Sorry man but could you post your counterpoints with at least some substances? Otherwise it will look like just hatemongering which is likely your intention anyway.

 

Adding complexity doesn't create a free lunch. You lose $10k (put expires worthless) seven times to make $50k once.

 

Ah, the current buzz word. I think Elon coined that one to perfection.

Using the same word, Porsche, with the Taycan, is the disruptor to Tesla's monopoly. Now people have a choice at the top end. Isn't that how one uses the word?

Tesla was the disruptor to the conventional engine cars, and now someone else disrupt their EV monopoly.

 

That's true. But nowadays no one do naked shorts as the down side is literally infinite.

By using straddles, the downside is limited. On top of straddles, one can also off load the risk to a 3rd party too.

 

That was my point. Whoever sells you the options (hedge, insurance) has to protect himself from the risk that you off loaded to him. He will transfer to you the costs of doing so (as reflected in the price of the option, hedge, insurance you buy), and then some, or go bust himself.

 

I think I understand now why you have a short position with TSLA. You're missing a number of key components that have significant bearing on future earning. Whether any of that is already calculated into today's SP is unknown but let me clarify a few of your points.

You're position most likely is founded on traditional automotive companies such as VW, BMW, Mercedes which are heavily leveraged in their automotive divisions. Some of the heavy industry corporations that tend to dabble in automotive are minor players as a result of their diversification such as Saab, Mitsubishi, Hyundai, Yamaha.
You could also look at Tesla Inc. as one of those minor players in the automotive arena.

Your premise that Tesla is not a tech company is false, hugely false. No other automotive manufacturer designs and builds their own computers, software, autonomy to the level that Tesla does. There is $1/2 B in outstanding revenue from software alone. The Smart Summon beta release only captured $30M to give you an idea of how much revenue their software generates.
Do any of the legacy automakers sell software?
Do they design their own motherboards?
How about their autonomy divisions?
What do they have to show for that?

Maven was bought by GM to jump start their autonomy skunkworks and has since shuttered the service in 8 major US cities, Currently Maven was valued at $19B.
If Maven (GM Cruise) which reportedly sucks, is worth 1/3 of Tesla, my guess is Tesla's autonomy has not been priced in. Furthermore, "According to a January report in the Financial Times, the investment research division of Morgan Stanley recently valued Waymo at $175 billion."
Who in their right mind would value Waymo at 4X Tesla when their autonomy division dwarfs Waymo's data collection alone?
Your next falsehood is that Tesla Inc. is just a car company. Again hugely false. As other posters have pointed out, Tesla Energy (TE) is positioned to be just as big as Tesla Automotive (TA)

Elon R. Musk -- Founder, Chief Executive Officer & Director
I think there is generally a lack of understanding or appreciation for the growth of Tesla Energy, as Kunal was talking about. In the long term, I expect Tesla Energy to be of the same or roughly the same size as Tesla's automotive sector or business. This is the most underappreciated group. I think it could be bigger, but it's certainly of a similar magnitude to Tesla Solar. Meaning, if you take Tesla Solar plus battery stuff, Tesla Energy is, I think, the least appreciated element.


The other myth I see repeated here is lack of demand which again, not true.
Zachary Kirkhorn -- Chief Financial Officer

"My third and final point is around demand and growth. Our global order rate remains strong and continues to increase. Despite increases to production levels, our order backlog has been growing, and quarter to date orders are significantly higher than at this point in last quarter. In the immediate term, we're focused on increasing production of Model 3 and Model S and Model X as quickly as we can. The bulk of this work involves continued optimization of existing equipment. We've also made targeted adjustments to pricing to better balance supply and demand."

Lastly, I truly hope you do not act on your short position. IMO, you will loose it all. Trade the volatility, the downside is limited.

 

Tesla does plan on building their own cells. This was a major concern leading to the acquisition of Maxwell.

https://www.electrive.com/2019/06/27...ry-production/

"Elon Musk hinted that the scaling of battery production was currently limiting Tesla’s growth. “We are doing everything we can to ensure that we can scale as quickly as possible,” said Musk. But when it came to battery production, he said he “didn’t want to let the cat out of the bag too much”. Drew Baglino, vice president of technology, added that its best to be “master of your own destiny”.

They've also toyed with the idea of vertically integrating mineral supply with mining. Along with reducing the amount of cobalt vs nickel in their chemistry, puts Tesla years ahead of anybody else.

https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/11/1...ting-questions

“We might get into the mining business, I don’t know, maybe a little bit at least,” he said. “We’ll do whatever we have to to ensure that we can scale at the fastest rate possible.”

 

I think that's a pretty devalued use of the term ("disruptor"). To be a "disruptor of a disruptor" is pretty meaningless as it then would lend some credibility to being a "disruptor of a disruptor of a disruptor" and so on. For "disruptor" to have any semantic value/meaning, there can only be one (from any given perspective) I think...

 

A disruptor has to be something that rendered prevailing technology useless. Automobiles disrupted horse carriages, digital photography disrupted films..etc.. Taycan has pretty much just copied Tesla's technology. It's not even close.

 

There's always risk with any financial endeavor. Who said anything about a free lunch. Just reducing risk as an alternate to a short position.

What? Please explain.

 

Really? How about a detailed explanation of this, sighting specific technologies?

 

Their intention of getting into the mining business shows there is an upcoming raw material sourcing problem. Additionally there is not enough future battery manufacturing capacity in the next 10 years to cover EV and renewable energy demand. They have no choice but bring up their own cell manufacturing.

Either Tesla Energy or Tesla Cars will suffer. Whichever has higher margin gets the available batteries.

 

Are you sure data collection itself is enough for the win? Tesla so far hasn't proved it. They however deliver lots of software bugs with their products.
Waymo already has self driving cars on the road.
I write it down again.
Waymo already has self driving cars on the road.



When one business unit is in trouble, Elon moves the spotlight to another one. Remember the ad-hoc autonomy day when the car sales dropped substantially?

 

Read here about FSD and Elon's promises over the years;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Autopilot

FSD (level 5 - full self driving - all modes) isn't going to happen anytime soon, and without governmental controls of the system. No single automotive OEM can assume the potential liability.

Again, you and Elon can dream on! Please avoid the continual Tesla pablum.

 

You mean citing? Gladly. Like most everyone else Taycan copied the prevailing skidpad battery layout but that's just about it. It's still lacking Tesla technology in most other areas. Drivetrain efficiency, battery range, user interface, OTA update capability, autopilot, self driving set up... BTW Porsche did talk about the last two items. It does not even talk about them anymore.