TSLA stock price discussion thread

[cwerdna]

Yeah set limits that's the ticket. No way you can lose then :lol:

It's no guarantee, esp. if there's something goofy (e.g. whacked price or flash crash). But, at least if you set some reasonable stop limits (esp. this) or stop losses at levels well above what you paid but still well below where it's at now, if something happens, you can at least lock in some gains.

It's better than being inattentive, having a stock crater and returning to find "what happened to my stock?"

To give some numerical examples, let's say one bought TSLA at ~$27 (what looked like a prior support level) and rode it all the way up to now ($87.80). What's wrong w/setting a stop limits around $40, another around $35 and another around $32? Those look like prior resistance levels. Often, resistance levels become support.

Sure, you'll take a bath compared to where it is now, but you'll likely still have locked in some gains, if you set your trigger and limit sell price wide enough.

The fraudster execs at Enron kept being bullish during their stock's plummet and bad news. Look what happened to them.

 

[TonyWilliams]

In this article Randy Carlson shows Teslas long term plan on how they'll make money replacing the ICE, giving away free energy to licensee's of their technology:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/1300141-supercharging-tesla

"But for investors hoping this $35 stock will turn into a $100 stock, there is a huge, seemingly insurmountable problem ahead."

 

[apvbguy]

As Cramer likes to say "Bulls make money, bears make money, pigs get slaughtered."

The same Cramer who was bullish on Bear Stearns a day before it went bankrupt and caused wall street panic (and trillion $ bailout) in 2008

cramer is just a showman however the axiom is valid. you'll never go broke taking profits.

 

[TonyWilliams]

here is an interesting view:
http://www.streetinsider.com/Analys...+is+the+New+Porsche-VW+-+Analyst/8332355.html

"Under a very extreme bullish scenario, if Tesla can achieve a 20% operating margin and deliver 200,000 units, a price target of $307 per share could be justified, according to Morgan Stanley data."

 

[mitch672]

In this article Randy Carlson shows Teslas long term plan on how they'll make money replacing the ICE, giving away free energy to licensee's of their technology:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/1300141-supercharging-tesla

"But for investors hoping this $35 stock will turn into a $100 stock, there is a huge, seemingly insurmountable problem ahead."

Pretty interesting quote, Eh? It might very well be $100 before the end of the week, it was trading at $90 in the after hours session tonight, a new 52 week high. It is absolutely ahead of itself, that's obvious, but it was also undervalued before, so no telling what it will settle out at.

 

[mitch672]

here is an interesting view:
http://www.streetinsider.com/Analys...+is+the+New+Porsche-VW+-+Analyst/8332355.html

"Under a very extreme bullish scenario, if Tesla can achieve a 20% operating margin and deliver 200,000 units, a price target of $307 per share could be justified, according to Morgan Stanley data."

Yes, 200,000 units could be reached sometime after the Gen3 car in 2017, Model S/X will never be 200K units/year, but Tesla is trading on its future value like a technology stock, not like an old auto mfr whose growth is stagnant.

 

[cwerdna]

To give an earlier example in TSLA's stock history, around November 2010, it had a very rapid run up from ~$20 to a peak of ~$36 at end of November 2010. If you bought at that point, you'd have watch your TSLA stock fall then go up/down for awhile and as low as ~$21.

You wouldn't have broken even until end of March 2012!

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

here is an interesting view:
http://www.streetinsider.com/Analys...+is+the+New+Porsche-VW+-+Analyst/8332355.html

"Under a very extreme bullish scenario, if Tesla can achieve a 20% operating margin and deliver 200,000 units, a price target of $307 per share could be justified, according to Morgan Stanley data."

Translation: Morgan Stanley owns a bunch.

 

[mitch672]

To give an earlier example in TSLA's stock history, around November 2010, it had a very rapid run up from ~$20 to a peak of ~$36 at end of November 2010. If you bought at that point, you'd have watch your TSLA stock fall then go up/down for awhile and as low as ~$21.

You wouldn't have broken even until end of March 2012!

How about this example, 1,100 shares purchased between July 2012 and September 2012 average price was $29 or so. A certain person who will not be named got itchy and sold it all at $46, locking in a tidy profit. 10 days later it was in the low $50's, said person repurchased 300 shares at $52, only putting booked profit into the shares. Stock is now up $38 from that point 2 weeks ago. Point being, buying and having patience would have resulted in a $60K profit now, instead of $19K booked and $10K on paper.. The moral: Never fight the tape, the trend is your friend

I'd rather be long and weather the pullbacks than miss the climb to the stratosphere.
If Tesla is successful, and valued as a technology company, 20-30 time multiples will be the norm, we could be looking at the next winner winner chicken diner. Notice the trend is up, the car is fantastic, and if they continue to execute, this could be what funds your retirement. Or not, I say go test drive a Model S before you place your bet.

