# TSLA Analyst Coverage - 2018 Q3



## WaitingForTesla (Apr 8, 2016)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/789897608965783552
https://news.vice.com/story/why-are-investors-paying-millions-to-bet-against-tesla

Came across a news article with more financial doom and gloom. I have a love-hate relationship with the Vice organization. They do some good reporting and I admittedly watch their content for HBO, but much of their satellite content (that falls outside of the flagship content) is produced by 22 year old barely out college. I know several people who have or are working there and my bias is furthered by how poorly they pay their people. So take this with a grain of salt. That being said it's good to get other perspectives and this attempts to put in laymen terms the bears point of view.



> Over the past three and a half years, Tesla's share price has risen more than 400 percent. In addition to making co-founder Elon Musk even more fabulously wealthy than he already is, the company's ballooning value has put it in the crosshairs of short sellers, investors who bet that the stock is headed for a fall.
> Because Tesla continues to bleed cash, and needs to raise money in the bond market to finance its car-making and energy operations, investors are betting its high-flying stock will come back to earth, if not in the near term, then in 2017, when lower-priced competition from Detroit starts to hit dealerships. In the three months since mid-July, Tesla's share price has fallen roughly 15 percent to about $198 a share from $225.25 a pop.
> Since Elon Musk announced in June his proposal to merge Tesla and another one of his companies, the solar technology firm SolarCity, short-seller interest in Tesla has spiked significantly. At one point, the demand for shorting the stock was so high that people betting against Tesla were collectively paying*over $1 million a day* in fees in order to continue making their bet.
> The shorts took a bath last month when the stock price rose as investors scurried to acquire stock to be eligible for a November vote on Musk's proposed Tesla-SolarCity merger. But now the stock is beginning to *inch back down*, so the shorts are back in business... _Continue on link_


----------



## Jayc (May 19, 2016)

Sometimes you have to go back to basics to interpret and understand seemingly complex issues. In this case read about all the investors predicting doom and gloom for Tesla. Go through the articles they author and read into the phrases they use to describe Tesla. It will be very clear to understand that they do not want to believe that Tesla will be successful. That is where they start from and then they go on to explore different ways to justify their made-up point of view. Now at this point you'd be inclined to question or attempt to find out why they take this stand. Have a look at the profiles of most of these very vocal anti-tesla characters such Jim Chanos or Coal Murray, they fit into a certain profile of people nearing their end of working life and those who have done well for themselves with the world as it is today. Just as we cannot expect a car company doing very well in the ICE car industry to come up with an EV to better or kill ICE, we can never expect those investors making billions out of today's chaos to change the world. In fact they will be the first to take a stand against change and that is exactly what is happening here. It is very clear to see. Just go back to basics, that's the way to analyse.


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

Breaking news:

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1013519243030253570


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Yep. 5k model 3, 2k S + X.

Shorts will of course call it a burst rate.


----------



## Brokedoc (May 28, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> Yep. 5k model 3, 2k S + X.
> 
> Shorts will of course call it a burst rate.


Reports of employee leaks on Bloomberg suggest it was a true 5k Model 3s produced in 7 days. Supposedly when the 5,000th car rolled off the line, the factory erupted in cheer because there are counters throughout the factory.

Supposedly also, the 5,000th car didn't occur until after midnite so technically some of that production should be counted for Q3 instead of the end of Q2. Depends on when their official cutoff time is.


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

Brokedoc said:


> Reports of employee leaks on Bloomberg suggest it was a true 5k Model 3s produced in 7 days. Supposedly when the 5,000th car rolled off the line, the factory erupted I. Cheer because there are counters throughout the factory.
> 
> Supposedly also, the 5,000th car didn't occur u til after midnite so technically some of that production should be counted for Q3 instead of the end of Q2. Depends on when their official cutoff time is.


I read their shift hours actually meant 5000 was indeed Q2. Can't recall where...


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

Whether or not they met their targets, the Tesla team deserves a big round of applause for a job well done! Here’s to a phenomenal 1st half of 2018 and even more success in the 2nd half!!


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

C'mon Bloomberg! Your tracker is falling behind! 6K+ VINs registered; Tesla confirms 2Q production numbers. Let's go! Let's see what that tracker looks like now!


----------



## Wilson (Jun 2, 2017)

So TSLA at the open is up almost 20, trading in the low 360’s and then steadily falls to around 335 by lunch time. I thought the good production news and the ensuing short squeeze would make this a big day for shareholders. I’ve been investing for long enough to know logic doesn’t always apply or takes a little time, but in this instance I am pretty surprised. What am I missing? I thought the short sellers were almost out of ammunition.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

I'm likewise baffled by this. Is there some piece of TSLA news that I missed here?


----------



## Marcumar (Jul 20, 2017)

Equity trading isn't always logical, especially during one trading day. Use the opportunity to increase your stock and stay patient.


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> I'm likewise baffled by this. Is there some piece of TSLA news that I missed here?


Best indications I've seen are that investors do not believe the 5K rate is sustainable yet and that the last week of June was a one-time affair that took extraordinary effort.

I can't disagree with that assessment, but I also don't think it will be more than 3 more weeks before they hit 5K production routinely and then on to 6K.


----------



## BigBri (Jul 16, 2016)

An analyst downgraded the stock

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/tesla-stock-downgraded-to-sell-from-hold-at-cfra-2018-07-02


----------



## JWardell (May 9, 2016)

Stock market analysts never cease to boggle me.
Seriously, now they are complaining that Tesla's production rate is too expensive!


----------



## Tchris (Nov 22, 2017)

Looks like a buying opportunity this morning. Down over 5% as of 8:50 am Pacific time.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Tchris said:


> Looks like a buying opportunity this morning. Down over 5% as of 8:50 am Pacific time.


No kidding. Too bad I did my last purchase at the turn of the month, nothing I can spare to buy some now :Þ $315? Seriously!

ED: Okay, okay, I can afford a little more 
ED2: Dang, bank is closed. Fun, the disadvantages of being time-shifted from the US...


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

Now might be my time to pounce. Been flirting with the idea for far too long. I seem to hesitate and get nervous...which I shouldn't because I'm fully aware of the long game that owning Tesla stock would be. I have funding I've set aside to invest, but considered something like Vanguard...then I started having the Tesla stock idea and have watched on the sideline, and watched this thread (and others) but havent acted. Do it Love, DOOOO EEEEET!!!!! LESSSSGOOOO!!!! /endrant


----------



## JWardell (May 9, 2016)

The investors boggle my mind yet again. So much for selling some stock for a down payment, unless there's a huge rally on Thursday.


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

JWardell said:


> The investors boggle my mind yet again. So much for selling some stock for a down payment, unless there's a huge rally on Thursday.


I was fortunate to get my deposit money out when it was still at $360. The only good news I can muster today.

Dan


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

It’s the beginning of the end for the bearish thesis. Tesla’s a real car company now and is on the verge of making huge profits. A turnaround upswing can happen any time...

Like many investors here, I’m in it for the long haul. A few downswings in price won’t make me lose sight of the enormous potential of this company. And I believe that Tesla is way undervalued even today, given their current state. If there was no backlog demand for the Model 3, then I would be worried.


----------



## slacker775 (May 30, 2018)

If you read the various 'analyst' things, they are disappointed that Tesla didn't meet their *delivery* expectations. They dont tend to look any further than that and dont realize how many cars were produced, and delivery was held off til Q3 in order to generate a farther larger revenue pop. I anticipate Q2 revenue numbers to be around expectations or even below initial guidance. That will send people into a tizzy that Tesla is going to be bankrupt by October, etc. All kinds of sky-is-falling nonsense. Then Q3 numbers will be radically better and the stock will shoot up big time. The longer-term concern should be Q4 or 19Q1 numbers as they get through the reservation back-log. Will they saturate the market and not find new takers after that point due to cost, EV anxiety, ICE FUD, whatever? That's the real risk.

It is probably worth noting that there's been all this talk of ~450k reservations for two years. They've delivered ~30k cars and stockpiled ~10-15k and are fulfilling a bunch of reservations seemingly in the next couple weeks. If they are saying you can order now and get a car in 5 months or less (lets just forget the SR, standard trim configs for them moment), that's within 100k cars @ 5k/wk. Sure, a bunch of folks are waiting for SR due to the lower cost, different needs etc, and some folks cancelled their reservation for take your pick of reasons. We would be looking at ~150-170k cars delivered by Nov? Out of 450k reservations? Even if there are 100k SR-wanting reservations out there, those are the sorts of things that analysts should be discussing more, but they won't because they stay so far up in the clouds when 'analyzing' a company that they have zero idea of what's actually going on.

In short, I take any 'analysts' guidance with a ginormous grain of salt as they can often be poorly informed, putting on whatever spin they choose or have been guided to do, or whatever. All that it really tends to be is another data point worth considering. It is akin to all the sports talking heads making their Super Bowl picks at the start of season and never getting called out when the Browns don't make it yet again. They can say whatever they want because they dont get called out on it.


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

Dan Detweiler said:


> I was fortunate to get my deposit money out when it was still at $360.


Oh, well now we know what happened. Dan unloaded his portfolio. Thanks Dan!


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

I was thinking about taking some out at $370, with the hope of being able to buy back in cheaper at a later date. But I didn't because I really don't want to get into a sort of "day trading" mentality when I have 1% transaction fees (have not found a good deal on buying US stocks outside the US :Þ)


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

Ha!

Well, if my $2500 unload caused all that, then we have MUCH bigger things to worry about. LOL!

Dan


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

Wow, this kind of stuff is scary. I really, REALLY hope that Elon and the legal team at Tesla stand up to this crap and fight back.

Dan

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/07/05/a-sinister-cellar-of-the-tsla-short-story/


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Dan Detweiler said:


> Wow, this kind of stuff is scary. I really, REALLY hope that Elon and the legal team at Tesla stand up to this crap and fight back.
> 
> Dan
> 
> https://cleantechnica.com/2018/07/05/a-sinister-cellar-of-the-tsla-short-story/


They're doing the easiest way to fight back - by becoming profitable so there's no need for the capital markets. Oh, they'll use them to accelerate scaleup of course, when the rates are good. But a profitable company cannot be sunk by this strategy.

This time, Chanos bit off more than he can chew.


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

1.5 hours to go... I'm very interested to see what happens when the market opens today. Thoughts? Will it continue to slide? Immediately rebound?


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Lovesword said:


> 1.5 hours to go... I'm very interested to see what happens when the market opens today. Thoughts? Will it continue to slide? Immediately rebound?


Hopefully rebound at some point after opening, as I just put in a $3k buy


----------



## JWardell (May 9, 2016)

I'm not so sure it will rebound until Tesla officially announces the 200K situation and that deliveries were intentionally held up. One thing is very clear: there was no end of quarter push for delivery like they usually have.
It's possible that Tesla is waiting for a week so they can say "we intentionally held deliveries for 200K and then in just the first week of July we delivered 18 bazillion cars" etc


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Tesla will never say "we intentionally held deliveries", as that would come across as them trying to cheat the tax credit. But what Tesla will do is keep churning out cars at a high weekly rate** to show that it's sustainable. Wherein the Q2 numbers become irrelevant.

There were also a slate of FUD stories yesterday that are starting to come unraveled. Aka, there was no "800 S+X shortfall" due to Model 3 production, the "brake and roll" test actually *was* redundant, etc.

** The Model 3 line was down on 4 july for the holiday so there probably will be some degree of lower production in the first week of July.


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> ** The Model 3 line was down on 4 july for the holiday so there probably will be some degree of lower production in the first week of July.


I actually think it was down for a few days for the holiday and for routine maintenance. First week production should be very off. Don't look for full production to be back until next week, but then it's full steam ahead!


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

Does anyone else believe that the shorts are in full force now to bring TSLA down before end of Q2 as a last desperate attempt before Tesla becomes cash flow positive? That's the impression I got from Dan's posted article: https://teslaownersonline.com/goto/post?id=120149#post-120149


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

$ Trillion Musk said:


> Does anyone else believe that the shorts are in full force now to bring TSLA down before end of Q2 as a last desperate attempt before Tesla becomes cash flow positive? That's the impression I got from Dan's posted article: https://teslaownersonline.com/goto/post?id=120149#post-120149


Yes, that's the impression I've gotten - trying to get the price down before covering short positions. I'm also seeing anonymous newly-registered "Tesla employee" Twitter accounts suddenly popping up with complaints tagged to journalists, as the only tweets on the accounts.


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

$301!  I’m not going to sell... I’m not going to sell... I’m not going to sell... I’m not going to sell... I’m not going to sell...


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

$ Trillion Musk said:


> $301!  I'm not going to sell... I'm not going to sell... I'm not going to sell... I'm not going to sell... I'm not going to sell...


Sell? You should be buying!


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

Have you listened to this interview? Holy crap. Lies, intimidation, threats towards other entities to further push the short thesis. This has to be illegal. If Fairfax can do it, so can Tesla. Sue them for all they're worth.

Dan

http://techcastdaily.com/2018/07/04...professional-trader-jesselivenomore-07-04-18/


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

NOGA$4ME said:


> Sell? You should be buying!


Indeed. My reaction to it going down is frustration - not with the value of my Tesla portfolio (I only care about the long-term picture - aka once their ability to sustain profitably is undeniable and the short game collapses), but with the fact that if it goes down much further it'll tempt me to make even more purchases, when I've already spent more than I'd really prefer to this month 

I can't imagine why someone would sell in a market like this, unless they actually believe the nonsense about Tesla not being able to produce vehicles and "going bankrupt aaaaany day now".


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

NOGA$4ME said:


> Sell? You should be buying!


Dipping below $300 now. I'm tempted to buy more today.

Do we know when Tesla is announcing Q2 results?


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

garsh said:


> Dipping below $300 now. I'm tempted to buy more today.


And back above $300. How sure are you about your ability to time the bottom?


----------



## Bokonon (Apr 13, 2017)

garsh said:


> Do we know when Tesla is announcing Q2 results?


Not yet. Last year's earnings call was August 2nd, FWIW.


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

You guys saw this, right?

Dan

https://electrek.co/2018/07/05/elon-musk-reporter-bribing-tesla-employee-rich-tsla-short/


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

NOGA$4ME said:


> Sell? You should be buying!


Maybe I couldn't but my wife did!


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> And back above $300. How sure are you about your ability to time the bottom?


Very, very unsure. 

If I find out what day Tesla is planning to announce Q2 results, then I'll just buy the day before or the day after (I'm still trying to decide which might be better). One of those should be close enough to the bottom to make me happy.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Aaaand... we're back in positive territory 

If you guessed "$296,45" for the bottom, you win!


----------



## sandange (Apr 21, 2016)

already at 313.74


----------



## Bokonon (Apr 13, 2017)

I'm very curious to see how all of this whiplash between the 360s and 280s has affected short interest (if at all). Count me in for a good ole-fashioned ROFLcopter if short interest has actually increased.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

Bokonon said:


> I'm very curious to see how all of this whiplash between the 360s and 280s has affected short interest (if at all). Count me in for a good ole-fashioned ROFLcopter if short interest has actually increased.


I'll guess that short interest in Tesla has waned somewhat recently. People are starting to understand that the Model 3 is a very good car, not the piece of crap they first assumed it would be. Having driven one for the previous 7 weeks, I KNOW it's a GREAT car.

Collectively, the shorts are their own worst enemy. They tend to pile on when the price starts to decline. But they are generally more emotional and more erratic than a typical long (they will disagree vehemently with this). The first shorts to pile on tend to be more short-term traders with sizeable trades. So many of them are starting to cover their positions shortly after the shorts that are more momentum based start to pile on which can cause the price to start to rise and the later shorts to second guess their timing. Which might cause them to cover and to possibly do so at the same time that longs who have been waiting for a good entry to pull the purchase trigger. The net effect can be to "pump up" the price above where it was to begin with.

In any case, Tesla is a stock that's basically impossible to accurately value at any moment because of so many unknowns. The valuation becomes a function of the faith of investors. Although I've made my living in the markets for the last 25 years, I've never bought Tesla, it doesn't fit the profile of companies I'm comfortable analyzing and investing in. A lot of that has to do with the fact that Tesla is a financial threat to so many different interests. And I don't care to try to analyze what they might be doing behind the scenes to bring Tesla down and how effective their efforts might be.

In the short term, over the next year or so, I think we will see prices between $200 and $400. If things go better than I expect, you could see higher prices based upon investor euphoria (for lack of a better term). But I don't see a ton of near-term upside based on the fact that Tesla appears resigned to avoiding the capital markets until they can more fully prove themselves as being able to stand on their own, This likely means much slower expansion into new models and new markets. Of course, no one knows what future news will bring. Tesla could announce funding next week for a plant in China and the share price could soar to $500 on euphoria. Or, particularly bad news could explode the Tesla story and send shares plummeting to below $100. It's better than any casino, but not by much. And this is coming from someone who knows and believes that BEV's are the car of the next decade and probably beyond and that solar has a bright future.

If things go as planned, and that's far, far from a given, Tesla could be worth $3000/share or more. That would likely take a long time. I don't think the Tela longs fully appreciate the number and the size of risks beyond their control that they face. And I don't think Tesla shorts understand the very real opportunity Tesla has to become a hugely profitable powerhouse, in batteries, solar and BEV's.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

PNWmisty said:


> I don't think the Tela longs fully appreciate the number and the size of risks beyond their control that they face.


As a representative of the Tesla longs.... 

I believe their biggest risks are access to financial markets, and access to raw materials for batteries.

Battery materials are obviously very important to Tesla. It sounds like they've done a good job of securing supplies near term, and are actively attempting to secure future supplies, often through non-conventional means. They've been talking to some of the smaller mining companies that don't deal with the materials Tesla needs, and convincing them that the market is going to greatly expand and that they should be part of that expansion. Risky as heck, but Tesla knows that the existing supply is completely inadequate and that they need to do more work than usual to expand it. I see these non-conventional avenues as a sign that Tesla realizes that such an expansion requires more companies to enter that market, and they're helping to make that happen.

Borrowing money allows Tesla to expand more quickly than they otherwise could. While a fully-ramped Model 3 production line could make them profitable in the near future, it wouldn't bring in enough money to support developing Roadster2, Semi, Y, and a pickup, plus two more giga-car-factories in China and Europe, plus the ongoing expansion of the Supercharging network, and further development of solar shingles, etc. etc. Being able to borrow money at good rates allows for that kind of expansion. But the shorts have managed to make such borrowing very expensive for Tesla currently. Musk knows this. That's why he's concentrating on making the company profitable THIS year. If he can show a profit, that provides two paths forward: 1) They can lower the rate of expansion, funding it with profits. Then they are no longer beholden to the shorts' manipulation of their access to borrowing money. 2) Many in the financial sector will see that Tesla is making a profit, and stop listening to the shorts' cries of "the sky is falling". Tesla will once again have access to borrow money on good terms.

Worst-case scenario: when Tesla was in danger of going bankrupt while spooling up production of the Model S, Elon had a handshake agreement with Larry Page to have Google purchase Tesla to keep it in business. I bet Larry would put that offer on the table again if necessary. Elon has a lot of good (and rich) friends who can help him out financially if necessary. The downside is real, but I think there is a safety net if things get really bad.

So, I'm willing to go long on TSLA. The upside is enormous. This isn't just a car company. It's also an energy company. It is more than that too. It's a disruptive force in both automobiles and energy. We're at a position where we can see this happening. We're still at the beginning of this happening. That doesn't occur very often in one's lifetime - at least not one where we have this much knowledge of the company and can make a semi-informed decision to invest. So I'm all-in.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

One of the fun things about mineral supplies is that for the most critical ones, Tesla's needs may actually *decrease*, not increase, or at least only increase slowly - despite the fast-increasing production volumes. At least once they phase out the old 18650s, that is.

The 2170s have a staggeringly low cobalt cathode percentage of 2,8%, and are apparently en route to almost no cobalt.

I don't know how it fares with reducing lithium, but there's significant potential there too. A li-ion battery needs a theoretical ~17 g/kWh lithium, but traditionally has ~70g/kWh. So there's not as much potential for improvement as with cobalt, but there's nonetheless potential.

The "bulk" ingredients of course can't be reduced, and actually slightly increase. But they're cheap. Nickel is a commodity metal used in making stainless steels; forecasts are that EVs will only increase global demand 10-40% by 2025. And on the anode end, graphite can be synthesized from any hydrocarbon feedstock. The cathodes also have alumium, which is of course a commodity metal, and the casing is of course also alumium. I don't know what electrolyte they're using, but usually the rarest element in them is fluorine, and the world is hardly about to undergo a fluorine shortage. The separator membranes aren't a threat either.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Even Tesla Bulls Are Getting Uncomfortable
The shorts will try anything. Desperation is setting in.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

I figured they'd go for the "it's a burst rate" argument, but man, I didn't think they'd go _this_ heavily for it, or that they'd be this successful at getting it taken seriously. Wonder what they'll do in a couple weeks when Tesla can show that they can do sustained 5k? Can't imagine that argument holding. They'll surely switch to "Tesla can't be profitable", but when the Q2 report comes next month with Tesla's margins once again growing and SG&A / R&D / cost of revenue not growing proportional to volume (if at all), that argument will be increasingly difficult to hold. What then? Will they insist on that argument despite the numbers? General aspersions? Revert to the "competition hypothesis"? Give up? I'm wondering how their game plan plays out.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Tesla's Junk Bonds Are Sending a Powerful Message to Investors Right Now
This hits a lot of the shorts' talking points.

_At 88 cents on the dollar, Tesla's 5.3% notes due 2025 are hovering around the all-time lows_
_amid lingering questions on Model 3 production targets_
_Musk's increasingly erratic behavior has shaken the confidence of analysts at big firms_
_Tesla will need to raise a lot of capital but may have problems doing so._


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

From SeekingAlpha:

Tesla's New, Unsold Inventory Is Soaring, Again
Come on, summerfun. The build up of inventory this quarter is directly attributable to holding off on the 200k US delivery. The only mention he makes about the 200k delivery is that he's sure Tesla already crossed it in June. That's a convenient omission from the dialog that helps spread FUD.

If Tesla Hit Its Production Goal, Why Did The Stock Crater 15%?
I especially love the stock price chart that shows a narrow price range on the Y-axis, and covers only _two days_.
Oh no! The sky is falling!


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

My favorite Seeking Alpha provocateur, Montana Skeptic, has chimed in once again:
I Believe Musk Is Bluffing About Tesla Q3 Profits
He believes that Tesla will try to raise capital again in Q3.

It seems that Q3 results are going to be the turning point, one way or another. If Tesla shows an ever-increasing production rate for 3, AND is able to show a profit, then the shorts are going to get killed.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

A surprisingly pro-Tesla article in Forbes:

In Elon Musk Vs. The Media Saga, Tesla Model 3 Wins

It basically says that every time a negative article is written about Tesla, it's free publicity & advertising for Tesla, and potential buyers of the car (as opposed to potential investors in the company) don't care about the unreliable accusations - they like the sexy fast cars.


----------



## Bokonon (Apr 13, 2017)

garsh said:


> It seems that Q3 results are going to be the turning point, one way or another. If Tesla shows an ever-increasing production rate for 3, AND is able to show a profit, then the shorts are going to get killed.


Sounds to me like they're already moving the goalposts...

Previously: "Tesla will never be profitable, they lose money on every car they sell. Bankwupt!"
Currently: "Tesla won't be profitable this quarter. It's a bluff!"
After Q3: "Tesla was barely profitable this quarter. Not sustainable!"
After Q4: "Tesla has an absolutely absurd 200+ P/E ratio. Look out below!"
After 2018: "Spare change, please? Sir? Ma'am?"


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

Sheesh. Pre-market today has the stock up to $327.00 already. My broker was getting my account open Thursday and I didnt get in at 310 like I wanted...probably still worth it to get in now at 327, I just won't get as much as I wanted to get.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Lovesword said:


> Sheesh. Pre-market today has the stock up to $327.00 already. My broker was getting my account open Thursday and I didnt get in at 310 like I wanted...probably still worth it to get in now at 327, I just won't get as much as I wanted to get.


I think I'm going to wait for Tesla to announce Q2 results. I think the shorts are going to have one final, big push to drive the stock price down before Q3 results.


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

garsh said:


> I think I'm going to wait for Tesla to announce Q2 results. I think the shorts are going to have one final, big push to drive the stock price down before Q3 results.


I know this sounds bad, but I hope so. I'm so irritated right now because I was calling and calling on my broker Thursday. When I saw it hit 300 per I was frantically trying to get a buy in. I talked to him last Tuesday and he said I would need to open an account... even though I have one with him for mutual funds, I guess it's different for individual stocks. So, he dragged his feet and the account wasn't opened until Thursday afternoon. It was still around 310 at that time, an on into Friday, even Monday morning...but I didn't pull the trigger. Now I'm just watching it climb and feeling helpless and bitter.

Background: I'm a stock noob. This would have been my first venture into buying a specific, individual stock. I have mutual funds through my broker already... they're doing ok.

Should I just open an etrade account???


----------



## JWardell (May 9, 2016)

I think the Chinese Gigafactory signing news this morning is going to make a good impact, perfect timing with tariff wars.


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

garsh said:


> I think I'm going to wait for Tesla to announce Q2 results. I think the shorts are going to have one final, big push to drive the stock price down before Q3 results.


Respectfully question your prediction. Unfortunately, I have heard "one big final push from the shorts" or something very similar way too many times now. Their resources seem endless and it really does feel more like a personal vendetta against Tesla, not just simple greed. Despite my best efforts, I still don't understand how one segment of the market can have such a dramatic impact on the success or failure of a company. I have no doubt they will fail in the end and Tesla will come out smelling like a rose, but the lies, corruption and slander they will have had to suffer through just isn't right. Yeah, I know that's just my own naive self.

Dan


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

garsh said:


> I think I'm going to wait for Tesla to announce Q2 results. I think the shorts are going to have one final, big push to drive the stock price down before Q3 results.


Or it could work in precisely the opposite direction, like happened when they announced their 5k production numbers: let the stock build up based on anticipation of good news, and then FUD the good news with accusations of distortion and unsustainability.


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> Or it could work in precisely the opposite direction, like happened when they announced their 5k production numbers: let the stock build up based on anticipation of good news, and then FUD the good news with accusations of distortion and unsustainability.


Like I said above, their resources seem endless and as long as they continue to have the power to manipulate the information and thus the stock, I see this just continuing to be this bungy ride between $290 and $350. Depressing. Hope I'm wrong.

Dan


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Dan Detweiler said:


> Like I said above, their resources seem endless and as long as they continue to have the power to manipulate the information and thus the stock, I see this just continuing to be this bungy ride between $290 and $350. Depressing. Hope I'm wrong.
> 
> Dan


Not unlimited, but they can sure string it out for a while.


----------



## JWardell (May 9, 2016)

Dan Detweiler said:


> Like I said above, their resources seem endless and as long as they continue to have the power to manipulate the information and thus the stock, I see this just continuing to be this bungy ride between $290 and $350. Depressing. Hope I'm wrong.
> 
> Dan


I hate that I can only agree with you. Several times lately I am convinced stock will jump, and instead I just see more media misinformation. It's very frustrating and should be illegal. The media today no longer has any ethics.

Maybe I should make the most of the bungie cycle; buy under 300 and sell at 350. I really wish I had the million dollars to make that worthwhile...


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Dan Detweiler said:


> Respectfully question your prediction.


I'm ok with being wrong too. That just means I probably won't purchase additional shares, and I'll be happy that the shares I already own are increasing in value.


----------



## roflwaffle (Sep 25, 2017)

Lovesword said:


> I know this sounds bad, but I hope so. I'm so irritated right now because I was calling and calling on my broker Thursday. When I saw it hit 300 per I was frantically trying to get a buy in. I talked to him last Tuesday and he said I would need to open an account... even though I have one with him for mutual funds, I guess it's different for individual stocks. So, he dragged his feet and the account wasn't opened until Thursday afternoon. It was still around 310 at that time, an on into Friday, even Monday morning...but I didn't pull the trigger. Now I'm just watching it climb and feeling helpless and bitter.
> 
> Background: I'm a stock noob. This would have been my first venture into buying a specific, individual stock. I have mutual funds through my broker already... they're doing ok.
> 
> Should I just open an etrade account???


I'd open an etrade/fidelity/etc account and set up a buy limit order if you want to purchase individual equities. You may even be able to make that order conditional, eg, buy if Tesla drops to $280, but don't buy if it drops to $150 because it might suggest Tesla's going under. Not that I think that'll happen, but it could.

If you're not already doing the following, I'd also drop the broker, minimize investments in specific equities, and maximize investments in mutual/index funds through whichever account you set up. As an investment, buy and hold the market, not a specific company. You can still buy some company, but I would view that more as a bet than an investment. Also, check out the Bogleheads (BH) wiki and forum if you already haven't.

https://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Main_Page


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Yeah, I learned the hard way to set limits. Because I have to work through my bank, which has limited hours, and then has to go through a broker in NY, there's often a significant delay on orders. One of my recent purchases I requested from the bank when the stock was around the 320s... and then they made the request during closed hours when it was in the upper 340s... and then the stock opened in the 360s (*** purchase goes through *** ), falling immediately, and then over the next couple days falls to under $300. :Þ It's the only one of my TSLA purchases that hasn't worked great for me (was only ~$3k), and it taught me a tough lesson about setting limits.

Even still, I expect even that purchase to turn profitable "soon enough".  As mentioned before, the ability to drag down the stock through FUD is not unlimited. But yeah... figure out at what numbers you'd like to buy (or sell) stock, and set that up in advance.


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

garsh said:


> It seems that Q3 results are going to be the turning point, one way or another. If Tesla shows an ever-increasing production rate for 3, AND is able to show a profit, then the shorts are going to get killed.


In typical _Elon time_ fashion when he gave three weeks for the shorts to bailout, he really meant three weeks plus a quarter... heck maybe two. 

I should have known better!


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

What is this woman talking about? She's nuts.

Dan

https://www.cnbc.com/video/2018/07/11/journalist-elon-musk-questioned-tesla-reporting.html?play=1


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Dan Detweiler said:


> What is this woman talking about? She's nuts.
> 
> Dan
> 
> https://www.cnbc.com/video/2018/07/11/journalist-elon-musk-questioned-tesla-reporting.html?play=1


Oh yeah, Linette Lopez.
There was a big kerfuffle on the twitters between her and Musk.
Basically, she's in bed with one of the major TSLA shorts, and her reporting consists mostly of Tesla hit pieces.


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

Dan Detweiler said:


> What is this woman talking about? She's nuts.
> 
> Dan
> 
> https://www.cnbc.com/video/2018/07/11/journalist-elon-musk-questioned-tesla-reporting.html?play=1


How L-Lo can you go? She must be some car manufacturing expert stating that assembly lines ought to be rectangular like the rest of the industry.

