Mega Thread for Tesla Investors

Discussion in 'Tesla' started by TeslaInvestors, Sep 2, 2018.

  1. TeslaInvestors

    TeslaInvestors Active Member

    Saw this puff piece today:

    I asked a simple question in the comment section: How did the Autopilot and AEB do in the Chinese test drive car in avoiding the giant STATIC pole?
    No abuse, no name calling like the Tesla trolls on site. Just a simple question.
    Comment blocked. Tesla Pravduh achieved.
  2. Pushmi-Pullyu

    Pushmi-Pullyu Well-Known Member

    No, it's a complex question. In formal logic, a "complex question" is one that assumes facts not in evidence; the classic example being "Did you stop beating your wife?"

    Or to put it another way: Your so-called "question" isn't a question at all, it's an accusation.

    Your accusation assumes that Autopilot+ Autosteer was active at the time of the crash during the test drive in question.

  3. I think most of the shorts up around Jan 23 were hoping for a retest at bare minimum of the 256 or so multiple lows. That never happened, never close actually. Probably they were internally hoping for a downward breakthrough. Chart wise now I would say it is trouble ahead in short city. Nothing is pointing down. A meander along as it has been since 17 perhaps, but a breakthrough down trend seems not at all in the cards.
    So there is reason to be upset if short. Which it seems most are. From this point probably it marks overall market trend more than anything. More likely up than down though.
    Only way I could see to knock down this enormous short interest is to start paying dividends which they distinctly do not intend to do, and is likely a bit why it attracts such short interest. Chatter on some sort of accident in China, that sort of thing can only put a blip down on the stock for a tiny bit of time. Bigger issues of price, number sold meeting production targets, acquisitions(they just had one) are the thing, not that. Shorts always float news that is not news to get a very temporary blip they can cash in on. Typically that move is made when the stock recently appreciates to get the newer buyers out, a easy target.

    News just came out three hours or so ago, auto subprime is at default levels not seen since 2010(tells you something on how real are the numbers showing full employment and all that). Should in theory move the whole sector down. But Tesla as we know are not having buyers with subprime like credit scores. Quite often nuance is lost in the initial due mostly to program buying. One auto company in part goes down, the rest trigger for sell automatically.
    No matter, may not even affect the sector, we shall see. And is tesla a auto company? The new governor of calif just suspended part of the tunnel expansion for high speed transit, wondering on that. Elon building tunnels and all ;)
    That as opposed to some china possible auto drive fail accident thing.
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2019
  4. TeslaInvestors

    TeslaInvestors Active Member

    @ron in new mexico , Welcome new guest investor to this thread! I welcome all views, even if I may not agree with them.
    And promise to be respectful (unless one stoops low, like Pushy here, who stooped low and stayed low forever).

    I covered most of my short at about $286. I am actually waiting for Elon to prop up the stock again with fake tweets etc.
    May be another attempt at fake go private. Or he might announce miracle battery with maxwell tech, promise it in "3 months may be,6 months definitely" , being his usual over optimistic self, going into ecstatic mumbles as he speaks about such things. Who knows. The guy is very innovative in pumping the stock. And his followers too lame to ever doubt his claims.

    I see what you are saying. But these are also times when it can be more lucrative to be short, if something happens suddenly. Many shorts think there is something fundamentally wrong with Tesla's business model, and some of its numbers are stretched, if not cooked. If that is true and gets exposed by a govt body, stock can tank 80-90% overnight. While there is low downward risk, there is also low risk for shorts for an upward surge. Model 3 ramp fell flat. Bulls are giving up on the fake Model 3 ramp stories. Even short interest has come down a lot, lowering the risk for any short squeeze.

    IIt's a valid point that Tesla lease etc. are higher quality. But Tesla buyers/lessors are also the ones that will be impacted more with a stock market crash. If economy falters and stock market crashes, then they can just buy a cheaper, better real Corolla than being the poorly made electric Corolla from Tesla at twice its price.

    We will see. 2019 can be disastrous if US sales don't pick up fast enough for Tesla.
  5. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web Well-Known Member

    Just remember that unlike corporate officers, everyone else is free to lie, mislead, and trash talk (aka., this thread.) You might find this hard to believe but there are trolls on the internet.

    As for TSLA investing, I had a very happy experience in 1991 with APPL that I sold to make a house down payment that we own free and clear. Tesla with the Model 3 was replicating the Apple pattern. Regardless, I remain confident, a bull, in my TSLA investment. But I also like to hedge my bets and have an equal position in gold mining. Full disclosure, I'm an older investor, now age 69, who is moving his 401k into stocks.

