TSLA Market Action: 2018 Investor Roundtable

[SOULPEDL]

It would be great for Ohio and US if Tesla came to the state for many reasons but politics and unions could make it difficult to operate.

Ohio is not desperate and they can always get more military money courtesy of Trump before the elections. Therefore I would not count on any concessions.

It's been said here before... this factory purchase likely wouldn't happen unless the plant fully closes, people give up, town gives up, cobwebs form, then lowball an offer (if even needed) on Tesla terms - no union and state opens their Tesla sales channel.

I'm suspicious of this statement by Morgan Stanley who basically just downgraded Tesla in the same breath. Yes, Elon mentioned it when asked if he might consider it "next year" but that's a big maybe. I took it to mean "you never know" or "if the price is right... hmmm."

It's a setup IMO... Next headline from Morgan Stanley: "Tesla doesn't need the extra factory because they're running out of customers."

 

[SOULPEDL]

Off topic... I just got a nail in my tire. Service coming out with spare soon, and taking mine to Tesla Service... FOR FREE. They'll actually send it anywhere. Yes, the repair will cost something, but who does this level of service?

I keep loving this car and Tesla more everyday.

 

[AudubonB]

There is some disagreement on whether OH should even be considered a swing state anymore.

14 states were closer than Ohio in 2016, including "red" states, Georgia and Arizona. Only one Dem holds a statewide office in OH.

I'm sure the clueless MSM will continue to call OH, IO as swing states - but they are no longer swing states.

Ofcourse, in the unlikely event of Sherrod Brown becoming the Dem nominee, it would be interesting to watch.

Your statement makes little sense - that's not what being a swing state entails. The reference is to its status in US Presidential elections. Ohio has a 56-year record of picking the winner of the White House; one has to go back to 1960 when it voted for Nixon to find the last time it failed to hit it correctly.
Continuing back, it chose Dewey over FDR in Roosevelt's final, 1944, election; Grover Cleveland over Benjamin Harrison in 1892 and over James Blaine in 1884 (but it correctly went for Harrison over Cleveland in 1888).
So - choosing the winning side all but four times since 1856...I don't think Ohio is ready to give up its mantle as a swing state.

 

[Zhelko Dimic]

Off topic... I just got a nail in my tire. Service coming out with spare soon, and taking mine to Tesla Service... FOR FREE. They'll actually send it anywhere. Yes, the repair will cost something, but who does this level of service?

I keep loving this car and Tesla more everyday.

Most new cars (if not all) have road service assistance included for first few years. I had it on BMW, Mazda, Porsche, Tesla,...

 

[neroden]

OT

I also experience very large reductions in cold weather driving range, that are also easy to understand. In my case, I drive about 10 minutes to work, and then 10 minutes home. About one of the worst corner cases (even if common) for cold weather driving, as the heater(s) in the car are running full blast heating the battery and me. About the time everything is warmed up, I'm parking in the garage. Translates to about 550 wh/mile for me, instead of my usual 350-380 wh/mile (a Model X).

And doesn't translate at all to being out on the highway for hours. Same car and temps, 60 mile drive to our other house for an hour and a half, and the mileage is the pretty typical 350-380 wh/mile after driving for about 15 minutes.

Correct. Worst *long range* mileage reduction I've gotten is about 30%, in -15F weather or in an ice storm (where I had to keep the windshield heater on full blast).

But if you drive 10 minutes, park, let the battery cold-soak for an hour, repeat, you'll get horrendous mileage. (Did that with five stops one day, and it was sort of scary until I understood it.) That's just how it works. Luckily, totally irrelevant to range because you're obviously not going very far if you're doing that.

 

[Cattledog]

This selloff is now being compared to 2008 and 1987. It is unlikely to be over.

The question is: is it going to be an almost instant bounceback like 1987, a surprisingly fast recovery like 2008, or a horrible long dragged-out affair like the Panic of 1901, or worse, the Long Depression of 1873?

You're watch must have been spinning a lot faster a decade ago than mine!

 

[neroden]

OT

@neroden I know you don't put much belief in the POTUS influencing the economy.

But it seems the OI may actually be able to wreck it. With Mathis gone the child is even more unchecked.

What do you think?

It's certainly easier to break things than it is to have any sort of productive, intentional effect. I mean, the President certainly can make a big mess.