News flash to L-Lo... A lot of folks admire Elon not because he is just different but that he's making a meaningful difference in the world. Such a fossilized boneheaded pawn for Chanos.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Her "source" is Martin Tripp, the Tesla sabateur who tried to frame his coworkers. Who it should be added was recently caught lying about not knowing how to code and then tried to cover his tracks by deleting his StackOverflow, Scribd and Adafruit accounts 

He's also the guy who a friend stated was planning to shoot up the Gigafactory. Want to take a guess as to what was the only other thing on his Scribd account apart from coding/sysadmin documents? If you guessed NRA publications, you win a prize! And his alibi for that was freaking hilarious.

Back to Linette: Ignoring that Tesla says that Martin confessed to receiving payment from her (and that her soliciting a crime would itself be a crime...). She keeps going around trying to get interviews with anyone who's had a bad experience with a Model 3. Basically she appears to have made it her life's mission to attack Tesla, by whatever means necessary.

She's also the person behind the... um... "interesting"... Chanos cufflink photo / puff piece. A fawning piece about his lovely cufflinks which includes a closeup photo taken in someone's middle class kitchen. Been wracking my brain trying to figure out how _that_ scenario came about.

She was also caught recently lying about having not been at the party with Chanos in Vegas, despite having tweeted about it at the time.


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

garsh said:


> Oh yeah, Linette Lopez.
> There was a big kerfuffle on the twitters between her and Musk.
> Basically, she's in bed with one of the major TSLA shorts, and her reporting consists mostly of Tesla hit pieces.


Oh, I'm well aware of the ongoing controversy. Just trying to figure out what the hell she is saying. She obviously...embarrassingly obviously has absolutely no idea what she is talking about. Cringeworthy.

Dan


----------



## slacker775 (May 30, 2018)

roflwaffle said:


> I'd open an etrade/fidelity/etc account and set up a buy limit order if you want to purchase individual equities. You may even be able to make that order conditional, eg, buy if Tesla drops to $280, but don't buy if it drops to $150 because it might suggest Tesla's going under. Not that I think that'll happen, but it could.
> 
> If you're not already doing the following, I'd also drop the broker, minimize investments in specific equities, and maximize investments in mutual/index funds through whichever account you set up. As an investment, buy and hold the market, not a specific company. You can still buy some company, but I would view that more as a bet than an investment. Also, check out the Bogleheads (BH) wiki and forum if you already haven't.
> 
> https://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Main_Page


This is exactly what most folks should do. Use low cost ETFs/Funds for most of your investing as it gives you broad diversification (like stuff that tracks the S&P etc). You can do individual company stocks as more of a value-add sort of thing. A little extra vote of confidence if you will, but if you want actual returns going the diversified route is the way to go. And I can't stress enough how you want to check out the expense ratio/load on them, which can sometimes be buried a bit. If you have a 401k for with a broad list of funds, you'll find some that are over 1% which doesn't sound like a lot, but that basically eats all of your gains. As an example, my wife had an old account from a prior gig that had about $4500 sitting in it. It was invested in expensive funds and had zero growth. I moved it to a few different Vanguard funds at like 0.04 expenses and without adding a single dollar, that account is almost $7500 after 2 or 3 years. Thats money sitting idle and almost doubling in a short period of time. Think of continuing contributions to your 401k at low expense with dividend reinvestment and that's how you get actual growth.

That is the one downside to owning Tesla stock at this point. We're likely a long way from seeing dividends which is a great way to get some extra growth without selling anything. It's the gift that keeps on giving.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

slacker775 said:


> This is exactly what most folks should do. Use low cost ETFs/Funds for most of your investing as it gives you broad diversification (like stuff that tracks the S&P etc). You can do individual company stocks as more of a value-add sort of thing. A little extra vote of confidence if you will, but if you want actual returns going the diversified route is the way to go. And I can't stress enough how you want to check out the expense ratio/load on them, which can sometimes be buried a bit. If you have a 401k for with a broad list of funds, you'll find some that are over 1% which doesn't sound like a lot, but that basically eats all of your gains. As an example, my wife had an old account from a prior gig that had about $4500 sitting in it. It was invested in expensive funds and had zero growth. I moved it to a few different Vanguard funds at like 0.04 expenses and without adding a single dollar, that account is almost $7500 after 2 or 3 years. Thats money sitting idle and almost doubling in a short period of time. Think of continuing contributions to your 401k at low expense with dividend reinvestment and that's how you get actual growth.
> 
> That is the one downside to owning Tesla stock at this point. We're likely a long way from seeing dividends which is a great way to get some extra growth without selling anything. It's the gift that keeps on giving.


If Musk supported paying dividends at this point, I'd vote my shares to any proposal to remove him from the board.  This company has no business paying dividends now vs. spending every penny scaling up as quickly as possible. I'd argue that if it wasn't for the short campaign against them, even the rush to become profitable would be shortsighted.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

I love this image from Bloomberg.
Click the picture for the article.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

The Shorts are still exerting all kinds of influence on media reporting.
Take a look at these headlines:

Will Tesla Be 'Tripp'ed' Up By A Whistleblower?
Tesla whistleblower says Elon Musk is lying to investors
Tesla 'whistleblower' tells SEC company misled investors and put customers at risk
Tesla whistleblower retains law firm famous for winning $22.5 million Monsanto suit
Tesla whistleblower tells SEC of alleged wrongdoing at Gigafactory
Tesla 'whistleblower' tells SEC company misled investors
Tesla Whistleblower Ups Ante, Making a Formal Complaint With the SEC
Tesla 'Whistleblower' Tells SEC Company Misled Investors, Put Customers At Risk
So, what *single* publication decided to publish a headline that was more in line with Tesla's messaging instead of the short sellers? If I gave you three guesses, you'd probably never guess it correctly:

Tesla's Alleged Saboteur Is Doubling Down
Come on, media! "Saboteur" makes for a much sexier headline than "whistleblower". But I guess we know who controls editing at most of the major publications, don't we.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Fun fact: most journalists these days are active on Twitter. Let them know what you think of their coverage, good or bad. Be polite


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

They deserve to be sued, especially Lopez & Tripp. Edit: INSIDER TRADING IS A CRIME.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Ok, I'm ready for a Tesla-positive article again.
How about this one?

Tesla's Advantage: Technology - "A Decisive Barrier For Legacy Carmakers"

Summary: Batteries & Software
Quotes:

_In the traditional industry, OTA capabilities reach little more than telematics and infotainment system updates..._
_...traditional OEMs have shown little effort to commit meaningful capital to battery technology._
Tesla has proved that they can build a competent car. Sure, their fit & finish may not be on the level with many of the older manufacturers. But if Hyundai/Kia can get to that level (and they have), then I see no barrier to Tesla reaching that level too. Probably within the next year or two.

But for companies that are used to outsourcing so many parts of their cars to so many different suppliers, where do you even start as far as redesigning & retooling to make the entire system a cohesive whole that can be updated over the air? Does GM suddenly take all of that business away from Harmon and design it themselves? How do they gain expertise in that area? Surely, they don't just let Harmon take over development of all the vehicle software, right? But Chevy used LG Chem to create much of the software for the Bolt. Do they let Harmon create it for some cars, and LG Chem for others? That's silly - why pay twice for the same thing. It's a bit of a pickle.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Most are going to simply be too risk averse to make change in a timely manner, and will see any change to "how things have been done" as opponents just "being different for the sake of being different" or "not being mature enough to appreciate why things are done the way they are".

I can't help but think back to the infamous example of Xerox PARC, which practically invented the modern computer (the mouse, GUIs, fonts, WYSIWIG text editing, ethernet, you name it), but commercialized / actively promoted almost nothing, because Xerox was so set in their ways. Copying machines had been such a gold mine for so long and everything being proposed by those Silicon Valley nerds at PARC sounded so pie-in-the-sky and radical, they just couldn't wrap their heads around not only the possibility of shifting, but the _fundamental need to. _So they imagined up all sorts of roadblocks as to why personal computers could never be a success, or at least not anytime remotely soon. And in the end it was other companies that really took PARCs ideas and ran with them. Particularly Apple. Which is now the most valuable company in the world.

Hmm, could there be a lesson in there somewhere.....?


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Elon really (messed)-up on twitter over the weekend. He called one of the Thai divers (a British ex-pat) a "pedo". He has since deleted all of those tweets. But there are going to be repercussions this time, I bet.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

I was pretty mad at him for that, as I had just written an article defending him against the ridiculous "he's a secret Republican" attacks... but then that transitioned into people wanting me to defend the pedo guy stuff, which as soon as I saw it my reaction was, "Ugh, Elon, can't you tell how this is going to come across." Felt like a parent whose kid just did something stupid - "you have such potential, why are you throwing it away over something so stupid?"

To be perfectly fair, Vern did attack him first. In an immature, false, and crude manner - making claims about Musk making the sub without request or input, getting kicked out by the military, and telling him to shove the submarine up his arse. I'd be pretty mad too if someone I didn't know got on TV and told me to shove my donated money and time I spent, on request, to save children, up my arse. But it's not Vern who's going to come out of this looking bad. Musk needs to learn that just because normal people fight and name-call on Twitter every bloody day doesn't mean that someone in his position can.

I look forward to his response. Because there really needs to be one. At least he deleted the tweets. Too bad it took a couple hours. Yes, "middle-aged white western male in Thailand" is a common profile for someone looking to procure children. No, making accusations based on profiling is _not okay_. Not for calling Mexicans rapists, not for calling Muslims terrorists, and not for calling old white western men in Thailand pedophiles And from Musk of all people, who has many times spoken out against profiling...

He needs to take a couple day vacation. His tone the other day was the most irritated and raw I've ever seen from him (not just in that reply). Being the first to work and the last to leave, sleeping on a couch, etc... it's great to set a good example, but the human body has limitations. And with all that's on the line here, all of the resources involved, he should come to terms with having someone review his tweets for potential PR disasters before posting them. No, normal people don't need to. But normal people aren't billionaire lightning rods involved in multiple high-value, world-changing ventures.


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

Yeah, I was disappointed too. I think the stock is taking a hit this morning because of it. I love to see it when he defends his companies but this just seemed very childish name calling. He just needs to keep doing what he has been doing with Tesla. Keep pushing out those cars. Show profitability and try not to get drawn into these petty, immature jabs at him that are only there to elicit those types of replies so they can use them against him.

Dan


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

He also responded to someone who questioned his sub's ability to work with "stay tuned jackass", and a lot of other stuff. So obviously feeling attacked, angry, lashing out, just in general miserable. Sounded like a person who needs some combination of a big hug, a lot of sleep, and some time away from the internet.

A cabin out in the Icelandic highlands for a week with Grimes would really do him some good.


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

Damn...stock way down this morning. This one, I hate to say, is completely on Elon's twitter feed.

Dan


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

On the upside, if it drops below $300 it triggers a buy from me


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

I'm in!!! Finally! Thanks and shout outs to Twitter, human nature, and all things emotional for causing knee jerk, now deleted, reaction tweets! Hugs to Elon, you fine, fine human being, which can manipulate stocks even easier than the short army lead by Thanos ...er.. I mean Chanos and his seemingly _infinite _abilities to use all kinds of illegal, deceptive and manipulative tactics.* A mere "pedo" comment in a tweet and look at that, a time to purchase specifically created for Love by Elon. It's a beautiful thing. Less than three man, less than three!! <3

So happy to finally be a "member" of the stock holders! 

*worth your time to read this link, which was even tweeted out by Musk himself:
https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/elon-musk-vs-short-sellers.118431/


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Lovesword said:


> I'm in!!! Finally! Thanks and shout outs to Twitter, human nature, and all things emotional for causing knee jerk, now deleted, reaction tweets! Hugs to Elon, you fine, fine human being, which can manipulate stocks even easier than the short army lead by Thanos ...er.. I mean Chanos and his seemingly _infinite _abilities to use all kinds of illegal, deceptive and manipulative tactics.* A mere "pedo" comment in a tweet and look at that, a time to purchase specifically created for Love by Elon. It's a beautiful thing. Less than three man, less than three!! <3
> 
> So happy to finally be a "member" of the stock holders!
> 
> ...


Nice timing. Beyond the latest "news" that nobody will remember a couple months from now, the stock is pushed down by the short theory that Tesla's only capable of 5k as a burst rate, not sustained, and that the Q2 numbers will be a tire fire because completed Model 3 sales were so low and there was so much in in-transit inventory. Buy on low expectations, sell on high ones.  Q2 report coming out in a couple weeks.

If Q3 comes in as profitable (by any margin), and Q4 sustains and grows that, I can't see how that could be interpreted as anything but the complete failure of the shorts' "Tesla can't produce" / "Tesla can't be profitable" hypotheses. I mean, they can switch to the "competition hypothesis", but it's pretty weak sauce, since Tesla will have reservation and order numbers on their side, and the "competition"... doesn't. They might push "Tesla can't be profitable with SR/non-PUP in the mix" for a quarter or so, but that wouldn't last long.


----------



## slacker775 (May 30, 2018)

A next likely tactic that the shorts would try to play would be that build quality is garbage. They'll find somebody to complain that their car was delivered in pieces in a box and told to bugger off or the like just to elicit big headlines. That's where it's good that the SC's appear to be delaying deliveries for some seemingly minor issues to stay in front of those things. Hopefully my car has no issues at all and I still get it Saturday!


----------



## Bokonon (Apr 13, 2017)

Couldn't agree more with @KarenRei's assessment of this regrettable situation. The disappointed-parent analogy perfectly describes how I felt as I watched those Tweets roll in, one after the other.... sigh. 

The fact that Elon's vision, influence, and identity are so tightly coupled with Tesla and SpaceX creates a big conundrum for those of us who are fans of the companies first, and the man behind them second. When the latter does something questionable, the burden of explaining his behavior falls on our shoulders, just as it does when Tesla misses one of its [own, highly optimistic] production targets. And that's a difficult position to be in when, the day before, we were triumphantly extolling Elon's bureaucracy-busting vision for how a company should be run or lauding his willingness to torque bolts on the production line. For many, an argument based on equivalence, regardless of validity, is more easily articulated and understood than an argument based on a Venn diagram showing that not-all-A-is-B and vice-versa.

As someone who burns the midnight oil more often than he probably should, I know firsthand how prolonged periods of sleep deprivation can lead you to a dark place, where emotional sensitivity increases, tolerance for adversity and capacity for cognitive dissonance decreases, and your willingness to adhere to social norms breaks down. You never arrive there all at once: much like the proverbial boiled frog, you get there one step at a time, with no sense of how far you've strayed until you realize you've gone too far.

I hope Elon has a chance to unplug, regroup, apologize, and refocus. The fact that he deleted those tweets -- eventually -- makes me hopeful that he has already begun this process.


----------



## @gravityrydr (Apr 12, 2016)

This latest series of tweets really has me shaking my head and thinking WTF dude. His twitter feed has been entertaining but lately, he's been sliding toward tech bro territory. He really needs to get someone to filter his tweets or at least bounce some back to him and ask do you really need to say this? Or maybe just give me a heads up so I can cover my position on my stock.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Lovesword said:


> ...the short army lead by Thanos ...er.. I mean Chanos...


----------



## Bokonon (Apr 13, 2017)




----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

Surely this should have SOME positive impact on stock prices. 30% profit margins? Yeah baby!

Oh, and in the comments Monro says over 30% profits for long range and predicts "double digit" profits on the standard range.


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

Seeing as how I'm not the best at photoshop...nor at posting GIFs apparently (/hat tip @garsh ), I'm just going to leave these here and see what transpires...


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

Lovesword said:


> Seeing as how I'm not the best at photoshop...nor at posting GIFs apparently (/hat tip @garsh ), I'm just going to leave these here and see what transpires...


(Yes I'm quoting myself...deal with it)

That hair though. Like a tsunami of grey Brillo resting atop that baby butt pink skin, so freshly exposed by the escaping follicles (the taste of freedom, too much to resist...even though it meant plucking ones self and falling to the floor of a swanky Washington D.C. bordello full of "those dirty immigrants" and what I can only assume that (incoming Star Wars nerdism) Anakin and Obi Wan refer to as Younglings)) to the years of sun, cigarette smoke and outright LIES that await it until it also dies and becomes a blotched and cancer spotted mess of wrinkles and regret... hoping that somehow the children of this wretch of a man's offspring will also have hair that then becomes their offspring and succeeds them to achieve higher ranks of being (spoiler alert) <gasp> another racist troglodyte...or at least a Kardashian. This majestic hair...It's brilliant, and sad... it's Point Blank, but also so Statlor and Waldorf. It's 'MERICA. And also, somehow, both sides of Batman's Two Face. 
If you've made it this far, thanks...I have zero point to all of this. 
I just felt like being creative, vengeful and vent-ful. Hope you don't mind.


----------



## Bokonon (Apr 13, 2017)

Lovesword said:


> That hair though. Like a tsunami of grey Brillo resting atop that baby butt pink skin, so freshly exposed by the escaping follicles (the taste of freedom, too much to resist...even though it meant plucking ones self and falling to the floor of a swanky Washington D.C. bordello full of "those dirty immigrants" and what I can only assume that (incoming Star Wars nerdism) Anakin and Obi Wan refer to as Younglings)) to the years of sun, cigarette smoke and outright LIES that await it until it also dies and becomes a blotched and cancer spotted mess of wrinkles and regret... hoping that somehow the children of this wretch of a man's offspring will also have hair that then becomes their offspring and succeeds them to achieve higher ranks of being (spoiler alert) <gasp> another racist troglodyte...or at least a Kardashian. This majestic hair...It's brilliant, and sad... it's Point Blank, but also so Statlor and Waldorf. It's 'MERICA. And also, somehow, both sides of Batman's Two Face.


Impeccable analysis. Adding $5K more TSLA at market open.

Also +1 for troglodyte.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> He also responded to someone who questioned his sub's ability to work with "stay tuned jackass", and a lot of other stuff. So obviously feeling attacked, angry, lashing out, just in general miserable. Sounded like a person who needs some combination of a big hug, a lot of sleep, and some time away from the internet.
> 
> A cabin out in the Icelandic highlands for a week with Grimes would really do him some good.


Just a week or so after saying he will have to watch his mouth, now the pedo accusation!

I don't know what to think other than ^^ or else maybe this is a calculated move to increase volatility. I can see how ensuring the share price is a yo-yo can keep the traders coming back for more which keeps trading volume higher and probably helps the share price float at a higher level, on average. It seems like Elon might have a method to his madness. When the share price has already climbed high enough to where it will naturally drift lower over time, he fires off a few "hot-head" comments which then causes the sell-off to be a bit quicker and harder which make the traders pull the trigger (regardless whether buying, selling or covering). I think this clears out a lot of trading action and the quick sale price caused by something so silly and irrelevant is an enticement for new long-term positions from those sitting on the sidelines who had been unable to pull the trigger at higher prices. This supports the share price by "pumping up" long-term holders and causes share prices to float at a higher level than it would otherwise be.

This theory arose out of the fact that I'm having trouble believing he really has that little control over himself. Not all things are what they appear and someone with Musk's intellegence might use that to his advantage.

In any case, I think TSLA might be in the mid- 200's to mid-high $300's for a long time. Maybe 2 or more years depending upon overall market sentiment.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

Dan Detweiler said:


> Surely this should have SOME positive impact on stock prices. 30% profit margins? Yeah baby!
> 
> Oh, and in the comments Monro says over 30% profits for long range and predicts "double digit" profits on the standard range.


I can't believe he actually admits he's eating crow! That means many of us knew more about the built-in quality of the Model 3 before Monroe did. Or that this is his new strategy to help his traditional clients out some way in the future since his last attempts fell on mostly deaf ears and damaged his credibility.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

A slight aside, but... &!*$ stupid Landsbankinn (bank, where I buy my stock through). Came last week to set a stop order. Wrote out very clearly written request (for the service representative who didn't know a thing about stock and was just acting as a middleman to convey my order to their stock person), spelling out... "If TSLA drops below $300, buy 200k krónur's worth. If TSLA drops below $290, buy another 200k krónur's worth. If TSLA drops below $275, buy another 200k krónur's worth". 

This shouldn't be hard.

First he kept asking me to put the TSLA price in krónur. I told him that nobody trades US stocks in krónur, but he insisted, so I did. He then started writing up a request for me to buy $300 worth of TSLA. I stopped him immediately. After another 5 minutes of explanation, he understands his mistakes. He fills out the form with the right purchase amounts and starts writing the email to go with describing the stop order. I can't see his screen because it has one of those narrow-view coatings on it. He finishes it and turns it to me so I can see it and it says to buy, in each case, if the price "doesn't go above $X". I told him, no, that's wrong; the price is already above, that should be to buy if the price goes *under* $X. He changes it and submits it.

I wake up this morning, and what do I know, but my bank account is empty and all purchases were triggered at $310 (not a bad price, but I didn't want my bank account emptied unless the price was *really* good!)

I go back to the bank and the guy is there, and simply refuses to accept responsibility or do anything about it. Turns out that he did change the email... to read if the price "doesn't go under $X". He left the "doesn't" in there. Aarrgh! He claims I confirmed the new version, which is A) false, B) absurd, and C) just reinforcing how much he didn't understand the original request he was processing in the slightest. Eventually a manager hears the raised voices, comes over, apologies, and agrees to make it right.

What a morning :Þ So wish I could just buy through an app like you guys...


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Ouch. Wow, that's pretty incompetent.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Well, here comes pedogate.

Should Tesla Actually Fire Elon Musk?
What If Tesla's Musk Premium Becomes A Discount
Tesla chief Elon Musk's latest outburst raises doubts on leadership, rattles investors
Elon Musk's 'pedo' attack rattles Tesla investors: 'This thing is unraveling'


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Anyone surprised?

People will have forgotten about it in a couple months time. When I look back at Tesla's stock price over the past six months I have to struggle to remember why each particular dip occurred. And most of them make you laugh and shake your head, thinking, "Why did people think that this would have so much of an impact on the ability of the company to succeed?"


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

PNWmisty said:


> I can't believe he actually admits he's eating crow! That means many of us knew more about the built-in quality of the Model 3 before Monroe did. Or that this is his new strategy to help his traditional clients out some way in the future since his last attempts fell on mostly deaf ears and damaged his credibility.


Yeah, this is a very interesting turn of events.

Basically the Autoline guys and Sandy Munro are a bunch of Detroit "big auto" shills that see the world through their distorted glasses that show the big 3 in a favorable light and everyone else, not so much. Clearly they did not appreciate Tesla honing in on their turf. And even if their intent with their first set of videos was not intended to bring down Tesla, it was probably more of a "see, they don't know how to make vehicles like we do here in Detroit...we are still relevant and better than those upstarts".

But I think that Sandy Munro, maybe in light of similar teardowns in Europe, started to fear that if he wasn't honest about how things really were under the surface, that his credibility (and livelihood) would be in peril once the other results were revealed.

Now to be honest, I think he is also a bit out of his element here. His impression of the "density" on the circuit boards being evidence of a "symphony of engineering" is a bit humorous to me. Maybe the automotive industry to date has not had a need for high density circuit boards, but from the pictures I saw, those would have been considered state of the art 15 years ago. He also showed his ignorance with respect to modern robotics technology in the last video.

Don't get me wrong--I'll take his eating crow. But I think his obviously extensive experience is probably more suited to vehicles of the last millenium than it is to modern EVs (I still don't think he understands the basic difference between energy and power, and voltage and current).


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

Speaking of eating crow, here's one bear that is at least admitting that there are cracks in the bear thesis:

https://seekingalpha.com/article/41...ercent-plus-margins-teslas-long-range-model-3

Oh, he tries so hard to try to spin things at the end, but this is the best he can come up with:


> By virtue of this being very new, decidedly positive information, we would expect short-term price improvement for Tesla. On a medium-term view, this does not change the fact that Tesla has no clear path to the net income required to justify the current market cap without adding multiple new factories in short order.




He also gives himself this out:


> That Munro's estimates have swung so widely is surprising, and may in the eyes of some diminish the confidence that can be placed in these figures.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> What a morning :Þ So wish I could just buy through an app like you guys...


I don't understand what's preventing you from wiring money to a brokerage firm in the US and opening an account.

On the downside, I worry you might become obsessed with trading TSLA


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

PNWmisty said:


> I don't understand what's preventing you from wiring money to a brokerage firm in the US and opening an account.
> 
> On the downside, I worry you might become obsessed with trading TSLA


All firms I've looked into so far only do business with US residents. Even having a US mailing address alone isn't good enough, they want you to reside there.

Trust me, I don't like paying 1% transaction fees, so if you know of a better alternative, you have my _full attention_.


----------



## Bokonon (Apr 13, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> All firms I've looked into so far only do business with US residents. Even having a US mailing address alone isn't good enough, they want you to reside there.


Is this true even for a joint account? In other words, could your parents (or other family with a U.S. mailing address) setup a joint account with rights of survivorship (JTWROS) and name you as one of the tenants?

Another option (one with which I admittedly have no experience) might be to create a U.S.-based LLC, with you and/or U.S. family as members, and then open a brokerage account in the name of the LLC, just as investing clubs typically do. Going this route will most definitely require additional paperwork and perhaps incur some kind of "LLC account" fee the brokerage, but it's another path to explore.

In both cases, I'm not sure of what the implications would be for your tax filings and liability in Iceland and the U.S., nor do I have a sense for what other regulatory hurdles you may encounter. But if you're looking for a more convenient investing experience, free of transaction fees (not to mention gross incompetence! ) the additional overhead could be worth it.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

The gross incompetence - apart from wasting an hour of my time - may actually work out to my favour, lol. To make it right, the manager said that they'll waive the fees and sell the stock, and if there's any losses, they'll eat them, and any gains, I'll get them. Stock is up 1,24% right now. So I guess that wasted hour might earn me $60 or so 

Honestly, I have no objection to buying Tesla at $310. But I do have an objection to having an empty bank account!  That's why I set limits - if I was going to risk having so little cash on hand, it better be _very much_ worth my while!


----------



## Marcumar (Jul 20, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> What a morning :Þ So wish I could just buy through an app like you guys...


Couldn't you just use a European broker? Iceland is part of the European Economic Area after all. In Germany I would recommend Flatex:

https://www.flatex.de/en/

P.S.: When will Iceland finally join the European Union?


----------



## Bokonon (Apr 13, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> The gross incompetence - apart from wasting an hour of my time - may actually work out to my favour, lol. To make it right, the manager said that they'll waive the fees and sell the stock, and if there's any losses, they'll eat them, and any gains, I'll get them. Stock is up 1,24% right now. So I guess that wasted hour might earn me $60 or so
> 
> Honestly, I have no objection to buying Tesla at $310. But I do have an objection to having an empty bank account!  That's why I set limits - if I was going to risk having so little cash on hand, it better be _very much_ worth my while!


Hey, $60/hour works out to about $125K/year -- not bad! And now it's up over 4%, so hopefully your grossly incompetent broker is still trying to figure out how to sell your position.


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

I don't really want to start a new thread just to post this link, so I figure this is the best place for it... a good read regarding the recent, ugly Twitter comments by Musk. Not written in defense of him and his actions, but a deeper look into what exactly happened. I enjoyed the read so wanted to share it.

https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-ful...-involvement-with-the-Thai-cave-rescue-effort


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Marcumar said:


> Couldn't you just use a European broker? Iceland is part of the European Economic Area after all. In Germany I would recommend Flatex:
> 
> https://www.flatex.de/en/


Sent an inquiry to Flatex to see if I'd be able to use it. I'm not fond of Landsbankinn getting 1% of my trades (although given how much I've made on Tesla, I don't regret at all doing so, given that was the only option available to me at the time  ).



> P.S.: When will Iceland finally join the European Union?


When A) the majority of people support it, and B) we stop electing Sjálfstæðisflokkurinn, Framsóknarflokkurinn, and Vinstri Grænir. :Þ Basically "the money" here has run a really good campaign to defend their interests (fishing, energy, agriculture, etc) against competition, convincing people that the EU is just going to leach off Iceland's resources - while meanwhile _they _leach off the country, and we pay ~5% higher interest rates than you do and all of our consumer goods prices are way jacked up because of monopolistic practices among stores. The corruption is an open joke here:






Activate the text for English subtitles  It was funny when Costco came in and suddenly everyone had to lower their prices to compete with an actual competitor for the first time.

(BTW, it'd be easier to convince people to join the EU if you guys would establish a common fiscal policy - good to see you're at moving in that direction. It's pretty hard to defend the notion of a common currency without a fiscal union. Of course, we use worthless inflationary coins with pictures of fish on them as currency, so what do we know?  )


----------



## Marcumar (Jul 20, 2017)

The one thing I forget about Flatex is that they charge 5,90€ for dividend payouts >15€ and at this time have a negative interest rate of 0,4% for idle money. I had no problem with that, because they have the cheapest transaction fees and I used to trade only in ETFs. But some US companies pay dividends four times a year, so that could get very expensive.

I use Onvista now. Would also recommend them, but their homepage is only in German and some foreign nationals had problems opening an account there.

https://brokerchooser.com/questionnaire/starter

Degiro seems to be available in Iceland.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Dividends are irrelevant to me because, well, Tesla. 

Degiro doesn't list Iceland on its front page: https://www.degiro.eu/#

Broker Chooser? Nice that that exists 

Oh yeah, one thing that was bothering me before, thinking about it was... if I pick a broker who's not my bank... won't I have to wire money to them to have money in my account? And thus pay wire fees? Which aren't exactly cheap....


----------



## Bokonon (Apr 13, 2017)

Apology: check. Moving on....


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1019472152796381185


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

Bokonon said:


> Apology: check. Moving on....
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1019472152796381185


I figured this was coming...glad he did it. Will this be the end of it? Of course not. His corporate and personal enemies are going to exploit this to the hilt. Especially with the positive news regarding Model 3 profitability.

Dan


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

Dan Detweiler said:


> I figured this was coming...glad he did it. Will this be the end of it? Of course not. His corporate and personal enemies are going to exploit this to the hilt. Especially with the positive news regarding Model 3 profitability.
> 
> Dan


Ack, sorry. Aimed for "agree" and rated "funny" on accident. Changed now, but the system message you get prompted me to reply.


----------



## EValuatED (Apr 29, 2017)

Lovesword said:


> Ack, sorry. Aimed for "agree" and rated "funny" on accident. Changed now, but the system message you get prompted me to reply.


Off topic: Awesome @Lovesword "spartan" profile/avatar picture! (Almost snorted my coffee!)


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

The shorts may manage to keep this alive for a couple days, but people are going to get tired of it. News is news only when it's new.

The fun part about the apology is that I've noticed that it's forcing the media to cover the fact that Vern told him to shove the submarine up his arse, rather than their previous reporting that only mentioned that Vern called it a "PR stunt".


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

EValuatED said:


> Off topic: Awesome @Lovesword "spartan" profile/avatar picture! (Almost snorted my coffee!)


Thank you  I thought I posted this somewhere on this forum some time ago... but I can't find it now using search (while at work and half arseing the search functionality). I'll link to it later upon finding it.

