Search results

About the only thing that is going to strand an EV is running out of juice. And monitoring battery power is easy. All kinds of gremlins strand tens of thousand of ICE vehicles every day. Which is why the Japanese have been and now the Germans are really into Hybrids.

And Tesla spends ZERO on advertising.

I was a Tesla doubter until I saw the plurality of Major ICE Automakers fail miserably at EV’s up to this point in time. No clear thinking person could rationally argue against the fact that Tesla has a huge jump on EV competitors. I’m stunned that the Germans and the Japanese look to be left...

Tesla Q4 EPS: $2.14 vs. $1.72 Est. Q4 Revenues: $7.34B vs $7.02 Est.

Nissan Leaf Sales Falter As New Competitors Offer Better Technology, Looks https://www.forbes.com/sites/neilwinton/2019/11/12/nissan-leaf-sales-falter-as-new-competitors-offer-better-technology-looks/#432771821a74

Your opinion doesn't move markets. I really don't have any dog in this fight, but every manufacturer that has attempted to compete with Tesla has failed spectacularly at it up to this date - including the Chinese State subsidized manufacturer Nio. Every Volkswagen/Audi Eon SUV has been...

Shorts have lost many billions on TSLA. I'm sure the new valuation level reflects a recently completed Chinese Gigafactory and siting the Berlin Gigafactory. And nobody (including the Germans) has a serious, affordable mass-produced alternative to Tesla. $240K Porsches are not going to take...

If you want to short a cult, now's your chance :rolleyes: This is a 'futures' play on getting a Gig factory completed in China and another sited in Berlin.

The easy and most expensive way is with a Bloomberg Professional Terminal. Your alternative is math.

Apples and oranges. And no about CTA partnership prospectus as compared to a proprietary trading firm employee agreement.

Ummmm, yep. No clear thinking person would posit that Bernie is a positive for equities and energy in particular.

There are edges to be exploited only with very positive or negative (90% or better close-on-close) correlators. A couple examples would be GC and AUD or GC and CHF.

I would argue that "first loss funding" is against CME, ICE, and Eurex electronic trading firm membership rules. Again, if this business model includes exchange traded futures then by all means please complain to the CME and they will shut that down. Proprietary futures trading firms are NOT...

If someone runs into this issue with anyone purporting to be a prop firm that trades exchange futures, and for any reason takes employee/trader funds - please complain to the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. Because it's definitely against their rules for electronic trading firm membership.

Spreads are so cheap to margin that quite a few traders hold them longer term. And why not?

They do stupid, ridiculous size in the spreads. On exchange and off. Note futures versus Bond futures, Eurodollars and STIRS, Swaps versus futures, etc.. Thousands at a whack. The notoriously big traders are in the basis spreads - cash versus futures. All exchange spreads are treated as...

It's a bit more complicated than that for the ICS exchange market - there's a very unique idiosyncrasy that is unique to the CBoT interest rate spread: The spread is quoted as that day's net change from the previous trading session's settlement. AFAIK this is unique to the CBoT inter market...

Contact TOS tech support, because there are quite literally thousands of exchange spreads. They're a prominent feature for TT and CQG. If there's monster HF and Prop Firm traders or big Commercials - they are trading spreads.

The way proper, registered futures prop firms work is that they pay their employees a draw salary, and at the end of the year they pay out the bonus (the split). They will also pay you on a W-2 per exchange rules.

Not in futures. In fact, the CME and ICE will not allow Member Proprietary Firm customer funded prop accounts. CME and ICE only allow Member Proprietary Firms to risk the firm's capital.