Contrast this with Reuters, who can't resist "balancing" som good news with "but the competition is coming", the same refrain we have been hearing for the last 15 years, and which is still to arrive.
"...as the U.S. automaker grapples with intense competition in China and Europe". But is it though? Where are all the other EV makers posting profits? And will the relatively low-margin auto sales industry continue to be Tesla's bread and butter business model over the upcoming few years? Why is it that so many of Tesla's competitors have alarmingly low Altman-Z scores and are hovering in the risk of bankruptcy zone? And why do we get so many of these alarmist stories from Reuters? Doesn't Tesla spend loads of advertising dollars with them? Well, no it doesn't, actually.
If it's Reuters, you can place a readonable bet that it's going to be another hit piece on $TSLA. Same with Business Insider. Tesla's multiple is so high because the market has to some extent priced in the present value of future earnings, which include disruptive technologies like the imminent arrival of Robotaxi revenues, which if Tesla executes well, are likely to be massive. Down the track we have Optimus, likely to dwarf Robotaxi, and if Elon is to be believed, data centres in space! I think it's risky being a short in such times.
To include an analyst like Gordon Johnson with a zero star rating and include his low-ball rating of sub- $20, artificially skews the anslyst's average rating way lower than it should be, artificially strengthening the Bear's case for a lower price.
Grateful for $TSLA. Has needed a lot of patience since 2021 but it looks like blue skies ahead at last. Flirted with a couple of ETFs on th NZX, $USG and $USF , mainly as a way of getting exposure to z mag 7 without exceeding to NZD 50k FIF limit. Timing was wrong though, took a small loss on those two.
Whilst this may not be the promised 500 by year end in Austin, Musk's words, "slowly at first, then all at once", should serve as a warning to those shorting this stock. When FSD 14.3 arrives, and it is obvious to all that Full Self Driving is, to all intents and purposes, finally solved, then this opens the door to Tesla turning on their fleet at the flick of a switch to a full-on instaneous Robotaxi fleet. People worried about falling registrations should note that Tesla can simply continue building cars and expand its in-house fleet, without adding to inventory. Those Robotaxis will then generate ongoing revenue which will dwarf the one-time profit selling cars generate.
Hmm... who are the only car companies Selling EVs at a profit? That would be Tesla and perhaps BYD, though BYD appear to have their own problems. Whilst it is tempting to look at deliveries to measure a car company's performance, Tesla is a different beast, one that is transitioning away from car sales as the major revenue source, to repeatable revenue streams such as FSD, Robotaxi, Optimus and vehicle hire. There's a reason Tesla is gearing up to vastly increase vehicle production in 2026 and 2027, and it's not because it plans to use these extra vehicles in the traditional marketplace of old.
Hmm. the comments about Musk pay packages seem a bit off-beam to me. Firstly I would be very surprised if TSLA's existing accounts don't make provision for Elon's 2018 pay package. Secondly, his recently approved package only becomes payable if Tesla achieves gargantuan results, in which case the tranches achieved would be justified in terms of increased shareholder value delivered. What does the author want? No pay package and sub optimal profits, or a huge pay package if gargantuan growth is achieved? Personally I'd prefer the latter.
Bottom up. As a long term investor rather than a trader, so long as the fundamentals of a company are sound, all the cyclical dips are expected pleasant buying opportunities for me along the way. If I was a short term trader, on the other hand, my tears would be plentiful at the moment!