EDIT: Found it. https://teslaownersonline.com/threads/random-musings.5858/#post-77607

GO GO TESLA STOCK! UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP!!! 
Or heck, down ... I'll buy more!


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

This article makes me laugh.

Tesla: Where Is The Board Of Directors?

_If the Board of Directors were to do the responsible thing, it likely would cause Tesla shares to crash._​
I can't believe this guy has the gall to say that the board of directors of a publicly-traded company should undertake an action that guarantees that the stock price plummets.


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

garsh said:


> This article makes me laugh.
> 
> Tesla: Where Is The Board Of Directors?
> 
> ...


Journalism is dead. This is pathetic. This is the drivel that gets posted on a site that a good amount of people likely turn to for investment advice and information, but instead they get opinion pieces linking to more opinion pieces that strategically push only their agenda instead of facts and seek for clicks for revenue.

#ShortSeekingAlpha


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Randy Carlson has put up another bullish Tesla article on Seeking Alpha.

*Tesla Fires A Shot Across The Bow*

I especially love the graphics.


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

OK ok... #shortseekingalpha EXCEPT THIS GUY


garsh said:


> Randy Carlson has put up another bullish Tesla article on Seeking Alpha.
> 
> *Tesla Fires A Shot Across The Bow*
> 
> I especially love the graphics.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Here's a fun thing, that I don't think a lot of people have caught onto yet. A number of manufacturers think they're "competing" with Model S / Model X with new vehicles. We'll ignore the elephant in the room (charging networks) for now and just look at range:

Audi E-tron: ~220mi EPA (248mi WLTP)
Jaguar I-Pace: ~220mi EPA
Mission E: ~245mi(?) EPA (310mi NEDC)

Vs. Tesla's lineup:

Model S: 259-335mi.
Model X: 237-295mi.

Now, Tesla, still clearly leads, but I'm sure these others think they're "close enough". But I think they forgot something: Tesla now has a mass manufacturing line for an extremely efficient 211kW PM motor. They don't have to make brand new Model S / Model X vehicle lines on a new platform with denser cells and/or more room for more cells in order to add range; they just need to replace the rear induction motor with a new PM motor, and they'll add at least 10% to the range due to the higher efficiency. Aka:

Model S: 275-369mi
Model X: 261-325mi

Given how quickly Tesla seems to move when adding new options for the Model 3, I'd bet Tesla could make the change in around 3 months. This one little thing alone would make the "upcoming competition"'s range seem quaint and historical by comparison. 

Of course, if they did reengineer from the 18650s to the 2170s, that would be a massive _additional _range bonus


----------



## Marcumar (Jul 20, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> Dividends are irrelevant to me because, well, Tesla.
> 
> Degiro doesn't list Iceland on its front page: https://www.degiro.eu/#
> 
> ...


I did some reading on Degiro. They are really cheap, but have some strange systems in place to handle your money: 
- They'll lend your stock to other parties, hopefully not short sellers :anguished:
- Money is stored in the companies hedge fund instead of a bank account :anguished:

SEPA wire transfers are free of charge for me, but Landsbankinn charges at least 600-700 ISK for all European transactions. So I could send you money for free to Iceland and you still would have to pay for receiving that. You really seem to have a bank cartel up there...

People complain about the EU all the time, but it did strengthen consumer rights and competition.

So if you're okay with the fees, and they will let you open an account, I still would recommend Flatex to you. Even with wire fees you would only pay 10-15€ per transaction. I wouldn't buy Tesla on the Nasdaq or NYSE, but rather use Xetra/Frankfurt/off-exchange trading if the prices are comparable.



Bokonon said:


> Apology: check. Moving on....
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1019472152796381185


Finally. I hope he learned a lesson not to feed the trolls.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> if they did reengineer to the 18650s


Karen means from 18650 to 2170.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

garsh said:


> Karen means from 18650 to 2170.


To, from, what's the difference....


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> Here's a fun thing, that I don't think a lot of people have caught onto yet. A number of manufacturers think they're "competing" with Model S / Model X with new vehicles. We'll ignore the elephant in the room (charging networks) for now and just look at range:
> 
> Audi E-tron: ~220mi EPA (248mi WLTP)
> Jaguar I-Pace: ~220mi EPA
> ...


When you don't have a charging network to support long distance travel, you may as well cap the range as well, because you are basically confining the vehicle to regional use as best. It's almost like jumping back to the year 2013 before Superchargers enabled long distance travel. Yes, the Model S could certainly travel much farther than the competition at the time, but you still needed a second ICE vehicle to take long trips. Maybe this is the market Audi, Jaguar & Porsche are shooting for now. Too bad Tesla has a 5 year head start on them!


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Marcumar said:


> So if you're okay with the fees, and they will let you open an account, I still would recommend Flatex to you


Working on it. Unfortunately, as soon as you start the account registration process it all switches to German. My browser could translate fine, although it's no help with all of the terms and conditions files they want you to confirm you've read :Þ But they responded to my email that I should be able to register with them (I'll need to do some sort of video confirmation process). I've never had luck with videochats before, but I'll give it a shot. So far I can't even get past the "enter your phone number" box... doesn't like my Icelandic number.

It's a big hassle, but to switch from 1%-per-transaction fees to fixed fees is obviously worth it.


----------



## EValuatED (Apr 29, 2017)

Lovesword said:


> Journalism is dead. This is pathetic. This is the drivel that gets posted on a site that a good amount of people likely turn to for investment advice and information, but instead they get opinion pieces linking to more opinion pieces that strategically push only their agenda instead of facts and seek for clicks for revenue.
> 
> #ShortSeekingAlpha


1. I understand that some readers of news sites that publish seekingalpha or businessinsider pieces (that are devoid of actual facts or grossly inaccurate) have complained to the editors and/or publishers of said sites that they should stop presenting biased/non-factual/nonsensical opinion pieces as News. What would happen if 500000 Tesla owners/reservation-holders, and, millions of Tesla fans, all did this?

2. And what would happen if 500000 Tesla owners/reservation-holders, and, millions of Tesla fans, all bought 1, 10, 100, or more shares of stock each? (In the U.S., Robinhood offers free, no-fee online investment accounts for small/retail investors. I.e., no fee to open an account, link a bank account, transfer in few hundred and buy 1, 2, 5, 10, etc., shares.)


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

It looks like the shorts have already abandoned the tactic of calling for Musk's head over pedogate.
We're back to Tesla running out of money it seems.

Tesla's plan to make cars in China won't be easy to pull off
Ok, that's actually very true.

For Tesla Model 3 buyers, delays could be deal-breakers
The sky is falling! Repent, the end (of Federal EV tax credits) is nigh!

Tesla Could Be Doomed by Earning Money


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

garsh said:


> Tesla Could Be Doomed by Earning Money


The nutshell of this article:



> If Tesla starts delivering consistent earnings, investors will start to value it like a car maker-a high-growth auto firm, for sure, but a car maker nonetheless.


Because as we all know, once Apple started making iPhones it was lumped in with the likes of Western Electric:









And once Amazon started selling more than books, it was lumped in with the likes of Sears, Montgomery Ward, and Service Merchandise.

Yes, this make perfect sense!


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

garsh said:


> It looks like the shorts have already abandoned the tactic of calling for Musk's head over pedogate.
> We're back to Tesla running out of money it seems.
> 
> Tesla's plan to make cars in China won't be easy to pull off
> ...


I just saw an article yesterday... not sure why I even bothered reading it... but essentially it was saying "Why it would be BAD if Tesla becomes profitable..." WUT????

EDIT: ha! @garsh linked to it! I should have paid more attention prior to posting. Sorry.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Yeah, it's completely ridiculous.

If Teresa Rivas of Barron's could be bothered to act just a *little* *bit* like a journalist, she could discover that Tesla also makes Powerwalls and Solar Panels. But that would involve doing some extensive investigation - like, going to www.tesla.com and clicking a couple links.

And then a hardcore journalist might discover that Tesla creates a lot of car parts in-house, where traditional manufacturers would outsource. And that Tesla runs all of their own sales centers where a traditional manufacturer uses dealers. And that Tesla runs their own worldwide Supercharging network, where a traditional car manufacturer would rely on various third-party gas stations. But that would simply be way too difficult for a modern journalist to uncover. Oh, and they bought a couple of robotics firms so that they can now supply their own manufacturing robots, instead of outsourcing that stuff.

So Tesla will never be treated as a traditional auto manufacturer, because it is a combination of:

Auto manufacturer
Solar Panel manufacturer
Battery Storage manufacturer
Worldwide refueling station conglomerate
Worldwide auto sales conglomerate
Wordwide auto service conglomerate
Robotics manufacturer
Car seat manufacturer
Various other usually-outsourced car parts manufacturer.
But apparently Barron's hires journalists who are too lazy to figure that out.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Beyond this, their argument is based on the short notion that Tesla should be valued based on how many cars they make _today_, and completely ignoring their growth trajectory, and how much money they're investing in that growth trajectory, and how likely that growth trajectory is to be seriously challenged anytime in the next couple years (answer: it's not. Beyond a couple years maybe, but there's no serious near-term threat). So they put up these notions like, "OMG Tesla only made ~100k cars last year but the market values it at $55B - sell sell sell! Short short short!"

They're missing Valuation 101: you don't value a company based on where it stands _right at this moment_, but where you think it will be at some point in the future that you'd like to sell, relative to how long you have to wait and how likely you think they are to get there in that timeframe.

This viewpoint (judging a company by its current value vs. current (or even historic) production rates) is so amateurish it's embarrassing. I love a good debate with people about the nitty gritty of where Tesla is headed, the timing, the odds of making it, what the competition is doing to try to catch up, where the overall EV market is headed, etc. But when a person doesn't even understand the basic aspect, that people go long on a stock based on how the company will stand _in the future... _I mean, where do you even start?


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

Lovesword said:


> I just saw an article yesterday... not sure why I even bothered reading it... but essentially it was saying "Why it would be BAD if Tesla becomes profitable..." WUT????


I know. The view that small earnings would be valued lower than large losses is truly the opinion of someone who thinks current TSLA longs are in such a fog, they won't realize they are over-valuing the shares until the P/E hits them in the face. It's a ridiculous notion.

But that has never stopped a Tesla short before. It's probably just a reflection of their biggest fear of all, that Tesla will actually become profitable.


----------



## slacker775 (May 30, 2018)

I'm seeing the articles talking about folks cancelling reservations left and right and how that will kill Tesla. I can't help but feel that there may be some truth to that due to delays in SR coming to market and the expiration of the tax credits. If I was in that scenario, I might consider getting my 1K back now since I'd likely be able to order by Q1 next year and get the vehicle within a few weeks/months, probably within the $3750 tax credit window. If I ordered later, i'd only have to plunk down $2500 instead of $3500 as well, so no big deal. 

The potential positive of this scenario is that it would 'smooth out' the revenue from the M3. A big concern that I had was that with the 400k of reservations, if they were blowing those out over just a quarter or two, you could have a few blockbuster quarters with gushing profits, but then hit a certain saturation point and then have revenue plummet as production is sustained and you settle into a more normal sales cycle. 

I'll bet that the Q2 numbers reported on 8/1 might be OK, but not anything spectacular, the headlines will be doom-and-gloom and all that, but then Q3 numbers will be massively better. Ideally, Q4 follows and then 1H next year sustains the growth as SR rolls out, perhaps more options and customization gets added to the mix and the MY gets unveiled. 

Sustained growth is what we all want to see.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> But when a person doesn't even understand the basic aspect, that people go long on a stock based on how the company will stand _in the future... _I mean, where do you even start?


It seems like most TSLA shorts have already mastered addition and subtraction so it would probably be safe to start with easy multiplication and division. If that gets them more confused, and it probably will, just give up.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

slacker775 said:


> A big concern that I had was that with the 400k of reservations, if they were blowing those out over just a quarter or two, you could have a few blockbuster quarters with gushing profits, but then hit a certain saturation point and then have revenue plummet as production is sustained and you settle into a more normal sales cycle.


If the Model 3 quality/reliability remains as high as it's been, and there are no major scandals, I think Tesla can sell over 20,000 Model 3's/month, far into the future, at least until the end of next year, if not indefinitely. A greatly under-appreciated fact is that most auto purchases are somewhat of a spontaneous decision. People go take a test drive and, before they know it, they are signing papers. There are literally millions upon millions of potential purchasers waiting in the wings. And the Model 3 has some important qualities that allow people to justify their purchase. No oil/filter changes, doing the right thing for climate change/pollution, keeping the kids safe, saving money on gas, etc. Compared to any other similar sized car, the Model 3 is an easy sell without huge advertising expense.

So, no, I have almost zero concern they will run out of buyers short of major new developments like a global recession. I'm more worried about production risk, problems with suppliers, labor or a major earthquake that shuts down the Freemont facility for an extended period of time.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

slacker775 said:


> Sustained growth is what we all want to see.


It depends upon who "we" is. Plenty of living, breathing people are actively working to harm TSLA's success.


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

Always love to see the analysts that make the argument that people are cancelling because of huge wait times. Reminds me of the old quote attributed to Yogi Berra: Nobody goes there anymore...it's always too crowded.

Now okay, I get that the situation is a bit different here: the cancellations they are talking about are for the SR model, but somehow they conveniently forget the fact that the backlog is created by the demand for the significantly higher profit margin vehicles. Oh yes, always quick to point out that the base model will "never" be built, somehow without realizing that Tesla is going to be able to sell as many highly optioned copies as they can build for the rest of the year.


----------



## slacker775 (May 30, 2018)

I agree. With the flood of M3's hitting the streets these days, that should generate a lot of new interest. A big barrier to getting into EVs for so many folks would be the range anxiety - what do you mean only 80mi???? - and the typically funky looks of most EVs. The M3 actually looks like a car that people would want to drive and has the range to give people comfort that they can actually get to where they want to go. If Elon can keep the tweets to a minimum and the media doesn't sensationalize every traffic incident just because there was a Tesla within 1000', there could definitely be significant traction. And all without a single TV advertisement. That's pretty incredible stuff.


----------



## slacker775 (May 30, 2018)

Oh and those naysayer articles always conveniently forget that some portion of the 400k reservations are outside NA and thus don't really even have an opportunity to final purchase the car just yet.


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

Pictured: Rajvindra Gill and James Chanos


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

OMG...for tonight's entertainment popyourself some popcorn, grab your favorite beverage and read through the comments on this article. Absolutely hillarious...and almost all the FUD is immediately debunked.

Dan

https://www.wsj.com/articles/first-...formance-a-thrilling-modern-marvel-1532022533


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Dan Detweiler said:


> OMG...for tonight's entertainment popyourself some popcorn, grab your favorite beverage and read through the comments on this article. Absolutely hillarious...and almost all the FUD is immediately debunked.
> 
> Dan
> 
> https://www.wsj.com/articles/first-...formance-a-thrilling-modern-marvel-1532022533


The Wall Street Journal is paywalled, so that link doesn't work unless you have a subscription.

There is a workaround though: access the article via Twitter instead: https://t.co/TQeWHVe7XC


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

garsh said:


> The Wall Street Journal is paywalled, so that link doesn't work unless you have a subscription.
> 
> There is a workaround though: access the article via Twitter instead: https://t.co/TQeWHVe7XC


Thanks!


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

garsh said:


> It looks like the shorts have already abandoned the tactic of calling for Musk's head over pedogate.
> We're back to Tesla running out of money it seems.


Ok, the "Tesla running out of money" headlines aren't working quickly enough. BUT... see those parking lots full of Model 3s? LACK OF DEMAND! Tesla can't GIVE those cars away, they're so bad!

First, there's John Engle, a regular TSLA short on [email protected]:
Weak Model 3 Demand Is Burning Tesla

Oh, and of course, Needham's crystal ball somehow told him that cancellations are outpacing new orders. LOL!
Needham Downgrades Tesla, Says Model 3 Refunds Are Outpacing Deposits

Now, I think this article is actually pretty spot-on. I think Elon is running the company to the edge of running out of cash. But the institutional shorts (Chanos) are putting too much pressure on the financial market so that they won't lend money to Tesla at good rates. So I think Elon has doubled-down, slashed expenditures and headcount, and will plan on just surviving until Model 3 production is profitable. Unlike the Motley Fool's conclusion, I don't think Tesla is going to borrow money until AFTER Model 3 production has ramped up and the company is profitable.
How Close Is Tesla to Running Out of Cash?

And... WOAH! A bullish SeekingAlpha article! It doesn't happen often, but it's nice when it does.
Tesla: $330M Net Profit In Q3 On Sales Estimate Of 6,600 Model 3 Cars/Wk

_I estimate that Tesla should sell 20,000 Model 3 cars more than needed for breakeven in Q3.

If correct, Tesla would show a *net profit around $330 million in Q3.*

Independently, the Model 3 should rise to about position #14 for July sales of more than 20,000 cars.

I continue to hold my *price target of $400 per share* until net profits are proven rather than estimated._​


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

What really sucks about all this for me personally is that my time for delivery is coming in the next 2 months or so. Certainly before the end of Q3. The money I have in TSLA is my down payment money. The shorts and the media have successfully managed to hold the price down to where I will see minimal gain...better than it sitting in a savings account, but still minimal. Instead of the stock sitting at $400 or more, they are going to keep it in the low $300s by the time I need it. When they show significant profits at the end of Q3 the stock will most likely soar to new highs but I will need my money before then I'm afraid. I can really see why Elon would prefer to not go public if he had the choice. Keep SpaceX private!

Dan


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

garsh said:


> Ok, the "Tesla running out of money" headlines aren't working quickly enough. BUT... see those parking lots full of Model 3s? LACK OF DEMAND! Tesla can't GIVE those cars away, they're so bad!
> 
> First, there's John Engle, a regular TSLA short on [email protected]:
> Weak Model 3 Demand Is Burning Tesla
> ...


In shocking developments, I drove around town today and found that every other car manufacturer is doing this too! Every single one of them have MULTIPLE locations around my city where they have tons of cars just sitting there that nobody wants to buy! LACK OF DEMAND! When I got home, I did some internet-ing and to my surprise, this is happening in almost EVERY CITY! Just tons of these parking lot type places with unsold cars sitting there. Can you imagine the sheer number of cars these manufacturers must have out there in inventory to be doing this? Tesla has a couple thousand out in some rented parking lots in California and this is news worthy!? Hey dude with the plane, do this same thing at ANY car manufacturer and tell us what you find. At their factories. At their dealerships. What's that? Oh you don't want to? Gee I wonder why...

Why don't these people consider a few things. One (and primary), logistics. Tesla ramped up production rapidly. Do they have the systems in place to ship as rapidly? Perhaps, not yet. Even if they do, that's one side to the logistics puzzle. Are the areas around the U.S. and Canada also ready to receive a massive influx in product? Are the delivery centers and service centers sufficiently staffed, equiped and have the needed space? Tesla doesn't have dealer lots as we all know, so without large parking lot style places to store them in every city around, why NOT keep them close to the factory until the specific vehicle(s) are ready to be delivered? How hard is it to do a SMIDGE of research and discover that Tesla's delivery staff is currently over capacity, they're trying to get cars to people as fast as they can, and that we have people, even quite a few on our own forum board here, that are all paid, ready, willing and EAGER to have their cars but it's an issue of logistics and capacity? Yeah, don't do any research at all, just post a clickbait style headline and collect your check from Chanos.

Further, what's with the static shots? A photo? These people with short positions are so ready to attack Tesla they'll go fly a plane around snapping pics? That seems a bit extreme to me, isn't it rather costly to just randomly decide "hey I know, I'm going to fly around these parking lots taking photos!" Here's an idea...and I know this is CRAZY, but maybe we should monitor these locations OVER TIME and watch what happens. Are all these cars just sitting there for weeks/months without movement? I'm gonna take a HUGE leap of faith here and say NO. I would bet that as we watched these lots over days/weeks, we'd see a lot of movement, cars coming and going, car carriers loading up and heading down the road.

These articles are so tiring. I'm in the wrong line of work when what I should be doing is waking up, pulling something out of my arse that looks like it'll garner clicks, post that and then go have an early morning beer and call it a day.

On the topic of demand. A coworker of my wife wants to buy her car, another wants to see hers and mine and get one for his wife (or maybe an X), I have 2 or 3 guys that DAILY ask me how I'm liking my car. I've been in touch with MULTIPLE people in my area who are interested, want to know more, want to see our cars, sit in them, ride in them. I went to a BBQ 2 weeks ago where I didn't eat much because all I was doing was cycling people in and out of my car and taking them for rides. One guy wanted to drive it so bad but he'd been drinking, he later contacted me in email and we've been chatting since about Tesla vehicles. I had a random coworker put me in touch with his son-in-law who really wants a Tesla but doesn't know much about them, so we've been emailing. I've been in touch with Westmont, IL because I have 3 or 4 FAMILIES that all want to test drive, and Westmont is known to caravan multiple vehicles into Iowa if they get enough participation (and they have time, which lately is the hold up). Note: Iowa is currently still under the Stone Age dealership law thing so no Tesla localtion here, thus the caravan from Illinois.
What else...gave my neighbor a ride, he said he wants his wife to ride in my car, um...I'm likely forgetting tons of stuff, but my point is made. Demand? GTFOH


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

OMG! Look at all those Teslas out sitting in the sun. They can't sell them! It's all a false narrative. They are lying to us about all this EV garbage and how it's the future. NOBODY WILL BUY THEM! There is no demand. They're doomed for bankruptcy.

...oh wait...

Dan


----------



## NEO (Jun 28, 2017)

Uh oh, the negative news is never ending right now

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/20/jp-...l-plunge-more-than-40percent-by-year-end.html


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

Once again disgusted by the power of shorts and the media to manipulate the market to their whims.

Dan


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

> J.P. Morgan reaffirms its underweight rating for Tesla shares, saying other automakers may price their electric cars aggressively.


Of course they can. They can give them away for free if they want. Good luck doing that _sustainably_.

The actual question is whether they can compete on Tesla on pricing fundamentals. And for many reasons***, the answer is clearly - as of this day - a resounding _no_.

*** ... such as: 1) the simple fact that they're _not_ making more; 2) the far lower rates of investment in EV tech & production to this point; 3) the inability to make battery factories appear overnight; 4) the distribution of their vehicles today suggesting most manufacturers only care about ZEV compliance, 5) the multiple Model 3 teardown analyses, including specific statements from the German one that the companies that hired them would not be capable of making such a vehicle today 6) the fact that execs from these companies keep making statements that they think things Tesla plans to do are impossible (then Tesla does them), showing that _they_ can't do them and mistakenly think nobody else can either ... etc.

To be fair, J.P. Morgan seems to realize this:



> "We have highlighted more concerns regarding increased competition, including from automakers looking to use the sale of battery electric vehicles to subsidize their more lucrative internal combustion engine portfolio vehicles from a legal, regulatory, and compliance perspective, rather than trying to generate profit on the sale of these battery electric vehicles in and of themselves."


But exactly how many compliance cars does J.P. Morgan think they need to make? After some point, it's no longer "subsidiz[ing] their more lucrative internal combustion engine portfolio vehicles from a legal, regulatory, and compliance perspective"... it's just "making more of things that earn you less (or negative) profit on".


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

Dan Detweiler said:


> OMG! Look at all those Teslas out sitting in the sun. They can't sell them! It's all a false narrative. They are lying to us about all this EV garbage and how it's the future. NOBODY WILL BUY THEM! There is no demand. They're doomed for bankruptcy.
> 
> ...oh wait...
> 
> Dan


Oops, sorry, wrong clip.

Here's the right one. Look at all those unsellable Teslas sitting out in the open air. Wow, they must be hurting.










We could go on and on. Yet there is nobody calling BS. Nobody stopping this crap. It is just unbelievable to me. I know I am naive in regards to the ins and outs of the market. The money I have invested personally aside...this garbage is ruining companies. Companies making a difference and furthering what industry SHOULD be. I know the answer is "this is business and anything goes in business" or something of the sort, but there is something fundamentally wrong here. Call out weaknesses, sure. Be critical of the process or decisions, ok. But this is just out and out falsehood.

Sorry, rant over.

Dan


----------



## M3OC Rules (Nov 18, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> But exactly how many compliance cars does J.P. Morgan think they need to make? After some point, it's no longer "subsidiz[ing] their more lucrative internal combustion engine portfolio vehicles from a legal, regulatory, and compliance perspective"... it's just "making more of things that earn you less (or negative) profit on".


This one makes no sense to me. How is this subsidizing other cars? I thought they strategize around those issues to not lose money on higher margin vehicles but can you actually make more money on a lower margin car through legal, regulatory, and compliance?


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

Dan Detweiler said:


> What really sucks about all this for me personally is that my time for delivery is coming in the next 2 months or so. Certainly before the end of Q3. The money I have in TSLA is my down payment money.


Dan, You have broke one of the cardinal rules of investing. Never put money in the market that you will need in the next 3 years (let alone months).


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

PNWmisty said:


> Dan, You have broke one of the cardinal rules of investing. Never put money in the market that you will need in the next 3 years (let alone months).


Well, I look at it this way. I am still on the positive side, just not as much as I had hoped. If I had left it in a savings account it would have earned virtually nothing. We'll see where it goes in the time between now and delivery. With the apparent complete control the shorts seem to have over the price right now I'm not very optimistic that things will improve much in the near term.

Dan


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

Dan Detweiler said:


> Well, I look at it this way. I am still on the positive side, just not as much as I had hoped. If I had left it in a savings account it would have earned virtually nothing. We'll see where it goes in the time between now and delivery. With the apparent complete control the shorts seem to have over the price right now I'm not very optimistic that things will improve much in the near term.


The shorts don't control the price any more than the longs except for the fake news stories they are always getting published.

And I disagree the price is depressed right now. I think it could go lower just as easily as higher.Because if you think the shorts have run out of fake news stories to publish, well, you have another think coming. For the sake of certainty, if you really need that money to pay for the Model 3, it would be good to take it out now, rather than be forced to sell at whatever price it may be at when you actually need to cut the check. Unless you have plenty of money and like to gamble.


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

PNWmisty said:


> The shorts don't control the price any more than the longs except for the fake news stories they are always getting published.
> 
> And I disagree the price is depressed right now. I think it could go lower just as easily as higher.Because if you think the shorts have run out of fake news stories to publish, well, you have another think coming. For the sake of certainty, if you really need that money to pay for the Model 3, it would be good to take it out now, rather than be forced to sell at whatever price it may be at when you actually need to cut the check. Unless you have plenty of money and like to gamble.


Your statement is an oxymoron. You claim the short interest doesn't control stock prices and then admit that they push the FUD articles that are the very instrument by which the price is kept as low as possible. Sounds like a causal relationship to me.

Dan


----------



## NEO (Jun 28, 2017)

I had no idea how crazy this all is until I found the Twitter hashtag $TSLA. If you go on some of these accounts, they only tweet about Tesla. They are absolutely obsessed. Check it out if you have a few minutes to kill

https://twitter.com/search?q=$TSLA&src=tyah


----------



## Gavyne (Jul 7, 2018)

With Performance/AWD delivering in weeks, no wonder Tesla is receiving all sorts of attacks right now. They are about to receive all sorts of favorable reviews, and all the car enthusiasts are going to be talking about Model 3P. This is a special market to corner as they'll be converting many ICE muscle enthusiasts. Once you get the hardcores to convert, it lends Tesla credibility. The exposure will be broadened.

I think many thought Tesla was never going to last long enough to produce these Performance/AWD models. But yet, they are here. They can now produce Long Range RWD reliably and quickly. They are about to deliver thousands of Model 3P's that will have everybody talking. They have no competition at this price point in terms of tech, raw power, range, and charge network.

I expect to see more bought "analysts" speak up about how Tesla can't sustain the production and won't have enough orders. They're going to be yapping to distract people from all the good things people are going to say about Model 3P. It's going to be an interesting month up ahead.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Dan Detweiler said:


> Your statement is an oxymoron.


I think what he's trying to say is that the shorts will do all they can to influence the stock price, but they can't ultimately control it. The stock price is decided by stock owners willing to sell shares, and others willing to buy shares at that moment in time. Eventually the investors and potential investors are going to stop listening to the "short stories" as Tesla is shown to keep making progress with Model 3 production.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Business Insider: Thousands of Tesla Model 3 cars are sitting in giant parking lots in California - here's why

_What's likely going on here is that Tesla is on track to build quite a few more vehicles in 2018 than it did in 2017 and will have to expand its logistical footprint to get those cars from Fremont to the rest of the US._​








Wait, is this really Business Insider?


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

How Porsche Will -- and Won't -- Beat Tesla's Superchargers

_I think that if Porsche installs Turbo Chargers at all of its dealerships, that -- plus the increasing availability of CCS DC Fast chargers in Europe and the United States over the next couple of years -- will probably be enough to counter the Supercharger argument in the minds of most buyers._​
No, it won't, for three basic reasons:

Location, location, and location.​
Most charging will be done overnight at home. Fast chargers are only needed for long roadtrips. People don't need fast chargers at Porsche dealers. They need them along interstates.

If you want further proof that it won't help much, just look at Nissan. They have CHAdeMO chargers at most of their dealerships. Some other charging networks also have CHAdeMO chargers available. But they aren't located to support long-distance driving. It's nice in a proof-of-concept kind of way, and a few are located correctly to support a longer trip, but it doesn't work as a general long-distance travel recharging network.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Perhaps a bit offtopic, but I saw the best reply I've seen to people on sites like Seeking Alpha that call Tesla fans and longs "cultists" and say that Musk "hides behind his cult following":



> He doesn't hide behind a cult following... We are not a cult, we are a religion... What am I saying?
> 
> We are the ONE TRUE RELIGION! We have more overwhelming proofs of the existence of our Lord than any other religion.


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

Hey gang, I need your help. Trying to respond to a guy on Facebook that is spouting the supposed cancellation rate of the Model 3 as evidence that demand is falling. I mentioned that a large portion of those people chose to buy a Model S or X as noted by many here on this forum. Is there any statistical data to back up just how many have converted their reservation to another Tesla? I would really like to give him hard evidence.

Thanks,

Dan


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

I haven't exactly conducted a controlled scientific study on the topic. But it's a pointless argument, and the exact same one that they make with every single Tesla model that comes out. They're trying to say "Tesla will run out of customers" or even "Tesla is already running out of customers". Which is ridiculous; as you know from here, a large chunk of people are sitting around waiting months for their configured car to be delivered. The entire world outside of the US and Canada hasn't even started deliveries yet. SR isn't out. Non-PUP isn't out. Air suspension isn't out. Cream interior for non-performance cars isn't out. Trailer hitch isn't out. The car has been out for under a year and a lot of people don't want cars in the first 1-2 model years out of reliability / quality concerns. Test drive cars are literally only just now arriving at showrooms, and the distance between showrooms is usually huge. Purchase delays are finally down to a "mere" 1-3 months, but only if you want first-production configs. Advertising is a big fat zero. People actually getting to see the car through their friends, family, coworkers, etc are limited by the (proportionally) very small numbers actually out there thusfar. Reviews have been endlessly positive, and the reports coming in from said "friends, family, coworkers, etc" are likewise. On and on and on.

