ev-enthusiast
Active Member
Anybody wanting to discuss short term SP movements here?
Looks like some stop losses got triggered.
Looks like some stop losses got triggered.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
SunCatcher
Member
Tesla can't sell cars in Arizona, and yet there is a Tesla store in Scottsdale. Some states that don't allow car sales outside of a licensed dealership, still allow stores. Some don't. I'm personally looking forward to the "New" products in Tesla stores.
"In some states, Tesla is permitted to sell its electric cars online, deliver them to customers, and open as many Tesla Store showrooms as it wants."
Last edited:
Confirming my amateur standing, I am capable of depth perception with only two eyes and currently my brain is able to juxtapose them and interpret a three dimensional world. But you are right. I now remember reading somewhere that our eye and immediate nervous system are hard-wired to integrate the signal from each eye into a two dimensional frame before the signal is processed by the brain. That is a simple hardware problem making computation much simpler. Of course we can also focus the eyes (or I was able to do so until the last 40 years) giving us the possibility to get some sense of depth from one eye. I don't know if it is a difficult software exercise to integrate radar into this scheme but it would certainly be desirable for the reasons Elon articulates. Further, is there a way to change the focus of radar? Can it be as flexible as our eyes? That way you might be able to eliminate the need for the ultrasound sensors. Certainly they should be integrated into the central processing card.
I think we are getting more appreciation for the siamese "divorce" from Mobileye and the hire of chip gurus a few years ago.
Edit: Another thought or two. Our brains also integrate sound signals, doppler effect for example, for orientation as well as touch (analogous to radar?). Furthermore a few recent articles suggest we've found an area of the brain which is specialized in recognizing and tracking moving objects. Cf. articles on physics hard wired in our brains. Finally, I had a brain fart about reverse VR. All of the software for such integration of inputs is already available to someone and the processing capability. What is/should happen is integrating the technology for creating virtual reality in the sensory system of the car. Perhaps that is what Elon and his geniuses are working toward SAE4 quality autonomous driving.
By the way, what is SAE 4? I went to their site, but got too much info to weed through and nothing specific about the generalization.
Why do you think institutions are buying shares so they can vote? The top 10 shareholders in Q2 were still the top 10 in Q1. Their voting power didn't change. Unless these top holders are in two camps (one aye one nay), why would they buy shares to vote? And it also goes back to the question, if a large, long-term minded institution is in the nay camp, why would they buy shares in the first place? They should liquidate their holding instead.SingleContractI believe that I can officially declare that there won't be a squeeze triggered by shorts being forced to return their shares due to the merger, but if anyone else wants to double or triple check please do it!
Background it's obvious to me that the major institutions are buying shares so that they can vote without calling in their shares. If anyone wants to know how I figured this out let me know and I'll reply eventually. That made me think that this might be a legal requirement, so I called TD Ameritrade and asked "if I sell Tesla short, and the owner of the shares wants them returned to vote on the merger, can the shares I sold short be legally recalled?"
The man I talked to checked with me, to be sure he understood my question, then put me on hold while he checked with corporate governance. When he returned to the line he said "that's impossible".
I said "legally impossible"?
He said "yes".
Some further conclusions (mine) below. Discussion is welcome, particularly advice on what to do with our 50 March $380's!
1. A substantial part of the recent strength of the Tesla SP is due to institutions buying shares so they can vote, rather than any underlying strength in the stock.
2. Between now and the record date any catalysts could produce a bigger than expected result, possibly even a squeeze, due to the fact that the number of shares available to purchase is very low. OTOH I believe that due to Tesla's expected high OpEx and CapEx plus unfounded skepticism surrounding the M3 ramp and the SCTY merger reduce the chances of a large surge, and make the chances of a substantial squeeze very unlikely.
3. After the record date I believe that the institutions will sell the shares that were purchased in order to vote, possibly making this a good time to buy puts.
Chart for a Single Contract of a March$380 Strike, Paid $65 Each:
Edit: I checked and found GS sold half of their position in Q2 so that would make them drop out of top 10 shareholders. But the big picture is still the same. Top 10 institution holders have nearly 70% of the shares vote-able on the merger.
Last edited:
Gerardf
Active Member
Why do you think that ? Did I overlook something ?
I see the same booring no-volume virtually flat shareprice.
Sorry about the diversion into VR for car. I'll go to the Autonomous driving thread.
Edit: That wasn't productive, but here is something on how VR is done.
How to capture, edit and composite immersive video for VR, YouTube, Facebook and more - Features
Edit: That wasn't productive, but here is something on how VR is done.
How to capture, edit and composite immersive video for VR, YouTube, Facebook and more - Features
Last edited:
Do you think that these top 10 institutional holders would/need to recall their shares? Wouldn't that trigger short squeeze?
Recall or not, I never believed the vote would trigger a squeeze of any kind. I think the vote and result would be a non-event for the stock price, unless the final terms changed substantially.
1. A substantial part of the recent strength of the Tesla SP is due to institutions buying shares so they can vote, rather than any underlying strength in the stock.
