Investor's Corner
Tesla stock (TSLA) one week after Q2 2016 Report
Post Q2 Report Action
As we previously reported, the Q2 quarterly results were “mixed”:
- Revenue matched expectation, a positive for Wall Street;
- Earning losses were higher than anticipated, a negative, but for a company like Tesla, where the stock price is based on future expectations, the earning numbers are really not what counts;
- Slightly increasing gross margins, a positive;
- Practically zero ZEV credits for the quarter, a negative;
- Production and demand on track to support 50,000 deliveries in 2H 2016, a positive;
- Lower production numbers than previously anticipated, a negative.
When you have such a mix of positives and negatives, it is fairly normal for traders to have a “subdued” response, unlike the usually wild responses to results that are big misses or big beats on expectations.
Accordingly, this time around the technical response of the stock market to last week’s Tesla Q2 2016 report has been “muted.” The stock has been in “compression” (a horizontal back and forth) since the report, staying in the $225-$230 range, but overall 12-month Analyst Price Targets have actually decreased with the average dropping from $277 to $244.
Looking at more details of the reactions to the report, this is a small sample from Top Analysts, noting that none of them changed their position.
Alexander Potter of Piper Jaffray says “Teslas untouchable brand helps investors look past million-dollar losses.”
“It’s hard to recommend a cash-burning company with such an uncertain outlook,” said Potter, who reiterated a neutral rating and $223 price target on the stock. But consumers and investors still seem captivated by Tesla’s products, said Potter. And as long as the company “retains this aura,” its stock multiple will “probably stay buoyant,” he said.
Brad Erickson of Pacific Crest says “The risks still outweigh the rewards.”
“Brad rattled off a number of challenges Tesla still needs to tackle in a note to clients. But he reiterated a sector weight rating on the stock, said Tesla’s cash burn wasn’t as bad as expected during the quarter, and maintained the belief that the company’s longer-term vision is “second to none.”
Ben Kallo of Robert W. Baird says “Focus [is] on Tesla (TSLA) Production Ramp and Long Term Goals, Not Q2 Miss.”
Kallo commented, “Q2 revenue was in line with our estimate, but TSLA missed on EPS with higher-than-expected OPEX. Additionally, gross margin missed consensus estimates and was pressured during the quarter with the Model S refresh and X ramp, but automotive gross margin improved sequentially, which was better than we expected. Importantly, TSLA reaffirmed its 2H:16 delivery target of ~50k vehicles, expects margins to ramp in 2H:16 given higher manufacturing efficiency, and the Model 3 remains on track for 2H:17 production.”
Kallo also covers SolarCity (SCTY) and he commented that “Although SCTY has a 45-day go-shop period which could provide additional upside, we believe it is highly likely the TSLA and SCTY merger will go through, and we are moving to the sidelines.”
Colin Rusch of Oppenheimer “noted that Tesla appears to be taking on increasing responsibility when it comes to technology development.”
“Rusch wasn’t surprised by Tesla’s quarter, and the firm remains on the sidelines until Tesla can show some progress toward profitability. It also appears to have taken a hard line with suppliers on timelines, pricing and allocation of resources,” he explained. “While we see potential benefits, we note increasing risk on supplier pushback.”
Ryan Brinkman of J.P. Morgan noted that “JPMorgan cuts Tesla estimates on higher operating expenses.”
“To reflect lower revenue and higher operating expenses following the company’s Q2 results, Brinkman cut his 2016 earnings per share estimate for Tesla to (32c) from $1.60. The analyst notes his 2016 earnings estimate was $4.62 a year ago and $2.74 at the start of this year. This reflects the “degree of consistent ratcheting down of near-term earnings,” Brinkman tells investors in a post-earnings research note. The analyst keeps an Underweight rating on Tesla with a $180 price target.”
Shelby Seyrafi of FBN Securities “reiterated a Buy rating on Tesla Motors (NASDAQ: TSLA), with a price target of $275.”
Seyrafi is a 3-star analyst with an average return of 0.5% and a 51.5% success rate. Seyrafi covers the Technology sector, focusing on stocks such as Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Dot Hill Systems Corp., and Concur Technologies.
