Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

[M|S|M MYP]

So my buddy and I are in a heated debate. He’s of the opinion that’s it’s impossible to beat S&P long run and that if you do it’s just dumb luck. What would you say to him? Oh and on top of that he’s saying that it’s not dumb luck if you are a professional investor.

What is his definition of 'long run'? If you hold $TSLA for the next 10 years...i am 99.99999% sure your returns will be greater than the S&P. Sounds to be he's just bitter that he did not get into $TSLA when you did.

 

[Cherry Wine]

So my buddy and I are in a heated debate. He’s of the opinion that’s it’s impossible to beat S&P long run and that if you do it’s just dumb luck. What would you say to him? Oh and on top of that he’s saying that it’s not dumb luck if you are a professional investor.

"LOL"

 

[insaneoctane]

NHTSAs requirement for Tesla to classify an OTA as a "recall" is rotten. The OTA experience is heavenly compared to legacy auto's recall process. Everyone that has experienced a "recall" knows that it's not benign, you have to schedule an appointment, take time out of your day to drop it off, deal with advisors and paperwork, either wait or catch a ride home/work, return, deal with more paperwork and/or cashier, etc. Best case description is inconvenient, worst case is colossal waste of time. To conflate Tesla's OTA with legacy auto's recall process is biased BS.

 

[M|S|M MYP]

Here we go again:

This Is the Apple Car's Damn Fancy Roof

Dark, clear, or open at the push of a button. It's more than a sunroof, it's a sign the Apple Car is real.

www.motortrend.com

 

[Discoducky]

Did she say this? So, 400k this year? Is that how folks are reading this?

"GM said that the Silverado, Equinox, and Blazer EVs will all begin deliveries in 2023. The three vehicles will contribute to GM’s plan to deliver 400,000 EVs in North America in 2022 and 2023."

General Motors emphasizing faster electric vehicle launches after positive 2021 earnings

General Motors (NYSE: GM) is gearing up for a major shift in 2022 thanks to its evolving electric vehicle program, planning for record profit levels that could surge the company into a more well-rounded placement in an increasingly competitive sector. The automaker is preparing for faster...

www.teslarati.com

 

[larmor]

Sell your long term holdings?

Also cancel your cybertruck reservation, asking for a friend.

 

[XHabjab]

In US terms since the Buttonwood tree market makers have manipulated. technically the system(s) were not "set up to trust them". They were developed to improve liquidity and standardize tools of the trade. It is only by inference and political positioning that any reference to individual shareholders exists at all.
That may not be a popular view, but it is true. Worldwide financial systems were all developed to benefit financial institutions and institutional investors. I understand the previous sentence is absolute. A little more than 40 years ago I led a project for a very large financial institution to assess the structure and character of more than 170 individual financial markets, from the smallest at the time, the Seychelles to the physically largest, China (at that time they did not have a national system, and much intra-China trade ran on, believe it or not, bankcard debit settlement systems. That changed very, very quickly, but 1978 was the real beginning of their economic development).
That paragraph simply explains that the roelfo market makers and financial transactions is no monolithic at all. Almost none of it has much to do with individual consumers. There is a lesson that is unequivocal:

By design, participation in most securities or other financial markets does not have individual consumer benefits except from the typical Consumer Protection feature that are always designed to appear to have consumer benefits that are actually quite toothless.

The absolute classic example is in the present day. TSLA, represents more than half the total derivatives market. Why should that be? It si quite simple and transparent. TSLA is inordinately popular among active consumers who are self-directed. That means that those investors (US, if you please) are probably the most profitable single class of individuals. The result is that the TSLA individual investors devour large quantities of highly 'sophisticated' ...

note: I am using the 15c definition for the word:

sophistication (n.)​

early 15c., "use of sophistry; fallacious argument intended to mislead; adulteration; an adulterated or adulterating substance,"

...tools. Those tools are quite explicitly designed to generate r4venue from volatility, the more extreme the better.
Most fo us know that, but persist in trying to game a system designed to strip them of their money. In short, playing with derivatives as an individual consumer is roughly equivalent to using a 'system' to play slot machines. It cannot be successful long term and will not be.

Of course @StealthP3D is largely correct except for the purpose. Quite a few people here are using FINRA data:

Short Sale Volume Data

Short sale trade data is publicly available for off-exchange (OTC) trades in exchange-listed securities reported to a FINRA Trade Reporting Facility (TRF), Alternative Display Facility (ADF), or Over the Counter Reporting Facility (ORF).

www.finra.org

Given the interplay between DTC...

The Depository Trust Company (DTC)

DTC brings efficiency to the securities industry by reducing costs, immobilizing securities and making 'book-entry' changes to ownership of the securities.

www.dtcc.com

...FINRA and the reporting entities much short selling and consequent Fails to Deliver may never be reported at all.

