm in a bad mood)
Last edited:
SwedishAdvocate
Active Member
Informative of sorts...
The phrase "don't paint with a broad brush" comes to mind. I hope both you and Elon can remember that in your more frustrated moments.
Also, personally, I'm more than happy to read or skim past your OT posts at my leisure and let the mods sort out what should and shouldn't belong here. I'm not one to turn away an obviously well-educated and informed individual when they're looking to share what is often very useful information to the readers of this forum.
Keep on spreadin' that wisdom.
OT.... having trouble not informing people... I really will try to stop being helpful now...
Here's the *theorem*...
* IF everyone has the same information,
* AND everyone has the same ability to analyze the information,
* AND everyone has the same market power (this is basically monopoly-type power),
* THEN nobody would be able to beat the market.
This is, of course, true -- it's been proven mathematically.
However, the premises are blatantly false. Everyone has different information, different abilities to analyze it, and different amounts of market power. (The efficient markets *theory* claims that the premises are true, which is ridiculous.)
Using the contrapositive, we find that,
* IF someone can beat the market, then
* EITHER they have better information,
* OR they have better ability to analyze information
* OR they have more market power
Retail investors never have market power. So the only way retail investors can ever beat the market is to have better information or better analysis of it. Which is an interesting clarifying point when investing: if you think you have a way to beat the market, ask yourself "What do I understand that most of these yahoos don't understand?" If you can't think of anything, you don't have a good investment.
There is a big difference between efficient markets *theory*/*hypothesis* (which is false) and the efficient markets *theorem*. Let me explain.
Here's the *theorem*...
* IF everyone has the same information,
* AND everyone has the same ability to analyze the information,
* AND everyone has the same market power (this is basically monopoly-type power),
* THEN nobody would be able to beat the market.
This is, of course, true -- it's been proven mathematically.
However, the premises are blatantly false. Everyone has different information, different abilities to analyze it, and different amounts of market power. (The efficient markets *theory* claims that the premises are true, which is ridiculous.)
Using the contrapositive, we find that,
* IF someone can beat the market, then
* EITHER they have better information,
* OR they have better ability to analyze information
* OR they have more market power
Retail investors never have market power. So the only way retail investors can ever beat the market is to have better information or better analysis of it. Which is an interesting clarifying point when investing: if you think you have a way to beat the market, ask yourself "What do I understand that most of these yahoos don't understand?" If you can't think of anything, you don't have a good investment.
Neroden, you know all too well the art is to know when to listen and when not to listen. Dealerships was not elon listening but simple facts, i.e. base principles.
SW2Fiddler
We Are Cognitive Dissidents
Who said,
“I would rather be optimistic and wrong than pessimistic and right” ?
Hmmmm
You know who totally doesn't sound haughty, self-centred, and just begging for karma to take them down a peg? People who constantly insist that they know so much more than everyone else, when talking to forum full of people who obsessively research the topic.
As an energy company, Tesla is extremely undervalued.
The “partnership” value with the boring company, and SpaceX (and other Musk companies)is also extremely undervalued.
Most analysts don’t have a clue and it’s been that way from the first day.
Yeah, the way he described it in the interview he was set to go with the franchises, resistant to doing anything else, and the VC pushed him hard with lots of arguments over the course of time. Is he giving people time to *make* those arguments any more?
Nice emotional reaction. I don't really care about that. Be angry at me if you like. Go ahead and ignore the real risk factors for Tesla because you think that an accurate article was a "hit piece". Have fun. Not my problem.
Model 3 secured (Belgium) LR AWD.
To make this on-topic: a friend has just also ordered (even before me), but unlike me he only reserved many months later than me. He received his invitation mail later than me, but still today.
So it seems Tesla is inviting everybody at once in Europe.
Please adjust your earnings estimates with my the 2K euro deposit.
To make this on-topic: a friend has just also ordered (even before me), but unlike me he only reserved many months later than me. He received his invitation mail later than me, but still today.
So it seems Tesla is inviting everybody at once in Europe.
Please adjust your earnings estimates with my the 2K euro deposit.
Zhelko Dimic
Careful bull
Ok, so you know, it hasn't got unnoticed that you've increased frequency of posts on subjects unrelated to market action.
Sometimes I wish to call a moderator on you, but hey, moderators seem to be lax in this forum, they'd probably let you go off easy
My guess is that the answer to that question depends on which time frame encompasses "any more". If "any more" is 3-6 months ago: probably not. He was too busy to listen to much of anything. If it's literally right now, then I'd wager he probably does.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Poll