The shorts freak out like this every bloody time. And every time, Tesla has no trouble whatsoever maintaining and growing demand. There is no difference in the pattern of the rollout here than any other time.

So no, I don't have a study on me showing the conversion rate from two year old reservations (as if nothing is supposed to happen in a person's life in two years?). But it's an argument coming from a flawed notion.


----------



## Brokedoc (May 28, 2017)

I’m not a stock broker but I found something interesting if true.

An owner of TSLA can block their broker from lending their shares short if there is a pending order on those shares.

For example, setting a limit order on your shares like “sell TSLA at $1000” will tie up your shares and be very unlikely to be filled.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

Dan Detweiler said:


> Your statement is an oxymoron. You claim the short interest doesn't control stock prices and then admit that they push the FUD articles that are the very instrument by which the price is kept as low as possible. Sounds like a causal relationship to me.


It's not an oxymoron to me because I don't think the 200 day moving average share price is significantly different than where it would be if the shorts didn't publish their ridiculous fake news stories. These types of articles do affect the share price negatively (because they act upon peoples emotions or fear and greed), but the effect only lasts a few days or weeks. If anything, the share price is probably higher than it would be if there were no controversial negative stories about TSLA.

The shorts are their own worst enemy. And they eventually must become buyers of the stock (in order to cover their short position).


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

I'd like to add that _I wish_ Tesla was running out of US orders in current configs. I want my eurospec car, dammit!  But what I wish to be true, and what is true, are two entirely different things. There's no evidence that Eurospec will be coming out this year. I'm just hoping that it's not too long into next year :Þ _Reeeeally_ want my car by next summer.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Ok, what happened over at Business Insider?
Was their a coup of Tesla fans in management there?
Did the shorts stop sending the bribery money?
*A Tsunami of money could be headed Tesla's way in the next year - and that's bad news for the bears*


----------



## M3OC Rules (Nov 18, 2016)

Dan Detweiler said:


> Hey gang, I need your help. Trying to respond to a guy on Facebook that is spouting the supposed cancellation rate of the Model 3 as evidence that demand is falling. I mentioned that a large portion of those people chose to buy a Model S or X as noted by many here on this forum. Is there any statistical data to back up just how many have converted their reservation to another Tesla? I would really like to give him hard evidence.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dan


If demand is falling why is the number of reservations plus orders increasing? Elon could be lying about that but I think he would be violating SEC rules if he did.

https://bgr.com/2018/07/21/model-3-demand-orders-strong-elon-musk/


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

M3OC Rules said:


> If demand is falling why is the number of reservations plus orders increasing? Elon could be lying about that but I think he would be violating SEC rules if he did.
> 
> https://bgr.com/2018/07/21/model-3-demand-orders-strong-elon-musk/


The shorts are choosing to interpret that tweet as meaning "5000 conversions from the waiting list", and thus "Tesla has a terrible conversion rate!". Yeah, yeah, I know, but you know what sort of Cloud Cuckoo Land they live in  A couple of the more grounded ones are admitting that they're new reservations, but are insisting that that's somehow terrible now that anyone in the US and Canada can reserve, that the fact that a superflood of reservations didn't suddenly show up means bad news.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

garsh said:


> Ok, what happened over at Business Insider?
> Was their a coup of Tesla fans in management there?
> Did the shorts stop sending the bribery money?
> *A Tsunami of money could be headed Tesla's way in the next year - and that's bad news for the bears*


BI is often reminiscent of a tabloid. They have low standards when it comes to business reporting, and will publish whatever they think will get them the clicks. The more sensational, the better.


----------



## EValuatED (Apr 29, 2017)

Brokedoc said:


> I'm not a stock broker but I found something interesting if true.
> 
> An owner of TSLA can block their broker from lending their shares short if there is a pending order on those shares.
> 
> For example, setting a limit order on your shares like "sell TSLA at $1000" will tie up your shares and be very unlikely to be filled.


To paraphrase my earlier post... what would happen if 500000 Tesla owners & reservationists, and millions of fans, who are shareholders were to do what you suggest?


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

EValuatED said:


> To paraphrase my earlier post... what would happen if 500000 Tesla owners & reservationists, and millions of fans, who are shareholders were to do what you suggest?


Nothing at this point. The current shorts have already borrowed. I can't imagine that any of the institutional shorts are true believers in Tesla going under at this point, and thus looking to increase their exposure. Right now, they're trying to figure out how to get out without taking a bath.


----------



## EValuatED (Apr 29, 2017)

garsh said:


> Nothing at this point. The current shorts have already borrowed. I can't imagine that any of the institutional shorts are true believers in Tesla going under at this point, and thus looking to increase their exposure. Right now, they're trying to figure out how to get out without taking a bath.


Well alrighty then... back to my original post. What if we all bought shares!


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

garsh said:


> Ok, the "Tesla running out of money" headlines aren't working quickly enough. BUT... see those parking lots full of Model 3s? LACK OF DEMAND! Tesla can't GIVE those cars away, they're so bad!


I'll just leave this here:

Why are so many Ram trucks parked at Gibraltar Trade Center?


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Watching a show about the Thai cave rescue right now on Discovery. They're apparently just about to talk about Musk's submarine. Curious as to how they're going to spin this. Right before they cut to commercial, they mentioned "... including a solution offered by one of the world's leading tech pioneers", and showed the end of one of the pool tests of the submarine.

Obviously not immediately applicable to Tesla, but Musk's image certainly plays a role.

*ED*: Assuming they don't cover any more, I'd say that they took a sort of middle road in the coverage. Didn't present the SpaceX team's case for the sub or that Musk was asked to build it, and suggested that it would have been difficult to work, but also didn't portray Musk as "inserting him into the rescue without being asked", and didn't push the "the sub was impossible to work" meme either.


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

garsh said:


> Ok, the "Tesla running out of money" headlines aren't working quickly enough. BUT... see those parking lots full of Model 3s? LACK OF DEMAND! Tesla can't GIVE those cars away, they're so bad!


These naysayers keep ignoring the fact that Tesla vehicles are preordered. There's a 99% chance that a Model 3 in the lot already belongs to a reservationist waiting for delivery. And should that reservationist cancel, there's a line right behind him or her ready to take the VIN.

Dealer parking lots full of Model 3s should be taken as a very positive sign - that demand is great! It's an indication of a bottleneck in deliveries but not in sales.


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

Tesla bull vs bear debate between Galileo Russell (HyperChange TV) and Montana Skeptic. Haven't listened to it's entirety yet but so far the dialogue from both perspectives sound interesting:


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

$ Trillion Musk said:


> Tesla bull vs bear debate between Galileo Russell (HyperChange TV) and Montana Skeptic. Haven't listened to it's entirety yet but so far the dialogue from both perspectives sound interesting:


The general reaction to this debate in the comments was that Gali came off sounding like a child out of his league, which was clearly not the case. As always it was spun to be another example of bulls clearly having no understanding of how a business should be run. And once again, it seems to have worked. The market is showing that it only reacts to negativism and ignores the positive. The old adage "perception is reality" or in this case "perception becomes reality" is playing out in force with TSLA. Truly disgusting.

Dan


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

New York Post: *Elon Musk is a total fraud*

Wow. This article is full of misinformation/lies. Seriously. But I'm glad to see that one of the short-supporters has gone way off the deep-end. Maybe the legitimate media will finally wake up and see that they're being manipulated.



> Musk has been in business since 2002... He has yet to succeed at anything.


Seriously? How can a "journalist" completely miss that Elon Musk had two successful businesses (Zip2 and freaking PAYPAL for goodness sakes) before starting SpaceX and Tesla?



> SpaceX... has been a literal failure to launch. So many of its rockets have burned up or crashed...


Whereas 100% of EVERY OTHER COMPANIES' ROCKETS have burned up AND crashed.


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

TSLA is down to <$304 (-3%) premarket. After stellar reports of the Model 3 from Tesla critics Sandy Munro and Dan Neil, how could this be? The market is rigged!


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

$ Trillion Musk said:


> TSLA is down to <$304 (-3%) premarket. After stellar reports of the Model 3 from Tesla critics Sandy Munro and Dan Neil, how could this be? The market is rigged!


Rigged for a great BUYING OPPORTUNITY!!!


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

garsh said:


> Rigged for a great BUYING OPPORTUNITY!!!


Yeah well, these "buying opportunities" are getting ridiculous and consistent...as the shorts dictate. Tesla meets every "finish line" the bears seem to think they have to and yet the negative spin on everything and anything is what has legs. Production goals met, profitability proven, these have no bearing on the stock...only the negative BS. I am getting more and more disgusted with the stock market.

Dan


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Dan Detweiler said:


> Yeah well, these "buying opportunities" are getting ridiculous and consistent


Day-trading isn't worth it. If you're investing in Tesla, it should be for the long-term. There's just too much high-blood-pressure-inducing things happening to the stock price from day-to-day.


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

garsh said:


> Day-trading isn't worth it. If you're investing in Tesla, it should be for the long-term. There's just too much high-blood-pressure-inducing things happening to the stock price from day-to-day.


I am definitely not day trading...not smart enough for that, nor do I want to get involved with such slime. It is simply remarkable to me the ease at which the market responds to negative innuendo and the lethargy to respond to positive fact.

Dan


----------



## JWardell (May 9, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> BI is often reminiscent of a tabloid. They have low standards when it comes to business reporting, and will publish whatever they think will get them the clicks. The more sensational, the better.


Unfortunately you could insert the name of every other news organization in this statement 

I wish someone would pull an Elon on the news industry and go back to reporting "just the facts, ma'am"
HBO's Newsroom was so lovable because it did this fictionally, and that was before the last few years when things really got out of hand.


----------



## mdfraz (Oct 17, 2017)

Does anyone believe Tesla, even if they did ask for rebates from suppliers, stated in the letter "the request is essential to Tesla's continued operation"? Even if that's true, are they going to make that public in a letter to suppliers?

*Tesla Asks Suppliers for Cash Back to Help Turn a Profit -- Update*

9:50 pm ET July 22, 2018 (Dow Jones) Print
By Tim Higgins
Tesla Inc. has asked some suppliers to refund a portion of what the electric-car company has spent previously, an appeal that reflects the auto maker's urgency to sustain operations during a critical production period.
The Silicon Valley electric-car company said it is asking its suppliers for cash back to help it become profitable, according to a memo reviewed by The Wall Street Journal that was sent to a supplier last week. Tesla requested the supplier return what it calls a meaningful amount of money of its payments since 2016, according to the memo.
The auto maker's memo, sent by a global supply manager, described the request as essential to Tesla's continued operation and characterized it as an investment in the car company to continue the long-term growth between both players.
While Tesla said in the memo that all suppliers were being asked to help it become profitable, it is unclear how many were asked for a discount on contracted spending amounts retroactively. Some suppliers contacted about the request said they were unaware of such a demand.
Tesla declined to comment on the specific memo. But it confirmed it is seeking price reductions from suppliers for projects, some of which date back to 2016, and some of which haven't been completed. The company called such requests a standard part of procurement negotiations to improve its competitive advantage, especially as it ramps up Model 3 production.
The surprising requests raise further questions about Tesla's cash position, which has dwindled after it struggled to boost production of its first car designed for mainstream buyers, the Model 3. After months of delays, Tesla last quarter reached its longstanding goal of making 5,000 Model 3s in a single week, which, if sustained, will help it generate cash.
Auto makers and suppliers have complicated relationships, each fighting for the best deal under immense pricing pressure. Supply-chain consultants say sometimes auto makers will demand a reduction in price for a current contract going forward or use leverage of awarding a new deal to get upfront savings on a contract. But they say it is unusual for an auto maker to ask for a refund for past work.
Dennis Virag, a manufacturing consultant who has worked in the automotive industry for 40 years, said a solicitation like Tesla's could put suppliers in financial peril and jeopardize its future supply of car parts.
"It's simply ludicrous and it just shows that Tesla is desperate right now," he said. "They're worried about their profitability but they don't care about their suppliers' profitability."
Tesla has sought to balance its desire for rapid growth with paying for the expensive launch of new vehicles and building out infrastructure to compete against much larger auto makers.
Chief Executive Elon Musk has said he wants to avoid raising additional cash, promising the company can become cash-flow positive with the continued Model 3 build rate and turn a profit in the second half of the year. Many analysts expect Tesla eventually will need to raise more money.
Tesla has been burning cash at a rate of about $1 billion a quarter, and finished the first quarter with $2.7 billion in cash on hand. Tesla pledged to pare back planned capital expenditures this year to less than $3 billion from $3.4 billion last year. Its loss attributable to common shareholders in the first quarter was $710 million, the fifth consecutive quarter of record losses.
Tesla will need to pay down a $230 million convertible bond this November if its stock doesn't reach a conversion price of $560.64, and a $920 million convertible note next March if the stock doesn't reach $359.87. Shares closed Friday at $313.58, and are down about 4.5% over the past 12 months.
As part of Tesla's bid to become profitable, Mr. Musk cut Tesla's workforce by 9% in June and promised to slow other spending as well. He's become focused intently on becoming cash-flow positive, a person familiar with his thinking said.
Last month, he told employees in an email: "What drives us is our mission to accelerate the world's transition to sustainable, clean energy, but we will never achieve that mission unless we eventually demonstrate that we can be sustainably profitable. That is a valid and fair criticism of Tesla's history to date."
As a younger company, Tesla indicated it had trouble getting the attention of some of the most important suppliers. Mr. Musk has complained in the past that he wasn't getting parts makers' best teams, but he has said that changed with the Model 3.
Tesla has made changes with its suppliers in the past to help preserve its cash position.
In August, Mr. Musk told analysts Tesla was able to negotiate longer payment terms to about 60 days for Model 3 parts, in what he described as "the nirvana" that would allow the auto maker to make the car and get paid for it before the bill is due to suppliers.
"Obviously, that's like the promised land right there," he said.
Write to Tim Higgins at [email protected]


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Come on shorts, push it back down... I just placed a stop order at $301... YOU CAN DO IT!


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

BTW, Musk's response to this:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1021285179178881025
Any accountants care to address how retroactive cost savings are applied? I mean, clearly it would affect cash on hand, but where would it show up on the balance sheet, and would it really not effect profit to shareholders?


----------



## roflwaffle (Sep 25, 2017)

My guess is someone at Tesla negotiated a discount on past sales in exchange for a lesser discount on future sales. Tesla will have a credit with that supplier they can use to pay for parts this quarter, and that supplier may make a little more in the long run if Tesla gives up a little on the overall discount.

The stock slide is I'm guessing a combination of normal pre-earnings call movement along with speculation about what Tesla may do with their convertible bonds coming due late this year and next year. Depending on where Tesla's stock price is at, the bond holders can chose to be repaid with cash, or with Tesla shares.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318605/000119312517086195/d349123dfwp.htm
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318605/000119312514069693/d678614d424b5.htm

The speculation is that if Tesla's share price is too low, the bond holders will probably request repayment in cash, and to avoid that because the company needs cash, Tesla's board would adjust the conversion rate to encourage more bond holders to request repayment with shares. This would further lower Tesla's share price because of dilution and is what someone who shorts Tesla is looking forward to. I wouldn't be surprised if this was one of the reasons there's so much negative press about Tesla lately. The other reason is just the usual negativity from companies and industries Tesla could take market share from.

On the flip side, if Tesla can raise enough cash to repay the bond holders and continue to fund production/expansion (like getting a credit from suppliers), it won't matter if the share price is low. Ironically enough, something like that could increase the share price, which could encourage bond holders to request repayment in shares and leave Tesla with plenty of cash and greater valuation.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Given that the debt coming due in November is only $230m... that figure is so much less than their cash-on-hand, even accounting for a realistic Q2 burn rate, I can't see it as being a decisive factor. But of course, more capital means building more lines, which means more cars flowing out the door, so...

Still trying to understand how any "refunds on previous spending", which the article claimed Tesla is seeking, would not affect reported Q3 profitability. Unless Musk is saying that Q3 will be positive even if you subtract out said refunded spending.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

$ Trillion Musk said:


> TSLA is down to <$304 (-3%) premarket. After stellar reports of the Model 3 from Tesla critics Sandy Munro and Dan Neil, how could this be? The market is rigged!


This is normal and totally expected behavior of a stock like TSLA which is valued almost entirely on future performance that it has not yet attained. Stocks are valued on their ability to generate profits. A good product is only one piece of the puzzle.

It's also "buy on the rumor, sell on the news". This has been going on since "Wall Street" consisted of a couple dozen men who would meet on the sidewalk to trade shares in companies they owned. There is nothing new here.

I'm actually surprised TSLA is valued as highly as it is at this stage of Tesla's capability. This is not a stock for the faint of heart. I do think someday it will probably be worth 10 times its current value but that day is likely a long time off and far from certain. While I'm rooting for Tesla to succeed, and to succeed in dramatic fashion, I think there are stocks with better risk/reward ratios out there. Which is why I don't own any TSLA. I might be a buyer at $240 but, even that would entail serious risks.

And never invest money you will need in the short term or money you can't afford to lose.


----------



## NEO (Jun 28, 2017)

Will Trump going after CARB push the stock price lower? Buckle up folks


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

This will make you feel much better. Listen to Ben destroy the article by Maureen Callahan in the New York Post calling Elon a fraud. I feel so much better now! Will it stop the FUD? Of course not, but it sure is nice to see someone tear apart these arguments one by one.






Dan


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

His points could be made stronger, IMHO.

Still a hilariously bad article


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

My faith in Business Insider is restored! 

Tesla reportedly asked suppliers for a refund as it looks to turn a profit (TSLA)

Tesla loses top sales exec ahead of second-quarter earnings​
Ganesh Srivats was hired to become CEO of the online retailer Moda Operandi. If I was offered a job as CEO, I think I'd leave my VP job too.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Basically, from the sound of it, the whole premise of the original article was garbage. They're not actually asking for a refund for "past work", they're asking for a reduction in price of unfinished ongoing contracts. That's a totally different thing.

I'll add that "Tesla being tough on suppliers" isn't exactly news, and I hope it's not news to any of their suppliers. It probably won't come as a shock to anyone here that Tesla is obsessed with vertical integration and is always looking for any excuse to cut a supplier out of their chain so they can do the work inhouse instead. Even Panasonic ultimately better watch their back (although they're in a much better leverage position than most of Tesla's suppliers). If Tesla ever develops their own in-house, fully independent battery tech, and thinks they can get the capital to scale it up without Panasonic, they'll cut them out in a heartbeat.

If you're thinking about being a supplier to Tesla, don't expect a long-term loving relationship. You're selling parts and services to Niccolò Machiavelli. Set hard, fast terms, and don't bet your company on contracts being extended without painful negotiation.


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

NOTE: Looks like I wrote this yesterday and never posted. Decided to post now.

So now, with a Tesla response in hand, would have been a better time to be a reporter and report what is, in essence, a non-story if they indeed still feel like it. You know, with actual feedback (see: research) from the company you’re writing a negative hit piece about it. Oh, it was only a few suppliers? Oh, this is SOP for the industry? Yeah...let’s not wait to get that information when we can post a clickbait piece and then ANOTHER piece later.

And by piece I mean POS.

So sick of this. I do more research for an email response to coworkers than these “journalists” do for their Tesla attack posts.

No matter, my wife said “why is it going down?” followed by “let’s get more!” So, there you go...my money where my mouth is, and my middle finger firmly and aggressively in the air at any and all Chanos-ians.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Lovesword said:


> followed by "let's get more!"




I still don't think we've seen the end of the shorts' stock price "manipulations". It's quite likely to go lower. They're still mostly controlling the messaging in the media. And I can't imagine that Q2 financial results are going to be that good.


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

garsh said:


> I still don't think we've seen the end of the shorts' stock price "manipulations". It's quite likely to go lower. They're still mostly controlling the messaging in the media. And I can't imagine that Q2 financial results are going to be that good.


TODAY'S NEWS: Tesla's Performance Model 3 with white interior didn't get enough orders, so Tesla opened up the white interior to the dual motor variation. LACK OF DEMAND!

See? I'm in the wrong line of work... I got this short thing down!! Who has more tips for me? I want to work for WSJ or Seeking Alpha!
Go ahead and @ me your tips and I'll spin them into POLISHED EXCREMENT!!!

Edit to add this for the shorts:


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Lovesword said:


> I want to work for WSJ or Seeking Alpha!


Remember, Seeking Alpha is just a blog/forum. You can sign up and post articles there yourself if you want. I tried it out.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

garsh said:


> I still don't think we've seen the end of the shorts' stock price "manipulations". It's quite likely to go lower. They're still mostly controlling the messaging in the media. And I can't imagine that Q2 financial results are going to be that good.


On the other hand, everyone is _expecting_ a bad Q2. It'd have to be _really_ bad to be worse than expectations. I mean, they had 11k cars in transit (~$600M in revenue), that alone is going to be a huge hit.


----------



## TrevP (Oct 20, 2015)

I really don't expect to see any great news on financial side until at least Q3 or Q4 reports are out later this year and into February of 2019. Until then the crazy trolls will be out in force harassing us on social media.

I've noticed a HUGE amount of new Twitter accounts all of them out to badger people on twitter who say anything nice about Tesla or the Model 3. I've been the victim of it for sure.

Perhaps we should start a Twitter account to expose the miscreants....


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

garsh said:


> Remember, Seeking Alpha is just a blog/forum. You can sign up and post articles there yourself if you want. I tried it out.


Popular Tesla Forum Moderator flips sides to post for Seeking Alpha, the end is near!


KarenRei said:


> On the other hand, everyone is _expecting_ a bad Q2. It'd have to be _really_ bad to be worse than expectations. I mean, they had 11k cars in transit (~$600M in revenue), that alone is going to be a huge hit.


With EVERYONE expecting HORRIBLE Q2 results and Tesla's cash burn at an all time high, the company tries to explain away the thousands of cars sitting in parking lots as being "in transit."



TrevP said:


> I really don't expect to see any great news on financial side until at least Q3 or Q4 reports are out later this year and into February of 2019. Until then the crazy trolls will be out in force harassing us on social media.
> 
> I've noticed a HUGE amount of new Twitter accounts all of them out to badger people on twitter who say anything nice about Tesla or the Model 3. I've been the victim of it for sure.
> 
> Perhaps we should start a Twitter account to expose the miscreants....


Creator of popular website forum for Tesla Model 3 fanboys (who doesnt even want a Model 3 himself!) decries the FAKE NEWS and blames the deep state for Tesla's shortcomings. There is no end to their blind, unwarranted loyalty!

I love hobbies.


----------



## Brokedoc (May 28, 2017)

The shorts are working overtime today and TSLA has dropped under $300 again. I'm reposting this from another thread because it truly belongs here:

Sorry to inform you but a TSLA Short just published an article that says Tesla forged their emissions data just like VW. Something about how it’s absurd that Tesla can claim to be emission free.

He goes on to say that because Tesla’s are so quiet, he clearly heard a Tesla driver fart as he pulled away from the light so Tesla is deceiving the public about CO2 emissions.....


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

Brokedoc said:


> The shorts are working overtime today and TSLA has dropped under $300 again. I'm reposting this from another thread because it truly belongs here:
> 
> Sorry to inform you but a TSLA Short just published an article that says Tesla forged their emissions data just like VW. Something about how it's absurd that Tesla can claim to be emission free.
> 
> He goes on to say that because Tesla's are so quiet, he clearly heard a Tesla driver fart as he pulled away from the light so Tesla is deceiving the public about CO2 emissions.....


You are mistaken sir. What you heard was simply the new high tech Methane Booster on the premium edition. LOL!

Dan


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Tesla Shorts Are Scared, Exposed, & Desperate - Memo To Media: Don't Be Duped

Mostly a great article. It spends *way* too much screen real estate on twitter comments about Montana Skeptic. But otherwise, it makes a lot of great points.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

garsh said:


> Tesla Shorts Are Scared, Exposed, & Desperate - Memo To Media: Don't Be Duped
> 
> Mostly a great article. It spends *way* too much screen real estate on twitter comments about Montana Skeptic. But otherwise, it makes a lot of great points.


Actually found the Montana Skeptic stuff the most interesting. I hadn't run into that yet. Just days after he helped bully a Pulitzer-winning WSJ car reviewer into deleting his Twitter account, he deletes his own? I want to know more about his oil investments. So he invests the fund he's paid to manage in the construction of drilling platforms? Just how much of that fund has he invested in oil? I mean, it's a big difference between a 1% investment and a 90% investment. Also especially interesting that after all of this time about him pretending to have been warning people about the risks of Enron, he was part of the firm that was _advising Enron_ _during their crash_.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Political posts deleted.

Remember, no politics on this website. Discuss that elsewhere.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

I didn't see any politics in my post. I don't see how it's political to point out that he's the fund manager for a guy best know as being Donald Trump's best friend, operating out of Trump Tower. I stated no judgement for or against him for that. Is it really political just to mention that?


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> I didn't see any politics in my post. I don't see how it's political to point out that he's the fund manager for a guy best know as being Donald Trump's best friend, operating out of Trump Tower. I stated no judgement for or against him for that. Is it really political just to mention that?


Don't take it personally. It's a judgement call, and I'm probably wrong. Nothing is held against members whose posts are deleted. I just don't want to risk this thread devolving into politics.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

I promise, I certainly didn't intend the thread to devolve into politics! Trust me, I hear enough US politics as it is, on almost every other website these days! 

Back on topic: I'm actually surprised that Musk hasn't responded to the "called his boss" allegation yet. Then again, that's one of two conflicting stories being attributed to Montana Skeptic, so....


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> Back on topic: I'm actually surprised that Musk hasn't responded to the "called his boss" allegation yet. Then again, that's one of two conflicting stories being attributed to Montana Skeptic, so....


It is surprising, but I hope he never does. He just needs to stay out of some of these arguments.


----------



## @gravityrydr (Apr 12, 2016)

A bit off topic but somewhat in-line with the comments about twitter trolls. Twitter just implemented this. It's about damn time. I've been reporting these guys for a while. Crypto scammers who have bots that post as soon as Elon posts anything.
https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/24/...display-name-change-lock-account-crypto-scams


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

@gravityrydr said:


> A bit off topic but somewhat in-line with the comments about twitter trolls. Twitter just implemented this. It's about damn time. I've been reporting these guys for a while. Crypto scammers who have bots that post as soon as Elon posts anything.
> https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/24/...display-name-change-lock-account-crypto-scams


Thank you, about time :Þ


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

@gravityrydr said:


> A bit off topic but somewhat in-line with the comments about twitter trolls. Twitter just implemented this. It's about damn time. I've been reporting these guys for a while. Crypto scammers who have bots that post as soon as Elon posts anything.
> https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/24/...display-name-change-lock-account-crypto-scams


Meh...half-assed attempt to solve this. Sounds like it's keyed specifically to the name "Elon Musk", but probably will let "Eion Musk" and "Elom Musk" through just fine (and no doubt there are some other characters that are even closer). Plus, it sounds like they could go through the account setup steps and do the whole CAPTCHA thing and then just set the bot loose anyway. Not that I have a better solution, but I don't see it taking more than a few days for the scammers to figure out a way around this.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Yeah, unicode is especially bad about that.

http://www.unicode.org/Public/security/latest/confusables.txt

E: ⋿ Ｅ ℰ Ε Е ⴹ Ꭼ ꓰ
l: ‎׀‎ | ∣ ⏽ ￨ 1 ‎١ ۱ ‎ I Ｉ Ⅰ ℐ ℑ Ɩｌⅼ ℓ ǀ Ι Ⲓ І Ӏ ו ן ا ‎‎ ‎ﺎ‎ ﺍ ‎ߊ ⵏ ᛁ ꓲ
o: .... actually, there's so many here, I'm not even going to bother writing them all out 
n: ... you know, this is just taking too much time, you get the picture 

There's so many permutations of "Elon Musk", you can never block them all.

ED: Hmm, I actually wrote a lot more letters than the above for E and l, but apparently 2/3rds got filtered out by the forum!


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Jalopnik is going all-in on MontanaSkepticGate:

https://jalopnik.com/get-a-load-of-this-ridiculous-story-about-how-elon-musk-1827842961


----------



## Gavyne (Jul 7, 2018)

Wall Street analyst believes TSLA stock should surge on record deliveries:

https://electrek.co/2018/07/25/tesla-tsla-stock-surge-deliveries-q3-wall-street-analyst/


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Whoa, interesting. I recently posted a dozen comments on two Seeking Alpha articles. A couple of them appear to have been deleted however.

All of the deleted ones were questioning the fact that Montana Skeptic's story about Elon and his boss has now gone through three contradictory iterations (... leaving to spend more time on his investments ... Elon called his boss ... Elon emailed his boss, then a colleage emailed Elon...)

Apparently someone moderating Seeking Alpha doesn't like his story being questioned. Let's see what happens if I try to question it again.

*ED*: Apparently my new attempt at questioning it never made it past the moderator queue. Fun. Love the irony that they're censoring people questioning a story, in an article condemning censorship.


----------



## EValuatED (Apr 29, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> Yeah, unicode is especially bad about that.
> 
> http://www.unicode.org/Public/security/latest/confusables.txt
> 
> ...


Elon name variations: clearly a use case for AI /s


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

EValuatED said:


> Elon name variations: clearly a use case for AI /s


How about Twitter just append every EM tweet with a message about not believing cryptocurrency scams?


----------



## EValuatED (Apr 29, 2017)

NOGA$4ME said:


> How about Twitter just append every EM tweet with a message about not believing cryptocurrency scams?


Might be most effective!


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Lol, here we go...


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1022431146175475712


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> Lol, here we go...


He deleted the tweet.

Elon really needs to get past the troll baiting. 
That's what the rest of us are for.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

CNN: Tesla's magic is wearing off as Model 3 excitement dwindles

The title is click-baity as all hell. The content is actually reasonable - it opines that Tesla opened up ordering to everybody because the majority of the remaining reservation holders are waiting for the $35k car.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

garsh said:


> CNN: Tesla's magic is wearing off as Model 3 excitement dwindles
> 
> The title is click-baity as all hell. The content is actually reasonable - it opines that Tesla opened up ordering to everybody because the majority of the remaining reservation holders are waiting for the $35k car.


Except that's not true. I'm not waiting for the $35k car, I'm going to be giving Tesla upwards of 60k, depending. But I can't because I'm in Europe. And I want air suspension too, which isn't out yet. Only about a quarter of reservation holder configs can be locked in at this point. And even then, there's a long wait for delivery.

Article also doesn't bother to mention that Tesla just increased wait times on new orders.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Hello irony, my old friend:

https://www.thestreet.com/technolog...s-in-war-against-tesla-short-sellers-14664407

Article title condemns "schoolyard taunts". Byline calls people who disagree with the author "fanboys", and the first line describes Musk as having a "preschool temper tantrum".