This all sounds to be deeply conspiratorial. I don't really think that is true. factually very few people understand how this system works. Those who do are likely to be very, very 'nerdish' and some have very well developed analytic skills. Those few devise the various operational tools that end out being called 'bots', 'algorithms' or something else. Those are the automated tools that end out manipulating markets, quite often in ways that avoid regulatory reporting.
To my knowledge virtually no ostensible corporate leaders have any idea at all how this works. They only know they make tons of money until something goes wrong, whereupon they are perfectly equipped to deny responsibility, take their Nobel Prizes and/or $billions and retire into the sunset. In short, the system probably is mostly not corrupt but it is wide open for corrupt actions that are plausibly deniable.

This repeats regular warnings, that will invariably be ignored by people who are convinced they can beat the system. They're better off going to casino slots where they might at least get 'free' drinks when they lose enough.

I want to give heartfelt thanks for posting this. This message, and numerous others like it have given me my daily fix for learning, knowledge and understanding since I joined in 2018. I now know many things about markets, investing and TSLA that I would otherwise not have gained. Other topics too which are OT but not irrelevant.

You may notice the “Supporting Member” badge on my avatar header. I have not made the bazillions that many of you here describe but I’ve made enough to pay up for this simple title. Most of it from the knowledge and skills obtained right here.

Play on, @jbcarioca and do not sit down just yet.

 

[jerry33]

So my buddy and I are in a heated debate. He’s of the opinion that’s it’s impossible to beat S&P long run and that if you do it’s just dumb luck. What would you say to him? Oh and on top of that he’s saying that it’s not dumb luck if you are a professional investor.

Picking the right company and holding is not luck. Anyone can research a company. And it's well known that the investors that get the best returns are dead. So play dead with your shares and only sell if you need eat'n money.

 

[M|S|M MYP]

Did she say this? So, 400k this year? Is that how folks are reading this?

"GM said that the Silverado, Equinox, and Blazer EVs will all begin deliveries in 2023. The three vehicles will contribute to GM’s plan to deliver 400,000 EVs in North America in 2022 and 2023."

General Motors emphasizing faster electric vehicle launches after positive 2021 earnings

General Motors (NYSE: GM) is gearing up for a major shift in 2022 thanks to its evolving electric vehicle program, planning for record profit levels that could surge the company into a more well-rounded placement in an increasingly competitive sector. The automaker is preparing for faster...

www.teslarati.com

How does delivering 400k EV's contribute to profits? Oh wait...it reads "planning" for record profit levels....GOT IT!

 

[jerry33]

Here we go again:

This Is the Apple Car's Damn Fancy Roof

Dark, clear, or open at the push of a button. It's more than a sunroof, it's a sign the Apple Car is real.

www.motortrend.com

View attachment 763951

But will it also have sixteen cup holders?

 

[woodisgood]

NHTSAs requirement for Tesla to classify an OTA as a "recall" is rotten. The OTA experience is heavenly compared to legacy auto's recall process. Everyone that has experienced a "recall" knows that it's not benign, you have to schedule an appointment, take time out of your day to drop it off, deal with advisors and paperwork, either wait or catch a ride home/work, return, deal with more paperwork and/or cashier, etc. Best case description is inconvenient, worst case is colossal waste of time. To conflate Tesla's OTA with legacy auto's recall process is biased BS.

The fact that they have not created a new category of “fix” that clearly distinguishes it from the “recall” consumers are used to reveals their true intentions. They will do that when OTA recalls start affecting legacy auto more. For the time being, since it’s mainly Tesla, the impression that Tesla is constantly “recalling” vehicles is extremely useful.

 

[M|S|M MYP]

Only 20.....Bearish if you ask me:

 

[mongo]

NHTSAs requirement for Tesla to classify an OTA as a "recall" is rotten. The OTA experience is heavenly compared to legacy auto's recall process. Everyone that has experienced a "recall" knows that it's not benign, you have to schedule an appointment, take time out of your day to drop it off, deal with advisors and paperwork, either wait or catch a ride home/work, return, deal with more paperwork and/or cashier, etc. Best case description is inconvenient, worst case is colossal waste of time. To conflate Tesla's OTA with legacy auto's recall process is biased BS.

Tesla's main line updates are not declared as recalls.

Hear me out:
Before October 20, 2020, FSD was configured to full stop at stop signs. This is the legal standard.
Post Oct 20, assertive mode would purposely not fully stop at stop signs under certain conditions. This violates the legal standard.
NHTSA has an obligation to enforce regulations, laws, and standards as they currently exist.
Thus, once they were made aware of this rolling stop mode, they had no choice but to push for a reversion/ recall.
Since Oct 20 was a step change from legal to non-conforming, this reversion to the legal standard is a recall type event (versus just not being good at detecting stop signs). Recalls alert owners to a non-conforming condition (even though in this case, not an unsafe condition).

