Like playing chess, sometimes I guess how would the opponents think. Among all hardcore short holders, I think many of them regret what they did in the past few years. Tesla didn't bankrupt quickly as they expected. On average, shorts have to pay 6~10% a year to borrow the shares, that's significant if they have to hold 10+ years. Some of them buy Puts instead, the time decay is even more damaging for their accounts. Think about those holding 2018 Puts, TSLA has to drop 50% for them to just break even (depends on their strike price). The recent model 3 reservation is horrible news for them. After all, maybe EV is not a niche market anymore? Maybe the longs are right? On the other hand, large institution investors are very happy, they buy a chunk of TSLA, lend them to the shorts, earn a nice interest. If the stock goes lower, they buy more and lend to the shorts. At some point, there will be no more shares for shorts to borrow. But longs can keep buying. Shorts have no chance to win the fight. This is likely to turn into a slow Tsunami. Shorts took huge risk for a small potential return.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
Bears have been wrong on almost every prediction. I don't think they are right on this one. There are things money can't buy. Many rich companies failed competition against poor startups. It's good for the world if Apple develop EVs. I would be highly surprised if Apple cars are better than Tesla's. If they are not better, the pricing will be difficult.
ev-enthusiast
Active Member
larmor
Active Member
Tesla went thru several cars and learned alot from the process including building safe cars. If Apple can do this in one go, all the power to them...
After reading the Motortrend article they were hyping up yesterday on Twitter, it turned out to be just a really longwinded speculation on what the Apple might be and look like (read: a weirdmobile) and half-way through went off-topic and lost my interest. I want my 20 minutes back. Honestly, how much did Apple pay them for this? I'm generally a big car enthusiast but if those design sketches are a preview of the future of cars, then my love for cars will die along with it.
dc_h
Active Member
Please keep it on track tanner. This is the idle speculation, personal affronts and long term dreamers thread.
Sorry to stray as well, but is there any building consensus on if the new S will affect Q2 and Q3 sales and gross margins?
Excuse me? The majority of posts here (talking about the "Apple Car") aren't helpful... How is asking about short term movement on a thread titled "Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2016" off 'track', as you would suggest?
ev-enthusiast
Active Member
Ulmo
Active Member
Remember, I'm a novice in stock trading, but here's my take:
Apple as competition thoughts:
1. Tesla head-start
2. Apple has lots of cash.
3. Smart people can get stuff to work.
4. It will take time for #3.
5. EVERY CAR COMPANY UNDERESTIMATES HOW THE CAR LOOKS HAS A BIG IMPACT ON SALES. Only a minority (I'm guessing one third) of the population prefers ugly cars (to match what they look like); the rest want something nice looking. And although beauty is subjective, the average subjectivity tends to be fairly objective when it comes to how many cars are bought. That car revealed in the Apple sketches is UGLY! If that was an Apple plant, the intent was to under-whelm everyone to make them think it wasn't a threat and to go away while it builds something better, otherwise, they are ape-bat nuts. Or I'm ape bat wrong and everyone wants an ugly Apple car. I have been wrong before.
There's enough variability in my 5 guesses above + vs - that I'm guessing every serious well-heeled comment published about Apple car will probably be taken on face value by the less rational within the short term stock market. Longer term, idiot moves like releasing an ugly car to the market would flop. At the same time, a slightly alternative approach would be putting Hotz comma.ai software in the same car, and suddenly all of the people who don't own a car and don't care what it looks like would rent time in one and the market would skyrocket, even an ugly car. There's almost no difference in investment in those two options, with wildly different outcomes. I will not count Apple in or out yet.
If the long-term plan is to get into the car software business, and Apple does car software right (by this I mean autopilot stuff, not entertainment), then Apple would be well positioned to be a heavyweight in software for the next 200 years of space exploration and robotic existence. In a way, Apple has to do this. But, I haven't seen any solid evidence that they are going down that road. Theoretically, an ugly car would be a good place to house smart AI, since no one would be looking at the AI until they had a viable product and a huge market share head start.
Apple as competition thoughts:
1. Tesla head-start
2. Apple has lots of cash.
3. Smart people can get stuff to work.
4. It will take time for #3.
5. EVERY CAR COMPANY UNDERESTIMATES HOW THE CAR LOOKS HAS A BIG IMPACT ON SALES. Only a minority (I'm guessing one third) of the population prefers ugly cars (to match what they look like); the rest want something nice looking. And although beauty is subjective, the average subjectivity tends to be fairly objective when it comes to how many cars are bought. That car revealed in the Apple sketches is UGLY! If that was an Apple plant, the intent was to under-whelm everyone to make them think it wasn't a threat and to go away while it builds something better, otherwise, they are ape-bat nuts. Or I'm ape bat wrong and everyone wants an ugly Apple car. I have been wrong before.