----------



## Gavyne (Jul 7, 2018)

garsh said:


> CNN: Tesla's magic is wearing off as Model 3 excitement dwindles
> 
> The title is click-baity as all hell. The content is actually reasonable - it opines that Tesla opened up ordering to everybody because the majority of the remaining reservation holders are waiting for the $35k car.


"If I'm going to spend $53,000 on a vehicle I'm going to look at other things," she said. "I feel like I loaned [Musk] money but didn't get any benefit from it."

All I can ask is, like what? Tesla does not have a viable competition at that price point for BEV's. All the fearmongering about how other established automakers are going to "soon" come out with Tesla killers. Yet as we look at BEV's either out now or coming out, they still don't beat Tesla on range, powertrain, tech, and sexy looks. I know the last one is subjective, but have you looked at Kona? I-Pace (which is now delayed) with its instrument clutter and sluggish touchscreen? Leaf? The more we see from other automakers, the more you realize just how far ahead Tesla is at this EV revolution.

And even if someone comes out with something nice, such as Porsche's Taycan, or Audi e-Tron, Tesla still to this day have the best supercharger network in the U.S. Range anxiety is a big issue for those that haven't switched from ICE cars, so Tesla is still the better choice if you want to drive coast to coast. Not to mention most of the BEV's worth looking at are produced with limited availability.

I don't buy that the magic is wearing off. The problem is not enough people know about Tesla and Model 3's. These articles never account for how Tesla does not advertise. You watch TV these days, there are at least 1-2 car commercials every single commercial break, they're force jammed into your brains. Tesla is able to sell these many cars without spending millions on advertising money, that's amazing in itself. Also the test drives are just starting, and they aren't available everywhere yet. The more people test drive Model 3's, the more people will fall in love with them.

Most people out there simply don't know a thing about Tesla or Model 3. This is especially the case in U.S. because we are still very much an oil consuming country influenced heavily by oil industry lobbyists. I didn't even know Superchargers existed until April of this year.

For me personally, the long range battery + Supercharger network took away my range anxiety. This really is the #1 issue for most people. I had wanted to upgrade to a new car for awhile, but I didn't want another gas car, and all the EV/Hybrid choices are just butt ugly. It's like they made them to make people not want to buy them. Tesla solved the range anxiety and aesthetics issue I had with EV's. Once I felt the instant torque, I was sold. Anyways, there's money and demand out there, but public education is key.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> I want to know more about his oil investments. So he invests the fund he's paid to manage in the construction of drilling platforms? Just how much of that fund has he invested in oil? I mean, it's a big difference between a 1% investment and a 90% investment.


There's nothing wrong with being invested in oil, I've had BP as one of my 7 or 9 core holdings for a while now. It becomes a problem when you actively try to increase the value of your holdings by spreading propaganda designed to reduce the chances of success of a company like Tesla. Skeptic's background might be in oil but he admitted to having a rotating basket of TSLA put options over the years. He didn't specify if it was only in his personal account or also in the account he professionally managed for his boss. But I have to assume he had TSLA puts in both personal and professional accounts (what's good for the goose is good for the gander, right?). Skeptic obviously lost a lot of $$ on at least a good portion of those put options and then the "fight" became emotional for him. He attributed his losses, not to his own misjudgement where the blame actually lay, but to Elon Musk's charisma and eternal optimism (which he viewed as hype and criminally fraudulent). But setting optimistic goals that are impossible to keep appeared to help Tesla perform. And there is no law against being eternally optimistic, even if that character trait was detrimental to shareholders, which I don't think it was.

Skeptic's boss was one of the earliest Model S purchasers and is a big fan of Tesla. I wouldn't be surprised if Skeptic's boss and Skeptic would verbally joust about Tesla's chance of succeeding with his boss letting his investment manager do as he saw fit (no micro-managing). But Musk did his boss a favor by cluing him into Skeptic's extra-curricular activities of bashing Tesla and sowing the seeds of FUD, both to the investing public and to professional money managers with the obvious intention of cutting off TSLA's access to investment capital. Skeptic also worked with journalists so they could publish misleading articles about TSLA. His boss made him choose his job or his TSLA bashing. I'm impressed that he put his foot down. Additionally, there is nothing wrong with a CEO calling up a wealthy customer and letting him know what his employees are up to. Especially if it's no good.

Now here's the kicker. If Skeptic was being sincere and accurate and fair, it would be rather heavy-handed and over-controlling of his boss to dictate his activities outside of his professional duties. Of course, MS was such a prolific Tesla basher it's highly likely he worked on his articles while he should have been actively managing his portfolio. But the fact that his boss put his foot down indicates he was shocked by what MS had written about Tesla and did not view it as the work of a neutral analyst just trying to look at the facts. I don't think I read one MS TSLA article that didn't make up crazy explanations for facts that were obviously due to other things. As I recall, one of the last things he wrote (that I can't imagine was the work of a sincere and honest analyst) was that the stockpiling of Model 3's near the end of the second quarter was due to lack of demand, not a desire to avoid hitting the 200,000 tax limit prematurely.



> Also especially interesting that after all of this time about him pretending to have been warning people about the risks of Enron, he was part of the firm that was _advising Enron_ _during their crash_.


This guy sounds like an enemy of the people of the world. I'm glad he was stopped! I wonder how many millions he has lost on betting against TSLA?


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> *ED*: Apparently my new attempt at questioning it never made it past the moderator queue. Fun. Love the irony that they're censoring people questioning a story, in an article condemning censorship.


Welcome to Seeking Alpha! It is a snake pit of hucksters and hypesters pretending to be objective analysts. But big money always draws those types. There are also sincere analysts but most of them are woefully unknowledgeable about the subjects they write about. Be afraid, be very afraid.


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

PNWmisty said:


> Skeptic's boss was one of the earliest Model S purchasers and is a big fan of Tesla.


Now *THAT* is a very useful bit of information that I had no seen reported anywhere and if true, goes a long way in helping explain what otherwise would actually seem like childish behavior on Musk's part. Is that information cited somewhere?


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

NOGA$4ME said:


> Now *THAT* is a very useful bit of information that I had no seen reported anywhere and if true, goes a long way in helping explain what otherwise would actually seem like childish behavior on Musk's part. Is that information cited somewhere?


It came out after my post to which PNWmisty was responding. It was Tesla's response to the story. They encouraged reporters to confirm that with Rahl's office.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

NOGA$4ME said:


> Now *THAT* is a very useful bit of information that I had no seen reported anywhere and if true, goes a long way in helping explain what otherwise would actually seem like childish behavior on Musk's part. Is that information cited somewhere?


I would only buy the "childish behavior" accusation if you thought Skeptic was a sincere stock analyst. And I don't see how any person with knowledge of the subject could believe that after reading his articles. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the CEO of a company who is being carefully and professionally libelled in the press by a malicious actor with serious conflicts of interest taking action and letting the perpetrators boss know what is going on. It's actually a professional courtesy to protect said boss from further problems.

The fact that he was an early Tesla owner is just the icing on the cake.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Martin Tripp's lawyer is looking to try to destroy Electrek:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1023271396049399808


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

PNWmisty said:


> I would only buy the "childish behavior" accusation if you thought Skeptic was a sincere stock analyst.


Not necessarily. I certainly have a healthy amount of disdain for MS, but without the additional information that EM potentially had a relationship with Rahl changes the perspective from a "I'm gonna tell your mommy" tattle tale, to more of a, "Hey, you might be interested in knowing what one of your employees is spouting off about".

I personally think that Elon should fiercely correct falsehoods that become widespread, but absent additional relationships like this, I wouldn't agree with the tactic of seeking out and calling up supervisors/bosses to put pressure on employees. Better to either confront the individuals directly and engage in a serious (but not Twitter-based) debate about the facts, or just leave it alone altogether.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

NOGA$4ME said:


> I personally think that Elon should fiercely correct falsehoods that become widespread, but absent additional relationships like this, I wouldn't agree with the tactic of seeking out and calling up supervisors/bosses to put pressure on employees. Better to either confront the individuals directly and engage in a serious (but not Twitter-based) debate about the facts, or just leave it alone altogether.


There is no ultimate truth here, only personal opinion but I think one of the great things about a society that is supposedly free and democratic is that we have a right to speak our sincere mind, discuss issues openly (even with strangers) and share thoughts. So I have to disagree with your belief that making an employer aware of conflicts of interest that may be arising from their employees is a bad thing. It would only be wrong if Musk applied some kind of coercion to MS's boss in an attempt to get him to censure his employee. But no evidence has been presented that that is what happened.

A free person does not bend to codes of conduct that they have not agreed to and that offend their sensibilities. "Thou shalt not be a tattle-tale" is not a high minded ideal, it is a tool of bullies to control and dominate and to keep the truth in the dark.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Some rather pro-Tesla articles today.

Tesla's second-quarter earnings are expected to be terrifyingly bad, but it likely won't send stock crashing - here's why

Tesla Will Raise Billions But they Should do it in their Own Terms


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

garsh said:


> Some rather pro-Tesla articles today.
> 
> Tesla's second-quarter earnings are expected to be terrifyingly bad, but it likely won't send stock crashing - here's why
> 
> Tesla Will Raise Billions But they Should do it in their Own Terms


Both good but brief and somewhat simplistic articles. They don't seem overtly "pro-Tesla" except that, unlike articles from the shorts, they assume demand for Tesla's will not fall off and that they will continue to sell 5,000 Model 3's and 2,000 Model S/X's per week, even after the initial reservation backlog is fulfilled. I think that is more likely than not but far from certain. Because wrenches tend to be thrown into moving machinery. It could be as simple as a global recession or an earthquake at the Freemont factory. I wouldn't bet on either of those things happening, but I wouldn't bet that one of them won't happen either. Another risk is that a supplier is unable to supply a critical part. While Tesla tries to protect against this, it's impossible to be completely protected, particularly when there are so many with a financial interest in Tesla failing (and not just short-sellers). This inability to obtain critical components can be orchestrated by bad actors.

It is literally impossible to guess the minds of the largest Tesla shareholders and therefore nobody can predict the share price movements. But I think it as likely as not that TSLA will spend some serious time in the $200's, right as revenue is soaring.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Tesla's obsession with vertical integration leaves it less vulnerable to outside forces killing critical suppliers. Tesla tends to buy more generic parts from outside suppliers and do more critical part manufacturing in-house.

Tesla's plan isn't 5000 Model 3s per week ongoing. Heck, that's not even the plan for the current quarter. This quarter is 6000. Q4 is 7500. Q2 2019 is 10000.

I have no doubt that Tesla will continue to sell them. The reviews have been overwhelmingly positive. And Tesla's demand is being artificially hindered right now - limited availability, "Bankwuptcy" FUD, people who don't like buying early model years, limited knowledge of EVs in general, no experience with Model 3 in particular (few showrooms, no test drives until recently, etc) no advertising, limited geographic availability at present, and on and on.

Tesla has continually gone through this cycle. They make a new car. Shorts say nobody will want it. It gets tons of reservations. Shorts say Tesla will fail once they exhaust those reservations. But purchases just continue to grow. 

I see no reason at all to see any difference this time. They've made a winner, and they're going to keep making and selling them in larger numbers.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> I see no reason at all to see any difference this time. They've made a winner, and they're going to keep making and selling them in larger numbers.


I think so too. But don't over-discount all of the potential things, many of which neither of us can see right now, that can derail the best-laid plans. As an investor, I'm more concerned with these types of unforeseen risks with a company that is not on a more solid financial footing vs. a more established company that can more easily weather unforeseen hardships.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

More Seeking Alpha articles.

Tesla - A Stealth Capital Raise?

_Additional disclosure: Short via Puts
Hi Elon. I am retired. No boss to call._​
LOL! Awesome!

How To Trade Tesla Q2 Conference Call?

_Finally, there is one unintended yet pleasant consequence from the finding of this study. There is no evidence that average Tesla short sellers have exerted any significant, negative long-term price impact from their short orders. They may be aggressive risk takers. They may be opportunistic, but they are not manipulative.

Though, *I don't have any data to conclude the same for Tesla institutional shorts*._​
I don't understand the point of this statement. The institutional shorts would be the only ones capable of any sort of manipulation. Joe Shmoe with his 1000 short puts just doesn't have the capital required to keep enough regular shares on hand to sell them off in order to bring the stock price down.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

garsh said:


> More Seeking Alpha articles.
> 
> Tesla - A Stealth Capital Raise?
> 
> ...


Also, even if Tesla did the aforementioned "stealth capital raise" - which they don't need to - it would only be a couple percent dilution. Hardly worth the hyperbole.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Forbes: Tesla Model 3 Outselling Small And Midsize Luxury Cars In U.S. In July [Infographic]

_(Of course, whether small and midsize luxury cars should be defined as the Model 3's competition, as Tesla has claimed of late, is debatable.)_​


In an otherwise reasonable article, he throws in this parenthetical sentence for no good reason. It links to the following article:

Business Insider: Tesla is making confusing claims about how Model 3 sales compare to its competitors like Mercedes, BMW, and Audi

Which is just full of ridiculous and incorrect information about car segments. It includes this little gem in the summary:

_And ultimately it doesn't matter, because the Model 3 is capturing electric-car sales, not undermining market share for luxury brands._​
Which I don't believe for one second.


----------



## Jayc (May 19, 2016)

What we are witnessing is the last cry of desperation from an industry that has no hope left.

Every time I see an article like this from Business Insider, Seeking Alpha and the like, all I see is the very negative thought process of the authors involved who are left having to write up misleading, false articles to make a living. Just imagine what sort of miserable lives these people must be leading. To wake up in the morning with the intent of writing up false stories - what a sorry existence that must be don't you think.

This is why Tesla has nothing to worry about. All they have to do is continue on the right path and success is guaranteed. That is as definite as evolution and natural selection as we know it


----------



## JWardell (May 9, 2016)

What. The. Heck. is going on with the stock price? It should be jumping to 600 by now!
How many days before the call? I guess a good time to get in to quickly double your money


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

JWardell said:


> What. The. Heck. is going on with the stock price? It should be jumping to 600 by now!
> How many days before the call? I guess a good time to get in to quickly double your money


What has happened recently to cause the stock to jump to $600? (objectively)

2Q earnings report/call are Wednesday.

The results will not be pretty, and we know that, since they were still actively ramping up in 2Q, adding the GA4 line, and (wink, wink) held back deliveries to avoid going over 200K. So 2Q is not going to be a pretty quarter, and I suspect that there is some baking in of the anticipated negative news into the share price.

However, the smart money knows well the reasons behind the poor quarterly results and the growth potential in the 3 and 4Qs, so see this for what it is...an amazing buying opportunity.

It won't be until 3Q results are reported in early November that we will have some definitive evidence to substantiate the $600 share price you think it deserves (mainly because Wall Street types have no ability to see beyond one quarter out in the future).


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

NOGA$4ME said:


> So 2Q is not going to be a pretty quarter


And I expect that the shorts will view this as their last chance to manipulate the stock price downwards and cover.

So I'm planning to press that "buy" button on Thursday. We'll see how good of a prognosticator I am.


----------



## JWardell (May 9, 2016)

NOGA$4ME said:


> What has happened recently to cause the stock to jump to $600?


They put a Model 3 in my driveway. Period.

They've done it. I bought stock a year, two, and three years ago on the gamble that they could really pull this crazy thing off, become a real volume car company, make the best car in the world, and produce thousands and thousand of them.

I was not the first to reserve. I knew by the time they got to me, they would have already delivered to many many others. It's a big hump to be over, and they're just getting started. And they truly changed the whole industry while they're at it.

Well worth double the price in my book.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

JWardell said:


> They put a Model 3 in my driveway. Period.


Well, they need to demonstrate that they can do that 5000+ times per week, and make money while doing so. So, patience. If they can do that, we'll see $400/share rather quickly.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Goldman Sachs warns of 'waning' Tesla Model 3 social-media buzz
_Enthusiasm for Tesla Inc.'s Model 3 is "waning," analysts at Goldman Sachs said...
















_


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Their graph doesn't support their claims.










*Skew*: There's been a repeated cycle of ups and downs after the initial buzz wore off. No shock there. The fact that they ended the graph on a "down" has no meaning.

*Overall*: Discussion of the product has doubled since early this year (you can filter out the spikes since they just reflect short-term news). Yes, both negative and positive have gone up, but who really cares? The people who hate Tesla are not the market.

Not that Tesla has done this, but it's worth pointing out that you can actually take over a market _just by making people hate you_. GoDaddy did this with domain name registration, probably the least controversial thing one could think of. They ran a media campaign full of blatantly sexist ads and got a ton of negative press for it. But the result was that for most people, whenever they needed to register a domian and needed to think of a registrar to use, GoDaddy was the only one that came to mind.

Again, not that Tesla did this by any stretch. But the key point is, if the choice is between "a low level of commentary, where positive slightly outranks negative" and "double that level of commentary, where negative and positive are roughly equal", you almost always want the latter.

And really, this chart is almost exactly what I'd expect. You always get a lot more buzz in the leadup to a product release (due to speculation) and immediately after. Then it dies down, except for breaking news. Meanwhile, the background buzz from people getting their vehicles steadily grows, with a lag behind deliveries. I'm not sure what exactly why Goldman Sachs would expect it to look different.


----------



## Gavyne (Jul 7, 2018)

This should make investors happy: https://electrek.co/2018/07/31/tesla-gigafactory-panasonic-battery-cell-production-model-3/

To know that Panasonic is increasing cell production by 30% by end of the year, this means they believe in Tesla and they see an increase in demand and production. Also worth noting, this very interesting part:



> Now Japanese media Nikkan is reporting that Panasonic is planning to increase its battery cell production capacity by 30% at the plant by the end of the year with three new production lines for a total of 13.
> 
> Panasonic Chief Financial Officer Hirokazu Umeda confirmed that production has gained momentum and they expect it to start being profitable by the end of the year:
> 
> ...


They must know something if they also plan on turning profit exactly when Elon said Tesla was going to, in Q3/Q4.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

In advance of the Q2 report, Clean Technica offers a list of "Boneheaded Questions" Musk should consider likely to be asked, and their patently obvious answers:
https://cleantechnica.com/2018/07/30/tesla-conference-call-11-boneheaded-questions-musk-can-expect/

A gem from MSNBC:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/31/tes...ut-of-state-solar-division-to-build-cars.html



> One reason Tesla needs so many hands on deck at Fremont, workers explained, is because the company introduced an all-manual, no-robot line under a tent to ramp up Model 3 production. Among other tasks, workers in the tent tear open boxes of batteries, get them out of the way fast, and then get underneath vehicles to push batteries into place and secure them.


Perhaps that's just really bad wording, but it sounds like the author thinks that EVs are just powered by a bunch of D-cells. "Boxes of batteries" and workers "pushing them into place" by hand? Does this person have any clue how large and heavy EV batteries are?

It's quite true that GA4 is less automated than Tesla's other GA lines. And there are lots of boxes of parts constantly arriving from suppliers; general assembly is the process where all of the numerous "bits" of the car come together, and always involves lots of manual labour, although Tesla has focused heavily on automation of it in its other general assembly lines. But those cardboard boxes aren't full of "batteries". Battery packs are wheeled to the line, and raised with lifts. In Tesla's other GA lines the mating process is fully automated, although I wouldn't be surprised if in GA4 aligning the pack and bolting it into place is done by hand. But there's no way that workers are getting "under" the vehicles after taking the batteries from their "boxes of batteries", to "push them into place".


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> Perhaps that's just really bad wording, but it sounds like the author thinks that EVs are just powered by a bunch of D-cells. "Boxes of batteries" and workers "pushing them into place" by hand?


If I were a Tesla assembly worker, and some "journalist" was fishing me for dirt on Tesla's production issues, I could imagine feeding them misinformation to make them appear ignorant.


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

Greenlight Capital's 2Q investor letter has been posted on Seeking Alpha: https://seekingalpha.com/article/4192993-greenlight-capitals-david-einhorn-q2-2018-letter?dr=1

Greenlight is a Tesla short and bemoans in the letter that _"TSLA soared 29% during the quarter and was our second biggest loser"
_
The letter dedicates a page and a half (of the basically 6 page letter that includes details of the wedding of one of their analysts) to attempting to justify their position on Tesla including a personal note that "_David _[Einhorn]_ is happy that his Model S lease has ended and is excited to get the Jaguar I-PACE, which has gotten excellent reviews"
_
(oops, I guess he'll have to wait...damn delays!)

At any rate, the big takeaway of the letter is the fact that the same brilliant analysis of Greenlight that led to them shorting Tesla stock, resulted, as a whole, in a 5.4% loss for the quarter and an *18.3% loss year-to-date*.

Ouch! Couldn't have happened to a nicer group of people.


----------



## Model3P75D (Jul 22, 2018)

$ Trillion Musk said:


> Whether or not they met their targets, the Tesla team deserves a big round of applause for a job well done! Here's to a phenomenal 1st half of 2018 and even more success in the 2nd half!!


For sure they deserve a round of applause, I picked up my M3 performance model 4 days ago and expected a slow delivery process and compromised finish! Surprisingly, the car is put together well and drives like a Ferrari. I have owned P85 with autopilot for 2 years and that's awesome as well. I miss the luxuries of the S but performance and fun to drive of 3, is one of a kind!


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

Model3P75D said:


> I picked up my M3 performance model 4 days ago and expected a slow delivery process and compromised finish! Surprisingly, the car is put together well and drives like a Ferrari. I have owned P85 with autopilot for 2 years and that's awesome as well.


Who would have thunk it? You mean the stories in the press do not reflect reality?


----------



## MelindaV (Apr 2, 2016)

thread to discuss the Q2 call is posted HERE


----------



## Gavyne (Jul 7, 2018)

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/t...llion-paper-loss-after-stock-rally-2018-08-02



> Investors who are betting that Tesla Inc. shares are poised for a fall were sitting on a paper loss of nearly $2 billion Thursday, after the stock rallied more than 16% following its latest quarterly earnings.
> 
> Tesla short sellers were down $1.7 billion in mark-to-market losses on the 35.1 million Tesla shares that they have shorted, according to S3 Partners LLC, a company that has access to and tracks real-time short interest data.
> 
> ...


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

This is interesting.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1025118034669830144
Let that sink in - today's price jump was simply organic. The shorts haven't even begun to try to cover. When they do, it will drive the stock price even higher. Will there be a race between the shorts to get out before the others do? Will they try to wait for a dip in the price that may never come?


----------



## Bokonon (Apr 13, 2017)

garsh said:


> Let that sink in - today's price jump was simply organic. The shorts haven't even begun to try to cover. When they do, it will drive the stock price even higher. Will there be a race between the shorts to get out before the others do? Will they try to wait for a dip in the price that may never come?


I feel bad for anyone who is [still] waiting for the "inevitable" dilution by capital raise or bond conversion as their cue to cover their position. Historically, that has not been a successful strategy with TSLA, as investors have reacted favorably to any financial development that reduces existential risk to the company. In that regard, many shorts could easily find themselves waiting for Godot.

On the convertible bond side, it's worth noting that there are $920M in convertible notes that mature in March 2019 with a conversion price of $360, or just above today's closing price (source). Converting that entire tranche would increase the float by about 2%, which, if you're already down 30/40/50%+ on your TSLA short, really isn't going to make a significant difference...


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

The best 15 minutes of summary I have seen. The guy is a little hard to watch sometimes in his delivery but I think he nails the mindset of many shorts. It has come down to a matter of pride for many. They just can't see the writing on the wall...and they're going to lose their shirt I think if they don't wake up really soon. The important observations are in the second half if you can get through the numbers at the beginning.

Dan


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Great video.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Dan Detweiler said:


> The best 15 minutes of summary I have seen.


Meh.

He's assuming that the price increase is due to the shorts covering. But my source (posted above) says that he's not seeing _any_ of the shorts covering yet. I think Jeremy is just making assumptions, and he might be wrong. If the price increase was entirely organic, and the shorts haven't begun covering yet... watch out!


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

garsh said:


> Meh.
> 
> He's assuming that the price increase is due to the shorts covering. But my source (posted above) says that he's not seeing _any_ of the shorts covering yet. I think Jeremy is just making assumptions, and he might be wrong. If the price increase was entirely organic, and the shorts haven't begun covering yet... watch out!


True, but if what you say is true that mean even better news for us!

Dan


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Let's see what the shorts on SeekingAlpha had to say after Tesla's earnings report. 

Marginal Analysis: Forecasting Tesla's Q3 Performance: $6.99B In Revenue, $85M In Operating Profit

Sounds like someone may be "seeing the light". They see profit in the future. I wonder how much longer they'll keep a short position in TSLA.

Anton Wahlman: Tesla's 'Confidence Game' And $2.4 Billion Balance Sheet Hole

Anton is still in complete denial. He can't believe that Tesla will get by without raising additional money. Sure, Tesla will borrow money to create the Shanghai factory, but he seems to think that additional borrowing will be required. I wonder just how much money he'll end up losing due to his short position.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

garsh said:


> Let's see what the shorts on SeekingAlpha had to say after Tesla's earnings report.
> 
> Marginal Analysis: Forecasting Tesla's Q3 Performance: $6.99B In Revenue, $85M In Operating Profit
> 
> ...


Big difference between "borrowing" and "selling equity".


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

Ben Sullins makes a great point in this video that should send TSLA shorts running for the hills: the Model 3's disruptive market is more massive than what everyone has been saying.





The Model 3's iPhone moment is taking place, and it's wonderful to see!


----------



## Ode to Joy (Mar 11, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> Great video.


Do you have an english translation of the icelandic poem you quoted?
Just curious.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Ode to Joy said:


> Do you have an english translation of the icelandic poem you quoted?
> Just curious.


Oh, my sig? It's the chorus of the linked song, "Af ávöxtunum skuluð þið þekkja þá" (By Their Fruits Shall You Know Them), by Jónas Sigurðsson :

----
This guy shops in the craziness store, lets vote for him!
He's not some sort of political type, let's vote for him!
Lost no assets in this so-called crash, let's vote for him!
He's made of gold, this calf / And his s***'s not gonna shovel itself!
----
Later the singer begins to chant the title, reducing it to just "af ávöxtunum" (by their fruits), but slowly morphs it into "af vöxtunum" (from their (bank account's) interest). 

His "political" songs are my favorites of his work. Another good one is "Hleypið mér út úr þessu partýi" (Let Me Out of This Party), whose chorus translates as:

------
We struggle to loan money... To others... To keep the consumption going
To buy new things... For others... To keep the economy growing
And this endless work. .. For others... To pay for the party
And you never get to come up to breathe
-----

He then goes off into detractors shouting things at him urging him to not make a big deal of the status quo, and he (and the audience at concerts ) responds to each with shouting "ÉG SEGI NEI!" (I SAY NO!), etc.

At one point, a member of the Pirate Party delivered the lyrics of that song as a floor speech in parliament 

Man, it's been a long time since I was at a Jónas Sigurðsson concert.... but, I'm at a Mugison / Sykur / Valdimar / Prins Póló concert right now that's about to start, so I think I'll live, lol


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

Zac & Jesse make another great point regarding Tesla chips:


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

I love the smell of fresh-burned shorts in the morning!
Tesla short sellers are sitting on a paper loss of nearly $2 billion after stock rally
Tesla shares spike, dealing short-sellers a $1.7 billion loss
Tesla shorts lose more than $1 billion on post-earnings surge

But wait! It gets better! There are still optimistic shorts!
Tesla Shorts Stand Their Ground After $1.7 Billion Loss
Tesla Stock Short Sellers Aren't Scared
Shorts Are Sticking With Tesla Despite $1.7B Loss

Or maybe some of them just really like the burn.


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

Well, at the risk of offending some...

...DAMN, this is funny! LOL!






Dan


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

$ Trillion Musk said:


> Zac & Jesse make another great point regarding Tesla chips:


I'm in the chip business, so I feel a bit more qualified to comment on this than other more general auto manufacturing topics. As usual, I think Zac & Jesse are overblowing the whole chip thing (not that I mind--even if overblown, provides some balance to the FUD side of things).

The type of chips that Tesla is making are not in and of themselves groundbreaking. Other chipmakers already make hardware neural nets, although I will say that they are certain running with the leaders, and the fact that it could be in productized form in the near future is significant.

And it's also not like they beat nVidia at its own game and were able to magically produce a chip that's 10X more powerful. nVidia GPUs process 200 frames a second using software that implements a neural net on a processor. But that processor can also do many more things. The Tesla neural net is a purpose built neural network implemented in hardware. Yes, it can do 2000 frames a second, but that's all it can do. Of course this is great if your application is a vision processor for autonomous driving. Not so great if you need to render 3D graphics on a display or mine bitcoins or do something else. It's apples and oranges.

I also don't agree that you can compare nVidia's market cap with Tesla's because nVidia "only" makes "a" chip, and Tesla makes chips, cars, batteries, solar panels, etc. To draw a comparison there shows a very naive view of how stock prices work in different industries.

I do agree that at this stage in autonomous driving technology development it is good for Tesla to push the technological boundaries themselves. Even though the R&D cost will be enormous, it will allow them to progress faster than anyone. But at a certain point, the level of innovation that they can maintain will no longer be competitive with the industry as a whole, and they should probably approach their solution with the expectation that at some point they may want to go third party.

This is the way it was with my former company (IBM) and chips. When the chip industry was young and IBM had what was probably the most demanding need for ICs, they created their own chip fabs and design software groups that led the industry for 20-25 years. But eventually the rest of the industry caught up and was competitive with (and exceeded) IBM's, and IBM did the right thing and jettisoned their chip business a few years ago. The advantage it had given them was now a liability and made them uncompetitive.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

An interesting Seeking Alpha article:

Tesla Shorts Have Won Past Year

I was initially ready to dismiss this article outright. But, Tesla stock is really volatile. It's possible that a short happened to time their "shorting" when the stock was at a high point. Could there be evidence that shorts came out ahead with some well-timed daytrading of TSLA? So I read the article to see what tidbits it might uncover. I was quite disappointed. The entirety of the argument was that the stock was volatile, so that it's *possible* that longs lost money and shorts made money. That was quite disappointing. More like an article of "wishful thinking".

But now I was curious. Were there shorts that made money? Do we see a case where the number of shares shorted dropped to coincide with a drop in stock price? That could indicate that there were some shorts who cashed out and made money.

Here's the "short interest" over the past year: https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/tsla/short-interest

There were a few minor drops in shares shorted, but only two significant ones:

2017/09/15 -2017/09/29. Shorted shares dropped from 30M to 27M. Share price dropped from $375 to $341
2018/06/15 - 2018/06/29. Shorted shares dropped from 37M to 35M. Share price dropped from $370 to $343
So, it looks like some shorts *could* have actually come out ahead if they were timing things correctly. But there are still $35M worth of TSLA shorted, and most of those shorts were convinced that Tesla would complete fail and the stock become worthless. Those people aren't making any money.

