This was addressed so many times by Kurt and others. When trading, either selling or buying you do not move the price because it works against trader. Engaging in either price support or suppression is totally different. In case of shorting you want to time large trades with the downward ticks, greatly multiplying the effect, potentially triggering cascade of stop loss orders or panic selling because abrupt drop typically is associated with some kind of bad news. So when people see such a drop it unnerves, sometimes enough to panic sell. The key is concentrated in time selling. This is well known technique, and I am surprised that you are unaware. I actually saw a very good description associated with the SEC rule which limits short selling activities under some circumstances - you can just surmise how this works straight from the SEC wording about the prohibition. I don't have time to dig it out now, but will later. May be somebody can help if has time now...
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
This was addressed so many times by Kurt and others. When trading, either selling or buying you do not move the price because it works against trader. Engaging in either price support or suppression is totally different. In case of shorting you want to time large trades with the downward ticks, greatly multiplying the effect, potentially triggering cascade of stop loss orders or panic selling because abrupt drop typically is associated with some kind of bad news. So when people see such a drop it unnerves, sometimes enough to panic sell. The key is concentrated in time selling. This is well known technique, and I am surprised that you are unaware. I actually saw a very good description associated with the SEC rule which limits short selling activities under some circumstances - you can just surmise how this works straight from the SEC wording about the prohibition. I don't have time to dig it out now, but will later. May be somebody can help if has time now...
dennis
Model S Plaid
Given Apple's expertise in batteries (they buy them), that should be about as successful as their current effort to compete with Tesla with the Apple Car.
I expect the 100 kWh pack will have a lifespan in the 1-2 year range. Tesla is obligated to buy a lot of cells from Panasonics factories in Japan, and the Model S/X is the likely place to put them to use. The plan for Tesla Energy and Model 3 however is to use 21-70s.
This is different this time.
This isn't about "cool"
Elon has used the term "beautiful"
Beautiful solar roofing is what the market needs.
Electrolytes is what plants need.
Just because there's no reports doesn't mean the cars don't exist! In each case, there's a gap in dates where the "missing" VINs are. Unless you are willing to conclude, without evidence, that the factory was shut down or they just stopped issuing VINs for several days but then restarted at a number that surprisingly coincides with regular VIN issuing cadence, the theory fails. The much more likely explanation is that those VINs exist but are not reported, either because they are inventory, issued to non-Forum members or whatever. If the VINs suddenly jumped by an un-issuable number one day to the next (say 1-2k jump in a day) then you would be on to something, maybe (assuming they didn't just issue a bunch at one time for some reason - issuance does not mean they are built right away). Let's start with the most recent:
Missing 168,xxx - 6 day gap. Exactly what would be expected for a run of 1000.
10/11 - 167,8xx
10/17 - 169,xxx
Missing 165,xxx - your best argument, but not definitive. 2 day gap at worst, 10 day gap at most. Note this is self-reported data and not everyone knows the *exact* VIN assignment date because they check MyTesla 10 times a day. It's possible the 10/4 person was actually assigned on 9/26 or 9/27 or something. Unlikely that Tesla issued that few of VINs between 9/26 - 10/4, but possible. Need more data here.
9/26 - 164,xxx
10/4 - 164,xxx
10/6 - 166,2xx
Missing 163,xxx - 7 day gap. Exactly what would be expected for a run of 1000.
9/19 - 162,xxx
9/26 - 164,xxx
If I had to guess, I'd say they were in scramble mode at the end of the quarter to make new inventory. Many stores sold every car in their possession, including all floor models. Hard to sell cars when there's nothing to show customers. I bet ~2,000 inventory cars were made in that period and we will see them soon.
"Missing" 135,xxx and 136,xxx: the fact that 1 or 2 exist of each disproves your theory that those VINs were skipped. The fact that these numbers are (apparently) only showing up now strengthens my claim that sometimes inventory VINs are hidden from view until later when they are made available for sale.
ev-enthusiast
Active Member
Does Tesla make their own batteries?
I know they make the battery pack, but I thought they buy their Batteries from Panasonic.
Why is this type of trolling tolerated here?
So I stopped during the day to check it out, and that is indeed Tesla Mobile store, complete with gray Model S and Model X with Airstream trailer in tow. After speaking with wonderfully enthusiastic and knowledgeable sales guys, the are traveling pulling the trailer between locations in NYC, Long Island, NY, Saratoga NY, Princeton, NJ. As weather gets colder they are scheduled to go down South along the eastern sea-board, eventually to Florida. Surprisingly they sold two cars (did not ask whether MS or MX) while parked in Princeton. I am not sure how somebody just passing a trailer in the center of Princeton could drop a 100K out of the blue, but it happened.
Attachments
Last edited:
I honestly can't tell if you are trying to make a point through sarcasm or if you are just trolling..
IIRC DaveT also made the point the the primary mover that is missing is new buyers. But it is apparently much more exciting to think that Mr. Burns is shorting the stock out of hatred for Musk and his renewable energy products.
New buyers will do nothing to the SP if there are determined short sellers around to negate the effect and dilute the stock.
This midday downdraft is apparently due to the FBI director at 13:00 EDT indicating that his agents are further investigating Hillary Clinton's emails handled by a private server when she was secretary of state. The market in general and investors in alternative energy stocks in particular appear to fear that that may increase the chances for Donald Trump to become president.
I suspect that most voters have already made up their minds, and the effect of today's news will be minimal. If polls after today indicate as I expect that Hillary Clinton is still likely to win, stocks in general and TSLA in particular should rebound from today's fall.
As noted in my book, the market in late October typically enters a six-month period of strength. The outlook for a presidential election can cause market confusion and indecision early in October, but as the outcome becomes more certain, especially if in the direction of the Wall Street favorite, a meaningful rally can be let loose.
The point is that people have repeatedly said that a constraint to adoption of home solar is how bad the panels look.
So this isn't just an issue of "cool tech" it is addressing a constraint in the market. It is a differentiator that can make a big difference to adoption and therefore $$$
Elon has said the same thing so I don't think he is trolling.
Elon and others have talked about how important the look of the panels is to get wider adoption.
They aren't trolling. I agree with them.
ev-enthusiast
Active Member
Curt, thanks for providing some context and information on possible reasons for SP movements.
MitchJi
Trying to learn kindness, patience & forgiveness
I don't think it's reasonable to think that most or all of the downturn was caused by shorting. I believe that it's more reasonable to believe that there are other weaknesses that shorts were able to exploit.
It's not 100% a product introduction, but part 1 of an effort on Elon's part to show that the SCTY acquisition makes sense. Part 2 is on November 1 when he explains the financials. He said that he convinced the major institutional fund managers. If he can convince the market as well we'll be off to the races. It's not unlikely he can do that, since he convinced the fund managers without showing the product.
I'm sorry. I meant that there might be a temporary bump, like the recent ER.
But it's also possible that we'll get a permanent bump, as I suggested above, or possibly if it completely fizzles we could see $180-$195. It's a very hard situation to predict.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
