Author Topic: TSLA - Tesla Motors  (Read 947139 times)

TwoCitiesCapital

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2683
Re: TSLA - Tesla Motors
« Reply #3460 on: February 13, 2020, 03:39:56 PM »

I mean, if we're setting the bar that low (a ride of 20-30%), then 80-90% of companies would have had to considering issuing shares in 2013, 2017, and 2019.  Instead we got more and more buybacks each year...the exact opposite of what your suggesting here.


It's not just the 20% that matters.  It's where they are in the life cycle of the company, the opportunity set, the capital need, the valuation, the risks, etc.  All those are are relevant to one's decision to issue shares.  If you reread my comment, it was not a formulaic "If shares rise 20%, then issue shares."

Of course, but only one of those things that changed in 10 days and not by much more than the 20% you stated. (32% based on the closing price the day comments were made versus where they closed yesterday prior to the announcement).

He already negated the rally up to ~$600/share by saying, at that time, there was no need nor intent to issue.

But again, arguing straw-men. My main issue isn't his issuing shares - it's that he said he wouldn't/didn't need to and did anyways after just 20-30%.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2020, 03:59:23 PM by TwoCitiesCapital »


Dalal.Holdings

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1222
Re: TSLA - Tesla Motors
« Reply #3461 on: February 13, 2020, 04:26:46 PM »

Is lying only wrong if it loses a company money?

We live in a society that praises lying (Trump, Musk) and doing whatever it takes to win.  Truth is dead...

There are many on here who would rather win (stock appreciation) no matter the cost than have principles.  And in a society that exalts money above all else the incentives sort of speak for themselves.

Funny.

The guy who's about to beat the likes of Boeing for the 1st manned mission from a pvt co and has schooled all automakers with EVs (despite using a fraction of the resources) is a fraud. I guess we should give Boeing the contract because their management seems nicer (even though their rocket failed and their missions are much more expensive for taxpayers than SpaceX). Not sure what "truth" you are discussing. Perhaps you are confusing "truth" for noise.

The deranged things being said about Musk could have been said about Steve Jobs (abandoned his 1st born for a while and didn't pay any alimony, believed in fruit for curing cancer, was a bully, adopted ideas from xerox, etc etc) or Thomas Edison or Ford. The only difference is Twitter didn't exist back then. These people are not like you. They are not like your conventional CEOs. Not buttoned up like Jeff Immelt, Ginni Rometty (but boy did they get some golden parachutes for terrible performance but I guess some shareholders will tolerate poor performance from a CEO who looks the part).

Funny thing is that CoBFers will buy these companies much later (when it is too late) as "good value stocks" like AAPL after a more conventional CEO like Cook takes over. Too late, you missed out on much of the ride.

You may be angry about Trump--he's the President and actually has an impact on a citizen's life, but to be angry about a CEO of a business that you don't have to invest in or purchase from, well that doesn't strike me as rational.

Maybe you should focus on your "oddball stocks" or cigar butts. Those are businesses that will surely make huge contributions to society.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2020, 04:38:53 PM by Dalal.Holdings »

Dalal.Holdings

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1222
Re: TSLA - Tesla Motors
« Reply #3462 on: February 13, 2020, 05:50:02 PM »
13F out...Jim Simmons' Renaissance Technologies boosted TSLA stake about 6x, now #2 stake...

Guess Renaissance must not have access to all that quality data some of you folks have derived from Twitter and news outlets speculating about every auto accident involving a Tesla or Elon's Tweets. Care to share it w Jim?
« Last Edit: February 13, 2020, 05:52:56 PM by Dalal.Holdings »

Spekulatius

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5336
Re: TSLA - Tesla Motors
« Reply #3463 on: February 13, 2020, 06:41:31 PM »
13F out...Jim Simmons' Renaissance Technologies boosted TSLA stake about 6x, now #2 stake...

Guess Renaissance must not have access to all that quality data some of you folks have derived from Twitter and news outlets speculating about every auto accident involving a Tesla or Elon's Tweets. Care to share it w Jim?

Renaissance techs average holding period is about 2 days. They probably rode the momentum up and they may ride the momentum down. It is likely that their position has changed, by the time anything is filed.
Life is too short for cheap beer and wine.

Dalal.Holdings

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1222
Re: TSLA - Tesla Motors
« Reply #3464 on: February 13, 2020, 07:12:43 PM »
13F out...Jim Simmons' Renaissance Technologies boosted TSLA stake about 6x, now #2 stake...

Guess Renaissance must not have access to all that quality data some of you folks have derived from Twitter and news outlets speculating about every auto accident involving a Tesla or Elon's Tweets. Care to share it w Jim?

Renaissance techs average holding period is about 2 days. They probably rode the momentum up and they may ride the momentum down. It is likely that their position has changed, by the time anything is filed.

They had TSLA at prior qtr end as well. 600k shares. Would Renaissance hold onto something as #2 position worth billions for even two days if it resembled Enron like some astute investors on here have claimed?
« Last Edit: February 13, 2020, 07:19:50 PM by Dalal.Holdings »

cherzeca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3466
Re: TSLA - Tesla Motors
« Reply #3465 on: February 13, 2020, 11:52:24 PM »
13F out...Jim Simmons' Renaissance Technologies boosted TSLA stake about 6x, now #2 stake...

