Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla 5-1 Stock Split

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 105 posts

Re: Tesla 5-1 Stock Split

#91

Post by aeternum »

webXL wrote: post #61
hmate9 wrote: post #46

TSLA stock is up over 7% after hours now. ~$15 billion of "value" created out of thin air. Sounds ridiculous.

About $6 trillion was "created out of thin air" in the S&P 500 since mid March. But don't confuse value with output or wealth. The market is forward looking and valuations are pretty unstable long term.

Everything is relative, we're printing a lot of money right now, possibly for the right reasons. In general though those valuation probably do make sense in a world where money is plentiful.

Re: Tesla 5-1 Stock Split

#92

Post by runawaybottle »

sfblah wrote: post #12

Does anybody else share my sort of shell-shock WRT Tesla? I'm one of those who thinks its stock (and probably all the big tech names) are in a bubble. But whenever I say that I get shouted down, downvoted, told I'm an idiot, etc. I'm hoping this comment is vanilla enough to be safe... just curious if others have had the same experience. To be clear: I'm not interested in debating the value of Tesla. I'm curious if ot…

Tesla is in bed with China, a country deadly serious about electric vehicles. Plus, many of the other car manufacturers buy electric parts for their own EVs from Tesla.

The worldwide initiative in this direction is strong, so the projected valuation could be just about right. Tesla is part of a global bet.

Re: Tesla 5-1 Stock Split

#93

Post by chemmail »

sfblah wrote: post #12

Does anybody else share my sort of shell-shock WRT Tesla? I'm one of those who thinks its stock (and probably all the big tech names) are in a bubble. But whenever I say that I get shouted down, downvoted, told I'm an idiot, etc. I'm hoping this comment is vanilla enough to be safe... just curious if others have had the same experience. To be clear: I'm not interested in debating the value of Tesla. I'm curious if ot…

Exactly what ISN'T a bubble? Countries, empires, worlds, galaxies, rise and fall all the time.

Re: Tesla 5-1 Stock Split

#94

Post by cynix »

esrauch wrote: post #82
rich_sasha wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are weird incentives for this. In US the tick size for any stock is always $0.01. So a stock with a price of say $1 has a minimum bid ask spread of 1%, which is a lot. On the contrary, if one share is too expensive, it limits liquidity in a stock. This is usually bad, though Berkshire Hathaway voting shares are deliberately kept expensive to stave off speculators. This then get meta-player. A split suggests the…

It seems very strange; can a share not be worth less than 1 cent, or can it for ask but not bid?

It can be "worth" less than 1 cent. That simply means if you put in an offer at 1 cent, nobody will buy it, because they think it's worth less.

Re: Tesla 5-1 Stock Split

#95

Post by nine_k »

mac01021 wrote: post #74
nine_k wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bet on self-driving trucks instead. They can go like 95% of the way via highways driverless, only accepting a driver to drive it through a city to a loading ramp, and maybe to a pump midway a very long trip. Drivers will not disappear soon but will provide local service. Having a driverless car which can navigate through a city would be great, but it is a much more complicated problem to solve.

Is there a good asset to buy to bet on those?

I wish I knew! There are a few, and different experts suggest different winners.

Re: Tesla 5-1 Stock Split

#96

Post by robjan »

basch wrote: post #84
GuB-42 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that Tesla is a bubble, more like gambling. Tesla right now clearly isn't worth $1T, but it is definitely on something big. Electric cars look well set to be the future, and so are the batteries that go with them. And currently, Tesla is a leader in both these fields. Furthermore, Tesla is creating an ecosystem not unlike Apple with its cars, it includes their supercharger network and all their software…

It is worth $1T in the sense that people have said "this team looks like the best team to give $1T to to build cars." Sure, everyone is investing to make money and extract it later, but its also a bet that they will be a player for a while, are more efficient at using the cash then their competitors, can scale better. At the end of the day it is capital allocation, and the market has decided this team is the best tea…

$1TN is just the last price multiplied by the number of shares. The amount Tesla raised was just however much they earned from the original sale of stocks.

Re: Tesla 5-1 Stock Split

#97

Post by basch »

robjan wrote: post #96
basch wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is worth $1T in the sense that people have said "this team looks like the best team to give $1T to to build cars." Sure, everyone is investing to make money and extract it later, but its also a bet that they will be a player for a while, are more efficient at using the cash then their competitors, can scale better. At the end of the day it is capital allocation, and the market has decided this team is the best tea…

$1TN is just the last price multiplied by the number of shares. The amount Tesla raised was just however much they earned from the original sale of stocks.

Tesla can buy other companies with it's stock.

Facebook's stock is basically Mark's personal currency.

I understand that buying stock isn't straight up giving a company cash, but by pumping up its value, the shares the company is in control of are worth more. I also totally get how thinking people are this altruistic with investing is naive, and it's probably just fomo and short squeezes in a death spiral.

Re: Tesla 5-1 Stock Split

#98

Post by beamatronic »

nine_k wrote: post #58
webXL wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So there is an alternative?

Buy gold ;) I wonder why TSLA is compared to dot-com stocks. Tesla produce real, tangible things, with sale and resale value; same applies to their factories. They are in the "real sector", while dot-coms were (and are) in the "virtual" services sector propped by ad revenue. TSLA can be a bubble, but it must be a different kind of it.

Did that in 2008. Heard the brrr machines then. Gold crashed. I was only now, 12 years later, able to sell and break even.

Re: Tesla 5-1 Stock Split

#99

Post by nine_k »

beamatronic wrote: post #98
nine_k wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buy gold ;) I wonder why TSLA is compared to dot-com stocks. Tesla produce real, tangible things, with sale and resale value; same applies to their factories. They are in the "real sector", while dot-coms were (and are) in the "virtual" services sector propped by ad revenue. TSLA can be a bubble, but it must be a different kind of it.

Did that in 2008. Heard the brrr machines then. Gold crashed. I was only now, 12 years later, able to sell and break even.

Hmm. Did the same in 2008. Somehow I bought it in the summer when it was still cheap, and gold crashed soon, but went back up in the winter, and stayed above my purchase price all the way since then. (I wish I sold it in 2012, though, before the next crash.)

Re: Tesla 5-1 Stock Split

#100

Post by riffraff »

wilg wrote: post #75
riffraff wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WebVan[0] and Pets.com[1], two of the most well known busts of the dot-com era, did not use ads. Ad-based-internet became a big thing many years later, I believe. (I do agree that TSLA is different, anyway.) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webvan [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pets.com

Strange that you would say Pets.com didn't use ads given in your link there is a section about their famous sock puppet mascot with the following quote: > Pets.com hired the San Francisco office of TBWA\Chiat\Day to design its advertising campaign. Also here's a collection of Pets.com TV ads: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sICSyC9u5iI And Webvan did ads too: https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2001/03/05/…

they advertised, sure, but were not "propped by ad revenue".

Advertising was a cost for them, like it is for Tesla, they weren't in the business of _selling_ ads, like Google or Facebook.

Post reply on HN