/me ducks and covers

 

[dhrivnak]

There's a reason Tesla management has a dim view of VTG. It's because Tesla management uses first-principles thinking like a guided laser to arrive at the truth of things better than most people can in their wildest dreams. Tesla's success is a direct result of thinking about thousands of things correctly and avoiding the temptation to use fuzzy thinking to arrive at non-optimal solutions

Sure, VTG might seem like a great thing to one with less ability to fully parse the necessary considerations, but that doesn't mean that person is thinking more clearly than Tesla management or that they have more information at their disposal than Tesla management or that Tesla management has a conflict of interest that leads to a non-optimal position. In a nutshell, here's why widespread VTG does not make sense:

An EV's battery must be sized taking all relevant considerations into account. Too big and the owner is wasting money on seldom used capacity while packing around excessive weight that reduces the efficiency of the vehicle and wears the tires unnecessarily quickly.

There are two primary use cases for VTG; (1) Emergency energy storage of each EV to draw upon in the event of power failure and (2) The collective storage of all EV's in a region to buffer grid demand and reduce the need for peaker plants. The least desirable place to put batteries for emergencies is in a vehicle that has an indeterminate location. If the EV's battery is sized properly for daily needs then by the time you get home and find your power is out, there is precious little storage available to use as backup power, especially if you don't want to disable the remaining functionality of your car during a power outage of indeterminate length that prevents you from re-charging it. For the reasons already given, it would be silly to oversize the vehicle battery to achieve a certain kWh buffer of capacity that you normally wouldn't have purchased, just for emergency needs. That money should be put into batteries purchased for that purpose that don't have to be lugged around everywhere you go and that are always available for use when the need arises.

VTG for buffering grid demand. This use case is no more compelling to the individual car buyer than the scenario for emergency storage because the primary benefit to the car owner is simply a small arbitrage on the price electricity. Any energy used for grid storage is not available for range. Therefore, the battery must be sized larger than optimal for transportation alone. If the arbitrage profit makes it worthwhile to pay for more batteries than you need for transport alone, then it makes sense to buy those batteries, using a loan if necessary, and mount them in a stationary location, not lug them around with you wherever you go.

In both of these use cases the common principle is that the car battery should be sized for transportation, not stationary storage. If either of these use cases appear to make sense, they should also make sense with stand-alone storage batteries. You are paying for that capacity in both dollars and weight when it's installed in the car. It's fuzzy incorrect thinking to say, "Yes, but I already have the battery, I might as well make it do double duty." That's because there is not a good correlation between when you have a power outage and when you have lower transportation needs. Nor is there a good correlation, for most people, between when the grid needs storage capacity and when you have reduced transport needs.

In short, don't drive around with your unneeded battery capacity. It wastes tire life, reduces handling, increases the cost of the car and reduces driving efficiency. It also puts a more expensive battery at risk in the event of an accident and doesn't ensure the extra capacity is available when it's needed.

Batteries are of great benefit to any grid system, but they should be sized for the use case, located where needed and reliably available.

I am sorry but I think you are REALLY missing the boat on this issue as many people consider this a very large benefit in emergency or back up situations. You state "If the EV's battery is sized properly for daily needs then by the time you get home and find your power is out, there is precious little storage available to use as backup power, especially if you don't want to disable the remaining functionality of your car during a power outage of indeterminate length that prevents you from re-charging it." But the reality is very different as people size their battery for weekend or vacation trips not their daily commute. 95% of the time I arrive home with a battery at 75% or better. And no I do not want a smaller battery as the Tesla is our primary trip car. Even if the car had outlets I could power the refrigerator or other essentials if the power were out. Then there is camping, tail gating and worksites where 120V and even 240V power would be very beneficial. If done right, as most Tesla owners also have solar, then I could likely run my solar in the event of an outage, keeping the house and the car charged. If Tesla were to sell PowerWalls I agree the need would be reduced, but most of the country cannot buy a PowerWall. And even with PowerWalls the use cases of camping, tail gating and worksite power are huge.

 

[Ipcress]

There's a reason Tesla management has a dim view of VTG. It's because Tesla management uses first-principles thinking like a guided laser to arrive at the truth of things better than most people can in their wildest dreams. Tesla's success is a direct result of thinking about thousands of things correctly and avoiding the temptation to use fuzzy thinking to arrive at non-optimal solutions

Sure, VTG might seem like a great thing to one with less ability to fully parse the necessary considerations, but that doesn't mean that person is thinking more clearly than Tesla management or that they have more information at their disposal than Tesla management or that Tesla management has a conflict of interest that leads to a non-optimal position. In a nutshell, here's why widespread VTG does not make sense:

An EV's battery must be sized taking all relevant considerations into account. Too big and the owner is wasting money on seldom used capacity while packing around excessive weight that reduces the efficiency of the vehicle and wears the tires unnecessarily quickly.

