Investor's Corner
The Anatomy of a Tesla ($TSLA) Trader Analyst
Hi, my name is …
Marco Papa. I am a techie by trade and very much a product of the first dot com boom (and bust) of the 90’s. I originally came to this country from Italy to pursue a PhD in computer science at USC, back in 1981. I worked for 6 different dot-coms in the span of 10 years, starting as software developer, then system architect all the way to several CTO positions. All these companies, except one, no longer exist: they either were sold, or went bankrupt. But in the process I learned a lot about company valuations, private placements, and raising tens of millions of dollars from VCs, banks and brokerage houses. And yes, like many other Internet executives of the time, I owned a Ferrari 355 spider convertible. I’ll come back later to the Ferrari.
After 10 years of high-stress jobs, I decided to move to slower-paced “environments”: for the past 14 years I have held a daytime job working for state government and a nighttime job teaching Web Technologies at USC.
“Buy what you know”
But it is during the dot-com era that I started tinkering with Mutual Funds and stocks. For the initial 15 years I was an “investor”. I would purchase mutual funds and stocks and hold them for a minimum of a year. Then in 2005 something changed: I consolidated all my retirement funds from the various companies I had worked for into a single SEP-IRA at E-Trade and strangely enough, after answering a simple questionnaire, E-Trade gave me access to Level 2 Options trading. I did not know much about options then, so I subscribed to a service called the Options Oracle from The Market Guys (http://www.themarketguys.com), which recommends entry and exit points for options trades for a fee. I learned a lot, but I felt frustrated that I was trading options of companies I knew nothing about. So I decided to follow an investment method that I had learned when I used to hold shares in Fidelity Magellan Fund (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magellan_Fund), a fund with $20B of stock investments, and the best performing one between 1977 and 1990, averaging over a 29% annual return. Peter Lynch, Magellan fund manager at that time, created the investment method commonly referred to as “Buy What You Know”: invest in businesses that you understand “personally”, especially if you buy and own their products. Since that time, I have tried to follow the “Buy What You Know” method in all my investments and trades.
Interestingly it is at that time that I started making my “switch” from Windows to the Mac. My first Apple purchase was an iPod; I subsequently trashed a ThinkPad and bought a MacBook, and finally trashed an HP desktop and bought a Mac Pro. Today I own probably close to 25 Apple devices, once I count all the iPhones, iPads, Apple Extremes, Apple TVs, and Apple Watches my wife and I use daily. In 2006 I started “investing” in Apple stock. After the stock market crash of 2007, I started “trading” Apple options. Between 2006 and 2014 I made more money trading AAPL than any other stock. During that time, I added a few more stocks to my trading pattern: Netflix (NFLX), Amazon (AMZN), Google (GOOG), Facebook (FB), Starbucks (SBUX) and more recently Tesla Motors (TSLA). These are all companies that qualify for the “Buy What You Know” mantra: I either buy their products regularly or use them in my daily life.
$TSLA to P90D
I started reading about Elon Musk since he founded PayPal. I read about his promotion of sustainable energy as a way to save our planet. In 2012 I installed solar panels in my house in Redondo Beach, CA. In 2013 I replaced my energy-hog 2007-vintage Mac Pro with a low-energy Mac Pro (a.k.a. the “can”). In 2014 I switched all light bulbs in my house (over 300 of them) from incandescent to low-energy LEDs. And in 2015 I bought a red Tesla Model S P90D (a.k.a. Red Five X-wing). By now my carbon footprint is in pretty good shape.
I started trading TSLA options in early 2014. By summer of 2015 I had enough profits from option trades in TSLA, AAPL and SCO to pay in cash 2/3 of the price of my P90D.
