Suggestions for a speculative punt?

grumiofoundation

adindas said:

benbay001 said:

I dont need to investigate Tesla further to know its overpriced.
Whatever you buy Tesla for, be it a taxi company, and charging company, a car company or a bitcoin holding company, i can guarantee its overpriced.
If something appears at first glance to be wildly overpriced then simply move on.
As i have said before, i think Tesla is a wonderful company and i really hope they succeed, but likewise id hate to be in a world where 40% of cars are Teslas and cannot see that happening anyway.
If you can provide vague numbers for where you think Tesla will get to in terms of sales and profit over the next 5-10 years then go ahead, but ive never actually seen a Tesla bull show any figurework to justify the price.

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/quote/TSLA/holders?p=TSLA

But these top hedge fund managers managing fund  in Vanguard Group, Inc, Blackrock Inc, Baillie Gifford and Company, JP Morgan Chase etc will definitely disagree with you as they have invested millions of dollars in TSLA..

How much of that is in Index trackers where the fund manager doesn't have a choice? Therefore can't all be construed as (e.g. Vanguard) saying 'this is a good investment'. 

benbay001

A quick google suggests vanguard have 7 trillion in assets under management, so 40 billion is really just Tesla's % of the global index.

benbay001

So, from your link, the top mutual fund holding is "Growth Fund Of America Inc" who, had you bought them in 2000 at the peak of 35usd, you would have seen negative returns when adjusted for inflation until 2018 when it hit 55usd.
(inflation over that period was 59% https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-1633409/Historic-inflation-calculator-value-money-changed-1900.html) 
So, remind me again how professional these people are?

adindas

grumiofoundation said:

How much of that is in Index trackers where the fund manager doesn't have a choice? Therefore can't all be construed as (e.g. Vanguard) saying 'this is a good investment'.

benbay001 said:

A quick google suggests vanguard have 7 trillion in assets under management, so 40 billion is really just Tesla's % of the global index.

Have you had a look the weighting of TSLA in other funds? Just have a look the weighting of TSLA in SMT (Scottish Mortgage Trust) from Bailey Gifford’s for instance.

https://www.bailliegifford.com/en/uk/individual-investors/funds/scottish-mortgage-investment-trust/#Overview

Have you had a look the wiegting of TSLA across ARK Invest fund ?

I do own VLS100, Vanguard S&P 500 myself and do not want to touch it.

And anyway Vanguards fund is an underdog compared to other actively managed funds.

benbay001 said:

So, from your link, the top mutual fund holding is "Growth Fund Of America Inc" who, had you bought them in 2000 at the peak of 35usd, you would have seen negative returns when adjusted for inflation until 2018 when it hit 55usd.
(inflation over that period was 59% https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-1633409/Historic-inflation-calculator-value-money-changed-1900.html) 
So, remind me again how professional these people are?

Sorry I do not waste time investigating the thing I do not believe at the first glance. I spend time more on finding the gem that I believe could turn to become a monster. This will only happen in a growth companies rather than well establish dinosaurs’ companies as they will not have a lot of headroom to grow. Also how many well establish dinosours companies went bancrupt in the past ??

I look at in my history. I started investing Tesla since there were $810 before the stock split (equivalent to $162 with current price)

I started investing in NIO they were under $10 but have to resold in September last year due to admin problem and restarted again with $17.05.

Even with the recent market correction, I do not lose money at all. Not nice to see your profit was taken away for you, but keep in mind this happened to everyone who are investing. Even you are holding a blue chip with good financial or well known index/mutual fund.

underground99

benbay001 said:

So, from your link, the top mutual fund holding is "Growth Fund Of America Inc" who, had you bought them in 2000 at the peak of 35usd, you would have seen negative returns when adjusted for inflation until 2018 when it hit 55usd.
(inflation over that period was 59% https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-1633409/Historic-inflation-calculator-value-money-changed-1900.html) 
So, remind me again how professional these people are?

The decade from 2000 was a poor one for US stocks, and a lot of US-focused growth funds had not recovered from the dot-com collapse and made much in real terms before the global financial crisis hit towards the tail end of the decade.  Still, from 31/12/00 to 31/12/20 the fund would have turned an investor's $10k into $54.6k nominal -  and whether you adjust that for inflation or not, it's more than the S&P500 composite which turned the $10k into only $42.2k.  It's a $250bn fund that's been running since the mid seventies, reporting a life to date NAV total return of 14% at the last quarter of 2020. Most of its investors would be satisfied with that, so the team running it for the last quarter century would probably not be considered 'unprofessional'.

Over the last decade, that fund has beaten the S&P but lagged the Lipper Large Cap Growth index (an uninvestible index of active mutual fund strategies), meaning that some of its large, largecap growth-focused mutual fund peers have done better than it. But when you look at how the best performing actively managed growth funds have achieved their results, a lot of them held Tesla as it grew exponentially over the last few years.  So, suggesting that if they hold Tesla they shouldn't be considered professional, seems wide of the mark IMHO.