    Soon I will be under an IRS age requirement that in a year or two will require me to take funds out of my 401k. But I don't want to take out so much that the funds are subject to a higher tax rate. So I've been taking early 401k chunks and putting them in a 'safe harbor': TSLA and KL.

    Bob Wilson
  6. Well appreciate your comment and agree for the most part. I think on a chart only basis there is little to recommend a change in the pattern present since mid 2017. There are consistant moves up and down within a defined range and you as a short may certainly exploit these to good effect. Most shorts however as the duration of the holds expresses, are looking for a more bang for the buck however outcome(to my opinion)which would entail a breakdown below the target I mention.
    The Tesla buyer to my opinion is little involved with market pressures most of us may find which will translate to peoples choosing a Corolla rather than a Tesla. Will they put off buying a car entirely, that is quite possible. And you are right the economy will probably show negative GDP numbers next quarter and company reporting is all to the downward side. Which will anticipate a significant downward push in the market some already before us. I would guess tesla will nevertheless not breakdown below the number I mention. Good move on your getting out of the short point. Excellent. I often misread things thinking for example apple would hold at 162 as opposed to going to 145.
  7. It's your own business Bob not mine of course. I tend to put things into stocks with dividends if safety is the concern which at a older age it usually is. I can weather any amount of stock loss with a dividend coming it if it is appreciable and consistant in being paid out. As such Tesla would certainly not be a fit. I did this with BHP several years ago and weathered many downslips to find eventually a return to value and I pocketed all the dividend in between.
    Gold was a good move. I put money into gold itself a few months back and have been looking for a downward slant to invest more but it simply has never dropped. So I am stuck, hoping for more downside to come which never seems to happen.
    I may get desperate and simply thrown some more in but usually I do best when I stick to my plan. Like gold however more than the miners in this current stock environment this quarter.
  8. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web Well-Known Member


    Bob Wilson
  9. There may be a buck to be made, I feel there will be. I personally always thought that and missed the boat to my thinking in the beginning.
    Now there may be still, and these are going mainstream, Tesla certainly leads the way and global sales, but there are so many possibilities and so many supposes, I would not use retirement income in this. If the retirement income was this part only the speculative part, yes. Joe speaks for America in this and he now owns one. Many sectors grow and continue to grow for many years at great pace. This is one, but individual players in sectors may vary considerably.
    I expect the stock will do great. But it is not without risk of a significant sort.
  10. Pushmi-Pullyu

    Pushmi-Pullyu Well-Known Member

    Yes, I understand (in theory only) how one can profit in a well-timed short-term "short" investment in a stock.

    What I do not understand is those short-sellers who treat TSLA as a long-term investment. Maybe there are not a lot of those, but they seem to be a large proportion of the loudest voices among the anti-Tesla crowd, because we see the same comments being repeated under the same screen names for years, both at investor sites such as Reeking Alpha and Yahoo Finance, as well as on EV forums like this one. Well, not so much on this forum; I think so-called "TeslaInvestors" is the only long-term Tesla basher who still posts regularly here. The others disappeared shortly after Tesla started showing strong quarterly profits.

    But in comments to InsideEVs news articles, atho the volume of Tesla hater comments certainly has dropped after Tesla started showing strong net profits, we still see the occasional serial Tesla basher posting. In fact, the professional Tesla basher who goes by "tftf", one of the most long-term and most prolific posting to Reeking Alpha, posted multiple anti-Tesla FUD comments just today.

    But back to the subject at hand: Isn't a long-term "short" investment in TSLA guaranteed to lose money? I'm not an investor myself, but what I've read is that there is literally no limit to the amount of money one can lose in a "short" investment, while the amount of money one can win most definitely is limited.

    Maybe some of those short-sellers who regularly parrot anti-Tesla pravduh do regularly cash out and then buy back in on borrowing Tesla shares to bet against. But their monotonous drumbeat of "Tesla is on the verge of failing" seems to indicate otherwise. If they cashed out, wouldn't they then want the stock price to go up again before buying it, in the hope it would then go down? So why don't they flip-flop, alternating between Tesla cheerleaders and Tesla bashers?

    It would make financial sense if they were to have two screen names; one used for cheerleading and the other for bashing. But they don't; they just keep bashing all the time. Some on Reeking Alpha posts dozens or scores of Tesla hater posts every day, almost without fail! And some of them have been doing that literally for years.