2. Between now and the record date any catalysts could produce a bigger than expected result, possibly even a squeeze, due to the fact that the number of shares available to purchase is very low. OTOH I believe that due to Tesla's expected high OpEx and CapEx plus unfounded skepticism surrounding the M3 ramp and the SCTY merger reduce the chances of a large surge, and make the chances of a substantial squeeze very unlikely.
3. After the record date I believe that the institutions will sell the shares that were purchased in order to vote, possibly making this a good time to buy puts.
Chart for a Single Contract of a March$380 Strike, Paid $65 Each:
Wouldn't it be a little dangerous to buy puts now, better to wait for any temporary bounce related to improved financials in Q3? In the last call Wheeler said they had a good chance for non gaap profitability in 2H if they hit guidance. Even if they fall a bit short the financials are set to look a lot better in Q3 and Q4 than in 1H of the year, right? Although if you think the market is going to do a September slump and tsla will follow it down, maybe puts now would pay off.
Last edited:
How is short squeeze not possible? About 27 million shares, that is 30% of the float is sold short. Retail investors own about 10% of the float and mostly in cash accounts like IRA. So, almost all of the shares sold short belong to those top 10 institutions. Are you implying that most of it need not be recalled to vote? How can they get even a simple majority?
It is also possible that the top institutional holders of tesla are increasing their stake for the same reason they are big holders in the first place, they are bullish on Tesla long term and now that tesla is finally hitting volume production on model X (a major concern/hurdle is overcome) they are happy to up their bets at current SP?
Who said a majority is required? I think most corporate votes go with a plurality, with most shares unvoted. Actually, since Elon isn't voting his shares a majority would be essentially impossible since many other shareholders will join in not voting. I think this is why the recall thing is silly. Think of it this way: While I have not reviewed the ownership, the vote could be (making up numbers) 25% yes, 5% no, 70% abstain. Merger approved. Someone who knows more about corporate governance please correct me if I have it wrong.
RobStark
Well-Known Member
GM gets a lot of vitriol from me because they actively campaign in State Houses all over the country to prevent Tesla from opening stores even in States like Maryland where Tesla, the Maryland Auto Dealers and State legislators came to a compromise. GM threw a grenade in the room and almost succeeded at blowing up a compromise.
Nissan gets some vitriol from me because they are so close and yet so far. Nissan CEO Carlos Ghosn speaks to reporters and the public as if he gets it. Nissan has the manufacturing and technical capacity to mass produce compelling BEVs yesterday but somehow doesn't. It has let its first mover advantage slip away.
I think about Ford as much as I think about Suzuki. By which I mean not a whole lot.
Whenever there's a transaction happened, the ownership of the shares transferred with it. As you said, retail investors hold less than 10% of the float. So who were buying those shorted shares when the short sell happened? Very likely the institution holders too. So as a collective entity, their voting power didn't change at all. They don't need to recall anything to do the majority vote. Short selling doesn't affect the composition of voting rights. For example, say you are Fidelity and holds 99k shares and I'm a retail investor with 1k shares. And we're the only two long holders. Anton sold short 2k shares. By statistics, he borrowed 1.98k from you and 20 from me. When he shorted the stock, there are people who bought it. And by statistics again, you bought 1.98k and I bought 20. After this transaction, you are still holding 99k shares in terms of voting rights. Of course, there are many many more participants in the market. But statistically, no recall would be need to do the vote. Unless all the shorts were borrowed from one or two largest institutions holder and these one or two institutions did not buy a single share from the short sale, and decreased their voting power greatly, and they want to vote at full strength. But this is just not what has been done.
Well I think the most likely situation was the biggest institution holders didn't see anything changing the long term view and bought the majority of the secondary offering. Later on when the merger was announced, some institutions disliked it and sold away their position to those institutions who favor it.
Bizarre movement today. The moving averages haven't been this close in a long time and the RSI is near a low for the year. Expecting filing for vote on merger any day now. It seems unlikely that SolarCity would wait the full 45 days. Market is holding Tesla near $225 because of the conversion ratio. An announcement soon would benefit SolarCity and Tesla.
Bob Lutz is a monkey for hire. I think he's at a point in his life where he really doesn't care and simply wants to stick to what he's been saying for years, even if he knows he's wrong.
Remember this beauty?
One frame and the next frame from the same camera can still allow triangulation, unless we're moving directly at the object. Since camera trajectory is known due to all the sensors in the car, I'm guessing they can get at what's where fast enough looking at some number of consecutive frames.
Hogfighter
Professional Lurker
So here's my play.....constructive criticism is appreciated.
I sold some TSLA and bought SCTY. It's in my Fidelity account and earning over 20% interest on them borrowing my shares to lend out to shorts. I'm writing covered calls slightly OOTM each week for another 1% per week. The stock seems to have a floor since they've gotten a buyout offer, as well as a ceiling which is the takeover price.
It's like owning TSLA on steroids so far.
I sold some TSLA and bought SCTY. It's in my Fidelity account and earning over 20% interest on them borrowing my shares to lend out to shorts. I'm writing covered calls slightly OOTM each week for another 1% per week. The stock seems to have a floor since they've gotten a buyout offer, as well as a ceiling which is the takeover price.
It's like owning TSLA on steroids so far.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