Not that I'm saying Tesla is a great investment at current prices or will 'grow into' its shareprice within a specific timeframe - just noting that using a cherry picked timescale to pour scorn on a growth fund that holds Tesla, to back up your notion that nobody credible would own it, is not always going to stand further scrutiny.

It goes without saying that there are a heck of a lot of idiots who know nothing about company fundamentals who will hold Tesla because its a cool company whose shareprice has been seen to go up a lot, without really knowing what they are doing.  The success of such idiots in recent years probably gives them false confidence. But investment professionals do invest in low profit, pre profit or pre revenue companies all the time, hoping for growth, and the fact that gullible idiots also invest in the same companies once they reach the public markets does not necessarily mean that they are doomed.

I do agree you can't read a high holding by Vanguard or Blackrock or State Street is a 'stamp of approval' because they are mostly buying to meet their commitment to allocate their index funds' money in line with the indexes tracked.  The ownership by Baillie Gifford is more of a stamp of approval because they are making the active decisions to remain a shareholder, but you know Baillie Gifford funds invest with a 'house style' which can sometimes produce very big losses.

benbay001

I cant disagree with much you said there.
I was using the time scale I used as evidence that large tech heavy funds are perfectly capable of creating a bubble, in contrary to adindas's point "But these top hedge fund managers  .... will definitely disagree with you as they have invested millions of dollars in TSLA.."

underground99

benbay001 said:

I cant disagree with much you said there.
I was using the time scale I used as evidence that large tech heavy funds are perfectly capable of creating a bubble, in contrary to adindas's point "But these top hedge fund managers  .... will definitely disagree with you as they have invested millions of dollars in TSLA.."

Yes of course, the people buying millions of dollars worth will look like geniuses when it goes up and then failures if it goes down or flat. With anything that goes up to high valuations you will always be able to point to a lot of people holding it... and they are right to do so, until they aren't any more .

adindas

underground99 said:

It goes without saying that there are a heck of a lot of idiots who know nothing about company fundamentals who will hold Tesla because its a cool company whose shareprice has been seen to go up a lot, without really knowing what they are doing.  The success of such idiots in recent years probably gives them false confidence. But investment professionals do invest in low profit, pre profit or pre revenue companies all the time, hoping for growth, and the fact that gullible idiots also invest in the same companies once they reach the public markets does not necessarily mean that they are doomed.

benbay001 said:

I cant disagree with much you said there.
I was using the time scale I used as evidence that large tech heavy funds are perfectly capable of creating a bubble, in contrary to adindas's point "But these top hedge fund managers  .... will definitely disagree with you as they have invested millions of dollars in TSLA.."

Idiots are people who have missed the boat and feel bitter, demonising people who disagree with them. Now they try to impose their own beliefs to other people for their own idiocy. lol

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/quote/TSLA/holders?p=TSLA

You might want to write your article in leading financial newspapers such as Bloomberg, CNBC, CNN Finance, FT, Barron, Motley Fool, Morningstar, etc and put a big title "these fund managers ARE IDIOTS". The fund managers on the list above are not investment professionals.

Those retailer investor who are investing in NIO, TESLA ARE GULLIBLE IDIOTS.

If these people ever convince what you are writing you might get paid for your article. You might even hired as a top hedge fund managers.

And how long TSLA has been in the stock market ?? Is 10 years not enought of evidence ??

Using the same logic Other idiots might also say I was using the time scale as evidence that government bonds, treasury bonds are perfectly capable of making money.

Well at least in the current market conditon, earning less than 1% interest per year is better than nothing.

underground99

adindas said:

And how long TSLA has been in the stock market ?? Is 10 years not enought of evidence ??

Being on a stockmarket for years is not evidence of whether the value people are currently paying will be judged reasonable with hindsight. The 'market' has already decided that the price a year ago of about $70 was incorrect and it should be almost $900 in late January this year, but only $560 on Monday, but $670 Tuesday. 

What was the share price of Enron or Worldcom in 1999 or 2000? And then by 2003? Was the fact they had been on the stock market for 10 years not enough evidence that the price in 2000 was fair?  I guess you were not an investor learning the markets on a free trading app in 2000.

benbay001

adindas said:

You might want to write your article in leading financial newspapers such as Bloomberg, CNBC, CNN Finance, FT, Barron, Motley Fool, Morningstar, etc and put a big title "these fund managers ARE IDIOTS". The fund managers on the list above are not investment professionals.

What would i realistically gain?
There are plenty of articles out there about Tesla being wildly over valued, so what good would the opinion of yet another person have?
If the bubble pops, what do the managers lose? Theyve received their commission for the duration of the bull market, and if sensible they have tucked away enough that they can retire. 
If the fund loses 70% of its value, so what? The investors can hardly blame the management, because every other "growth" "tech" fund will be in the same position, they all buy the same few stocks.