    I just don't get it. Maybe they are getting paid to shill for those with financial interests in seeing Tesla fail, such as Big Oil and its "think tank" propaganda mills. Russian troll farms are a possibility, too; unfortunately, those working for Russian troll farms are increasingly seen posting on just about any controversial or divisive issue. :(

    Or... perhaps I'm trying to find a rational motive for irrational actions; maybe they (or some of them, anyway) really are as far removed from reality -- clinically insane -- as some of their comments suggest.
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2019
  11. I don't know the personal philosophies or psychology of professional shorts. The most notorious that I know of Chanos is short specific to China, and has been for years and years, so long so it defies any rational basis. On the opposite side long, is a guy who is all in on gold, long gold, and has been for almost the same amount of time. A particular psychological type seems to be found in both, short and long holders. They both act the same in their approach and manner. Differing entirely in specific, one is long gold and the other short China, but they both psychologically seem the same is my point. Talking head shows in the industry trot out these guys if their play seems to make sense for a brief moment or two. Mostly they are all known as jokes though both rich and successful at times.
    Is there a industry bias against tesla...certainly there has been. That is a known proven. Now I think it has by system devolved, it is more company against company, as all are into electric.
    Shorts tend to specialize in shorting, not going long nor appreciating stock valuation. It is just not what they do. Regular investors go both short and long and have all sorts of variance. Sans a dividend paying stock there may be no real loss to a short holder. Put dividends into the mix and it curtails the duration of the hold immensely. Someone has to cover the dividend.

    There may be motives that are not known by us and are remote from normally considered rational. Not related at all but it serves as example. A company such as soda stream, which in the past used settlers, lands occupied by israelies as part of their workforce, may attract a short interest that defies logic, as its basis is not of the economic but political. Those against the occupation and thus the stock(I think they are not doing that now). Things from some past or some past history of the particulars involved may hold burdens some think need to be paid.

    Why back in the day has Microsoft always been the subject of hackers and all that, and apple not so much. Is it that MSFT is so much worse at things, or is it as internet parlance has it, Gates back in the day used common technology on a open, (back in that day) university forum connected medium for his own patentable interest. And thus since this community was also that of the hackers, the subject of their hacking. This from the day he announced his intention and was informing all to cease and desist as he now was furthering patent claim. And then Steve Jobs and the creation of apple as well as result. True or not the idea of that persists.
    Again not related, but related in a way. Shorts may have some things known of or suspected to be true, as motive, we just are not purview to and they will hence fighting for in their eyes truth justice and the American way, never stop.
    Match that with a psychological type and I think that is it. Since you asked, I again am no authority in this at all. I have traded a lot and still hold things, but in general these are not nice people to my opinion and the investments are very difficult to isolate from environment degredation or other nefarious result. . So I try not to look at them at all, nevertheless find out why they do what they do.
    Shorts ultimately they aim to devolve a stock value to bankruptcy. That is typically their ultimate aim with most corporations. I think most justify that by saying...look they did this or that plainly false information they must be punished killed off. That to my opinion is often rationalization for wanting to kill completely a thing in this specific, a corporation or other.
    Stocks are reflective of business and even the best of players does things not right at times. So they are found and then they are used to justify action. I guess they just enjoy it. But it is a guess I am not one. Things used to be in place which required moving out of a short hold when certain limits were reached. Now short holds may go all the way to the state of bankruptcy.

    Reeking alpha, that reminds me of a company that acts in concert with one of the talking heads who appreciates stock prices for specific companies, before they come in for the strike and act with some specific knowledge discloseur which will result in a known stock drop price. Improving their profit margin. The drop is often pretty close to the recent appreciation. The whole thing being orchestrated in a way. But that one company is not just shorting.
    So it is if such things were occurring would make it a veritable cesspool. I do not claim to know if they are or not but to state I suppose they are and that mention only brought up that memory not that it is that nor similiar.
    The whole industry is corrupted and completely to my opinion. I endure it as I have had to at times.
    With so much short interest Tesla is risky, has to be. Great gains may be in the offer but really it is with such a degree at great risk. It is not a car company as its valuation speaks not of any car production numbers. Like amazon was as well not a book company, but that is as it was thought for quite a while. So is misread to my personal opinion.