There's enough variability in my 5 guesses above + vs - that I'm guessing every serious well-heeled comment published about Apple car will probably be taken on face value by the less rational within the short term stock market. Longer term, idiot moves like releasing an ugly car to the market would flop. At the same time, a slightly alternative approach would be putting Hotz comma.ai software in the same car, and suddenly all of the people who don't own a car and don't care what it looks like would rent time in one and the market would skyrocket, even an ugly car. There's almost no difference in investment in those two options, with wildly different outcomes. I will not count Apple in or out yet.
If the long-term plan is to get into the car software business, and Apple does car software right (by this I mean autopilot stuff, not entertainment), then Apple would be well positioned to be a heavyweight in software for the next 200 years of space exploration and robotic existence. In a way, Apple has to do this. But, I haven't seen any solid evidence that they are going down that road. Theoretically, an ugly car would be a good place to house smart AI, since no one would be looking at the AI until they had a viable product and a huge market share head start.
Last edited:
Motortrend just announced that they are basically dying. This looks like a desperate attempt at clicks by putting Tesla and Apple in the same article and creating hype about it.
I still think we are headed rangebound to the goal posts I posted earlier, with a more exact target of yesterday's pivot around 255.7. The black swan today is that many took profits yesterday afternoon, and many more are getting on the sidelines (in a wide array of indexes). The Doha meeting and the fact many have been burned from the aftershocks of oil movements will put many specs on the sidelines going in to the weekend. From a macro point of view, this meeting has more consequences market wide than people are giving credit. No one wants to play musical chairs on this one. This has created extremely low volume on typically volatile stocks. To which bears are certainly taking advantage of. I would watch carefully between 12:30-2EST, as that will likely pin the movement in to power hour.
As for Doha, IMHO there is no way they will come to a consensus, it's absurd to even entertain the idea -- this is buy rumor sell news v2.0 on oil, which will effect many things market wide. Longs in oil are going to get burned [again], and that liquidity is going to cause a very short term ripple next week. My opinion, just providing some insight.
dc_h
Active Member
Sarcasm, we can be a bit dry in the midwest, so sorry if it was not noted. You specifically asked about short term pricing, one of the few references to pricing all day. It was my "nice" way to encourage more discussions specific to the stock price.
Many (including GS) predicted the Doha meeting will have no results. My view is different. I think there is a decent chance they will have a favorable outcome (for oil producers). Oil exporting countries suffered dearly in the past 2 years. It's in everyone's interest to cut 5% production and double triple the profit.
dc_h
Active Member
Thanks for the update. This will have a big impact on the jhm hedge. If you are both right, the SCO\TSLA combination could be a good cover today. If oil went down 10%, it could create a new macro environment, at least short term.
Apple effect should have no short term consequences, other than a short knee jerk reaction. Any plans would take years to come to market in any consequential form and will be well telegraphed merely due to the immense manufacturing infrastructure that would be required.
I do wonder about Doha this weekend. That's why I pre-maturely dove to the sidelines, although I do hold some shorter term protective puts and a June call position that is well in the money. I would not be surprised to see a bear attack before the ER and other possible catalysts. I also feel like the market has had a good run.
It would be nice for TSLA to really decouple from oil, but given the probably lack of other news, TSLA will probably trade largely with oil and NASDAQ next week.
What is playing out is the consequences of the Model X ramp. I do wonder what kind of overhang of Model X's there were from Q1 and what that means for Q2. The ER will help to shed some light, but that could easily also be misconstrued.
I do wonder about Doha this weekend. That's why I pre-maturely dove to the sidelines, although I do hold some shorter term protective puts and a June call position that is well in the money. I would not be surprised to see a bear attack before the ER and other possible catalysts. I also feel like the market has had a good run.
It would be nice for TSLA to really decouple from oil, but given the probably lack of other news, TSLA will probably trade largely with oil and NASDAQ next week.
What is playing out is the consequences of the Model X ramp. I do wonder what kind of overhang of Model X's there were from Q1 and what that means for Q2. The ER will help to shed some light, but that could easily also be misconstrued.
That doesn't mean they will do it. Various oil producing nations have been screaming for some sort of action for quite some time now. The Saudis have been playing a battle against Iran's, Russia's, and U.S. production. They have succeeded to some degree.
The issue is whether or not this has anything to do with TSLA anymore. We are now in the after Model 3 unveiling era, AM3U, and in the BM3D (before Model 3 deliveries) era, so do we play by the same oil rules? Several tests are coming up to find out.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