But more importantly, let's look at the interval where the number of shares shorted rose significantly:

2018/03/29 - 2018/04/13. Shorted shared rose from 32M to 38M. Share price rose from $266 to $300.
There are people who added *significantly* to their collection of shorted TSLA shares between these two price points! In order for those 6 million shares to make them any money, the stock has to drop below at least $300/share. What are the chances that this happens with Tesla turning a profit in Q3?

So no Bill, the shorts haven't won the past year. But you keep telling yourself that.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Not analysts' opinions, but the IIHS's:

http://www.iihs.org/iihs/news/statusreport/article/53/4/3



> The combined crash avoidance features on the Tesla Model S are reducing third-party physical damage and injury liability claims, while the benefit of adding "Autopilot" is limited to lowering collision claims.
> ...
> The combined driver assistance features on the 2014-16 Model S lowered the frequency of claims filed under property damage liability (PDL) coverage by 11 percent and the frequency of claims under bodily injury (BI) liability coverage by 21 percent, compared with the 2012-14 Model S without the technology, HLDI found.
> ...


They also did a comparison of emergency braking and lanekeeping, and the results were more mixed:

http://www.iihs.org/iihs/news/deskt...river-assistance-features-in-road-track-tests

The two Teslas (a 2018 Model 3 and a 2016 Model S) both hit the stationary target, apparently filtered out (I thought they removed the stationary object filtering several updates ago?), but had a gentler and more consistent deceleration profile against moving targets (matters more to me, due to bad / icy roads on which hard braking means a crash). For lanekeeping on curves, Model 3 remained in its lane in all 18 trials, and Model S went out only once; the competition was very much hit or miss. Strangely on the hill tests, Model 3 did best but Model S did worst (not sure why that would be). 3 and S never disengaged on hills and curves like the competition. Lastly, in 180mi real-world driving test, Model 3 was the only vehicle to never fail to slow for a vehicle, but it also had 12 mild false positives (gentle braking where it wasn't needed). IIHS's conclusion:



> IIHS can't say yet which company has the safest implementation of Level 2 driver assistance, but it's important to note that none of these vehicles are capable of driving safely on their own. The production vehicle that can safely drive itself anywhere, anytime isn't available at the local car dealer and won't be for quite some time.


That said, their data table at the bottom clearly shows Model 3 as their best performer (too bad their S had hill-fear!).


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

garsh said:


> An interesting Seeking Alpha article:
> 
> Tesla Shorts Have Won Past Year
> 
> ...


Don't forget that you have to pay interest to short a stock. If a stock remains level, you lose.

I went ahead and did the math you suggested above:

Date Short interest (M shares) TSLA ($) Avg. interest TSLA change ($) Gains (M$)
08-15-2017 28,70 362,33
08-31-2017 29,24 355,90 28,97 -6,43 -186,28
09-15-2017 29,98 379,81 29,61 23,91 708,07
09-29-2017 27,06 341,10 28,52 -38,71 -1104,16
10-13-2017 27,42 355,57 27,24 14,47 394,22
10-31-2017 28,09 331,53 27,76 -24,04 -667,31
11-15-2017 30,13 311,30 29,11 -20,23 -588,91
11-30-2017 31,16 308,85 30,65 -2,45 -75,08
12-15-2017 31,22 343,45 31,19 34,60 1079,18
12-29-2017 30,43 311,35 30,83 -32,10 -989,51
01-12-2018 30,68 336,22 30,56 24,87 760,01
01-31-2018 29,81 354,31 30,24 18,09 547,13
02-15-2018 29,38 334,07 29,59 -20,24 -599,00
02-28-2018 28,71 343,06 29,05 8,99 261,12
03-15-2018 28,38 325,60 28,54 -17,46 -498,39
03-29-2018 31,73 266,13 30,05 -59,47 -1787,37
04-13-2018 38,26 300,34 34,99 34,21 1197,11
04-30-2018 39,09 293,90 38,68 -6,44 -249,07
05-15-2018 38,88 284,18 38,99 -9,72 -378,94
05-31-2018 39,08 284,73 38,98 0,55 21,44
06-15-2018 37,29 358,17 38,18 73,44 2803,98
06-29-2018 34,59 342,95 35,94 -15,22 -546,94
07-13-2018 34,72 318,87 34,65 -24,08 -834,46
Net profit: -733,17M​
Aka, a net loss of $733M.

ED: Oh dang, the forum messed up the formatting of me pasting in my spreadsheet. It looked good when I pasted it!


----------



## JWardell (May 9, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> Not analysts' opinions, but the IIHS's:
> 
> http://www.iihs.org/iihs/news/statusreport/article/53/4/3
> 
> ...


The Model S they used in their tests was old with AP 1.0 and very strangely not updated, on software v7


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> ED: Oh dang, the forum messed up the formatting of me pasting in my spreadsheet. It looked good when I pasted it!


If you retry using CODE tags to surround the data, it should keep all of your spaces.


----------



## Bokonon (Apr 13, 2017)

RUT ROH! 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1026872652290379776


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Bokonon said:


> RUT ROH!
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1026872652290379776


Umm.. what does that mean exactly? What happens to shareholders who don't want to sell?


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

From TMC: "Well if the majority of share-holders approve the plan then you have no choice but to sell... (I've been through this rodeo with a different company before.)"


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

$420 eh?


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> Umm.. what does that mean exactly? What happens to shareholders who don't want to sell?


It likely doesn't matter assuming he can find 31% of shareholders that do (assuming Musk owns about 19% of the company already).


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

NOGA$4ME said:


> It likely doesn't matter assuming he can find 31% of shareholders that do (assuming Musk owns about 19% of the company already).


I'm not so sure he can't.


----------



## Bokonon (Apr 13, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> Umm.. what does that mean exactly? What happens to shareholders who don't want to sell?


Yeah, if a majority of shareholders approve the offer at $420, there isn't much you can do... unless Elon separately decides to offer some kind of "alternative" ownership vehicle in the private company (think along the lines of how he's funding The Boring Company). I think there are enough people that are such passionate supporters of Tesla and their mission that there would be demand for it, but if Tesla is generating positive cash flow and profit from here on out, I'm not sure that there would be a *need* for it.


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

Bokonon said:


> RUT ROH!
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1026872652290379776


Now we know what he's been doing with all the Etherium he's been collecting and not paying out!


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

I'm hoping for B shares. I'm totally cool with B shares.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Lol...


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/path%3D%252Fr%252Fwallstreetbets%252Fcomments%252F95dg60%252F


----------



## Gavyne (Jul 7, 2018)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1026885883482365953


----------



## Guy Weathersby (Jun 22, 2016)

I have thought for some time that Mr Musk would at some point try to take Tesla private, I think of it as Master Plan Part 3 ,but I wasn't expecting it this soon. 

I would hate not being a shareholder, but not having to worry about the market would probably be best for Tesla, so I would probably vote for his plan.


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

I saw the price not moving anymore and now I'm seeing reports that trading has been halted. I'm a stock noob... assuming, of course, that it's tied to Mr. Musk's comment. Is there some kind of rule there? A breach? Possible issue with what he said? 
Those with more experience than I, please give me a lesson!

EDIT: BBC is reporting it was halted with an announcement coming soon... I'm still not truly understanding but am buckling up for the ride!


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Lovesword said:


> Is there some kind of rule there? A breach? Possible issue with what he said?


Social Media is a valid way for a company to announce news. So nothing illegal about what he did. Public disclosure is usually just fine for a public company. Now if he *lied*, then that would be a problem.


----------



## JWardell (May 9, 2016)

I would certainly be all for it. I hate the shortsightedness and greed that drives public companies


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

Ok, so google and reading are my friends. I think I've got it figured out now... no one really has it figured out and everyone is speculating... need the announcement or tweet or whatever to come from Tesla/Elon expanding upon what was started.

Some news sources are even making 420 references (weed) and saying it's a joke.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Everything seems perfectly serious. This is not a joke.

I'm a bit freaking out right now because I have some stop orders that would sell half my stock at $420. It's even possible that it'll go over $420, due to shorts struggling to cover. Can't cancel them because the banks here are closed, and I had to buy through a bank. Just hoping that Tesla trading will remain stopped until market close....


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

Lovesword said:


> Some news sources are even making 420 references (weed) and saying it's a joke.


Are we having fun yet? Never a dull moment!


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

PNWmisty said:


> Are we having fun yet? Never a dull moment!


LUDICROUS SPEED MY FRIEND!!! 

My wife's text to me just now as I try to learn and fill her in to the best of my abilities:

"We should have bought more!" - my awesome wife


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

So, I thought I had plans for this evening, things not related to spending all my time on the net and watching CNBC...


----------



## JWardell (May 9, 2016)

Question for the smart financial folks:
Most of my Tesla shares are in my 401K. How would this work? Can I continue to hold shares in a private company or would I be forced to sell?


----------



## Bokonon (Apr 13, 2017)

Here you go, @KarenRei... You will have a choice to sell your shares or remain a shareholder in a private Tesla. Per Elon's blog post:



> First, I would like to structure this so that all shareholders have a choice. Either they can stay investors in a private Tesla or they can be bought out at $420 per share, which is a 20% premium over the stock price following our Q2 earnings call (which had already increased by 16%). My hope is for all shareholders to remain, but if they prefer to be bought out, then this would enable that to happen at a nice premium.


(source)


----------



## Mad Hungarian (May 20, 2016)

Bokonon said:


> Here you go, @KarenRei... You will have a choice to sell your shares or remain a shareholder in a private Tesla:


It's live again, and FLYING!!!


----------



## MelindaV (Apr 2, 2016)

Mad Hungarian said:


> It's live again, and FLYING!!!
> 
> View attachment 12829


and the couple sell orders I entered a few months ago when it was up around 370 have sold. some at $378, some at $384.50. wasn't expecting that today


----------



## Mad Hungarian (May 20, 2016)

MelindaV said:


> and the couple sell orders I entered a few months ago when it was up around 370 have sold. some at $278, some at $384.50. wasn't expecting that today


I don't think anyone was expecting what happened today! I hope you meant that first sell was at $378, not $278...

I actually was out for a bit after it peaked around $350, saw some good quick opportunities in cyber security stuff, but as soon as I saw then run begin after the Saudi news I went back all-in.


----------



## MelindaV (Apr 2, 2016)

Mad Hungarian said:


> I don't think anyone was expecting what happened today! I hope you meant that first sell was at $378, not $278...
> 
> I actually was out for a bit after it peaked around $350, saw some good quick opportunities in cyber security stuff, but as soon as I saw then run begin after the Saudi news I went back all-in.


yeah - typo


----------



## Bokonon (Apr 13, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> So, I thought I had plans for this evening, things not related to spending all my time on the net and watching CNBC...


There is no absolute certainty right now that Tesla will go private, and the likelihood of another party offering to buy all of Tesla above $420 is close to zero. The market will price TSLA in accordance with this uncertainty, so I doubt we'll see the full $420/share today, barring some insane structural issue with the market for TSLA (yes, shorts trampling each other).This happens all the time with buyout/merger transactions... Buyout price is announced at $X, price quickly ramps to $X*90%, but then flatlines with minor fluctuations for several days. Over time, as the probability of the deal going through increases (or decreases), the share price floats asymptotically toward $X (or falls back down). But it doesn't necessarily go to $X and get stuck there.

And worst case, if your limit-sell order gets triggered today, but you want to remain a shareholder for the long term? Tomorrow, buy back the same dollar value as was sold today. Or, since placing stock orders is a more involved process for you (alas!), wait to repurchase until the price stabilizes and you're comfortable with the odds of the vote going through.

EDIT TO ADD: Oops, quoted the wrong message... Meant to quote your "freaking out" message. All the excitement over the announcement and an ill-advised late-afternoon coffee made my index finger a little jumpy.


----------



## Mad Hungarian (May 20, 2016)

MelindaV said:


> yeah - typo


Phew!


----------



## Bokonon (Apr 13, 2017)

JWardell said:


> Question for the smart financial folks:
> Most of my Tesla shares are in my 401K. How would this work? Can I continue to hold shares in a private company or would I be forced to sell?


Not a CPA, but as far as I know, you can hold private securities in a 401K. Many 401K plans won't let you buy them (or individual stocks, for that matter), but if yours allowed you to buy TSLA, it shouldn't have any issue with a private TSLA.

I actually have an investment account with shares of the Dutch holding company that currently owns MobilEye, since I neither sold nor tendered my shares to Intel... I can't sell it or buy more shares, but it's there!

EDIT TO ADD: I'm assuming that you'd be holding the private TSLA shares for the long-term, possibly until it goes public again (as Elon suggested in his blog post), so you shouldn't even have to worry about jumping through hoops with your current plan provider (or rollover custodian down the road) to sell private securities when it's time to tap that 401K.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Yeah, probably only one stop order triggered, which is fine . I'll put in an order to buy at ~$370 or so in case the shorts push it down below there at some point, which they probably will (hmm, should probably add in some ~$360 and ~$350 buys too, just in case  )

Never should doubt the willingness of shorts to disbelieve literally everything Musk says. He could say the sun will rise in the east tomorrow, and shorts would place bets that it will rise in the west.


----------



## Bokonon (Apr 13, 2017)

MelindaV said:


> and the couple sell orders I entered a few months ago when it was up around 370 have sold. some at $378, some at $384.50. wasn't expecting that today


Oh no, an unexpected windfall! Tempted to add FSD back to your config?


----------



## JWardell (May 9, 2016)

Bokonon said:


> Not a CPA, but as far as I know, you can hold private securities in a 401K. Many 401K plans won't let you buy them (or individual stocks, for that matter), but if yours allowed you to buy TSLA, it shouldn't have any issue with a private TSLA.
> 
> I actually have an investment account with shares of the Dutch holding company that currently owns MobilEye, since I neither sold nor tendered my shares to Intel... I can't sell it or buy more shares, but it's there!
> 
> EDIT TO ADD: I'm assuming that you'd be holding the private TSLA shares for the long-term, possibly until it goes public again (as Elon suggested in his blog post), so you shouldn't even have to worry about jumping through hoops with your current plan provider (or rollover custodian down the road) to sell private securities when it's time to tap that 401K.


Thanks. I also managed to quickly execute 6 more shares before close as that cash was just laying around useless. This makes so much sense for the success of Tesla now that they have reached this production volume.

I should add, this is really because I still NEED to sell off the handful of shares I bought a year ago as a down payment for the car. Couldn't part with them at $290, was hoping they went well above $350. But now I only want to invest more...so sell the cash stock for bills, and buy more 401k stock to balance it


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

The stop loss triggered on our holdings today although we still have some shares. I was out of touch all afternoon and had only learned about the craziness just now.

If Tesla goes private I believe it would take away real risk from stock manipulation. Wall Street is cutthroat about TSLA and the likes of Chanos, even if there’s a small likelihood, can pose a serious threat to its finances.

And if we are allowed to keep our portion of ownership then I’m all for it. Let’s leave everyone else behind.


----------



## Brokedoc (May 28, 2017)

<<<<AND IN RELATED NEWS>>>>

Pharmacies across the nation are reporting tonight that there is a sudden shortage of adult diapers....

Apparently, TSLAQs across the country have suddenly lost their ability to control their body functions......


----------



## Bokonon (Apr 13, 2017)

Brokedoc said:


> <<<<AND IN RELATED NEWS>>>>
> Pharmacies across the nation are reporting tonight that there is a sudden shortage of adult diapers, *Xanax, Valium, Prozac, Zoloft, Paxil, and Ambien, among many others*....


FTFY.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

Bokonon said:


> There is no absolute certainty right now that Tesla will go private, and the likelihood of another party offering to buy all of Tesla above $420 is close to zero.


"All of Tesla" is not for sale! This is structured so anyone who wants out can get out. Everyone else signs papers and agrees to remain shareholders. The only part that gets sold is that portion of shares of those who want to sell for $420. That said, I was under the impression one would need to be a "qualified investor" to agree to this (and stay in) and obviously, not all current shareholders are qualified investors. So, I'm not sure how that will be dealt with.

I would love to see Tesla go private but, somehow, I don't see it happening. And this will cause lawsuits. Some people love to sue Tesla. That's just the way it is. The only kind of success some people approve of is their OWN success.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

$ Trillion Musk said:


> The stop loss triggered on our holdings today although we still have some shares.


That's not a "stop loss", sounds like a sell limit order.


----------



## samson (Mar 8, 2017)

If $TSLA do goes private..... I cant imagine how it would be in the world of private investors.


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)




----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)




----------



## Brokedoc (May 28, 2017)

I'm not a financial person but I've owned shares of companies that have either been bought by another public company or bought and taken private.

There are many small details unique to each company such as voting structure and how it's approved but my understanding is that after the board figures out the details of the deal (all cash for buyout or cash/equity shares in the new company for merger), it is put to a vote by the shareholders. If this happens in Tesla's case, after it gets approved, all the current shareholders are given a lump sum payment ($420) in their trading accounts for the agreed amount and you cease to have shares in the company. A private buyout by multiple parties such as would be likely in Tesla's case would then split up ownership of the company and voting rights privately amongst themselves. Of course many involved in the buyout would already be owners of the public company such as Elon, the Saudis, private equity groups, etc)

After restructuring the private company or reducing inefficiencies or whatever the new owners want to do without public shareholder scrutiny, they can choose to have another IPO at a higher market cap to liquidate some of their equity in the more valuable company.


----------



## Brokedoc (May 28, 2017)

KarenRei said:


>


I guess the only ones having a worse day today than the TSLAQs are the brokers that have to work late tonight on the phone making margin phone calls. LOL!


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

PNWmisty said:


> That's not a "stop loss", sounds like a sell limit order.


It was a trailing stop loss @X%. Totally caught me by surprise, and after finding out the reason behind the volatility I would rather have held onto my shares.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

<sniff!> <sniff!>
What's that burning smell?

From Monday morning:
Bulls May Not Have Noticed But Tesla's Growth Story Is Dead
BWAHAHAHA! 
Says demand for Model 3 doesn't exist. Says quality for Model 3 is terrible.
Says nothing about Tesla now making a profit on the Model 3s being built.

From Tuesday (yesterday) morning:
Tesla Investors Should Brace For A Credit Downgrade
BWAHAHAHA! I think John Engle needs to brace for a credit downgrade. 

Elon Musk takes Tesla on a strange route to a potentially smart idea, yet again
TLDR: Wow, it's like a hit piece on Elon, but saying the end result is smart. Strange. Looking through her past articles, she's always disliked Musk's behavior. And they're mostly about Elon's strange antics - not so much about Tesla itself. So, reasonable and consistent. I can understand disliking his behavior - I sometimes do as well.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

Brokedoc said:


> I guess the only ones having a worse day today than the TSLAQs are the brokers that have to work late tonight on the phone making margin phone calls. LOL!


I've never had a margin call but I imagine it's gotta be worse than the person who has to tell you about it! It's not like someone died!


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

$ Trillion Musk said:


> It was a trailing stop loss @X%. Totally caught me by surprise, and after finding out the reason behind the volatility I would rather have held onto my shares.


Oh, yeah, you reminded me why I always do market orders. Did you know that certain traders can see all the pending orders and can price their trades to either leave your order alone or take it out (depending upon their preference)? A market order is not perfect but it doesn't show your hand in advance. In a market as liquid as TSLA, it probably doesn't matter much, at least in terms of individual orders, but, in the aggregate, the outstanding orders are still a gift to professional traders that have access to that info.


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

PNWmisty said:


> Oh, yeah, you reminded me why I always do market orders. Did you know that certain traders can see all the pending orders and can price their trades to either leave your order alone or take it out (depending upon their preference)? A market order is not perfect but it doesn't show your hand in advance. In a market as liquid as TSLA, it probably doesn't matter much, at least in terms of individual orders, but, in the aggregate, the outstanding orders are still a gift to professional traders that have access to that info.


Thanks for this. I've asked this question a while back whether my trade is visible and never got a straight answer. Yeah, with a heavily traded stock like TSLA you can get away with it, but I agree with you that showing your hand is a big disadvantage.

Any chance for TSLA to dip below $350 knowing that $420 is the buyout price? Approximately how many trading days do we have before the company goes private?


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

$ Trillion Musk said:


> Thanks for this. I've asked this question a while back whether my trade is visible and never got a straight answer. Yeah, with a heavily traded stock like TSLA you can get away with it, but I agree with you that showing your hand is a big disadvantage.
> 
> Any chance for TSLA to dip below $350 knowing that $420 is the buyout price? Approximately how many trading days do we have before the company goes private?


At this point, nobody knows how long it'll be before privatization. Yes, it's certainly than possible that the endless incredulity of shorts could push it well down. I put a buy order in for $359 today.


----------



## Guy Weathersby (Jun 22, 2016)

$ Trillion Musk said:


> Approximately how many trading days do we have before the company goes private?


I am certainly not an expert, but I am pretty sure that we are talking months rather than days. I think that the biggest unknown is how long the SEC will take. Buyouts often take over a year to complete, but each is unique and, at the risk of abusing the language, this one is uniquely unique.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

$ Trillion Musk said:


> Approximately how many trading days do we have before the company goes private?


It's important to keep in mind that Musk said the decision to go private had not been made yet.


----------



## @gravityrydr (Apr 12, 2016)

Just, WOW. That is commitment. Also, what does "There was no borrow" mean?


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1026919508643078145


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

@gravityrydr said:


> Just, WOW. That is commitment. Also, what does "There was no borrow" mean?
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1026919508643078145


It meant his broker couldn't find any shares to loan him so he could sell them.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

PNWmisty said:


> It's important to keep in mind that Musk said the decision to go private had not been made yet.


Then elaborated:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1026914941004001280


----------



## EValuatED (Apr 29, 2017)

I'll just leave this here...










(Link to story.)


----------



## EValuatED (Apr 29, 2017)

Also potentially plausible scenarios for Musk & the board to take Tesla private can be seen in this article here also from CNBC.


----------



## JWardell (May 9, 2016)

EValuatED said:


> I'll just leave this here...
> 
> View attachment 12909
> 
> ...


That Short Buster graphic is spectacular


----------



## EValuatED (Apr 29, 2017)

JWardell said:


> That Short Buster graphic is spectacular


Yep! Almost snorted my coffee on that one (OK, I did a little!)


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

EValuatED said:


> Also potentially plausible scenarios for Musk & the board to take Tesla private can be seen in this article here also from CNBC.


How about these headlines for irony:

"Biggest oil nations invest billions in tech company that is set to decimate their industry"

"America seeks to destroy it's own future and most promising tech company, Tesla"


----------



## MichelT3 (Nov 16, 2016)

I have increased my # of shares these past months. 
Would earn nicely at $ 420, but would prefer to go on as a private investor. I hope that's possible for me also, as a non-US citizen. My broker couldn't tell me anything new. We just have to wait I suppose.

For my decision whether to stay on private or not, it matters whether it will be possible to sell reasonably easy. Might want the money to buy (a better version of) my Model 3. When I finally will be able to. In a year / 2 years.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

OK, the Tesla story is just becoming too much fun so I had to get some skin in the game. For the first time ever, I bought TSLA shares this afternoon. For better or worse, I'll probably just hold them for a long time. I wasn't ready to buy at $300 but that was before Musk started talking about taking it private and, when the shares dropped this afternoon I couldn't resist. Never a dull moment, I tell you!


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

PNWmisty said:


> OK, the Tesla story is just getting too much fun so I had to get some skin in the game. For the first time ever, I bought TSLA shares this afternoon. For better or worse, I'll probably just hold them for a long time. I wasn't ready to buy at $300 but that was before Musk started talking about taking it private and, when the shares dropped this afternoon I couldn't resist. Never a dull moment, I tell you!


You're already up aftermarket 

Too bad I'm already around what I consider my maximum exposure limit. I'd like to sell the ups and downs, but I hesitate about putting in a sell order given how quickly major news could change at this point. A sell order that might make sense now could suddenly become idiocy in a heartbeat.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> You're already up aftermarket


Yes, I expect a wild ride but it doesn't matter since I'm not looking to sell. What amazes me is what passes for financial journalism these days. Here's an excerpt from a Reuters article titled "Is SpaceX the model for a private Tesla?"

"Musk said in a tweet that he hoped all current investors would stay with Tesla when it went private and had a "special purpose" fund structure in mind to accomplish that. A special purpose vehicle is a structure that pools investors into a single entity. Private market experts say they are unclear how that would work."

Certainly, a special purpose vehicle to pool investors into a single entity could be structured a number of different ways but how much of an expert is a "private market expert" who can't even outline one or more possible structures for such an entity (especially considering that hundreds of them already exist)? Why even put this in your story if your private market "experts" had no idea? It would be like saying "Legal experts we spoke to said it was unclear how a law could be structured to make it illegal to mislead consumers".

In any case, I like this idea of privatizing Tesla. It would attract less short-term speculators, less greed and certainly fewer shorts (although the diehard TSLA shorts will probably still bet against the private company in Las Vegas), LOL! They are addicted and have to recoup their losses, you know? But all shorts will be forced to cover their positions and only the most demented individual shorts will keep placing bets against Tesla in betting markets. If privatized, I think most news articles about Tesla will take on a much more friendly tone.


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

Well, all this is getting very interesting with all the news of late. The stock has already risen enough for me to justify upgrading to dual motor. The question now becomes, will the possibility of privatization or delisting of the stock create a price that will justify Performance? 

Hmmm...I kind of doubt it with my limited shares but hey, I guy can dream, right?

Dan


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

TSLA delisting could happen between Q4 2018 and Q2 2019 according to Rob Maurer's observation at the 3:30 mark:

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/tesla-daily-tesla-news-analysis/id1273643094?mt=2#episodeGuid=http://techcastdaily.com/?p=555

Looks like the roller coaster ride will continue for a while.


----------



## jmmdownhil (Sep 12, 2017)

Funding problem solved!
(source: Bloomberg)
"SEC (calls Tesla): So where is the financing coming from for this going-private transaction?
Tesla: Funny story actually, we don’t know. But you could call Elon?
SEC (calls Musk): So where is the financing coming from for this going-private transaction?
Musk: It is coming from my good friend Gandalf the Grey! Would you like a bean?
SEC: Ah. Do you have a phone number for Mr. the Grey?
Musk: He lives in the moon!"


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

The funding is likely coming from a large fund or funds that will harness the profit of selling shares to short sellers when they need to cover their short positions. In this scenario, the big fund(s) have been acquiring the shares at $300-$370. Lots of them. Many of these shares are shares that short sellers have borrowed to sell at prices between $300-$370 and don't really exist except in an unrelated party's account (who has unwittingly, through their broker, loaned them out to be sold short). After acquiring a significantly large position in TESLA, the large fund(s) can agree to buy up to X number of shares @$420 at the close of the transaction to go private. When it's publically announced funding is secured and the deal is approved by shareholders, the share price will soar past $420 because there are more shares shorted than available on the open market. At that point, the big fund(s) can sell to the shorts at a high price (to cover the short sellers previous short sales) and shortly thereafter meet their commitment to buy them back (via the go private agreement) at $420. 

This is all possible due to the large number of short positions relative to the float (more shares shorted than the float). And then the "messiahs" prophecy (short squeeze of the century) will come to pass.


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

PNWmisty said:


> The funding is likely coming from a large fund or funds that will harness the profit of selling shares to short sellers when they need to cover their short positions. In this scenario, the big fund(s) have been acquiring the shares at $300-$370. Lots of them. Many of these shares are shares that short sellers have borrowed to sell at prices between $300-$370 and don't really exist except in an unrelated party's account (who has unwittingly, through their broker, loaned them out to be sold short). After acquiring a significantly large position in TESLA, the large fund(s) can agree to buy up to X number of shares @$420 at the close of the transaction to go private. When it's publically announced funding is secured and the deal is approved by shareholders, the share price will soar past $420 because there are more shares shorted than available on the open market. At that point, the big fund(s) can sell to the shorts at a high price (to cover the short sellers previous short sales) and shortly thereafter meet their commitment to buy them back (via the go private agreement) at $420.
> 
> This is all possible due to the large number of short positions relative to the float (more shares shorted than the float). And then the "messiahs" prophecy (short squeeze of the century) will come to pass.


Hence, the short sellers themselves would be funding the delisting...BRILLIANT!!!

I like it.

Dan


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

I strongly believe that the notion that a short squeeze can push it meaningfully past the $420 limit is a myth. Didn't happen with SolarCity, won't happen here.

Only a fifth of Tesla's stock is short. Institions / individuals that _have to_ liquidate will be flooding the market with a lot more stock than that. Let alone institutions / individuals who _want to_ cash out at $420. Nobody who has to (or wants to) liquidate is going to wait until the last minute to recall their shares, or they won't have shares free to sell to covering shorts. And it'll be a race to the bottom, because nobody who's selling their shares would rather sell for $420 than "any value greater than $420" - so whatever the current price is, they'll sell for less. Meanwhile, there's not going to be a rush for shares from investors at the last minute because most longs are buying while its well cheaper (e.g. $355 at present). You might have some fraction of "dubious longs" who don't believe Tesla is actually going to go private and think that $355 is a bad deal without privatization, but I have trouble believing that there's any meaningful fraction of them - given that the stock was already higher than this even before the privatization deal was announced.

It's not impossible for the stock to go well over $420, but I very strongly doubt it.


----------



## Guy Weathersby (Jun 22, 2016)

I tend to agree with your conclusion that the stock is unlikely to go much above 420, but I have a fair degree of uncertainty. The big question in my mind is how many highly committed longs are there? I for example find it hard to imagine a price which would convince me to sell Tesla, particularly since I might not be able to buy back in. My wild and groundless guess is that about 75 percent of private investors are in this camp. I have even less idea about institutions. If there are over 80 percent of committed longs, the ride could get pretty wild.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> I strongly believe that the notion that a short squeeze can push it meaningfully past the $420 limit is a myth. Didn't happen with SolarCity, won't happen here.


Don't expect this deal, if it comes to pass, to look anything like Solar City. Completely different beasts.

And don't expect $420 to be the actual price, that is just a convenient starting point. Notice how Musk used the number "420" to make the deal seem even more "pie in the sky" than the shorts would have thought if the number was 418 or 422? Assume your brain is a computer. Now switch "critical thinking skills" on "high" and turn the "fuzzy logic processor" on "dominant" mode and turn off the "standardized common knowledge" input. Now tell me why he picked "$420". Why would he choose a number that would make the whole thing seem more like a farce or a desperate move?

Because he likes appearing like a clown? Because he thought it would attract more investment from the Saudis? Because he needed the support of potheads everywhere? All wrong answers.