    So on your example.... a company who is in the business of shorting would be using other mean to appreciate stock value of intended targets which are not them nor can be traced to them. I would approximate legal hazard may present if one just used different names perhaps to present opposing views and reap consequent profit.
    I have five completely filled envelopes on my desk right now, all of which are in relation to potential law suits against one corporation I have held. I get such every year, for various reasons and all sorts of cause. So those in this field may have to be quite attentive as to how they do things to not threaten legal course.
    I throw them away as if the company treated me well they deserve not that. But most do not. So cautions are endeavored.
    I will add a tiny bit of political here. I have personally used litigation having appeared in court once thirty years ago. Corporation utilize our legal system at least annually, formally, all of them the big ones. Taxes fund our legal system completely and equal tax rates for the general public and corporation make no sense at all.
    It is amount of use is the thing and we are not equally using that and similar things. Like justification for those of differing income is also presently found always. Involved in stocks commodities, you are involved in litigation always.
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2019
  12. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web Well-Known Member

    • Skip to 18:15 and watch the fun.
    • Later, they laughed at the absence of UK superchargers.
    • At 28:00 they laughed at another, parked car.
    • 29:30, track mode ... more laughing.
    Bob Wilson
  13. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web Well-Known Member

    You'll notice how the massive engine block punched through the firewall into the cabin and killed everyone followed by the gasoline fire:

    Opps, different test drive:

    Bob Wilson
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2019
  14. Amazing vehicle. If you have not already bob you may care to visit Joe Rogans interview of a new democrat presidential candidate just aired yesterday. Speaks of possible roadblocks to things Tesla is involved with, that may be in a way hindered by pushback.
    Meaning their self driving truck technology EV. Not downplaying tesla I want them to succeed, and expect they will, but roadblocks to technology application exist, some not even on the horizon for most.
    I take the health of the economy and such are made up for the most part. And the most amount of new car buyers in default loan status just released yesterday, the most since 2010 and the great recession, speaks to my opinion.
    Started off just intending to watch a minute or so.. who is this guy Yang. Ended up watching the whole thing start to finish, fascinating.
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2019
  15. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web Well-Known Member

    You're seeing a major part of what motivates me and mutes the critics. Tesla customers are delighted with their cars. Like Apple owners of Macintoshes, we were totally thrilled.

    In contrast, the IBM-style kludge-ware and Microsoft operating systems were (and remain) a sad joke. They literally took (take) 2-3x as much maintenance labor as a Macintosh and remain(ed) unreliable. This is what differentiates Teslas from their honorable competition.

    Customers will consistently pay and return for quality and that is beyond surface defects. It isn't the wrapper but pedals-to-the-road that count. Tesla customers are delighted!

    Tesla critics don't understand but they don't have to.

    Bob Wilson
  16. All true. Keep in mind however before Steve Jobs stepped back in, Apple regardless of all that, was for quite a few years on the financial ropes. Elon for all his strengths is not known for predictability and he has already distanced himself a slight bit recently.
    This is not short fodder which is typically nonsense, but real things which add unpredictability to the mileau.
    Least we forget from tech crunch..
    "When Steve Jobs returned to Apple the company had just completed a fiscal year where they lost about $1 billion on $7 billion in revenue. The company was worth about $4 billion. Rivals like HP and Dell were worth about $62 billion and $8 billion, respectively."
    1997 that. You must know this I think.
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2019
  17. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web Well-Known Member

    It wasn't until John Sculley proposed an Apple version of an IBM PC that I started to lose my Mac and Apple enthusiasm. Scully proposed 'drinking the koolaid' and that was a bridge too far.

    Meanwhile, Jobs had formed Industrial Light and Magic and along the way joined the Unix cult. He got religion and when he returned, Macs moved beyond magic, again.