 

[cwerdna]

^^^
The trend can be your friend. It can also kill you if you ride a trend downwards and keep thinking or hoping it'll go back up. Hope isn't a strategy.

I have and had a bunch of stocks most of which I bought long ago that have never recovered, despite the market now being at all time highs.

What about the guy who bought LSI (I had this ) at the peak and rode it out? It hit a high of $100 in 2000. Now it's at $6.83. What about C? (I have some of that too. I thought I could do no wrong w/Citigroup which was amongst the largest banks in the world and Saudi Prince Al-Waleed having a big stake.) After adjustment for reverse splits and all, it used to be at the equivalent of over $500/share and dropped below $10. Now it's $48.92.

There are numerous examples of stocks (mainly in tech) that had a massive run up during the .com boom that crashed and never recovered, even to this day. Many of them went bankrupt as well.

 

[mitch672]

^^^
The trend can be your friend. It can also kill you if you ride a trend downwards and keep thinking or hoping it'll go back up. Hope isn't a strategy.

I have and had a bunch of stocks most of which I bought long ago that have never recovered, despite the market now being at all time highs.

What about the guy who bought LSI (I had this ) at the peak and rode it out? It hit a high of $100 in 2000. Now it's at $6.83. What about C? (I have some of that too. I thought I could do no wrong w/Citigroup which was amongst the largest banks in the world and Saudi Prince Al-Waleed having a big stake.) After adjustment for reverse splits and all, it used to be at the equivalent of over $500/share and dropped below $10. Now it's $48.92.

No worries, mostly playing with "house profit" now, I also take profits via puts and calls along the way (maintain a core position but take profits along the ride, downside protection insurance as well)

 

[derkraut]

As Cramer likes to say "Bulls make money, bears make money, pigs get slaughtered."

The same Cramer who was bullish on Bear Stearns a day before it went bankrupt and caused wall street panic (and trillion $ bailout) in 2008

Yup....the same one. He reminds me of a "Carney Barker" . And, I'm sure he laughs all the way to the bank.

 

[derkraut]

^^^
The trend can be your friend. It can also kill you if you ride a trend downwards and keep thinking or hoping it'll go back up. Hope isn't a strategy.

I have and had a bunch of stocks most of which I bought long ago that have never recovered, despite the market now being at all time highs.

What about the guy who bought LSI (I had this ) at the peak and rode it out? It hit a high of $100 in 2000. Now it's at $6.83. What about C? (I have some of that too. I thought I could do no wrong w/Citigroup which was amongst the largest banks in the world and Saudi Prince Al-Waleed having a big stake.) After adjustment for reverse splits and all, it used to be at the equivalent of over $500/share and dropped below $10. Now it's $48.92.

There are numerous examples of stocks (mainly in tech) that had a massive run up during the .com boom that crashed and never recovered, even to this day. Many of them went bankrupt as well.

And then there is Lucent Technologies, (prestigious company, owns Bell Labs) once traded at $67+ went down to $.77, merged with Alcatel and is now worth about 50 cents per share, based upon the merger terms.

 

[vrwl]

Long on TSLA, got in at 34

 

[cwerdna]

As Cramer likes to say "Bulls make money, bears make money, pigs get slaughtered."

The same Cramer who was bullish on Bear Stearns a day before it went bankrupt and caused wall street panic (and trillion $ bailout) in 2008

Yup....the same one. He reminds me of a "Carney Barker" . And, I'm sure he laughs all the way to the bank.

To claim Cramer was the cause of the of the collapse in 08 goes too far. There were a # of factors, but it was primarily the reckless mortgage lending by banks and then crap being mortgages bundled together w/good mortgages then being sold off. The lenders didn't have skin in the game and didn't care whether or not the mortgage could be repaid.

If you have a chance, haven't seen it yet, do watch "House of Cards" on CNBC re: the reckless lending. It was done a few years ago. It looks like you can watch the entire ep at http://www.hulu.com/watch/59026" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. Brief summary at http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/02/11/us-television-cnbc-idUSTRE51A8NF20090211" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. I posted about it briefly at http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=420306" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

As for Cramer and Bear Stearns, if correct, this illustrates the danger of following analysis or opinions of analysts/so-called "experts", no matter which side they're on: bull or bear.

 

[Smidge204]

I prefer to invest my money in casinos... at least there I know the odds. :lol:

=Smidge=

 

[Zythryn]

I prefer to invest my money in casinos... at least there I know the odds. :lol:

=Smidge=

I've had far better results in TSLA than I ever did in casinos.
I do agree though that shorting a stock seems more like gambling than investing. Especially when it is done without any more research than reading a NYT article.

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

Fasten your seat belts, looks like another pop at the open.

 

[evnow]

To claim Cramer was the cause of the of the collapse in 08 goes too far.

I don't think anyone is claiming that.

He is just another con artist (i.e. entertainer acting like an expert).

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

starting to look a little toppy