Colin Langan of UBS, says “Tesla, SolarCity synergies still cloudy.”
“Colin noted Tesla announced details of its agreement to acquire SolarCity (SCTY) and provided synergy targets with the deal. UBS said they remain cautious on the deal given the lack of compelling synergies and the fact the deal is an unneeded distraction for Tesla management, which already faces challenges with its Model 3 launch and production targets. UBS maintained its Sell rating and $160 price target on Tesla shares.”
The overall consensus of analysts covering Tesl Motors, reported at tipranks.com, is neutral (hold).

Source: TipRanks
Trade Analysis
Quarterly Reports are usually the catalyst that start or stop actions for swing traders. The Q2 report was no different. I called for a bullish swing trade when the MACD crossed to the bulls on July 1st. The trade closed on August 4th when the MACD crossed to the bears, the day after the Q2 report was released. This was a good trade that gained over $14 in about a month period to traders that went long on the stock (see the shaded band in the chart below). For option traders this was a “fabulous” trade.
A week after the report the market is undecided on what to do with TSLA in the short term. All indicators are “neutral”: the stock has gone sideways for a week; the MACD averages are flat and overlapping; the MACD itself is at zero; both the 50-day moving average (the red line in the chart below) and the 200-day moving average (the yellow line in the chart below) are flat. All of these indicators are showing the absence of a trend. Trading in these conditions is not advisable and fairly risky. I’m personally out of trading TSLA until a trend appears.

Source: Wall Street I/O
Investor's Corner
Tesla’s flying Roadster just revealed something bigger than the car
Analysts say the Roadster demo puts a Tesla and SpaceX merger back on the table.
The Roadster unveiling near Waco ended Thursday night, and by Friday morning much of the investor reaction had less to do with the car than with who owns the rocket technology inside it.
Wedbush analyst Dan Ives said the event “puts the Tesla/SpaceX relationship on the table in a tangible way,” pointing to the propulsion, pressure vessel and control hardware sitting on a Tesla product. Gene Munster of Deepwater Asset Management called the demo “a ridiculous display of engineering” with “no commercial value” beyond embarrassing traditional automakers, though he said it showed Musk wants the two companies together.
The more specific forecast came a day earlier from Barclays. Analyst Dan Levy told clients a deal could be announced before Tesla’s annual meeting, which must happen by December 6, and that an announcement in late October or early November could make shareholder approval harder. Barclays expects SpaceX to be the buyer in an all stock deal, with Tesla holders receiving SpaceX shares at a premium, based on market values of roughly $2.1 trillion for SpaceX and $1.5 trillion for Tesla. If nothing lands around the meeting, the bank still sees an announcement within 6 to 12 months.
The Roadster demo just added more weight to merger speculations. Tesla’s demo used cold gas thrusters and pressure tanks of the kind SpaceX uses on Falcon 9, and Musk described the car as a collaboration between Tesla and SpaceX engineers, as we mentioned in our breakdown of the three Roadster configurations.
Musk has not publicly addressed a deal since the event, as far as we have seen. His most direct answer remains the one he gave at the All In Summit, when he said that with so much collaboration, “who can imagine what action one might take” without ruling anything out. Ives has held to a 2027 timeline since his March note, and Musk pushed back on the China piece of the speculation when ARK floated a year end announcement in August.
The next test is Tesla’s third quarter earnings call on October 21. However, we recall in July that Musk told analysts, “we can’t talk about combining companies and that kind of thing on an earnings call,” so a clear answer wouldn’t be expected.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk breaks his silence on the Starlink impact to Ukraine drones
Musk says the US military and president set Starshield limits, not SpaceX, amid Ukraine complaints.
Elon Musk says the speed limit cutting out Ukraine’s military Starlink terminals is not SpaceX’s decision. In a post on X Wednesday, Musk wrote that “Starshield systems are owned and controlled by the US government. Any limits on speed or usage are decided by the US military and ultimately POTUS.” He added that Starlink is a commercial service limited to civilian or defensive activities and “cannot be used for offensive military action, as doing so would be inappropriate for a commercial company.”
He was replying to Mykhailo Fedorov, Ukraine’s former defense minister, who had thanked Musk for restoring connectivity at speeds up to 160 km/h and said removing the Starshield limit entirely is “now critical for Ukraine’s defense.”
