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.
OT alert:
If I make a suggestion...

If your post is "Market Action Related", make your first line read "Market Action Related" or
"M A R" or just "MR". If it's Off Topic, your first line could read "Off Topic" or "OT". Skip a few lines and then make your point.

This will help those who only want 'fundamentals' stuff to skip your post. I have too many TMC tabs open already and get lost far too easily. Tho, then again, maybe that's bc I'm just a grumpy 72 yo fart ;^)

Peace on you all.

Totally agree with this approach, for market related posts, I think we don’t need to tag it, but for any post that is OT, it would help if the first line started with “OT”, including replies in a discussion that has drifted and not quite related to MA anymore.

tl;dr: Please tag “OT” to every post that has drifted, use your judgement.
 
Heh. It's part of an overall strategy. People who've followed the strategies I constructed know that I sell both calls and puts as part of my strategy against stocks and other legs of the options. Most should understand that $500 is probably an important resistance and a safe strike to use. Newbies should stick to selling puts on dips.

"newbies should stick to selling puts on dips". Unless I'm am missing something, this is the absolute worst advice one could give to a "newbie", (one who has little experience in market in general and certainly little to none in options).

Case in point: There was a poster here a few days ago that announced that he had sold 10 Jan 2020 and rued the fact that he had not sold 100. He did not mention what strike price he used. I asked this poster if he had sold these puts to open a position or close a position. I got no response, so I'm going to assume that he sold to open. As an example, let's say he sold the Jan 2020 $300 puts. For the purposes of this discussion, it doesn't really matter how much he sold them for. What really matters is this: He has sold someone the right to put 1000 shares of Tesla to him at anytime between now and 3rd Friday of Jan 2020. So if, for whatever reason, Tesla tanks below $300, the owner of the puts can exercise his right to sell 1000 shares to the poster. The poster will have to come up with $300,000. If the poster had actually sold what he wished he had sold, he would have to come up with $3,000,000. (remember, I chose strike of 300 for illustrative purposes) One could assume any other strike, but the message is the same. Taking this type of risk and losing could change someone's life in a very meaningful and painful way. JMO
 
"newbies should stick to selling puts on dips". Unless I'm am missing something, this is the absolute worst advice one could give to a "newbie", (one who has little experience in market in general and certainly little to none in options).

Case in point: There was a poster here a few days ago that announced that he had sold 10 Jan 2020 and rued the fact that he had not sold 100. He did not mention what strike price he used. I asked this poster if he had sold these puts to open a position or close a position. I got no response, so I'm going to assume that he sold to open. As an example, let's say he sold the Jan 2020 $300 puts. For the purposes of this discussion, it doesn't really matter how much he sold them for. What really matters is this: He has sold someone the right to put 1000 shares of Tesla to him at anytime between now and 3rd Friday of Jan 2020. So if, for whatever reason, Tesla tanks below $300, the owner of the puts can exercise his right to sell 1000 shares to the poster. The poster will have to come up with $300,000. If the poster had actually sold what he wished he had sold, he would have to come up with $3,000,000. (remember, I chose strike of 300 for illustrative purposes) One could assume any other strike, but the message is the same. Taking this type of risk and losing could change someone's life in a very meaningful and painful way. JMO
Newbies should stick to buying calls. Good post.
 
Did anyone receive information about the settlement method for the 2019 bonds?

Only holders of the bonds needed to be informed, so either Tesla went with the default settlement or the note holders are now informed and keeping the information to themselves...
Could someone remind me of the default settlement?
I remember I saw if Tesla want to convert it to stock, the SP needs to be > 360ish(one of the bear thesis), but they have the option to change that convert price lower.
Now the SP is <360, does it mean if Tesla doesn't say anything(ie: not changing the conversion rate etc.), the default will be settle with cash?
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: Artful Dodger
What do you guys will be a share price we could actually reach next week?

I guess anything from 357 - 385 is possible ceteris paribus (no new new).

Go away, Well-Known-Astroturfer.

It doesn't matter what you write. You've repeatedly come here to lie, misrepresent yourself, and to try to engage in (illegal, FYI) bear raid tactics. You're not welcome.
 
Go away, Well-Known-Astroturfer.

It doesn't matter what you write. You've repeatedly come here to lie, misrepresent yourself, and to try to engage in (illegal, FYI) bear raid tactics. You're not welcome.
Yeah. I HATE these guys. Somehow their quasi-positive posts wherein they attempt to get a feel for our shareprice expectations actually piss me off MORE than their outright bearish bs.

I would do on-sight violence to any one of these guys in real life. Absolutely despicable wastes of oxygen.
 
OT alert:


Totally agree with this approach, for market related posts, I think we don’t need to tag it, but for any post that is OT, it would help if the first line started with “OT”, including replies in a discussion that has drifted and not quite related to MA anymore.

tl;dr: Please tag “OT” to every post that has drifted, use your judgement.
It should be easy enough for the esteemed members of this forum to use other threads for OT.

Market thread : anything about SP, Options in the short term.

General thread : anything about SP in the medium/long term.

Market Politics thread : anything that involves partisanship or ideology

We know why people post here instead of the general thread. Its because we get so much traffic here. But once we start following the rule, we'll have good amount of traffic in the general thread as well.
 
Last edited:
Battery plant capacity in 2021:

China - 380 GWh
U.S. - 119 GWh
Thailand - 51 GWh
Europe - 43 GWh
Other - 36 GWh

They don't explicitly state the current numbers per country, but currently China has a multiple of the U. S. production.

