Yes, and it was that way with AMZN too. It's a question of when, not if. And the higher it goes, the more unstable it will get.
This isn't a knock against Musk, or the cars, or the future of EVs. It's a play on the extreme emotional euphoria that has taken the price too high. All the good things about the company are independent of what people are trading the shares for. Bubbles only happen to companies with exciting potential. They are the ones that hurt newbie longs the most.
Analysts are like sheep dogs. They have a job to do. The thing to understand, which will make things clear, is that analysts do not work for retail customers. In sharp contrast, an advisor you pay, who has an incentive tied to your gains(losses) may provide unbiased help. Of course, such advisors are going up against the best quants and hedge fund guys, so they are totally out gunned. Anyway, the best thing to do when analysts open their mouths is nothing, or the opposite of what they recommend doing.
The expected human thought patterns after a huge price run like this don't allow longs to get the picture until the shares have tanked.
But, who pays for the electricity? The company? Or maybe it's part of the car price? Or added to the loss on the car?
I'm not saying we should quit trying to improve. I'm just saying that electric cars by themselves don't change anything. What we need is a clean SOURCE of power. Solar is a good start, and that is where a difference can be made. Then electric cars won't be burning coal. Without a clean source electric cars only shift the problem.
I think fossil fuel fired power plants are somewhat more energy efficient than gas engines, but they create the same basic problems. Putting a battery in a car instead of a gas tank only relocates the source of the problems and the inefficiencies. They are still there.
You are right about the noise.
But until the grid is powered by the sun, or fusion reactors, or tides and wind, etc, Tesla cars are COAL BURNERS. That's how a huge portion of your electricity is generated. The rest is from natural gas and oil fired power plants, and a smaller amount from dams. Only a trace comes from wind and solar.
Electricity is not an energy source. It is just one of the ways energy flows. Even a theoretically ideal, perfectly efficient, battery would have to be charged. What matters is what energy SOURCE that charge will come from.
Some day, if fusion or solar becomes the dominant source of power, then electric cars would make a lot of sense and, yes then there would be a huge reduction in pollution.
People are getting, or will soon get, margin calls, and stop orders are being triggered. Also many people who own these shares have stronger feelings today about saving what's left of their profits than about hopes of future potential. And those who have a loss now are trying to decide whether to cut it or let it get bigger.
It's natural for the volatility to spike on wildly changing price action and uncertainty. Sellers of options want more premium for the extra risk they now feel they are assuming when they write those calls, or puts. If you think they are too expense, the thing to do is sell some.
For every seller, there is a simultaneous matching buyer. So if people sell AMZN or other stocks to raise cash to buy the BABA IPO, that in itself won't have a direct effect on prices of the shares they sell. If you think about it, ALL the money is ALWAYS "on the sidelines". It's not "in the stock" Nobody has their "money in Amazon". Shareholders have a piece of paper or an electronic record of company ownership. The money is in somebody else's account.
What could make AMZN go down, indirectly, in connection with the IPO, would be a situation where more people want to sell AMZN "at market" than there are buyers who are willing to stay at the bid and not pull out of the inside market. If there are fewer buyers than sellers the price will reach a new equilibrium at some lower level.
It's actually possible that some of those receiving cash from flipping their IPO shares will be buyers of other stocks, which hypothetically could create demand for AMZN, and help its price find a balance point without a big drop. That's stretch, but it's possible in theory.
Another thing is that Alibaba is, and has already been in business. So the market share battle has already been going on.
The real issue is what effect the public trading of BABA will have on the market's interest in AMZN. The danger to longs is that over time people may lose enthusiasm here, and start chasing BABA and other new hot stocks. If that happens AMZN could become "dead money". (A term that ignores the fact that the money isn't in the stock) AMZN rose above 400 on a lot of excitement and momentum. If that attention shifts to BABA, then AMZN's price will suffer.
That's true. When total euphoria is reached, that's the top. When "it doesn't get any better than this", it doesn't.
Easy is right. If you are long a stock, the shorts in it are your friends. The shorts will eventually want to buy it. If squeezed they will push it higher for you. If you become a panic seller when the shares tank, the shorts will be there to buy from you when nobody else wants the stock.
The people who can hurt you are other longs. They already bought the stock, so they are going to be sellers. If they are smart they will distribute at the top and that selling pressure will keep it from going any higher. If they are not quick enough to bail out, they will become panic sellers making the bottom lower, and competing with you to find buyers.
The failure of the Amazon phone is already priced in. AAPL was sold on the news, and their phone was already priced in. Stocks make big moves on surprises, not expected events.
When it comes to free advice, and unsolicited money making opportunities, that's an even worse address than Lagos.
The purpose of upgrades is to influence people to buy. This is done because somebody want's to distribute shares with a profit near a major high.