5 ms·

is this for real and should I be angry? Cathie Wood and ARK are selling too. While putting out a report with a price target of $4,600 for TSLA, they’ve been ta

is this for real and should I be angry? Cathie Wood and ARK are selling too. While putting out a report with a price target of $4,600 for TSLA, they’ve been taking profits and trimming their TSLA position in their flagship ARKK fund from almost 4 million shares to less than 1 million. One of the biggest cheerleaders for Tesla is publicly saying the stock will quadruple, while cutting their holdings by 75%.

blitzar 4y ago
> putting out a report with a price target of $4,600 for TSLA That is the PR department. > they’ve been taking profits and trimming their TSLA position That is their fund mangement arm. Are you for real and should I be angry? Were you really unaware that the words these people say on the tv, while helpfull for their current position, dont always reflect their actions or even actual beliefs?
- carnitine 4y ago
  Price targets and investment research reports have nothing to do with the PR department.
  - blitzar 4y ago
    ARK wants even needs investors. Going on CNBC and telling everyone that the core asset of your fund is going to the moon, dont miss out!!!!!!!! is how you get investors to pay you a fat fee. Going on CNBC and announcing that your research department think your investors are going to lose 50% isnt good for business. The price targets and investment research is entirely PR - designed to get investors to invest with the fund.
hayd 4y ago
TSLA's gone up a lot in the last few years, perhaps 20% of Ark's market cap being in a single stock might be bad business? But I wonder if it's more likely to do with them losing 50% of their assets in less than a year: > As of February 2021, the company had $50 billion in assets under management. By January 2022, assets had dropped to $23.9 billion, after a period of poor performance.
- jjtheblunt 4y ago
  where "poor performance" is clearly an understatement
vmception 4y ago
No, you shouldn't be angry you should be objective. The fund can have its own investment time horizon that has nothing to do with the time horizon and accuracy of the report.
bombcar 4y ago
Cathie is a bit of a case and I'd stay away from the ARK fund myself (it's basically a bad way to own TSLA which was great when TSLA jumped) but that fund is limited to holding no more than some percentage as TSLA, maybe it was 10%? Disclosure: I held TSLA in the past, not at this time, though I hold index funds that hold it.

blitzar 4y ago

> putting out a report with a price target of $4,600 for TSLA That is the PR department. > they’ve been taking profits and trimming their TSLA position That is their fund mangement arm. Are you for real and should I be angry? Were you really unaware that the words these people say on the tv, while helpfull for their current position, dont always reflect their actions or even actual beliefs?

carnitine 4y ago
Price targets and investment research reports have nothing to do with the PR department.
- blitzar 4y ago
  ARK wants even needs investors. Going on CNBC and telling everyone that the core asset of your fund is going to the moon, dont miss out!!!!!!!! is how you get investors to pay you a fat fee. Going on CNBC and announcing that your research department think your investors are going to lose 50% isnt good for business. The price targets and investment research is entirely PR - designed to get investors to invest with the fund.

hayd 4y ago

TSLA's gone up a lot in the last few years, perhaps 20% of Ark's market cap being in a single stock might be bad business? But I wonder if it's more likely to do with them losing 50% of their assets in less than a year: > As of February 2021, the company had $50 billion in assets under management. By January 2022, assets had dropped to $23.9 billion, after a period of poor performance.

jjtheblunt 4y ago
where "poor performance" is clearly an understatement

vmception 4y ago

No, you shouldn't be angry you should be objective. The fund can have its own investment time horizon that has nothing to do with the time horizon and accuracy of the report.

bombcar 4y ago

Cathie is a bit of a case and I'd stay away from the ARK fund myself (it's basically a bad way to own TSLA which was great when TSLA jumped) but that fund is limited to holding no more than some percentage as TSLA, maybe it was 10%? Disclosure: I held TSLA in the past, not at this time, though I hold index funds that hold it.