Some of the big ones currently:

BYD - 26 GWh
Tesla - 20 GWh
Contemporary Amperex Technology (CATL) - 17 GWh
LG Chem - 12.8 GWh
Tianjin Lishen Battery Joint-Stock - 10 GWh
CBAK Energy Technology Inc - 8 GWh
Eve Energy - 7.5 GWh

Of those, Tesla is based in the U. S., LG Chem is based in Korea, the rest is based in China.

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
This is a particularly relevant topic to Tesla. I'm surprised no diehard fan has started a similar website to the Model 3 Tracker to show how battery production is due to expand over the next few years. If I knew anything about website development and had some spare time, i would definitely focus on building a site that can aggregate information on factory level production from TMC readers to forecast the growth in this area.

Real competitor expansion is completely hamstrung by increases in battery production. By tracking this at a granular level there is great insight to be gained in competitor plans.

Given Bloomberg's current reporting on M3 numbers, it would not be surprising if they are misguided on the volume numbers they are reporting for battery production.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cherry Wine
On general news, I check Vox (despite a dangerous promotion of hysteria over opioids, they're really extremely good overall)

Yes, VOX is good on "some" things (if you account for neo-liberal bias).
...

But Ezra's podcast is good - mainly because he calls great guests and allows them to talk without interrupting too much.

Eh... beware of Vox. I don't know which one I dislike more now, Electrek or Vox.

It's easy to get deceived when they keep saying stuff that sounds good, but sometimes it's hard to tell when they go off into crazy town. Not worth the mental effort to double check every time. Not getting into the specifics here.

But their podcast on Tesla/Musk was awful.
Yeah, check your Gell-Mann amnesia effect - Wikipedia
 
This is a particularly relevant topic to Tesla. I'm surprised no diehard fan has started a similar website to the Model 3 Tracker to show how battery production is due to expand over the next few years. If I knew anything about website development and had some spare time, i would definitely focus on building a site that can aggregate information on factory level production from TMC readers to forecast the growth in this area.

Real competitor expansion is completely hamstrung by increases in battery production. By tracking this at a granular level there is great insight to be gained in competitor plans.

Given Bloomberg's current reporting on M3 numbers, it would not be surprising if they are misguided on the volume numbers they are reporting for battery production.

I'll reiterate that one should remember that GF1 does not represent the only cells / packs Tesla will be consuming. Tesla will be consuming large amounts of local Chinese cell production capacity at GF3. So a sizeable bite of that Chinese production will actually go to Tesla.
 
A chief executive who thinks that they have the power to unilaterally revoke signed laws? Hmm, I think there's a term for this somewhere... ;)
The NAFTA treaty includes this section:

————————
Article 2205: Withdrawal

A Party may withdraw from this Agreement six months after it provides written notice of withdrawal to the other Parties. If a Party withdraws, the Agreement shall remain in force for the remaining Parties.
————————

By ratifying a treaty with this kind of provision, courts have previously found that the U.S. Senate implicitly gives the President the authority to withdraw under the provisions of the treaty. (The issue last arose when GWB withdrew from the ABM treaty).

The legislation that *implemented* the gory details of the treaty was H.R. 3450 - 103rd Congress (1994). Although a President can’t normally just “undo” a law, withdrawal from the treaty is covered in Title I, Section 109 which describes what happens when *any* party withdraws from the treaty (basically, the Undo key is pressed).

TL;DR - The President can unilaterally withdraw from a treaty when the treaty, executive, & legislature have ALL agreed ahead of time that he can.
 
Point well taken.

As I said - you have to understand what it means to have a neo-liberal ideological slant and adjust for that (here I'm talking mainly about discussions on public policy).

I've explained earlier my take on why liberal MSM has a negative view of Musk (and Tesla) - it started with him agreeing to be part of Trump's CEO board. It will continue to be so unless Tesla & Musk get more savvy about influencing media narrative. Its not just MSM - all manner of progressives too.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: neroden
I'll reiterate that one should remember that GF1 does not represent the only cells / packs Tesla will be consuming. Tesla will be consuming large amounts of local Chinese cell production capacity at GF3. So a sizeable bite of that Chinese production will actually go to Tesla.
I do not claim that. The general idea is to discern what is the maximum number of global EVs that can expect to be produced annually based on battery production - and how does that compare to EV demand. The closer these numbers are, the closer we get to the end of supply constraints by Tesla.

Obviously there are a myriad of factors that influence buyer decisions and the preference of one vehicle over another, but without knowing the basics of the supply and demand in the industry then we cannot make more detailed assumptions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dig deeper
I agree 100%. If one really wants to build wealth over time, buy stocks and hold; options are a loser's game. Short term trading (i.e. "trading shares") is also a loser's game. AMO.
Have to strongly disagree. Some uses of options are almost as safe as stock but more lucrative. For example deep in the money long term options with a distant expiration. For instance if you bought Jan 2020 calls strike 140 you can commit less money per share with almost no extra cost for time premium. Low trading volumes on a down day they can be bought for almost the price of stock less the 140 strike. That allows more leverage. Most option traders want a lot higher leverage. If you hold until near to expiration you can sell for very close to the target price and go out another year or sell some to convert some of the options to shares. Can the stock go lower than 140, of course but not likely. If the stock were to drop materially, paradoxically the option will actually develop a higher time premium
 
Status
Not open for further replies.