After trading TSLA for over two years I have a few opinions on how to invest or trade it. A stock for me is a good “investment” if it can be held for about 5 years, and provide annual stock gains of 5-10% per year. If you had purchased TSLA stock at the IPO in 2010 at about $19, you would be sitting pretty at a 10-bagger at $250, 6 years later. But if you had purchased it in March 2014 at $265 you’d be about even, two years later. Twice in the past couple of years TSLA stock raised to $275, while slamming back to $140-180 in just 6 months, both times. Tesla in my opinion is not yet a good long term investment.
Part of the reasons is that good long term investments are based on “fundamental” analysis of stocks. Fundamental analysis is based on analyzing the characteristics of a company in order to estimate its “value:” high earnings, income, high profit margins, and small debt are what investors are looking for. According to a recent thestreet.com article, “Tesla Motors has a ‘sell’ rating and a letter grade of D+ at TheStreet Ratings because of the company’s deteriorating net income, generally high debt management risk, disappointing return on equity, poor profit margins and feeble earnings per share growth.”
So if I would not recommend TSLA stock as an investment, why would I even consider TSLA for my trades? Because TSLA is a wonderful stock to trade, not on the basis of “fundamental” analysis, but on the basis of “technical” analysis. In finance, technical analysis is a security analysis methodology for forecasting the direction of prices through the study of past market data, primarily price and volume. The “value” of the company does not matter. Even just 10 years ago, trading on the basis of technical analysis was only for the pros: brokerage houses, money managers and hedge fund managers. Today individuals have access to tools, indicators, and “conditional” trades that make trading, and especially options trading, much easier and safer.
I consider myself a “swing” trader: I normally enter an option trade when at least 3 indicators are firing on all cylinders; I put conditional stops to lower my losses when the market goes against my trade, and get out of trades when indicators are turning negative.
Coming up
It turns out that TSLA is a fairly good “swing” stock, where the above methodology has worked well in the past. In the next few weeks, while covering the news about the company that can affect its stock price, I will introduce some of the tools, indicators and techniques that any trader can use to profit on TSLA. You’ll hear names like moving averages, pay-day cycles, MACD indicator, Heikin-Ashi charts, support and resistance lines. You will see that none of these are rocket science.
I will write a column, a couple of times a week, providing TSLA stock analysis, information on investing and trading TSLA stock and options, and covering TSLA earnings and all rumors and news that can affect the stock.
Now back to the Ferrari. The F355 Spider that I purchased in 1996 was priced at $137,000, had a top speed of 183mph, 375hp, 268lb-ft torque, and performed 0-60mph in 4.5s and the quarter mile in 12.9s.
The Tesla Model S P90D (Insane) I purchased in 2015 has a very similar price, $142,000, but with a top speed of 155mph, 691hp, 713lb-ft torque, and performs 0-60mph in 3.1s and the quarter mile in 11.7s. The Tesla sedan beats the Ferrari in all but the top speed rating.
But while you needed a Formula 1 driver to obtain those numbers in the Ferrari, mainly to change the gears at the exact right time, effectively anyone can get the Tesla numbers just by flooring the accelerator. The only thing I miss from the Ferrari is the “roar” of the engine; for everything else the Tesla is so much more fun.
Disclosure: I currently have no positions in any stocks mentioned, but I may plan to initiate positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Teslarati). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.
Elon Musk
SpaceX’s Anthropic deal has a catch, and Elon Musk just addressed it
Elon Musk says SpaceX’s Anthropic compute deal cuts both ways after Chamath floats higher prices.
Elon Musk pushed back on Sunday against the idea that SpaceX’s compute contract with Anthropic is a one way bet, after venture capitalist Chamath Palihapitiya argued the company could use a termination clause to charge the AI lab far more.
“It works both ways, of course. If compute becomes plentiful and cheap, SpaceX revenue will drop. No crying in the casino for either party,” Musk wrote on X Sunday evening, replying to a clip of Palihapitiya’s comments shared by AI commentator Rohan Paul.
