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
In a pointed message on X, Elon Musk warned that firms maintaining significant short positions in SpaceX over time face “very low” survival probability.
The statement comes amid post-IPO volatility for the rocket company, now trading under the ticker $SPCX.
The survival probability of firms who maintain a significant short position in SpaceX over time is very low
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 17, 2026
Five weeks after what was described as the largest IPO in history, the stock had fallen roughly 30% from its peak above $2.6 trillion, briefly surpassing Microsoft and Amazon in market value. Short sellers celebrated gains of about $8.7 billion, but Musk’s reply underscores his long-term conviction.
The warning directly echoes a detailed bullish analysis arguing that Starship’s cost reductions could unlock a multi-trillion-dollar space economy. Projects ranging from solar power beamed from orbit and asteroid mining to orbital data centers and Mars terraforming were projected to create over $100 trillion in new market capitalization.
In this vision, SpaceX acts as the essential infrastructure provider, akin to AWS for cloud computing, capturing monopoly-like revenues from launches, crew transport, and data traffic across a rapidly expanding frontier.
This is far from the first time Musk has targeted short sellers. With Tesla, he has repeatedly framed persistent bears as destined for major losses. In July 2024, Musk declared that once Tesla achieves full autonomy and volume production of Optimus robots, “anyone still holding a short position will be obliterated. Even Gates,” referencing Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates’ reported short bets.
Elon Musk reveals what Tesla stock surge could do to Bill Gates
Earlier, in 2018, he taunted shorts that they had “about three weeks before their short position explodes,” a remark followed by sharp stock gains. Musk has also called short selling “value destroying” and once suggested it “should be illegal,” viewing it as betting against innovation and progress.
Critics often dismiss Musk’s optimism as hype, especially when near-term metrics like quarterly deliveries or stock fluctuations disappoint.
Yet his pattern remains consistent: framing short positions against his companies as fundamentally misjudging exponential technological leaps. For SpaceX shorts, the message is clear: betting against multi-planetary ambitions and the infrastructure monopoly they enable carries existential risk for the firms involved.
As Musk and supporters see it, the space economy’s upside dwarfs Earth-bound valuation models, making today’s dips temporary in a decades-long ascent.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Elon Musk sends first warning to SpaceX short sellers
Tesla reveals first vehicle model to receive Starlink integration