    Bob Wilson
  18. Jobs did not reinvent the technology or do anything like that. His genius was applying existant superior technology to variance of application, in the end phones and all the rest. Which belies your assumptive premesis superior technology wins out. It did not, they were close to failing and likely would have been bought up for the assets and devolved in two years time. They were not applying the technology widely.
    Elon is venturing the application of superior technology of cars to other venues as we speak. Hence his ideas with semi's his solar and battery application and all the rest.
    That elon is doing all this does not however in any manner a retiree should devote all their resources in tesla with gold as a stop.
    A hedge needs to be something that serves to the inverse. With loss depreciation a other item held needs to appreciate in relative value. Gold with 08 as example, little served that. It depreciated not as much as stocks, but still depreciated. Why that, all the hedge funds and like asset holders were seeing cash outs of membership and had to meet obligations.They sold existing gold assets in mass as they were they things still held that had the most value. So it declined as so much hit the market at one time. A more viable hedge would be a thing tied into American bonds or equal. Advice to retirees to put main amounts of retirement funds into tesla is severely mistaken. The risk is untenable. it rides likely on one man. As did apple.
    Holding apple now are we? If we are, I strictly as well advise against that. Not based on the present stock moves, but the utilization of governmental means to reduce competition. That is not bad nor rarely done in and of itself. Though the arrest of a competitors family member for reasons of Iran sanction belies credibility, my hat is off to them for innovation.
    But it speaks to the fact that without intervention, they can no longer compete equally. As theirs is a constant growth model, this can only speak of bad things ahead. I say far ahead as it will take quite some time, they sit on literal mountains of cash, but it appears things are amiss in the kingdom when once they were not. The opium wars at the behest of English corporation were won, and trade ensued, but it spoke not of great things to come for the british empire and the corporations they represented. Government is employed at the behest of corporation for dire need usually after all else fails.
    They will continue to control the American market in all probability but the rest will eventually probably be lost. The American governments influence of empire is scattered and to diverse in application to be resultant in global effect. Apple will eventually suffer that deficit.
    A good present read of American empires dominance may be found with a check on who supports fully the US in their Venezuelan approach who opposes it directly and who in noncomittal. Maps reflecting this can be found. One can look at the absolute numbers of governments and get a certain read. However one may also then look at the populations contained by each government in each area and another read may be found. Phones sold and to be sold will be found to be in gross amount by majority that found beyond the scope of influence of American empire. Those are apples areas of future intended profits, which are devolving as we speak replaced in the main by a company whose name begins with H.
    Whose personal and families they apparently intend to imprison at each and every opportunity for stated reason of Iranian sanction violation..Comical that.
    There is a Chinese car company who is doing very well and is number two in global sales. If America had suddenly started to arrest their executive membership and/or their families, I would abruptly do a about face and say.....tesla you are finished globally. But tesla, so efficient and able to crush competitors cleanly and efficiently, they have have no need for such shenanigans. And shenanigans they clearly are...Iranian sanctions my foot, comical.
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2019
  19. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web Well-Known Member

    We'll have to agree to disagree about the Apple history:
    • Bought 128k original Mac in 1985 (MC68000)
    • Bought PC luggable - NEVER AGAIN!
    • Bought PowerBook 140 (MC68000)
    • Bought PowerBook (PowerPC)
    • Bought PowerBooks, two (Intel)
    • Currently using MacBook Pro (Intel)
    I've also owned and sold for a profit, APPL.

    Going back to basics, anyone who makes a product that not only meets but delights the customer, will find a repeat customer. Competition, especially as brain dead as Microsoft or others, has no chance at my dollars.

    So today I have an iPhone 5s, in part because I was given an iPhone 5 at NASA for official use. The iPhone 5 was so good, I went from flip-phone to a 5s and never looked back. Monday, I upgraded to the latest iPhone IOS.

    Bob Wilson
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2019
  20. Yes I will not belabor the point. I am certain I have owned apple at some point in time but it has never been a core holding nor can I recall the specifics at all.
    The phones are simply now a bit to expensive. Great features this and that certainly. A continuance in popularity will likely remain in the American market sans a gross economic decline. Honestly I have not done a work up and can not imply the specifics..
    I could endeavor it but have no reason to do so. I in the main now just protect assets with a cessation of aggressive investing.
    A decline is coming, GDP next quarter will likely not be a increasing percent and earnings are in decline not appreciating, but likely it will not be appreciable. A recession seems unlikely.
    A recession or like event and I would run not walk away from apple. Seeing them as most affected priced out of the market.
    Glad to hear you made money on it.
    Me personally I do not like the operational model of buying into each item with any item purchased apple. My last apple product was purchased I would guess seven or so years ago. My aversion to this is not widely held by others however. Your satisfaction is probably typical.

    AS to meeting expectations and delighting customers causing repeat customer experiences this is not necessarily so. On occasion a single item is the one desired and repeat purchases never ensue. It depends on the item purchased and context of the purchase. A person may have been delighted with the features of a electric typewriter in 1980. Did that require or infer a repeat For reasons which were external to the item itself. External and internal reasons for purchase or lack of purchase exist.
    In this specific elons cars are simply delightful, all say so. A repeat purchase who knows really. The market is in such flux with new technology and models and this and that really it is a bit early to say. Tesla seems unlikely, but may be out-tesla'd by someone. Has happened in corporate venue considered. Apple knockoffs lower priced very similar things of the same features is not abstract from this as consideration in other than US sold places..
    Who leads the way with delightful revolutionary innovative designs are not necessarily the same ones who establish and retain market share. Who first introduced the seat belt, it was not GM. Who first applied a gas combustion engine to a vehicle, it was not ford. And on and on.the inverse is likely the rule. Who applies the technology which delights to most effect with most profit is the corporate winner. With emphasis on profit.
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2019

Share This Page