Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

TSLA Market Action: 2018 Investor Roundtable

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Status
Not open for further replies.
In a general sense. The decision California took is a game changer. I would guess that, at some point in the future when Tesla ramps Solar Roof production at Gigafactory 2, the requirement will be expanded to include Solar Roof. I would also think that, the states that have adopted mandates similar to California's ZEV Program, would follow California on this front as well. Thoughts?

Red vs Blue: In the former states, citizens have the freedom to choose it if they want (and likely do not pull a permit to re-shingle their roofs); in the latter they can vote with their feet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ValueAnalyst
Exactly. Agreed. Thank you for bringing this up.

Assume shorter term, so say 4Q18, after weekly Model 3 production rate reaches 5,000 units, and Tesla achieves "sustainable" profitability.

For that state, I would set my "realistic value" around $500, considering volatile flexibility (so a range of $450-$550 fluctuation) I would say $600 would be a definite sell-point for me at that time.
 
It only became a good deal because of this ruling. I wonder how many politically connected people took advantage of this.
I have to disagree with you there a 40% discount on a company that was 100% not going to bankrupt while being a market share leader is always a good deal, imo. There was absolutely 0 chance that Musk let's SCTY go under and there was <1% that the merger would fail.

Free money all day
 
As it dips back down, it will be interesting to see if it as that floor just above 300 if it goes that low.

Being new to this game, can somebody give me a brief one sentence explanation as to how shorting brings the price back down?I would interpret it as profit-taking.
More selling drops the price, whether profit taking or new short positions.
 
Regarding the comment "All flash, no substance", I can never understand how they can call someone who is a self-made billionaire, who has built 3 transformational companies (Paypal, Tesla, SpaceX), no substance. If that is not substance, I don't know what is. There is no amount of flash to overshadow that amount of substance, imo.
 
Last edited:
As it dips back down, it will be interesting to see if it as that floor just above 300 if it goes that low.

Being new to this game, can somebody give me a brief one sentence explanation as to how shorting brings the price back down?I would interpret it as profit-taking.

Shorting one share of stock effectively adds a share of stock to the total pool of shares, which increases supply of shares. Basic rules of supply and demand apply and the SP tends to drop.

Longer explanation. Shorts are required to borrow shares to sell short. An owner of the share lends his share to the short seller, who then sells it to a second buyer, hoping to buy it back at a lower price. The second buyer is the actual owner of the share. The initial owner who lent the share does not technically own the share but owns rights that track the share price (and he can recall his share at any time and sell it). So in Tesla's case, with ~170 million shares outstanding and ~40 million shares short, effectively 210 million shares have been bought by investors, not 170 million. According to basic laws of supply and demand, if all the shorts covered the effective supply would drop by 40 million shares. When supply decreases, share price increases (even without the dynamics of a short squeeze).
 
My impression after the open is that shorts are working hard to bring this stock down. The reason is that traders are viewing $310+ as a clearcut range breakout that will attract traders big time. I'm actually surprised at how effectively the stock was brought down given where it rose to. However, TSLA is now dangerously close to the breakout point. It won't take much and there appears to be solid support just below.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.