Perhaps the most substantial way the President could damage the economy would be to damage trust in the idea of a reliable, fair, evenhanded legal system and governmental system, since the economy uses the legal system as its underpinnings. Perception of an irrational, inconsistent approach to policy (one thing one day, the opposite the next day) hurts; perception of unpredictable demands for bribes, unpredictable blackmail, and unpredictable taxes hurts; predication that all that matters is "are you in the King's favor" hurts.

And yeah, he seems to be trying to do all of that.

 

[neroden]

OT

You're watch must have been spinning a lot faster than mine!

In 2008 I was expecting years of a bad economy so I didn't reinvest until late 2010. I missed the entire 2009 runup in the stock market and most of the 2010 runup.

So yes, fast -- compared to those 19th century depressions. The 2008 recession is officially measured at 18 months.

The recession started by the Panic of 1901 lasted for three years.
The Long Depression lasted for at least 6 years (and by some metrics, 23 years).

Those aren't merely historical artifacts: Japan had a recession called the "Lost Decade" or now the "Lost 20 Years" from 1991 to basically... still going.

 

[azaz]

so Neroden are you pulling out of the market now?

 

[SunCatcher]

OT:

If they somehow manage to cram it through by knuckling under to Trump, the idiot wall funding is going to be passed by the narrowest of margins and -- being deeply unpopular -- will help elect Democrats. It might even be rescinded.

LOL, the thought crossed my mind that if that wall got built, it would turn out to be a 100 year supply of 20' steel beams for the locals to carry off 1 at a time (all they need is a battery powered sawzall ), and use to build the bridges and overpasses they need for their own country's betterment. Thousands of miles of quality American steel, all lined up and free for the taking... What are we going to do; guard every last mile of wall? That wall isn't expected to cost billions for nothing; those steel wall columns would probably be quite valuable in the recycle/reuse metals industry.

</OT

 

[neroden]

so Neroden are you pulling out of the market now?

No. I'm almost 100% in selected individual stocks which I have individual reasons to stay in regardless of the broader market movement. Stock picker, remember!

I should really get out of the smaller amount which is in funds, though. It's in accounts which are annoyingly more paperwork, though, so embarassingly I haven't done it.

 

[EVNow]

OT :

Your statement makes little sense - that's not what being a swing state entails. The reference is to its status in US Presidential elections. Ohio has a 56-year record of picking the winner of the White House; one has to go back to 1960 when it voted for Nixon to find the last time it failed to hit it correctly.

That is not how I'd define a swing state. This time for eg., it would have been perfectly possible for Hillary to have won the presidency without winning OH. Same in 2000, Gore should have won but for supreme intervention in FL recount.

538 uses a less confusing term. Here are the tipping point states as 538 saw it a week before the '16 election.

Which Tipping-Point States Favor Trump?

But when Pennsylvania is the tipping-point — the second most-common scenario — it’s usually in a more comfortable Clinton win, suggesting she’s also held the Midwest. Ohio is irrelevant for her map, but she wins it 60 percent of the time. She wins Florida in 71 percent of simulations, and even Arizona is better-than-even odds of being hers.

Ofcourse, that didn't stop Clinton from spending lot of ad dollars in OH a week before the election - and nothing in MI & WI. Clinton lost OH by 8% - but MI, WI & PA by less than 1%.

ps : When historical realignments happen, swing/tipping point states change. MO used to be a swing state, not that long ago, for eg.

 

[neroden]

OT

It's always Florida, it's always goddamn Florida. It's always the swing state.

The electoral college is *so* messed up. Please support the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

 

[neroden]

Same here. But mine don't expire till next week !

Funny. Mine expire in January, February, and March (monthlies). Short puts. All but one of them will be profitable at expiration as long as TSLA is above $300, some much lower. (That last one needs $336.)

I know I can take delivery if I have to and wait out a recovery. I'm just trying to figure out how to minimize my margin loan if I have to...

 

[EVNow]

Funny. Mine expire in January, February, and March (monthlies). Short puts. All but one of them will be profitable at expiration as long as TSLA is above $300, some much lower. (That last one needs $336.)

I know I can take delivery if I have to and wait out a recovery. I'm just trying to figure out how to minimize my margin loan if I have to...