There are two primary use cases for VTG; (1) Emergency energy storage of each EV to draw upon in the event of power failure and (2) The collective storage of all EV's in a region to buffer grid demand and reduce the need for peaker plants. The least desirable place to put batteries for emergencies is in a vehicle that has an indeterminate location. If the EV's battery is sized properly for daily needs then by the time you get home and find your power is out, there is precious little storage available to use as backup power, especially if you don't want to disable the remaining functionality of your car during a power outage of indeterminate length that prevents you from re-charging it. For the reasons already given, it would be silly to oversize the vehicle battery to achieve a certain kWh buffer of capacity that you normally wouldn't have purchased, just for emergency needs. That money should be put into batteries purchased for that purpose that don't have to be lugged around everywhere you go and that are always available for use when the need arises.

VTG for buffering grid demand. This use case is no more compelling to the individual car buyer than the scenario for emergency storage because the primary benefit to the car owner is simply a small arbitrage on the price electricity. Any energy used for grid storage is not available for range. Therefore, the battery must be sized larger than optimal for transportation alone. If the arbitrage profit makes it worthwhile to pay for more batteries than you need for transport alone, then it makes sense to buy those batteries, using a loan if necessary, and mount them in a stationary location, not lug them around with you wherever you go.

In both of these use cases the common principle is that the car battery should be sized for transportation, not stationary storage. If either of these use cases appear to make sense, they should also make sense with stand-alone storage batteries. You are paying for that capacity in both dollars and weight when it's installed in the car. It's fuzzy incorrect thinking to say, "Yes, but I already have the battery, I might as well make it do double duty." That's because there is not a good correlation between when you have a power outage and when you have lower transportation needs. Nor is there a good correlation, for most people, between when the grid needs storage capacity and when you have reduced transport needs.

In short, don't drive around with your unneeded battery capacity. It wastes tire life, reduces handling, increases the cost of the car and reduces driving efficiency. It also puts a more expensive battery at risk in the event of an accident and doesn't ensure the extra capacity is available when it's needed.

Batteries are of great benefit to any grid system, but they should be sized for the use case, located where needed and reliably available.

To every example you present, you might have added "in a perfect world". There is no question that everyone afflicted by a power outage lasting an hour or a day would be better off being able to utilize any available energy from their car/truck. Houston, anyone? yes, some people's state of charge will be low, and no, the energy available will not suffice for fully powering your whole house--but most dedicated powerwall installations will not either. Keeping a few critical critical systems on-line--refrigeration, internet, HVAC pumps will do it. Only a generator can do more, and many/most people don't need, want or cannot afford one. I think the Ford truck's VTG capability will be a big differentiator for them, and sell a lot of trucks. I hope Tesla is not of the "not invented here" school on this one.

 

[Tes La Ferrari]

Only 20.....Bearish if you ask me:

View attachment 763957

At least 20 ? They already beat that by 6 last quarter.

How - pray tell - will I stop this shaking in my boots?

 

[zach_]

I don't think macro's will matter actually because TSLA has been getting weaker and weaker when compared to the macros.

The chart on TSLA is already starting to show a future wedge that points to the meeting of the uptrend and downtrend lines around mid March at around 905-915/share. Seeing how Wall St loves to make their trend lines reality through superstition, I'd say that's exactly where the stock is going to be in mid March before we get a clear uptrend going. And even then, the uptrend might be a gradual increase like how we saw in May through Sept.

It's worth pointing out that while QQQ is positive on the day, ARKK is down quite substantially. I know many here may not agree, but there still appears to be large overlap in investment philosophies for TSLA and ARKK. If we take today as any indication, it seems there is still quite a lot of fretting about P/Es, even if macros are looking up in the short term.

 

[StealthP3D]

Starts to become a little clearer why NHTSA would insist on calling OTA changes “recalls,” eh?

Clearly the term "Autopilot" makes consumers think it's something it's not, but the term "recall" perfectly describes what happens everytime Tesla does an over-the-air update.

 

[SmokyPeat]

I'm sure we'll see V2G from Tesla once the million mile batteries are more widely available. Right now the cars with LFP batteries are best suited to V2G. Those cars, I assume, are also currently Tesla's lowest margin models. Once the improved 4680 batteries are flowing, there will be less risk of herding the customers most interested in V2G toward the lowest margin vehicles.

 

[Prunesquallor]

Only 20.....Bearish if you ask me:

View attachment 763957

Note it doesn't say 20 “models”, it says 20 "vehicles". Plausible.