Up up and up.
The court did mention that constitutionality, but barely, as mentioned in that TMC thread. They mention the first line thesis statement of that constitution section, declare it vague so they can't do anything with it, and then move on without even talking about the rest of that section. They don't discuss whether those laws are restraint of trade or monopoly, which are specifically prohibited later in that section, etc.
Rocky_H: Wow. I got to this part and was simply dumbfounded...
¶57 "The legislature may draw lines that the judiciary views as curious or even unwise. But unless those lines are utterly lacking in a rational basis, we judges have no say in the matter; we leave the second guessing to the political branches of government."
It amounts to saying that the legislature must have had a reason for drafting the law that way, and that makes it OK. I'll read the rest later. My head is hurting now.
Sympathy for the Bears... I'd rather listen to 'Sympathy for the Devil'!
Tesla (TSLA) surges to new high after analysts gives $368 price target, says ‘Tesla isn’t just another company’ -- electrek, Fred Lambert - Apr. 10th 2017https://electrek.co/2017/04/10/tesla-tsla-surges-new-high-price-target/
TSLA was at around 160 in Feb last year. It would be a double if you put in a M3 reservation and bought 220 shares for 35k you could sell half your shares and have the money to buy the car outright and then maybe get back some incentives for a vacation celebration. Just saying.
I wonder if anyone here did something like that.
Heh. As the $#0r+s haven't given up and would still have to cover, you'd find no... erm... shortage of buyers!
Actually if Tesla gives that cheap financing(around 1.7% or so) I would keep the 100 shares long term. But that is in my situation.
More "Stormy weather in Shortville"
New PT of 418 out there. Squeeze motivated/induced. If Elon puts hyperloop on this baby. easy 30-50 points more to the stock. Or if he decides to split it at 365 for 10:1
Its worth a thought that Model 3 has been factored in before... many times over
There is no need to split shares of TSLA so early. If BRK-A can remain relatively steady at over $250,000,000 per share, then surely TSLA can someday reach a comfortable $2,500 per share. Even if TSLA were to split, it should not do so prior to passing milestones such as $450, $600, or $750 to break the share price down to $150 per each, respectively. So 3:1, 4:1, or 5:1. Certainly not a 10:1 prior to reaching the aforementioned $2,500 per share. Heck, even BRK-B is at $166 per share these days. Coincidentally? TSLA will match the current Market Capitalization of BRK-A at $2,486.57 per share.
I'd happily welcome a split. It gives more flexibility. Commissions are so low that it is just noise.
I can't buy BRK-A yet. I couldn't afford it when it was "cheap" either.
Remember, AAPL was below $5 per share for the better part of 25 years since its IPO. And it was under $3 per share for about 19 years. If TSLA follows a similar trajectory, imagine if the ~$300 mark is effectively its $3 AAPL equivalent, ten years after IPO.
"New PT of 418 out there. Squeeze motivated/induced."
I don't own any TSLA (except maybe in funds) but if I did the thought that the stock price might be where it is in large part because of squeeze pressure would be very, very scary. Everyone should be careful not to have too much of their future invested in any one investment vehicle even if it's something you believe in.
For your consideration...
AAPL Stock Split History
___ 06/16/1987 ___ 2 for 1
___ 06/21/2000 ___ 2 for 1
___ 02/28/2005 ___ 2 for 1
___ 06/09/2014 ___ 7 for 1
@joemar10 I'm near Roanoke, VA. Its much closer for me to go to Raleigh for my car :(