-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
That Ford commercial targets nervous Ford executives and employees more than customers.
What, a dead meth producer is building the future?
dqd88
Member
Sorry, you are correct.
This is the one I was thinking of:
Was going off foggy memory. But the visuals of Elon amongst all those men in the headdresses (keffiyeh) is quite a site.
@ZachShahan at CleanTechnica has posted some nice Tesla charts (not nasty). Fun to peruse when whiling away the hours before Q3 results come out ....
18 Nasty Tesla Charts | CleanTechnica
18 Nasty Tesla Charts | CleanTechnica
Buckminster
Well-Known Member
OMG - Breaking Bad to Paint it Black and set in the future - perfecto. For a split second, I actually wanted one!
NikeWings
Active Member
Given the default cycle of the mortgage market is so long/complicated, many synthetics (credit default swaps, bonds etc.) were created to hedge the risk, repackaged/retraded multiple times over and this is primarily where the shorts scored big.....on the synthetics. Auto paper is easier to liquidate (repo and resale is quick) and doesn't carry the same default risk, so minimal synthetics are created and therefore no significant market depth/trading liquidity. Even Subprime auto securitizations generally yield nicely and carry ample credit enhancement requirements to cover value changes, again dimishing the risk......making them decent long plays for balance.
anthonyj
Stonks
Attachments
NikeWings
Active Member
dqd88
Member
Something about this doesn't add.
Let's simplify to illustrate.
Let's say there's 10 shares at IPO for Long Corp.
John buys all 10 shares. He then lends 5 shares to short seller Bob. Sam buys said 5 shares from Bob.
End result:
John owns 10 shares
Sam owns 5 shares
Now there are 15 shares floating, instead of the original 10.
What am I missing?
TROW filed a form 13G/A on 9/30/18 showing it increased its holdings above 10% to 17,419,812.
http://ir.teslamotors.com/static-files/de556a87-543f-4261-b76f-e54e161dccc5
You are citing a secondary source, and truncated the right side of the page which shows those numbers were all as of 6/30/18. 13Fs for 3Q18 are not due until 11/15/18.
I suggest you do some research about SEC's requirements for filing form 13s.
dqd88
Member
So then, does a major shareholder vote force a short squeeze? It would seem so by your logic
dqd88
Member
This video proves that Ford is tone deaf and doesn't have a clue as to how the world is moving.
1) I'm really mad at Bryan Cranston for doing this. What a f*cking sellout
2) Ford says "So let the other guys keep dreaming about the future; we'll be the ones building it"
- Tesla is not dreaming, they are doing
- You'll be the one's building it? When? You're already way behind. Like waaaayyyyyy behind
Only if people that have lent shares feel like they need to recall and vote all of their shares.
Building the future in office furniture is a little bit different than automotive.
Your point is well made that the shorts are shorter-term (no pun intended) investors overall and they're much more prolific with trading. We also see methodologies used in the trading by shorts that promote downward pressure on TSLA on days when selling and covering are equal (mandatory morning dip, selling in big clumps to trigger other selling but buying back judiciously, testing market for weakness and when it is found in late-afternoon light trading increasing the selling to game the system and push TSLA down, etc.).
We also know that the methodologies used in short-selling at TSLA are harmful to the stock price because when those methodologies are hobbled by the SEC alternate uptick rule (that comes into effect when TSLA experiences a loss of greater than 10% during market hours in any trading day) the shorts lose a tremendous amount of control over the stock price and TSLA trades much better for us longs. We don't see the heavy-selling icicles in the chart the way we see them on non-uptick rule days, for example.
OTOH, I like to point out that when FINRA says 60% of selling was by shorts on a particular day (we've seen lots of 58% days lately), the actual percentage of short-selling is exaggerated because when a batch of multiple transactions hits the ticker, the whole batch is required to be marked as "short" if there's one short sale involved. We also know there are legitimate uses of shorting that have nothing to do with gaming the system (hedging TSLA convertible bonds, quick moves by market-makers that are followed by actual selling, etc.). I've done everything I can to figure out when FINRA says 60% selling by shorts, how much true shorting is actually going on. I've queried Ihor Dusaniwsky (he makes a living tracking short interest at TSLA and with other volatile stocks), and even Dusaniwsky cannot give me an estimate. He lacks the tools to do so. What I do know, however, is that the daily charts for TSLA look noticeably different when FINRA short-selling data shows 60% vs. when it shows 40% or 45%.
My point is that the prolific short-selling and covering at TSLA has a significant effect upon the stock price, but when FINRA says XX% of TSLA selling was by shorts that day, we have to realize the actual number is a smaller percentage. How much smaller is the big question.
Last edited:
dqd88
Member
Thanks, you seem well versed in this stuff. So it seems there's no way to short auto paper
CALGARYARSENAL
Member
Tesla acting very well all things considered. Congrats to those who held. I'm over on Twitter fighting TSLAQ the best I can ever since Elon started to act somewhat more rational. If he can keep his tweets rational and deliver a product, I see good things happening. If he lashes out again with an incredibly stupid tweet, I will be selling shares yet again and reconsidering my faith in the man. Good luck to all.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Poll