I've been trying to do daily trades by either writing calls at what look like intraday high and buy it when the SP comes down a bit (or buy a call at intraday low and sell it when SP goes up a bit). The idea is to make a few thousand as I watch the market. But today I overslept and tried this at mid-day with not so great a result. But I always trade the next week's options for in case I've to hold the option for a couple of days.

But once the work gets back to normal busy schedule after the holidays, probably won't do any short term trading.

 

[SteveG3]

This selloff is now being compared to 2008 and 1987. It is unlikely to be over.

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

The question is: is it going to be an almost instant bounceback like 1987, a surprisingly fast recovery like 2008, or a horrible long dragged-out affair like the Panic of 1901, or worse, the Long Depression of 1873?

I don't see the mismanaged leverage necessary to repeat 1929, but let's hope I'm right about that...

We don't have the somewhat-competent government of 2008; 1987 was an essentially technical blip and this seems very different; but at least we have better institutions and a better understanding of money than they had in 1873 or 1901...

Article is comically thin for it's suggestion that we are in the midst of market upheaval like '87 or '08. We haven't had anything like those drops thus far, and the article makes no case for stocks being very overvalued at current levels, or the economy being in a fragile place. Just a single data point is cited that doesn't necessarily mean the market will go down from here. In fact, the article says hitting this data point is on average followed by a 4% rise the next week for the S&P 500, and +3% the following month. Bloomberg takes that one data point that doesn't really support the doom/gloom thesis, and simply adds a quote from a person with a title meant to suggest 'authority' who expresses handwringing.

Could just be the equivalent of Bloomberg and others picking a data point without context (like the goofy "market cap/vehicle sold stat" among others) re Tesla and then inserting grim quotes from people with titles meant to suggest 'authority.'

fwiw, I wouldn't be surprised if the market sells off another 10% from here... but, I don't see evidence provided to support "Shades of 1987 and 2008..." as the headline trumpets.

 

[Alphacrux]

Article is comically thin for it's suggestion that we are in the midst of market upheaval like '87 or '08. We haven't had anything like those drops thus far, and the article makes no case for stocks being very overvalued at current levels, or the economy being in a fragile place. Just a single data point is cited that doesn't necessarily mean the market will go down from here. In fact, the article says hitting this data point is on average followed by a 4% rise the next week for the S&P 500, and +3% the following month. Bloomberg takes that one data point that doesn't really support the doom/gloom thesis, and simply adds a quote from a person with a title meant to suggest 'authority' who expresses handwringing.

Could just be the equivalent of Bloomberg and others picking a data point without context (like the goofy "market cap/vehicle sold stat" among others) re Tesla and then inserting grim quotes from people with titles meant to suggest 'authority.'

fwiw, I wouldn't be surprised if the market sells off another 10% from here... but, I don't see evidence provided to support "Shades of 1987 and 2008..." as the headline trumpets.

Everyone here is assuming good delivery numbers early next month. If that happens, what’s the likelihood of shaking off the macros? I’m assuming it will take a very good Q4 ‘18 report in Feb. for that to happen.

 

[SOULPEDL]

Most new cars (if not all) have road service assistance included for first few years. I had it on BMW, Mazda, Porsche, Tesla,...

... with the same aluminum 19" rim, in better shape than mine? I hope they lose mine!!!

 

[SPadival]

Tweet since deleted - A Tesla lead tool & die specialist / manufacturing specialist (as per his LinkedIn profile) posted a selfie outside China GF3 .. yay!

 

[Buckminster]

Results from poll are in. Median is around $530. Not bad, but I was expecting higher. Teresa May would choose $900. In the middle of the factions but completely unsupported by either cohort.
What do you think the true valuation should be today, free of manipulation?

1. 
   <$400
   5 vote(s)
   10.0%
2. 
   $400 - $500
   16 vote(s)
   32.0%
3. 
   $500 - $600
   11 vote(s)
   22.0%
4. 
   $600 - $700
   6 vote(s)
   12.0%
5. 
   $700 - $800
   5 vote(s)
   10.0%
6. 
   $800 - $900
   0 vote(s)
   0.0%
7. 
   $900 - $1000
   0 vote(s)
   0.0%
8. 
   >$1000
   7 vote(s)
   14.0%