Starshield systems are owned and controlled by the US government. Any limits on speed or usage are decided by the US military and ultimately POTUS.
Starlink is a commercial service owned and controlled by SpaceX. Usage of Starlink is limited to civilian or defensive activities and cannot be used for offensive military action, as doing so would be inappropriate for a commercial company.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 14, 2026
The complaint started Tuesday night, when Ukrainian officials said military terminals began losing service above roughly 100 mph. Presidential adviser Serhiy Beskrestnov said the defense forces got no warning and several missions were disrupted, as Teslarati reported earlier Wednesday. The 7th Rapid Reaction Corps told Reuters connections dropped for 10 to 20 seconds at speeds well below the limit, which made drones harder to control. Poland’s foreign minister, Radoslaw Sikorski, asked Musk on X whether he is “playing politics with your products again.”
That is why the Starlink and Starshield distinction matters. SpaceX introduced Starshield in 2022 as the government version of Starlink, with an initial focus on Earth observation, communications and hosted payloads. It won a Space Force contract in 2023 with a $70 million ceiling. In December 2024, the Pentagon moved Ukraine’s terminals onto Starshield, covering about 3,000 units across two contracts. Ukraine’s military connections therefore run through a service that Musk now says sits under Washington’s control.
While Musk’s post describes who holds authority, it does not infer that anyone ordered the limit, and neither SpaceX nor the US government has confirmed who set it. Ukrainian officials have pointed to the timing, which follows President Trump’s push for an energy ceasefire and Musk’s Saturday post that “Zelensky has gone too far.” The BBC noted Trump denied threatening to restrict intelligence sharing with Kyiv, and no evidence has been presented that Washington requested the cap.
The episode also revives a promise from 2025. After Poland accused him of threatening Ukraine’s access, Musk said Starlink “will never turn off its terminals” and would not be used as a bargaining chip. Poland has since supplied more than 29,000 terminals to Ukraine. Teslarati also covered Kyiv’s search for Starlink alternatives in 2025, and the latest dispute gives that search new urgency.
Investor's Corner
Tesla opens the Q&A for its biggest earnings call yet
Tesla opens its Q3 earnings Q&A, and Cybercab, Robotaxi, Optimus and regulators loom over October 21.
Tesla has opened its shareholder question portal for the Q3 2026 earnings call, with the Say Q&A page already listing questions. Investors have until 4:00 p.m. EDT on October 20 to submit and vote on what management should answer.
The call is set for Wednesday, October 21. Tesla will post results after the market closes, with a live webcast at 4:30 p.m. CT, or 5:30 p.m. ET, through its investor relations site.
Say ranks questions by the number of shares behind the votes, which gives institutional holders extra weight over the retail crowd.
Ahead of Q2, retail investors asked why Robotaxi growth had stalled, when Cybercab would start customer rides, and where the Optimus Gen 3 ramp stood, while an institutional holder asked how Tesla and SpaceX would split Terafab duties. Cybercab has since answered one of those. Tesla said last week it has 300 plus Cybercabs serving Austin, up eightfold in 30 days, with Dallas named as the next city. The questions now are likely to move from when to how fast.
There is also a regulatory question hanging over the call. NHTSA has demanded sworn answers on how the pedal free Cybercab was certified against federal safety standards, with responses due October 30, nine days after the call. Whether an analyst raises it live is unknown, but it is the kind of exposure that tends to find its way into a Q&A.
The numbers will not be the main draw. Tesla already reported 486,532 deliveries and 13.7 GWh of storage for the quarter. Consensus sits around 43 to 45 cents per share on roughly $27.8 billion in revenue, according to Zacks, after a Q2 report that missed on EPS. Goldman Sachs, which holds a Neutral rating and a $360 target, argues the outlook for Robotaxi, FSD and Optimus will matter more to the stock than the quarter itself.
The call also lands six days after the rescheduled Roadster event, which Tesla will stream on X on Thursday, October 15, at 7:55 p.m. CT. If the Roadster shows up with a production date or a SpaceX thruster package, expect it to climb the voting list before the deadline.