Obviously, he wanted to increase short interest and limit share price increases (for the time being). OK, now why would he want to increase short interest and limit share price rise? Obviously, this makes a lot of shares available to trade hands because shorts can borrow shares from the longs (who continue to hold them) to allow big shareholders to increase their positions without there being any actual stock (remember, it's borrowed). Look at the spike in trading volume around this period of time and it's obvious that some shareholders have bailed while others have increased their position. Hmmm...I wonder who has been acquiring shares (hint: small fry like you and me don't even show up on the volume chart). Simultaneously, he's getting the shorts to agree to buy even more TSLA shares at whatever the price is at a future date. This is a commitment a short-seller cannot renege on, if they do, the broker that lent them the shares must make good. One way or another, every share sold short must be repurchased at a later date (interestingly, as soon as these shares are purchased, they effectively evaporate). The bigger this number of shares (sold short) is, the bigger the powder keg. Obviously, Musk is trying to use the extreme bias of the shorts against themselves.

For someone who had a large short position before the 420 announcement, the obvious thing to do when a buyout at a higher price is announced is to cover as quickly as possible. And while some shorts did cover (Anton at SA comes to mind) short interest hasn't declined, as would be the usual result of that announcement. But now some of the more intelligent and pragmatic shorts have been replaced with even more biased, more ****y and more emotionally involved short sellers. The smart, cool tempered shorts exited their positions before the loss became greater. Never for a minute think that $420 is the final price or that the final price creates a ceiling for how much a short will have to pay to cover. Because they will have to pay whatever the market will bear. And if there are more people who want to go along for the private ride than accept the final price, whether $420 or something else, is not relevant to how much someone is willing to forgo to get in on the private offering.

Look at it this way - let's say you want a 10-year investment with an 8 percent or better annual return and you think Tesla can provide that. Tesla is offering to cash you out at $420 but you want in so you decide to hold your Tesla shares. Assume there are short sellers who need to cover their short sales but there are no more people willing to sell them for $420 (because all the remaining shareholders want to be part of TSLA going forward). In this scenario, the short sellers will need to pay whatever price it takes to convince a shareholder to sell to them instead of taking an ownership share of the private company going forward. At this point the $420 is meaningless because the remaining shareholders don't want to be cashed out, they want to be part of Tesla. It will be up to the shorts to pay whatever it takes to convince the shareholders to take the cash rather than the ownership share. $440 might not do it. $880 might not do it, the sky is the limit. It comes down to the future value the large remaining shareholders assign to the company. Certainly, at a high enough price, the shorts will get the shares they need to cover, and cover they must. But that price is defined what the remaining TSLA shareholders think it's worth, not what Tesla is willing to pay for the shares. This scenario (where the value is determined by shareholders) only happens if the balance of shares sold short is high enough relative to the number of shareholders who want to be cashed out. In other words, the more shares that decide to stay "in", the more likely and the more dramatic the short squeeze. And the more shares the big participants mop up in the interim, the fewer people there are that will be wanting to be cashed out.

My theory is that, over the last several months, Musk's antics have depressed the share price from time to time and this was perhaps somewhat intended. Big buyers have stepped in an mopped up millions of shares in anticipation of this event. Look at the spike in volume at the end of March - huge long positions were established between $245 and $275. These are big players accumulating massive positions at low to medium prices. There is a lot of money in the world looking for a productive place to park. A LOT of money. Unimaginable amounts of capital looking for a productive place to park for a decade or longer. And a lot of dumb fund managers looking for protection against the next big stock market crash or correction think short Tesla is a good place to be. Which way will the teeter-totter go? I think I have an idea which way it will go from watching what Musk does. Because he is a lot more familiar with the mindset of the big holders than we are.

How to value Tesla through all this? A month ago, I was not willing to pay $300 for it. That's because I was only willing to value it 5-6 years out. Now I think it's easily worth $600-$800 in today's dollars, but I'm willing to look at it as a longer-term investment. The reason the shorts assign a value of $0-$50 is because they are only looking at the income stream last quarter, this quarter or next quarter. In the end, it's worth whatever someone is willing to sell it for and whatever someone is willing to pay for it. In the case of the shorts, they will be forced to pay whatever they have to in order to cover their shares so, with enough shorts, the longs are in the driver's seat when it comes to assigning value. The stronger the hand of the big funds who own TSLA, the more it's worth.

I'm really glad to hear the Saudi's like TSLA as an investment. This means it could be more profitable for them to sell less oil at a higher price because this would accelerate the growth in value of their investment in Tesla (by accelerating the adoption of EV's). Previously, I was worried big oil producers would stop EV growth in its tracks by making gas very cheap.



> Institions / individuals that _have to_ liquidate will be flooding the market with a lot more stock than that. Let alone institutions / individuals who _want to_ cash out at $420. Nobody who has to (or wants to) liquidate is going to wait until the last minute to recall their shares, or they won't have shares free to sell to covering shorts.


That's not how a deal like this would ever work. If a shareholder takes no action after a vote approves privatization/share buyout, then you will collect the $420 (or whatever the actual offer price is) at the same time as everyone else who doesn't sell on the open market sooner. You don't sell your shares into the open market unless you want out sooner or the price rises above the buyout offer and you want to sell. Those who sell earlier are selling to someone who will either collect the buyout offer from Tesla or take an interest in the private entity. Those who want to remain will have to give advance notice and forfeit their shares in exchange for private shares or an ownership in a special purpose vehicle set up for unaccredited investors. You can bet this will be designed to burn the shorts, not so much for Musk's personal satisfaction but more as a team effort to lower the average cost per share of the privatization.



> It's not impossible for the stock to go well over $420, but I very strongly doubt it.


Of course, no one including Musk knows what will actually happen. But I'm quite sure of a few things, the ride will be thrilling and have some unexpected twists and turns, a lot of shorts will get badly burned and it will take a lot longer than anyone is currently saying. There will probably be a big downdraft between now and then but this is actually a good thing for making the deal work.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

> That's not how a deal like this would ever work. If a shareholder takes no action after a vote approves privatization/share buyout


Put yourself in the position of a shareholder who either can't continue on with a private TSLA, or considers $420 too rich for their blood. Are they going to stick around for the vote? Of course not. Even if the outcome of the vote isn't a foregone conclusion by that point - it almost surely will be - any given investor will unlikely have a sufficient stake to flip the outcome. They're not going to stick around through to the vote just to prove a point; they'll sell beforehand if it can earn them more money.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> Put yourself in the position of a shareholder who either can't continue on with a private TSLA, or considers $420 too rich for their blood. Are they going to stick around for the vote? Of course not. Even if the outcome of the vote isn't a foregone conclusion by that point - it almost surely will be - any given investor will unlikely have a sufficient stake to flip the outcome. They're not going to stick around through to the vote just to prove a point; they'll sell beforehand if it can earn them more money.


The way a shareholder votes on the question of privatization will not bind them as to whether they sell or stay. If privatization is approved, every shareholder must decide by a certain date to stay or sell (or some combination of the two), regardless of which way they voted on privatization. If they take no action, they will be cashed out. Musk wants as many as possible to stay so he will structure the deal to encourage that as much as possible.

I think the vote to privatize will pass easily and anyone who wanted to sell would be best served waiting for privatization to approved. But it hardly matters what us little guys do, it's the institutions. The big short squeeze would be more likely to happen after approval.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

PNWmisty said:


> The way a shareholder votes on the question of privatization will not bind them as to whether they sell or stay. If privatization is approved, every shareholder must decide by a certain date to stay or sell (or some combination of the two), regardless of which way they voted on privatization. If they take no action, they will be cashed out. Musk wants as many as possible to stay so he will structure the deal to encourage that as much as possible.
> 
> I think the vote to privatize will pass easily and anyone who wanted to sell would be best served waiting for privatization to approved. But it hardly matters what us little guys do, it's the institutions. The big short squeeze would be more likely to happen after approval.


Why would a seller choose only $420 if there's a short squeeze that would push it over $420?


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> Why would a seller choose only $420 if there's a short squeeze that would push it over $420?


They wouldn't choose to sell at the offer if they knew they could sell for more but there is no guarantee they could sell for more. It would be a gamble.

I think the big short squeeze would happen as more and more TSLA longs decided to roll their shares into the private Tesla. This would likely involve the shareholder filling out paperwork provided by Tesla directing their brokerage to release the shares to Tesla on a certain date. On that date, Tesla would issue new company stock in the shareholder's name. I imagine the brokerage, once those shares were committed to Tesla, would restrict them from being sold or lent to short sellers (because they are already committed to Tesla). It's generally illegal to short sell unless there are shares available to back them up.

When a brokerage customer borrows shares to short sell, the lender retains the right to recall the securities at any time and without notice. If the shares are recalled by the lender, the broker will try to re-borrow the securities on the client's behalf. However, if shares cannot be obtained, the broker would be forced to cover the client's short position at the market price at the client's expense and potentially without notice. The beauty of this is that any shares bought to cover a short position, for practical purposes, immediately cease to exist. Of course, so does the short position.

If enough Tesla shareholders decide to roll their public shares into private shares and the shorts don't cover in time, there could be a situation created where brokerages around the world ran out of shares to lend to short sellers and the brokerages would be forced to buy shares at market prices, using their clients money, to cover their positions. If there were still outstanding shorts after all those wanting to cash out had sold their shares, then the price spike could spike to whatever it took to convince the remaining shares to sell rather than be converted to private shares. And the brokerages could be forced to cover at those prices on behalf of their clients. But that's only one way a short squeeze could develop (it could develop prior to all that). I'm not clear on the timing of these various events or how the "buyout" will be structured but there is no way it can be structured to prevent a possible short squeeze leading into the transition. But I imagine Musk would structure it as much as possible to favor a short squeeze. Because this is likely what the new investors (large funds) are counting on to help limit the overall cost of their new position of the private Tesla.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

PNWmisty said:


> They wouldn't choose to sell at the offer if they knew they could sell for more but there is no guarantee they could sell for more. It would be a gamble.


There is no gamble. They're always guaranteed $420. They either leave themselves the opportunity to capitalize on it, or they don't. Nobody is going to choose the former when they don't have to.



> If enough Tesla shareholders decide to roll their public shares into private shares...


It's not just about about "deciding" - many institutions (and unfortunately, quite possibly many if not most individuals, despite what Elon wants - there's a big discussion of this over on TMC**) _can't_ hold a stake in a private Tesla. They _must_ liquidate. On top of this you have to add the people who think $420 is a great price and choose to liquidate. Versus only 20% of the stock short.

Don't get me wrong, I _wish_ there would be some massive short burn to $500, $600, $700+. I just can't see it realistically happening.

** It's the "accredited investor" problem compounded with SEC imposed fund limits - for example, mutual funds cannot be comprised of more than 15% of illiquid securities. The best alternative that I've seen suggested so far is to have one of the stakeholders in TSLAP be a public company (which anyone can invest in), but unlisted so as to make it difficult to short (still possible, but you'd have to privately arrange transactions with stakeholders rather than just going through a broker). That structure still has some limitations, though.


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

I agree with the notion that Elon Musk is playing a strategic poker game against the shorts, ensuring that whoever is on Tesla’s side will get the upper hand, and playing mind games in order to raise the stakes. 

We may still have a few months to go before Tesla goes private. Can anyone foresee circumstances, such as something that would cause panic selling from the unconvinced longs, that would then cause TSLA to make a huge dip, as some speculated that share price could be halved before it turns around and skyrockets upward?


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> There is no gamble. They're always guaranteed $420. They either leave themselves the opportunity to capitalize on it, or they don't. Nobody is going to choose the former when they don't have to.


I see your point and agree with your thinking. Except for one thing. What if this period of supposed deal uncertainty is being used by the financial backers of the deal to mop up shares on the cheap? There would be a rotation of shareholders from those who couldn't go private, to those who would. The shares are likely already moving into the same hands as the people who are funding the deal. The more they buy now, the less it costs them to buy out the remaining shares at $420. Musk had to disclose the buyout plan publically or it would be insider trading. My theory is he made sure it sounded sketchy while simultaneously meeting disclosure requirements. Because, in any more normal situation, the price would typically rise to somewhere near the planned buyout price very quickly and would not provide much opportunity for mopping up shares on the cheap. The average daily volume for the last 10 days is over 15M/day. Before the deal is executed, it could already be largely accomplished at prices a lot lower than $420. If the shorts haven't covered by then, or even better, have grown their position to 45M or 50M shares short, the $420 will no longer act like a limit (because there would be more shares shorted than shares cashing out) and those who mopped up shares below $420 to help take it private can profit from the short squeeze.

Total shares outstanding: 170M

Shares held by insiders: 43M
Shares held by institutions: 106M
Shares remaining (individuals) 21M

Shares short: 35M

The shorts could be said to have pent-up buying demand. Apparently, they don't want to cover now at $355, they are waiting/hoping for lower prices. Currently, they owe a collective $12.4 billion to the market. That number could go way up. If this deal works it will be because of the shorts, not in spite of them.

On top of all this, the mama of all short squeezes could happen due to the buyout price being raised. If the acquisition of shares is going as planned, and short interest is still high enough to justify raising the price, it would be in everyone's best interest (save for the poor shorts) to raise the buyout price to $520 or maybe even beyond. All legal as far as I can see. And that is why short sellers are not typically the brightest bulbs in the room. When you borrow stock to short against it you are agreeing to let your broker cover on demand and possibly with without any advance notice. The buy will simply happen and the cost is deducted from the short-sellers account. This would put a lot of accounts into negative territory. Hopefully, it won't bankrupt any brokerages at the same time.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Extra, extra, read all about it!

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...to-be-in-talks-to-invest-in-tesla-buyout-deal


----------



## EValuatED (Apr 29, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> Extra, extra, read all about it!
> 
> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...to-be-in-talks-to-invest-in-tesla-buyout-deal


Karen with the scoop! Noting the mention of "Reuters reported on Aug. 11 that the PIF has shown no interest so far in financing Musk's proposed deal." Which I read about the other day... and was mildly incredulous, as they had just made a substantial investment... Likewise a similar SoftBank mention of no interest.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

EValuatED said:


> Karen with the scoop! Noting the mention of "Reuters reported on Aug. 11 that the PIF has shown no interest so far in financing Musk's proposed deal." Which I read about the other day... and was mildly incredulous, as they had just made a substantial investment... Likewise a similar SoftBank mention of no interest.


Yep, this literally reverses that Reuters report that all the shorts were sharing the other day.

This is just the sort of investments Tesla wants: those in the single-digits level. He doesn't want someone like Softbank grabbing the lion's share of the equity with one giant investment; he wants it spread around smaller parties. But they can't be too small due to the limit on the number of allowable investors. Someone like the Saudi Sovereign Wealth Fund, who just bought a few billion, possibly chipping in a few billion more, would be a good fit. My personal feeling for the amount that the buyout will cost is on the order of $20B total, maybe up to $30B, depending on the details.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> Extra, extra, read all about it!


This is beautiful and meshes perfectly with my theory posted 15 minutes ago.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> Yep, this literally reverses that Reuters report that all the shorts were sharing the other day.


It does "reverse" the reports all the shorts were sharing last week. But here's what they will latch onto: "Discussions at high level, but no commitments agreed." They will say this proves he lied when he tweeted "funding secured". But their critical thinking skills are so poor they won't be able to imagine that he had other funding secured as well. So they might even short more!


----------



## Bokonon (Apr 13, 2017)

PNWmisty said:


> But here's what they will latch onto: "Discussions at high level, but no commitments agreed." They will say this proves he lied when he tweeted "funding secured". But their critical thinking skills are so poor they won't be able to imagine that he had other funding secured as well. So they might even short more!


Visual aid:










As I sit here, already shaking my head in disbelief at what headlines we'll see tomorrow, I'm wondering if I don't have one more "Don't-bet-against-Elon arbitrage" trade left in me...


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

Bokonon said:


>


Bokonon, Your picture appears to show that the short's might finally be doing a little due diligence on location. It looks like they are already down in Saudi Arabia investigating the latest scoop from ground level. Impressive! I didn't think they had it in them.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

Below are a couple of quotes from Musk's blog post this morning: 
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/13/mus...s-of-funding-secured-tweet-in-taking-tes.html



> Therefore, reports that more than $70B would be needed to take Tesla private dramatically overstate the actual capital raise needed. The $420 buyout price would only be used for Tesla shareholders who do not remain with our company if it is private. My best estimate right now is that approximately two-thirds of shares owned by all current investors would roll over into a private Tesla.


The key words in this statement are " two-thirds of shares owned by all _current_ investors". Considering the recent news and corresponding increase in daily trading volume, it's reasonable to infer that the composition of "current investors" is changing. I suggest those trying to play the short-term are getting out and those who plan to stay long-term as major investors are increasing.

Unfortunately, short interest is only reported once/month and there is an almost two week lag between the report and the dissemination of info. So peons like us are always looking at short interest 2-6 weeks old! Does anyone know how to access any indicators that can reliably show more up-to-date short interest trends of individual NASDAQ stocks?

The most recent info (from the end of July) shows:

Total shares outstanding: 170M

Shares held by insiders: 43M
Shares held by institutions: 106M
Shares remaining (individuals) 21M

Shares short: 35M

With 170 Million shares, 1/3 is 57 Million who Musk roughly estimates might currently take the buyout. But shares are trading hands over the previous 10 days at more than 15M shares per day! That's 150 Million shares! In other words, Musk's rough estimate may have been correct at one point in time but the balance is likely changing to those who want to stay long-term. And if those long-term investors are the same ones who will be funding the buyout (paying $420/share) you can bet they would want to acquire as much as is feasible at lower prices. At some point, the shorts are probably going to get squeezed and those who had accumulated extra shares can sell off any excessive shares they may have acquired if the shorts are squeezed. Remember, a large short interest is guaranteed demand for that number of shares. As this deal takes shape, they could benefit from a higher buyout price if it causes a better short squeeze. Because those shares the big players can sell back to the shorts go away, they will not have to buy them back at $420 or whatever the buyout price is, they simply go away.

Will something like this work? I don't know but I wouldn't want to bet against Musk and any billionaires that might back him.
​


> I will now continue to talk with investors, and I have engaged advisors to investigate a range of potential structures and options. Among other things, this will allow me to obtain a more precise understanding of how many of Tesla's existing public shareholders would remain shareholders if we became private.


The more the big players accumulate in the coming weeks on the open market, the fewer shares they will have to buy at the buyout price and the larger their stake in Tesla going forward. And we should all know the Saudi interest is not just in EV's, that's probably the minor portion of their interest. And what better way exists to hedge and diversify their oil holdings going forward?


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

PNWmisty said:


> Bokonon, Your picture appears to show that the short's might finally be doing a little due diligence on location. It looks like they are already down in Saudi Arabia investigating the latest scoop from ground level. Impressive! I didn't think they had it in them.


I just thought the shorts were looking for a new place to put their heads. It must getting tiring walking around always having your head up your(/INTERRUPT SELF)HEEYYYYYYYY HEEYYYYYYY!!!!

Let's just say that shorts seem to suffer from HUTA syndrome.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

PNWmisty said:


> Unfortunately, short interest is only reported once/month and there is an almost two week lag between the report and the dissemination of info. So peons like us are always looking at short interest 2-6 weeks old! Does anyone know how to access any indicators that can reliably show more up-to-date short interest trends of individual NASDAQ stocks?


The only thing I found was following Ihor Dusaniwsky on twitter. who appears to run an analytics company. He semi-often posts the results of his analysis runs on the current state of Tesla shorts. He was the first to report that the majority of shorts did not appear to be covering yet when the stock price jumped from $300 to $350 after the earnings call.


----------



## @gravityrydr (Apr 12, 2016)

NOGA$4ME said:


> Meh...half-assed attempt to solve this. Sounds like it's keyed specifically to the name "Elon Musk", but probably will let "Eion Musk" and "Elom Musk" through just fine (and no doubt there are some other characters that are even closer). Plus, it sounds like they could go through the account setup steps and do the whole CAPTCHA thing and then just set the bot loose anyway. Not that I have a better solution, but I don't see it taking more than a few days for the scammers to figure out a way around this.


It's been a while and I haven't noticed a difference. Sadly, it looks like you are right.


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

Is the media starting to change it's tone?

Dan


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

Dan Detweiler said:


> Is the media starting to change it's tone?
> 
> Dan


And another:

https://www.cnbc.com/video/2018/08/...sla-stock-elon-musk-private-public-tweet.html


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Linette Lopez is back (yes, she's her usual self, so no, it's not worth reading)

*It is now abundantly clear that Elon Musk does not have 'funding secured'*
https://www.thisisinsider.com/fundi...out-taking-tesla-private-does-not-work-2018-8


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> Linette Lopez is back (yes, she's her usual self, so no, it's not worth reading)


Totally worth the read as this quote shows:



> Wall Street, which is chomping at the bit for big deals as always, estimates that a traditional leveraged buyout of Tesla would require about $66 billion in cash.


If I hadn't read that I wouldn't have known that streets could talk and even come to a consensus on the cost of a deal. The funny thing is, she claims Musk has no way to know how many shares would go private (and therefore how much the deal would end up costing). So I learned that a street knows better than Musk. I have a new respect for streets everywhere.


----------



## Gavyne (Jul 7, 2018)

Get the ball rolling!


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1029171381584314368


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

PNWmisty said:


> The shorts could be said to have pent-up buying demand. Apparently, they don't want to cover now at $355, they are waiting/hoping for lower prices. Currently, they owe a collective $12.4 billion to the market. That number could go way up. If this deal works it will be because of the shorts, not in spite of them.


Ihor Dusaniwsky believes that there is enough regular day trading in TSLA for the shorts to get out fairly easily without driving up the price much at all. So we won't see a short squeeze, if that's true. They'll most likely still be losing a lot of money.

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1028955078273716225It appears that the shorts have slowly started to buy out of their positions over the past two weeks, and the price has remained relatively stable this past week.

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1029385067708276736


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Indeed. The low short interest is tempting me to lower my $339 buy price to $329. If the shorts come flooding back into the market at some point (and you know they will; forget about the buyout, that's "a distant future possibility" as far as most traders are concerned), it'll push the stock price down. Maybe there's some institutional buyers out there who will price floor any short surge in order to bet on the buyout possibility, but I'm not going to bet on it. They're not causing the price to rise as the shorts bail, after all....


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

I posted something similar on TMC but haven't received any responses, just some "likes." Please let me know your thoughts, and if I'm off base in my thinking here.

I keep reading over and over in mainstream news outlets... $72 billion buyout (or more) and I'm getting sick of it. The ONLY place I saw a tinge of honesty was over on a Reuters article that did at least correctly point out Musk holds 20% of the shares. So what am I talking about? Nowhere do any of them provide the reader with the whole truth, the big picture. The simple math that just gets left out of every article, so conveniently.

Here it is: Musk owns 20%...he doesn't need to buy himself out!!!!!

That by itself already takes the "72" figure down to $57.6 billion. Definitely still a substantial amount, but Elon certainly won't be the only one holding on to shares. I couldn't find what I would consider "accurate" and "current" figures for individuals and their percentage, but you can likely assume that the individuals on the board with stocks aren't selling either, so the percent they hold would also subtract from the supposed $72 billion figure that keeps being thrown around. I would postulate that the figure would easily get below $50B with Musk and others holding.

More, all it takes is a few institutions like T.Rowe, Fidelity, Vanguard, etc. to hold and not sell and we're easily getting the dreaded 72 down into a range of like $30B-$40B. Again, still a large figure, but about HALF of what's being reported by news outlets as a straight up_ fact_.

I admit freely I don't know how all this works, if institutions can/will hold on to the shares, who has what percent (other than Musk) and if they also will hold, what the meaning of life is, etc... but for goodness sake, this part seems pretty clear to me even as a layman. There is a ZERO PERCENT chance that Musk would need to come up with $72 billion to succeed in the privatization of Tesla, and the actual figure WILL BE substantially lower.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Lovesword said:


> I posted something similar on TMC but haven't received any responses, just some "likes." Please let me know your thoughts, and if I'm off base in my thinking here.
> 
> I keep reading over and over in mainstream news outlets... $72 billion buyout (or more) and I'm getting sick of it. The ONLY place I saw a tinge of honesty was over on a Reuters article that did at least correctly point out Musk holds 20% of the shares. So what am I talking about? Nowhere do any of them provide the reader with the whole truth, the big picture. The simple math that just gets left out of every article, so conveniently.
> 
> ...


Yeah, whenever I see an article cite, without any clarifying context, "$72B", I take it as a sign that I can automatically discount everything the article says. If the author doesn't even have the most basic understanding of what's being discussed, why bother reading it?

FYI, Musk expects only about a third of the stock to be bought out (~$24B).


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> Yeah, whenever I see an article cite, without any clarifying context, "$72B", I take it as a sign that I can automatically discount everything the article says. If the author doesn't even have the most basic understanding of what's being discussed, why bother reading it?
> 
> FYI, Musk expects only about a third of the stock to be bought out (~$24B).


Thank you @KarenRei for this. I was curious if my thought process was way off here... there's much I don't know in this arena.

I first thought "I need to read more about this" but now I'm thinking that I actually need to read less!!!


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

garsh said:


> Ihor Dusaniwsky believes that there is enough regular day trading in TSLA for the shorts to get out fairly easily without driving up the price much at all. So we won't see a short squeeze, if that's true.


I've been in this game long enough to know that nobody knows how market participants will behave in the future. And I think Ihor Dusaniwsky, like anyone, has a right to their opinion but I think Musk actually has better access to information that is relevant to whether there will be the short-squeeze of the century. But yes, Dusaniwsky believes there is enough liquidity that there won't be a squeeze. But saying "So there won't be a squeeze if that's true" is like saying "There_ will_ be a massive short squeeze if Musk's comments are true".



> It appears that the shorts have slowly started to buy out of their positions over the past two weeks, and the price has remained relatively stable this past week.


In an earlier post in this thread, I predicted a bumpy ride going forward and opined there could be a dramatic downdraft in TSLA share price and that this can work in favor of a buyout. I believe the financiers of this proposed deal will use any large downdraft to mop up shares at a low price. This can dramatically lower the buyout price which, as has been pointed out, is widely quoted in the media based not only on 100% of the shares, but also at $420/share. Collecting more shares now lowers both of those costs. In fact, it's possible three or four big players could collect ALL THE SHARES NECESSARY on the open market to take Tesla private. And if they buy more than necessary, they can sell the excess off, probably at a profit once the deal has more certainty.

A deal like this probably won't happen quickly, these things take time. Plenty of time for the short sellers to gain more confidence to re-build positions.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

PNWmisty said:


> I've been in this game long enough to know that nobody knows how market participants will behave in the future. And I think Ihor Dusaniwsky, like anyone, has a right to their opinion but I think Musk actually has better access to information that is relevant to whether there will be the short-squeeze of the century. But yes, Dusaniwsky believes there is enough liquidity that there won't be a squeeze. But saying "So there won't be a squeeze if that's true" is like saying "There_ will_ be a massive short squeeze if Musk's comments are true".
> 
> In an earlier post in this thread, I predicted a bumpy ride going forward and opined there could be a dramatic downdraft in TSLA share price and that this can work in favor of a buyout. I believe the financiers of this proposed deal will use any large downdraft to mop up shares at a low price. This can dramatically lower the buyout price which, as has been pointed out, is widely quoted in the media based not only on 100% of the shares, but also at $420/share. Collecting more shares now lowers both of those costs. In fact, it's possible three or four big players could collect ALL THE SHARES NECESSARY on the open market to take Tesla private. And if they buy more than necessary, they can sell the excess off, probably at a profit once the deal has more certainty.
> 
> A deal like this probably won't happen quickly, these things take time. Plenty of time for the short sellers to gain more confidence to re-build positions.


Musk knows that Tesla will be profitable.
Musk believes he can go private.
Musk does not know how the market will react to these things. He - like the rest of us - can make educated guesses as to that, but he's not psychic.

I don't expect the shorts to give up in or after Q3, at least not en masse. Maybe after the Q4 results. You know just as well as I do that they'll call the Q3 profit a one-time thing, rigged by "total fraud" Elon.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> If the author doesn't even have the most basic understanding of what's being discussed, why bother reading it?


I get the best insight from articles that are not accurate (which is typically the majority). I have to process a lot of crappy articles to understand what is going on. The misinformation is every bit as informative as information that is correct. And you don't need to know whether it's correct or incorrect to add insight. Never assume a particular piece of information is correct without proof. And proof is awfully hard to come by most often.


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

What’s extremely annoying is how all of these FUDsters are accusing Elon Musk of lying and breaking the law while they themselves have been spreading lies for years and getting away with it. When are they going to be held accountable? Greed and deception are so rampant in the US, it’s quite suffocating!


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

I fully expected this to be a hit piece, but I think it's actually a fair and reasonable article.

*A Question for Tesla's Board: What Was Elon Musk's Mental State?*

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/15/business/elon-musk-tesla-board.html


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

Hey, what happened to the all important discussions on cash burn, ramp, tents, lack of $35K base model and huge lots of vehicles backing in the sun?

Seriously, the shorts are so easily distracted!


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

NOGA$4ME said:


> Hey, what happened to the all important discussions on cash burn, ramp, tents, lack of $35K base model and huge lots of vehicles backing in the sun?


They have decided to take another tack (since they weren't getting any traction on cash burn, production ramp, circus tents, etc.)

Now it's about suspicion of an employee dealing drugs out of gigafactory with ties to Mexican drug cartels, failure to report such suspicion to the DEA, although another charge is that the DEA reported their suspicions to Tesla and they failed to notify shareholders (never mind that such things are not material to shareholders). There is also a story that an undisclosed source said the BoD was concerned about Musk's drug use. Then there is a report from a fancy sounding company called "UBS Evidence Lab" that the Model 3 powertrain costs too much to build (directly contradicting the recent report from Monroe & Associates). From what I can tell, the UBS Evidence Lab is a typical wall street analyst firm dressed up to be more credible due to use of high tech but is still just as corrupt (if not more so) than your typical brokerage analyst. I'm sure I'm missing a few "hits" here but it doesn't matter. None of them appear to be material (or alternatively credible).

It looks like this is what's going on. First, we have a somewhat coordinated attack by multiple shorts and threatened business industries for obvious reasons. Here's where my analysis is going to lose a lot of you. I think Musk was expecting this and possibly even helped in the effort. Perhaps the personal drug use report. And his recent interview. Why would he do this? He wants temporary lower prices and negative news for two reasons: 1) to allow for a massive rotation of shareholders from those who would cash out at the buyout price into the hands of shareholders who will go private. 2) To encourage shorts to rebuild or double-down on their short positions. Both of these things will facilitate going private.

I knew the ride was likely to be rocky but it's not that concerning to me from a long-term perspective. Short burn of the century is on "Musk time". More "bad" news on the way. We haven't seen nothing yet. High trading volume is good. Chaos is good. Hang on!


----------



## NEO (Jun 28, 2017)

So where is the bottom? We are almost down to $300


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

NEO said:


> So where is the bottom? We are almost down to $300


I expect a lot of shares to trade around $290-$310 but trying to predict a bottom is a fool's exercise. You will know the bottom AFTER it happens.