Guess Renaissance must not have access to all that quality data some of you folks have derived from Twitter and news outlets speculating about every auto accident involving a Tesla or Elon's Tweets. Care to share it w Jim?

Renaissance techs average holding period is about 2 days. They probably rode the momentum up and they may ride the momentum down. It is likely that their position has changed, by the time anything is filed.

They had TSLA at prior qtr end as well. 600k shares. Would Renaissance hold onto something as #2 position worth billions for even two days if it resembled Enron like some astute investors on here have claimed?

I have no dog in this fight (bought a single put awhile ago that got stopped out the next day!) but I think the answer to this question is yes, while RT is really a black box to the outside world, based upon what I have studied about Simons, RT spends all of its copious talent and money on building more and better data based models with very little human over-layered tinkering to consider things like reputational issues at portfolio companies.  although if anyone could capture reputational data and model it, it would be RT 
« Last Edit: February 13, 2020, 11:54:26 PM by cherzeca »

Liberty

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13059
  • libertyrpf.com
    • http://www.libertyrpf.com
Re: TSLA - Tesla Motors
« Reply #3466 on: February 14, 2020, 06:02:39 AM »

The great thing is you don't have to buy the stock, or short it, or buy the products, so you'll be fine.

....


All I did was challenge some unchallenged claims and then discuss the answers, which is exactly what a discussion forum should be. When everybody is sitting on the same side of the boat, bad things tend to happen. It's healthy to have diverging opinions, it sharpens thinking. I'd rather that newcomers and lurkers who come to a thread get various takes and make up their minds about which makes the most sense than have everybody all singing kumbaya and saying that everything is amazing while the stock underperforms the index by 150% over a decade.

Will the real Liberty please stand up? Where the F did this guy go so quickly?

Don't know what you're reading into this, but there's nothing incompatible here.

I didn't say you can't discuss it or be negative about it or whatever. I'm just pointing out that in life, most things should probably go in the "too hard pile" and we don't have to bet on everything. These things don't have to affect us personally if we don't let them.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2020, 06:05:18 AM by Liberty »

Liberty

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13059
  • libertyrpf.com
    • http://www.libertyrpf.com
Re: TSLA - Tesla Motors
« Reply #3467 on: February 14, 2020, 06:03:38 AM »

In any case, all I'm saying is that you don't know, but we know that things changed a lot pretty quickly, so it's not implausible to say that his thinking could have changed quickly too.


For a company faced with the uncertainties that Tesla faces, shouldn't shareholders worry that management isn't doing their job if shares rise by 20% (or whatever) and they wouldn't at a minimum consider issuing more shares?

I mean, if we're setting the bar that low (a ride of 20-30%), then 80-90% of companies would have had to considering issuing shares in 2013, 2017, and 2019.  Instead we got more and more buybacks each year...the exact opposite of what your suggesting here.

It's not the only thing that changed. Prospects in China too (and the rest of the world, since it's all connected). So if you're seeing that you might have a large temporary dip in sales which can lower your cashflow at a time when you're growing capex fast, might want to raise money to be on the safe side.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2020, 06:58:49 AM by Liberty »

Kaegi2011

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 233
Re: TSLA - Tesla Motors
« Reply #3468 on: February 14, 2020, 06:08:36 AM »

Of course, but only one of those things that changed in 10 days and not by much more than the 20% you stated. (32% based on the closing price the day comments were made versus where they closed yesterday prior to the announcement).

He already negated the rally up to ~$600/share by saying, at that time, there was no need nor intent to issue.

But again, arguing straw-men. My main issue isn't his issuing shares - it's that he said he wouldn't/didn't need to and did anyways after just 20-30%.

After just 32%?  So we disagree on the magnitude required to issue shares?  What’s your threshold -50%? 100%? More?

thepupil

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1909
Re: TSLA - Tesla Motors
« Reply #3469 on: February 14, 2020, 06:12:17 AM »
13F out...Jim Simmons' Renaissance Technologies boosted TSLA stake about 6x, now #2 stake...

Guess Renaissance must not have access to all that quality data some of you folks have derived from Twitter and news outlets speculating about every auto accident involving a Tesla or Elon's Tweets. Care to share it w Jim?

Renaissance techs average holding period is about 2 days. They probably rode the momentum up and they may ride the momentum down. It is likely that their position has changed, by the time anything is filed.

They had TSLA at prior qtr end as well. 600k shares. Would Renaissance hold onto something as #2 position worth billions for even two days if it resembled Enron like some astute investors on here have claimed?

I haven't read the book, but from what I've heard, many people (and the models that they maintain) at Rennaissance and other shops of its ilk do not know the tickers they are trading (this is on purpose).

you also don't know Renn Tech's full Tesla position, they could have swaps/options/credit positions offsetting this.

I'd also point out that Rennaissaince manages several institutional products, not just the Medallion Fund. The institutional products have more normal alpha/track records. you don't know which Renaissance entity and which of its models likes TSLA.

Two Sigma, Citadel, and Susquehanna have been big holders of BP Prudhoe Bay Royalty Trust (a stock which contractually will go to zero) for the past few years. They probably made a lot of money on it with all kinds of sexy options arbitrage and borrow cost harvesting and stuff that is beyond me.

my point is, you should not take a quant shop's position in a stock as any kind of investment merit or investment negative. it probably just means there's something interesting going on with the trading/options/market making/short selling element to the stock (TSLA and BPT certainly fit that).