On the All-In podcast released Sunday, Palihapitiya said either side can walk away from the agreement on 90 days’ notice. If data center supply tightens, he argued, SpaceX could exercise that option and bring the contract back at two to three times the current price, and Anthropic would have little choice but to accept. He called it “the kingmaking move,” according to BigGo Finance.
The clause itself is not new. SpaceX disclosed in its IPO filings in May that Anthropic would pay $1.25 billion per month for dedicated capacity at its Colossus clusters through May 2029, nearly $45 billion in total, with both companies able to terminate on 90 days’ notice, as Teslarati reported at the time. SpaceX’s later compute deals with Google and Reflection AI carry similar exit terms.
What has changed is the political backdrop. Palihapitiya’s thesis rests on incoming Democratic governors pulling tax incentives for data centers and slowing new construction. In Texas, Gov.-elect Gina Hinojosa campaigned on a moratorium on new data center approvals, and Deutsche Bank analysts warned last week that SpaceX’s Texas compute capacity could face delays. SpaceX and Tesla shares both fell after the midterm results.
A slowdown would favor companies that already own capacity. SpaceX acquired xAI in February and has been renting data centers to outside AI labs before the space is needed for Grok. At the Baron Investment Conference on Friday, Musk said SpaceX was “getting 50 billion a year for 35 billion dollar investments” and that it can bring a data center online in eight or nine months, compared to two and a half years for competitors. He also said SpaceX is tracking toward an annualized revenue rate above $100 billion in December, with a “best guess” of $500 billion by December 2027.
Musk’s reply points to the other side of the clause. Anthropic has signed large compute agreements with Amazon, Google and Microsoft, and if that capacity comes online faster than new construction slows, the AI lab would have its own leverage to renegotiate or leave. Musk has called Anthropic “obviously currently the leader in AI,” and it remains one of SpaceX’s largest compute customers.
SpaceX shares rose more than 2 percent in overnight trading late Sunday after closing Friday at $134.27, according to Stocktwits.
Tesla and SpaceX shares fell on Wednesday after Democrats swept both chambers of Congress. The decline stood out as broader market securities recovered and turned positive, while both of Musk’s publicly traded companies lagged.
CEO Elon Musk already joked about the unsuccessful campaigning for the Republicans, but now the new party will make pretty drastic changes to how it handles Tesla and SpaceX, and those companies will adjust their outlook.
Let’s take a deeper look.
Tesla ($TSLA)
Tesla shares traded lower during the regular session after Democrats secured both the House and Senate. The stock was down 2.32 percent at around 1:45 p.m. on the East Coast, trading at around $389.30.
The pressure is tied to more than the raw scale of Musk’s political spending, estimated at $450–474 million this cycle with roughly $224 million directed at Texas. In that state, Tesla now faces a Democratic governor and a Democratic senator after Gina Hinojosa unseated Greg Abbott and James Talarico defeated Ken Paxton.
The Austin Gigafactory, Robotaxi pilot programs in multiple Texas cities, and any related AI compute expansion sit under a new state executive who campaigned against certain corporate subsidies and floated a moratorium on new data-center construction.
Federally, Democratic control of key committees opens the door to deeper examination of Tesla’s autonomous-driving safety record, federal energy-storage and manufacturing incentives, and the national-security implications of any combination with SpaceX.
Investors are also weighing whether the company’s historically close alignment with the prior Republican leadership will invite slower permitting, additional hearings, or tighter rules on Full Self-Driving deployment.
For Tesla, the political shift adds near-term friction around state permitting and federal regulatory approvals for autonomy and energy storage. A potential merger with SpaceX may face slower review even if it proceeds.
Core growth drivers such as vehicle deliveries, energy deployments, and robotaxi rollout remain intact, yet the stock now carries a higher political-risk premium that could weigh on valuation until the company demonstrates workable relationships with the new Texas leadership and congressional majorities.
SpaceX ($SPCX)
SpaceX shares also declined in live trading on November 4 following the Democratic midterm sweep. The stock traded at $134.97, down 4.49 percent. The drop occurred even as broader indexes stabilized, highlighting a company-specific reaction to the election outcome.