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

PNWmisty said:


> They have decided to take another tack (since they weren't getting any traction on cash burn, production ramp, circus tents, etc.)
> 
> Now it's about suspicion of an employee dealing drugs out of gigafactory with ties to Mexican drug cartels, failure to report such suspicion to the DEA, although another charge is that the DEA reported their suspicions to Tesla and they failed to notify shareholders (never mind that such things are not material to shareholders).


Yeah, thank goodness we can get back to some nice juicy drug dealing stories...I was frankly getting bored with the investment banker crap. Grabbing some popcorn!

I do love the comment in an article I read...sorry, I don't recollect the source right now...from the DEA that the DEA doesn't notify local law enforcement about ongoing investigations and they surely wouldn't have notified Tesla. Pretty much shoots that "whistleblower's" story dead.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

PNWmisty said:


> I expect a lot of shares to trade around $290-$310 but trying to predict a bottom is a fool's exercise. You will know the bottom AFTER it happens.


Having said that it looks like we have AT LEAST one more down day. At current prices I see no support so I'm thinking the highest bottom that is likely is $290ish.


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

Jumped in this afternoon, head first. I couldn't wait any longer.


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

Media outlets sound more like an episode of Entertainment Tonight. This is where the focus should be...but of course won't be.

https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-mod...ction-per-week/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

Dan


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Huge buyers' market today. If anyone missed their chance to get in, today is the day.


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> Huge buyers' market today. If anyone missed their chance to get in, today is the day.


Just bought more shares.


----------



## MelindaV (Apr 2, 2016)

just saw a headline "forget Trump and Musk, here are stocks that look toward the long term future"... isn't that exactly what they complain Elon/Tesla doesn't do?!


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

$ Trillion Musk said:


> Just bought more shares.


I set my buy for $288, thinking that'd be a shoo-in.

Market bottomed out at $288.20


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> I set my buy for $288, thinking that'd be a shoo-in.
> 
> Market bottomed out at $288.20


That's what you get for thinking. LOL!
You were close though...but that only counts in horse shoes and hand grenades, or so I was told as a kid. Let's hope you don't get another opportunity. 

Dan


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> I set my buy for $288, thinking that'd be a shoo-in.
> 
> Market bottomed out at $288.20


That's why I never round my price target to the nearest whole dollar. Almost nailed it though!


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

The NYT interview has some quotes I find illuminating. I think Musk is a master at using the media to his advantage so don't always take what he says at face value. I think he is egging on the big short sellers to increase their positions (which I think will help fund the buyout):

"I thought the worst of it was over — I thought it was,” he said. “The worst is over from a Tesla operational standpoint.” He continued: “But from a personal pain standpoint, the worst is yet to come.”

He blamed short-sellers — investors who bet that Tesla’s shares will lose value — for much of his stress. He said he was bracing for “at least a few months of extreme torture from the short-sellers, who are desperately pushing a narrative that will possibly result in Tesla’s destruction.”

Referring to the short-sellers, he added: “They’re not dumb guys, but they’re not supersmart. They’re O.K. They’re smartish.”

Why else would he say this if not to egg them on?


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Well, short sellers made a lot of money this week (a lot covered for profit taking today). You think Musk was trying to help them earn money?


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> Well, short sellers made a lot of money this week (a lot covered for profit taking today). You think Musk was trying to help them earn money?


No, I think he's egging them on to increase their overall position by admitting the pressure from the short sellers could actually destroy the company. A stunning admission if taken at face value.

While I'm sure plenty of short sellers made money on the recent drop, that was unavoidable if the share price was going lower (which is a helpful situation to allow shares to rotate into the big hands). It's important that new short positions are established and shorts are like vultures - they circle until the price starts to drop and then they all jump in. They like downward momentum and, the big short sellers are looking for a drop bigger than what we have seen, they want complete destruction, not leave $300/share sitting on the table.

His comments serve to ignite their greed so they won't cover at $300 but wait for more destruction.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

PNWmisty said:


> No, I think he's egging them on to increase their overall position by admitting the pressure from the short sellers could actually destroy the company. A stunning admission if taken at face value.
> 
> While I'm sure plenty of short sellers made money on the recent drop, that was unavoidable if the share price was going lower (which is a helpful situation to allow shares to rotate into the big hands). It's important that new short positions are established and shorts are like vultures - they circle until the price starts to drop and then they all jump in. They like downward momentum and, the big short sellers are looking for a drop bigger than what we have seen, they want complete destruction, not leave $300/share sitting on the table.
> 
> His comments serve to ignite their greed so they won't cover at $300 but wait for more destruction.


Short sellers covering and earning a profit does not help with that.

If someone big were trying to depress the stock to acquire it, there would be some floor with heavy price resistance. We've encountered no such thing. Every time people think they've seen anything even resembling a floor, the market has easily pushed through it.

We're not in some "brand new game" here. It's the exact same game as we've been in this whole time: freak out on the bad news, rally when they can't maintain it.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

BTW: if anyone needs help guessing as to what the next anti-Tesla argument in the media will be, I made a helpful tool.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> Short sellers covering and earning a profit does not help with that.


Of course not. But that is not the only effect Musk's comments have. It's necessary to take the entirety of the situation into account. Shorts cover and shorts establish new positions. Unfortunately, we only have access to short stats after the fact. Also, you can bet that a substantial number of shorts covered (at a loss) as the price spiked to $380 and then re-established their short positions at a new, higher price when it became apparent there was little meat on the bones. My analysis is that was Musk's intention when he announced: "funding secured". Of course, that can't be proven. If it could, it would be illegal market manipulation.



> If someone big were trying to depress the stock to acquire it, there would be some floor with heavy price resistance. We've encountered no such thing. Every time people think they've seen anything even resembling a floor, the market has easily pushed through it.


Your point is not clear to me. Past events that repeat do not guarantee they will keep repeating and the lack of a price floor does not mean one will not develop. These things take time. You would not know if big shareholders were increasing positions in preparation for an effort to privatize until well after the fact. The current volume is certainly high enough to support that theory.



> We're not in some "brand new game" here. It's the exact same game as we've been in this whole time: freak out on the bad news, rally when they can't maintain it.


Of course, share prices will continue to fluctuate but I disagree that new developments do not change the dynamics of the "game". IMO, the fact that Musk announced his intention to take Tesla private and has been in discussions with large shareholders certainly does change the game. Bigly. Without more clarity on the effort to go private, there is somewhat of a price ceiling at $420 whereas previously, none existed. That is powerful "insurance" for short sellers because, previously, there was no price ceiling, the sky was the limit.

For now, the price action looks flat to down. Based solely on the price and volume action, it looks to me like those interested in taking Tesla private are continuing to acquire shares. That doesn't mean a price floor has been established at $300, I fully expect another substantial price drop. But that didn't stop me from adding to my position today because there is no guarantee a drop will happen. If it does, I'll add more. At some point it will bottom, the acquirers will have all the shares they need and the stock will make some very violent moves upward and Tesla will be taken private and a price above $420 will not surprise me.


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> BTW: if anyone needs help guessing as to what the next anti-Tesla argument in the media will be, I made a helpful tool.


Doot doot doot doot doot....

Panel gaps EXCLUSIVE to Tesla! Quality control of a 2 year old playing with building blocks! Money lost on every car sold!

Doot doot doot doot doot....

Grimes! Banks!! Twitter!!! It's now popular to hate Elon Musk for (fill in the blank)* and I want to be in the "cool" crowd!
*maybe @KarenRei can make another spin wheel for this, lol.

Doot doot doot doot doot....









EDIT: Decided to throw a quick disclaimer on here that I'm only attempting to be humorous and add to KarenRei's awesome wheel of FUD. In no reality, ours or alternate, do I believe any of this to be true... especially the Tony Montanya mountain of "white powdery substance" being face planted by a man that appears to be Gronk.


----------



## @gravityrydr (Apr 12, 2016)

KarenRei said:


> BTW: if anyone needs help guessing as to what the next anti-Tesla argument in the media will be, I made a helpful tool.


Genius!


----------



## Bokonon (Apr 13, 2017)

PNWmisty said:


> That doesn't mean a price floor has been established at $300, I fully expect another substantial price drop. But that didn't stop me from adding to my position today because there is no guarantee a drop will happen. If it does, I'll add more. At some point it will bottom, the acquirers will have all the shares they need and the stock will make some very violent moves upward and Tesla will be taken private and a price above $420 will not surprise me.


I added today (for the first time in years) under similar reasoning. Saw the expected demand appear in the 290s *and* sustain itself throughout the day, and interpreted that action as a broad sign that investors interested in accumulating shares felt confident stepping in at this level... And so, being of similar mindset, I stepped in too.

Like you said, today's action doesn't necessarily mean we've hit the bottom, but I think it shows that the long-term Tesla investment thesis (i.e. my reason for being a shareholder) is alive and well(-funded), despite indications that Fidelity, TRP, and other long-time institutional TSLA shareholders have reduced their positions over the preceding months. On any drop from this level, I'd expect to see further signs of accumulation where the stock previously found support.

Given the way Elon has had his way with the board in the past, I'd have to think that most investors are expecting that a deal to go private will be announced sometime in the next 6-12 months. The question is, at what price? And at what risk (if any) to the company's ability to tap capital markets when needed to fuel further growth? Elon mentioned in the NYT interview that, at the time of the announcement, he wanted to give shareholders a 20% premium over TSLA's current price (then in the high 340s), but now that 20% premium is roughly $366, or a 13% discount off the original $420 buyout price. So, in addition to a heavily-manipulated daily news cycle, uncertainty about how a private TSLA would be structured and how it would affect the company's access to investment capital (if at all), and countless other narratives, the market is attempting to price in the probability and outcome of an event that is itself a function of all the other inputs. In the near term, the need for a seat belt is the only certainty I know.


----------



## @gravityrydr (Apr 12, 2016)

Finally freed up some money for another buy-in. Unfortunately, the money cleared my brokerage account to just miss yesterday's dip. Poised and waiting for another opportunity.


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

@gravityrydr said:


> Finally freed up some money for another buy-in. Unfortunately, the money cleared my brokerage account to just miss yesterday's dip. Poised and waiting for another opportunity.


Let's all hope you don't get quite that good of an opportunity again...just sayin'. LOL!

Dan


----------



## @gravityrydr (Apr 12, 2016)

Dan Detweiler said:


> Let's all hope you don't get quite that good of an opportunity again...just sayin'. LOL!
> 
> Dan


I'd be happy with $300


----------



## lascavarian (Feb 17, 2018)

Regarding debt load, it can instructive to remember that Tesla did not build the Fremont facility, they got it at a very very good price from an existing consortium of auto manufacturers.

There is current hysteria about the impossibility of Tesla being able to expand operations without more debt loading. "How can they expand without shouldering enormous additonal debt?" they say. 

I think a possible scenario might go something like this. Tesla introduces production of about half a million new cars mostly into the US market while the tax credit is in play. In addition to the actual production, there is the rising desire (reservations) for an EV vs ICE vehicle. FORD is already announcing they are moving to exit the production of sedans. GM has one product EV line but modest interest. Dropping orders for US auto makers results in a realization that there is too much traditional capacity in light of the addition of Tesla's ramping production and customer interest. US auto makers rush to close a few plants and/or sell them while the price is still good. Who is likely the only domestic buyer?

Tesla again gets a great attractive deal on an existing factory. Debt, not much at all. Plenty of capacity at a good price and likely tax incentives to boot for model Y, Semi and the Pickup and the $25k model. The key thing that Tesla has to do is build out the battery capacity on their own dime. If they have batteries then the rest will be doable at attractive prices.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

Bokonon said:


> Given the way Elon has had his way with the board in the past, I'd have to think that most investors are expecting that a deal to go private will be announced sometime in the next 6-12 months.


That sounds like a reasonable timeframe but I have a nagging suspicion it will probably happen a lot sooner, like before the end of the year, in 2-4 months. Hold on, it's going to be a fun, but bumpy, ride. Mostly fun. I also have a suspicion that it's a very bad idea to sell too soon. Even if it's at $419. That's the number one mistake most online investors make, sell an appreciating stock too soon. They figure they have done well so they couldn't be wrong by taking some or all off the table. But that is usually a costly mistake. Let your winners ride unless you have very good reasons to do otherwise.


----------



## JWardell (May 9, 2016)

lascavarian said:


> US auto makers rush to close a few plants and/or sell them while the price is still good. Who is likely the only domestic buyer?
> 
> Tesla again gets a great attractive deal on an existing factory.


Nah. Hyperloop to Freemont and Gigafactory. Huge parking lots no longer needed. Build more tents.
Done.


----------



## lascavarian (Feb 17, 2018)

JWardell said:


> Build more tents


I love the tent. I tend to see the real value more as some experience with possible off-planet structure options. But I think the sprung structures have a bright future.


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

Nice little bump in the stock this morning. Maybe a silent Elon makes for a happy stock? Whatever it is...I'll take it.

Dan


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

FUD from UBS at its worst; an obvious attempt to discredit the Sandy Munro teardown analysis of the Model 3.

It's amazing how so many people make careers out of chronic deception. What's even more amazing is how so many listeners base their reasoning out of this garbage.

So "UBS" must stand for "Ultimate BS"?


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

$ Trillion Musk said:


> FUD from UBS at its worst; an obvious attempt to discredit the Sandy Munro teardown analysis of the Model 3.
> 
> It's amazing how so many people make careers out of chronic deception. What's even more amazing is how so many listeners base their reasoning out of this garbage.
> 
> So "UBS" must stand for "Ultimate BS"?


Just when you think the BS is "ultimate", it will get worse. Mark my words. I guarantee it!

As an investor for the last 25 years, I've made the bulk of my profit from identifying and acting upon the purposeful BS and FUD. Anyone who tells me this doesn't happen, and that conspiracies don't exist, immediately lose credibility with me. Because I've made a lot of money acting upon the disparity between reality and manufactured FUD. An idea whose time has come is unstoppable. But don't for a minute believe there is not an army of opposing interests trying to stop it or slow it down. And it's very common for those efforts to slow the adoption of a new idea.

The new requirement that EV charging outlets need to be protected by a GFCI breaker, even when that outlet is in a dry area, is almost certainly in that category. As are any laws requiring noisemakers on EV's (while not requiring them on luxury cars with nearly silent engines/exhausts). The list goes on and on. EV's and solar panels with storage are extremely threatening to some of the most profitable industries and some of the wealthiest people in the world.


----------



## JWardell (May 9, 2016)

Elon: Juuuuust kidding!

https://www.tesla.com/blog/staying-public


----------



## @gravityrydr (Apr 12, 2016)

JWardell said:


> Elon: Juuuuust kidding!
> 
> https://www.tesla.com/blog/staying-public


I seriously don't know what to make of this. Friday night so the market has time to digest before the open is good. Maybe a good thing I didn't buy at the last dip. I still have ammo in the holster.


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

I would think the stock will take a short term hit on Monday. If nothing else the shorts and media will have a field day. The month of September could be rough on the stock I think...at least until we get more Q3 numbers.

Dan


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

"Back to your regularly scheduled program"


----------



## lascavarian (Feb 17, 2018)

Well, this removes some uncertainty. Some institutions may return to their positions. The removal of the 420 price may weaken some interest but approaching 3rd quarter profitability may keep interest in place. Thoughtful blog post is reassuring that Elon & board are functioning. Coming SW developments is a little sizzle as well.


----------



## EValuatED (Apr 29, 2017)

KarenRei said:


> "Back to your regularly scheduled program"


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

JWardell said:


> Elon: Juuuuust kidding!
> 
> https://www.tesla.com/blog/staying-public


 is right. I don't think this bodes well for the near term stock price...Hopefully, there are no kinks in the production ramp in the next two quarters because TSLA is more vulnerable than ever and we can expect to see renewed (mostly ridiculous) attacks from the short sellers and threatened interests. I bought because I really thought Musk was going to surprise everyone and pull this off but this changes everything. Back to $260?

I do find it interesting that no Model 3's have caught fire (that I've been made aware of) even though they have been racking up big miles (cumulatively). It seems gas-powered BMW's are the ones with a real issue but I would have expected a Tesla hater to buy one and figure out how to damage the battery sufficiently to get it to ignite. They probably bought one and drove it around and fell in love, unable to carry out their plan!


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

I woke up to this news (am still waking up really...thanks, beer), and my knee jerk reaction was the board and Elon don’t want the Saudis to become such a large stakeholder, or anyone else for that matter. Maybe they knew of a play in the works from stock moves they’ve seen. Who knows...I’m totally pulling this out of thin air based on my zero reading into the topic, heh. So...SPECULATION tag attached


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

PNWmisty said:


> I don't think this bodes well for the near term stock price...Back to $260?


BRING IT ON, BABY!!!

Daddy's got a hundred G's wasting away in bonds and he wants to move it all into TSLA!!!!


----------



## EValuatED (Apr 29, 2017)

Hot off the Electrek press:

*Tesla (TSLA) stock tumbles as take-private deal fails, Volkswagen reportedly tried to invest and Musk sees a surge coming*


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

I google TSLA and see an article title that says “Tesla shares getting walloped...” another says “Tesla stock tumbles...”

I scroll up to see it’s currently down 1.89% as of my writing this. Walloped!? Tumbles? Really?
FUD much?

Prepared for much worse than this and expected better from the shorts. Down a miniscule @2% is all they got!?
Bring it on!!!!


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Lovesword said:


> Prepared for much worse than this and expected better from the shorts. Down a miniscule @2% is all they got!?


I know. This is pathetic.
I want to buy at $250. C'mon shorts! Let's see what ya got!


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

garsh said:


> I know. This is pathetic.
> I want to buy at $250. C'mon shorts! Let's see what ya got!


There was new news today about VW. etc. I think it really capped the downside for the time being.


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

VW and SilverLake wanted to invest $30B! How come TSLA didn’t go up on this news?


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

https://www.engadget.com/2018/08/28/tesla-model-3-securities-fraud-lawsuit-dismissed/

_"Tesla has successfully convinced the court to dismiss the securities fraud lawsuit filed by shareholders over its Model 3 production issues. US District Judge Charles Breyer has officially dismissed the case on Monday, stating that federal securities laws don't punish companies for failing to achieve their production targets...."_


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

$30b from VW and Silver Lake, so the... so funding WAS secured.
Court dismisses securities fraud case...
Canadian court ruled Ontario government discriminated against Tesla with their EV credit phase out.
Tesla gets proof there are FAKE negative attacks sent to the NHTSA...
https://electrek.co/2018/08/27/tesla-fake-nhtsa-complaints-tactic-detractors/
New York Times article shown (in my opinion) to be a complete hit piece.
https://teslaownersonline.com/threads/two-cleantechnica-articles-i-think-are-"must-read".8399/
(Link to a thread I posted with two great articles in it, going to shamelessly plug it because they're really good reads)

Yeah, I'd say things are looking up. What's the next FUDing lie we get? And once again...BRING IT ON!!!


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Lovesword said:


> Tesla gets proof there are FAKE negative attacks sent to the NHTSA...
> https://electrek.co/2018/08/27/tesla-fake-nhtsa-complaints-tactic-detractors/


We've known that Keef Wivaneff has been doing this forever.
https://electrek.co/2016/08/26/tesla-model-s-filling-bogus-complaints-nhtsa-suspension-failing/


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

garsh said:


> We've known that Keef Wivaneff has been doing this forever.
> https://electrek.co/2016/08/26/tesla-model-s-filling-bogus-complaints-nhtsa-suspension-failing/


Interesting! I had no idea. Sorry about that.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

EDIT: I guess maybe it's good/important to keep spreading the truth because the lies are for sure repeated ad nauseam!


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Lovesword said:


> Interesting! I had no idea. Sorry about that.


I didn't mean it in the sense that there was no new information to report.
Indeed, the Electrek article that you linked also mentioned the same old article that I included.
What's not clear is if there's more people doing this than just him, or if ol' Weef is just that prolific.


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

garsh said:


> I didn't mean it in the sense that there was no new information to report.
> Indeed, the Electrek article that you linked also mentioned the same old article that I included.
> What's not clear is if there's more people doing this than just him, or if ol' Weef is just that prolific.


Definitely something I'd not heard about before, but should have! I'm glad that people are aware of this crap going on!

What a sad life... spent finding images of wrecked Tesla's online and then submitting false, entirely fabricated reports to the NHTSA. Pathetic. Should be illegal or at least have some sort of repercussions for falsified reports.


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

Great article from Ben Evans. It reinforces my faith in being a Tesla investor.
https://www.ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2018/8/29/tesla-software-and-disruption


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

Wow, is Toni Sacconaghi starting to see the light? First time I have heard any major analyst realize the BS behind the "competition" argument we have heard argued so much in the media.

Dan


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

Tesla bears vs. Tesla longs...lol


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1038887701653516288
Dan


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

Dan Detweiler said:


> Tesla bears vs. Tesla longs...lol
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1038887701653516288
> Dan


That's hilarious! And the brave person holding the camera and recording it all would be the SEC. The SEC report would have to say, In our opinion, the dog did not bait the bear, he was just walking along his normal route going about his normal business. There is no evidence of any wrong doing.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Time to dust off this thread.

Tesla is 'headed for the graveyard,' predicts former GM exec Bob Lutz

A few quotes from this article that I'd like to counter.



> He's got 9,000 people in that assembly plant producing less than 150,000 cars a year.


Tesla makes many more parts in-house. Most manufacturers only perform final assembly, and obtain all the parts from suppliers.


> He also said there is competition coming from not only Audi but Mercedes, BMW and Porsche. And those auto manufacturers can sell their cars at a loss and make up for it on sales of internal combustion vehicles.


If they could do that, they would have already employed that strategy against the Model S and X. The 3 is being produced in numbers too big for anybody to compete via losing money.


> "Tesla has no … tech advantage, no software advantage, no battery advantage. No advantages whatsoever," he said.


Tesla has no advantage in manufacturing, production, quality control, paint quality... The three areas that Bob lists are *exactly* the areas where Tesla holds a HUGE advantage against the incumbents.

Take a look at the I-Pace - a vehicle that is smaller & lighter than a Model X, but only about half as efficient as the Model X. The incumbents have fallen behind and don't even realize it yet.


----------



## EValuatED (Apr 29, 2017)

garsh said:


> Time to dust off this thread.
> 
> Tesla is 'headed for the graveyard,' predicts former GM exec Bob Lutz
> 
> ...


For Lutz to say "Tesla has no … tech advantage, no software advantage, no battery advantage. No advantages whatsoever," is either disingenuous or completely f'ng clueless. Add to this the articles where other manufacturers are clearly discovering the realities of where and how far they are behind (software, OTA updates, batteries, efficiencies/range), just makes these sorts of asinine statements look all the worse. You don't have to be a Tesla fan to admit reality. That said, there can of course be posturing & positioning. But reality is where the rubber meets the road...


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

garsh said:


> The incumbents have fallen behind and don't even realize it yet.


Oh, they know it. They just can't figure out why. The really important guys/gals in the fancy suits and highly polished shoes are wondering why they are behind. Each day they come into the office and wonder what's wrong with the guys/gals in engineering/design. I mean seriously, how hard can it be to hook up an electric motor to a bunch of batteries? LOL!


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

EValuatED said:


> For Lutz to say "Tesla has no … tech advantage, no software advantage, no battery advantage. No advantages whatsoever," is either disingenuous or completely f'ng clueless.


I'm going with the former. He doesn't want to admit he let them fall behind. He's hoping his legacy will be untarnished and people will blame his departure on the fact that their products can't compete.


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

On the contrary, I believe that Bob Lutz and legacy automakers are very much aware of the disruption that is Tesla. They’re just playing the perception game as they’ve had for years, hoping that trivializing, even demonizing, the EV movement would halt their progress. They’re also capitalizing on the fact that most folks are still clueless about Tesla. But yeah, I’m sure they must be terrified by now.


----------



## EValuatED (Apr 29, 2017)

PNWmisty said:


> I'm going with the former. He doesn't want to admit he let them fall behind. He's hoping his legacy will be untarnished and people will blame his departure on the fact that their products can't compete.


He's probably trying to stay relevant. Or can't help himself from making over the top statements. Or both. Either way, color me unimpressed.


----------



## EValuatED (Apr 29, 2017)

$ Trillion Musk said:


> On the contrary, I believe that Bob Lutz and legacy automakers are very much aware of the disruption that is Tesla. They're just playing the perception game as they've had for years, hoping that trivializing, even demonizing, the EV movement would halt their progress. They're also capitalizing on the fact that most folks are still clueless about Tesla. But yeah, I'm sure they must be terrified by now.


A number of folks have tried the same with Apple. But the market voted yes for Apple, and I think they'll increasingly be voting for Tesla.


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

LOL - Musk retweeted the Lutz article. 

Someone put five points into his "Trolling" skill when making his character sheet


----------



## JWardell (May 9, 2016)

PNWmisty said:


> Oh, they know it. They just can't figure out why. The really important guys/gals in the fancy suits and highly polished shoes are wondering why they are behind. Each day they come into the office and wonder what's wrong with the guys/gals in engineering/design. I mean seriously, how hard can it be to hook up an electric motor to a bunch of batteries? LOL!


The other companies know it. They know why. They're just scrambling to get ANY product out there before it's too late.

Remember it takes a typical car company 7+ years to make a whole new vehicle. Partial updates are on a 4-year cycle. A whole new powertrain? More like 12.

Also, typical car companies do not develop any of their own electronics. They are all made by suppliers. They can't even make their own headlights. On the electrical side it's a giant act of integration of items developed by others to paper specifications. This simply can never achieve the same efficiency, simplicity, and capability of a system engineered top to bottom under the same roof. And certainly not in the same amount of time.

It will take most companies 2-3 generations to catch up to the Tesla of today.


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

A movement has started c/o @Ryan in which current Tesla owners help out with new deliveries. The level of passion and excitement is just amazing and unequaled. Imagine what would happen if the whole world sees this!


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1043223971477385216


----------



## MelindaV (Apr 2, 2016)

$ Trillion Musk said:


> A movement has started c/o @Ryan in which current Tesla owners help out with new deliveries. The level of passion and excitement is just amazing and unequaled. Imagine what would happen if the whole world sees this!
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1043223971477385216


You don't see people offering to spend a weekend volunteering down at the Chevy dealership


----------



## Marcumar (Jul 20, 2017)

$ Trillion Musk said:


> A movement has started c/o @Ryan in which current Tesla owners help out with new deliveries. The level of passion and excitement is just amazing and unequaled. Imagine what would happen if the whole world sees this!


I think the short-sellers and FUD-media would say: "Tesla is desperate, they have to rely on their on customers to handle the deliveries..."


----------



## Dan Detweiler (Apr 8, 2016)

Marcumar said:


> I think the short-sellers and FUD-media would say: "Tesla is desperate, they have to rely on their on customers to handle the deliveries..."


You KNOW that is exactly what they will say.

Dan


----------



## Jayc (May 19, 2016)

When do we have the Q3 call anyone know ? Can't wait to hear the good news!


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

Jayc said:


> When do we have the Q3 call anyone know ? Can't wait to hear the good news!


You've got a month to wait.


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

Meanwhile, in today's TSLA news...





... except for that ending part.


----------



## Bokonon (Apr 13, 2017)

Lovesword said:


> ... except for that ending part.


Ssshhhhh!!!! The market doesn't close for another 90 minutes! 

Quick -- what does what one sacrifice to appease the market gods? A lamb? A human heart? Dollars? Sense? All of the above?


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

Bokonon said:


> Ssshhhhh!!!! The market doesn't close for another 90 minutes!
> 
> Quick -- what does what one sacrifice to appease the market gods? A lamb? A human heart? Dollars? Sense? All of the above?


Shorts.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Bokonon said:


> Quick -- what does what one sacrifice to appease the market gods? A lamb? A human heart? Dollars? Sense? All of the above?


How about... a pair of Shorts.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Lovesword said:


> Shorts.


Ha, you beat me to it!


----------



## Love (Sep 13, 2017)

garsh said:


> Ha, you beat me to it!


Ninja'd!!  Garsh, it should scare you that you're starting to think like me.


----------



## @gravityrydr (Apr 12, 2016)

Ugh!

https://money.usnews.com/investing/...y-tesla-inc-tsla-looks-increasingly-desperate


----------



## KarenRei (Jul 27, 2017)

@gravityrydr said:


> Ugh!
> 
> https://money.usnews.com/investing/...y-tesla-inc-tsla-looks-increasingly-desperate


I want to both say about that article, "That's pretty bad" and "Par for the course"... because both are true.


----------



## Bokonon (Apr 13, 2017)

@gravityrydr said:


> Ugh!
> https://money.usnews.com/investing/...y-tesla-inc-tsla-looks-increasingly-desperate


I admire anyone whose tolerance for cognitive dissonance is sufficiently high to make it past the second paragraph of that article. Reading for comprehension is an extraordinarily difficult task when your eyes won't stop rolling!


----------



## Gavyne (Jul 7, 2018)

Stocks going down, time to load up again.

https://electrek.co/2018/09/27/tesla-tsla-stock-tumbles-sec-sues-elon-musk/


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

Gavyne said:


> Stocks going down, time to load up again.
> 
> https://electrek.co/2018/09/27/tesla-tsla-stock-tumbles-sec-sues-elon-musk/


Anyone care to shed some light as to what laws he may have broken? I was so pumped to see the stock rise again only to suffer a set back with more negative news... again!


----------



## $ Trillion Musk (Nov 5, 2016)

Spoke too soon, Montana Skeptic! Someone please give these dudes a test drive in your Tesla.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

$ Trillion Musk said:


> Spoke too soon, Montana Skeptic! Someone please give these dudes a test drive in your Tesla.


I couldn't waste my time to listen to the entire interview but here's my favorite quote from the pompous and privileged Yale schooled lawyer, Lawrence Fossi, also known as "Montana Skeptic":

"The depth of the well of stupidity is profound."

I couldn't help but think that he's talking about himself, a man who has chosen to spend his life arguing against the mass adoption of EV's.

The mass adoption of EV's is a done deal, it's going to happen no matter how hard he rails against it. He just can't see it yet. This is a man who predicted the Model 3 was a pipe dream that could never reach production. When it did, he argued it could never reach profitability, and, now that he can see it's going to reach profitability says that he can see what Musk is up to, the Q3 numbers are going to be massaged to the point of fraud. Before Ford Motor Co. announced their all-electric autonomous semi-tractor he railed against the utter stupidity of a battery powered semi-tractor.

He has lost millions shorting TSLA and you can bet he's worth a lot less today than he was yesterday. This really frosts him because he thinks he's the smartest bulb in the room but everything keeps turning against him. And he's too attached to his old and ingrained prejudices to see why.


----------



## Jayc (May 19, 2016)

Anyone's got any thoughts on what is happening with the share price lately ? 

EU deliveries are going head as planned, US deliveries have matured and production level has reached record levels, Tesla is the only company transparent enough to show profitability producing EVs what else is the market looking for for ? It looks like the shorts are playing behind the scenes rocking the boat unnecessarily.


----------