Musk’s large contributions, concentrated in Texas races that both companies lost, place SpaceX’s Starbase launch facility and headquarters under a new Democratic governor.
At the federal level, Democratic control of Congress enables greater scrutiny of NASA, the Department of Defense, and other contracts that support a meaningful share of revenue, along with reviews of Starlink national-security uses and any Tesla merger. Analysts have noted that empowered committees can hold hearings and request documents on these relationships.
For SpaceX, the results raise the risk of delayed contract awards, higher compliance costs, and tighter constraints on AI and satellite infrastructure expansion, particularly in Texas where a data-center moratorium has been discussed.
A merger with Tesla could encounter political friction that slows integration of launch, connectivity, and autonomy capabilities.
While Starlink growth and launch cadence continue as primary drivers, the company faces a more contested path for federal funding and state-level operations, requiring management to rebuild ties with the new congressional majorities and Texas leadership to limit the overhang.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk calls Earth’s data centers “peanuts” next to what SpaceX is planning in orbit
Elon Musk says SpaceX capex efficiency is underestimated as orbital data centers loom by 2028.
Elon Musk is pushing back on one of the biggest worries hanging over SpaceX stock. In a reply on X on Sunday, Musk said the company’s capital expenditure efficiency is severely underestimated. He was responding to a Milk Road Stocks post citing analyst Kyle Reidhead, who estimates SpaceX will need to spend roughly $470 billion over the next five quarters.
Reidhead built that figure around the target SpaceX set on its third quarter earnings call: 13 gigawatts or more of compute by the end of 2027. In his breakdown, Nvidia captures 83 to 89 percent of the spending. SpaceX ended the quarter with 1.7 GW of nameplate compute and guided to $35 billion to $40 billion in fourth quarter capex, as Teslarati reported.
Musk did not attach a number to his claim, but the earnings call shows the argument. CFO Bret Johnsen said new compute currently pays for itself in under a year at today’s pricing, and Musk said that window could shrink to six months next year. Using that pace, Reidhead argues about $230 billion of the $470 billion could come from operating cash flow and about $60 billion from SpaceX’s roughly $90 billion cash pile, leaving around $180 billion to borrow. Musk confirmed last week that SpaceX had already closed a new $40 billion debt raise to buy GPUs.
The ground buildout is not the end goal. It is what is meant to pay for the move to orbit. Replying on Friday to charts built from Sequoia partner Shaun Maguire’s SpaceX model, Musk wrote that “Terrestrial compute will be peanuts compared to orbital compute,” adding that orbital compute deployed per month “probably exceeds terrestrial around the end of 2028 and then far exceeds it in 2029.”
Maguire’s model shows how steep that path is. It has capex climbing from $88 billion this year to $290 billion in 2027 and $369 billion in 2028, with SpaceX burning $77.8 billion in cash this year and $122.6 billion next year before turning $114.9 billion cash positive in 2028. Musk’s response to the model was, “I think we can do better.”
The orbital half runs through Starmind. SpaceX plans to operate up to 1 million AI satellites flying in clusters of about 10, linked by roughly 10 terabits of bandwidth, with deployment of thousands of units starting as soon as late 2027 out of its Gigasat factory in Bastrop, Texas, according to SpaceX’s space safety page. Musk has said each Starmind spacecraft will carry more than 250 kW of solar power.
Getting there depends on launch volume. Maguire’s model assumes 250 Starship flights in 2028, up from two this year and 38 next year. The nearer test is financial: SpaceX guided to $33 billion to $37 billion in first quarter 2027 revenue, more than double the $14.58 billion it booked in Q3, and Musk reposted that guidance again on Sunday morning.
SpaceX just cleared a key FCC hurdle in its fight with Verizon and AT&T
Tesla upfitter offers to keep Cybertruck alive
