Profile - To The Moon

jaz09

Posts · 2Posts · 2
Following · 0Following · 0
Followers · 0Followers · 0

- jaz09jaz09
  ·2021-07-04
  Nice
  AMC Options Traders Aren't Discouraged, Repeatedly Hammer Calls
  On Friday morning, Iceberg Researchannouncedit had taken a short position inAMC Entertainment Holdin
  AMC Options Traders Aren't Discouraged, Repeatedly Hammer Calls
  70 Comment
  1
  Share
  Report
- jaz09jaz09
  ·2021-06-23
  Cool
  Why I Believe NIO Will Beat Out Tesla
  The fact that Tesla scrapped its Model S Plaid Plus release is just part of it.Super fans of the latest and greatest high-endTesla, Inc. model received some disappointing news a week ago when CEO Elon Musk abruptly canceled the release of its highly anticipated Model S Plaid Plus with a tweet on June 6.Instead, the company has begun delivering a new Model S Plaid that has only a 390-mile range and 1,020 horsepower, though it still sprints to from 0 to 60 miles per hour in just two seconds.The go
  Why I Believe NIO Will Beat Out Tesla
  134 Comment
  Like
  Share
  Report

Most Discussed

Terms and Conditions·Privacy Policy

Company: TTMF Limited. Tech supported by Xiangshang Yixin.

Email：uservice@ttm.financial

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"isCurrentUser":false,"userPageInfo":{"id":"3585217871620120","uuid":"3585217871620120","gmtCreate":1622123848201,"gmtModify":1622123848201,"name":"jaz09","pinyin":"jaz09","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":0,"headSize":1,"tweetSize":2,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":0,"name":"","nameTw":"","represent":"","factor":"","iconColor":"","bgColor":""},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":"success","userBadges":[{"badgeId":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493-2","templateUuid":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493","name":"Senior Tiger","description":"Join the tiger community for 1000 days","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0063fb68ea29c9ae6858c58630e182d5","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/96c699a93be4214d4b49aea6a5a5d1a4","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/35b0e542a9ff77046ed69ef602bc105d","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2024.02.24","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84-1","templateUuid":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84","name":"Real Trader","description":"Completed a transaction","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":2,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"page":1,"watchlist":null,"tweetList":[{"id":155373413,"gmtCreate":1625381150632,"gmtModify":1703741092751,"author":{"id":"3585217871620120","authorId":"3585217871620120","name":"jaz09","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585217871620120","authorIdStr":"3585217871620120"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice","listText":"Nice","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/155373413","repostId":"1136694264","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1136694264","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Stock Market Quotes, Business News, Financial News, Trading Ideas, and Stock Research by Professionals","home_visible":0,"media_name":"Benzinga","id":"1052270027","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08bf7808052c0ca9deb4e944cae32aa"},"pubTimestamp":1625293431,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1136694264?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-03 14:23","market":"us","language":"en","title":"AMC Options Traders Aren't Discouraged, Repeatedly Hammer Calls","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1136694264","media":"Benzinga","summary":"On Friday morning, Iceberg Researchannouncedit had taken a short position inAMC Entertainment Holdin","content":"<p>On Friday morning, Iceberg Researchannouncedit had taken a short position in<b>AMC Entertainment Holdings</b>AMC 4.08%. Iceberg said options traders have lost money due to the stock trading sideways for the month of June and that the pump around the stock looks shaky.</p>\n<p>The news didn’t stop institutions from continuously hammering AMC call contracts and on Friday options traders had purchased over $2.59 million worth. The expiration dates for the contracts ranged from today up until Dec. 17 and a few traders chose a strike price of a whopping $145.</p>\n<p>AMC’s stock broke bearishly from a symmetrical triangle it had formed through its sideways trading on Friday, but held a support level at $47.91 and bounced from it. Bulls would like to see the dip continue to be bought and for AMC to end the day by printing a hammer candlestick and closing above the 21-day exponential moving average.</p>\n<p><b>Why It’s Important:</b>When a sweep order occurs, it indicates the trader wanted to get into a position quickly and is anticipating an imminent large move in stock price. A sweeper pays market price for the call or put option instead of placing a bid, which sweeps the order book of multiple exchanges to fill the order immediately.</p>\n<p>These types of call option orders are usually made by institutions, and retail investors can find watching for sweepers useful because it indicates “smart money” has entered into a position.</p>\n<p><b>The AMC Option Trades:</b>Below is a look at the notable options alerts, courtesy ofBenzinga Pro:</p>\n<ul>\n <li>At 9:42 a.m., Friday a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 265 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $59 expiring on July 9. The trade represented a $52,205 bullish bet for which the trader paid $1.97 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 9:51 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 247 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $65 expiring on Aug. 20. The trade represented a $221,065 bullish bet for which the trader paid $8.95 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 9:52 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 248 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $120 expiring on Dec. 17. The trade represented a $260,400 bullish bet for which the trader paid $10.50 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 9:53 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 356 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $65 expiring on Aug. 20. The trade represented a $311,500 bullish bet for which the trader paid $8.75 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 9:53 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 310 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $65 expiring on Aug. 20. The trade represented a $266,600 bullish bet for which the trader paid $8.60 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 9:56 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 310 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $65 expiring on Aug. 20. The trade represented a $266,600 bullish bet for which the trader paid $8.60 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 9:57 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 300 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $28 expiring on July 2. The trade represented a $221,065 bullish bet for which the trader paid $23.40 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 9:58 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 289 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $120 expiring on Dec., 17. The trade represented a $303,450 bullish bet for which the trader paid $10.50 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 9:58 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 580 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $55 expiring on July 16. The trade represented a $278,400 bullish bet for which the trader paid $4.80 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 10:07 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 258 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $80 expiring on July 16. The trade represented a $39,216 bullish bet for which the trader paid $1.52 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 10:24 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 352 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $50 expiring on July 2. The trade represented a $54,560 bullish bet for which the trader paid $1.55 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 10:26 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 234 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $145 expiring on July 23. The trade represented a $39,216 bullish bet for which the trader paid $1.31 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 10:31 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 224 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $145 expiring on Sept. 17. The trade represented a $105,280 bullish bet for which the trader paid $4.70 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 10:38 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 500 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $47 expiring on July 2. The trade represented a $146,000 bullish bet for which the trader paid $2.92 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 12:02 p.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 500 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $45 expiring on July 9. The trade represented a $305,000 bullish bet for which the trader paid $6.10 per option contract.</li>\n</ul>\n<p><b>AMC Price Action:</b>Shares of AMC Entertainment were trading down 5.3% to $51.33 at publication time.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>AMC Options Traders Aren't Discouraged, Repeatedly Hammer Calls</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nAMC Options Traders Aren't Discouraged, Repeatedly Hammer Calls\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<div class=\"head\" \">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08bf7808052c0ca9deb4e944cae32aa);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Benzinga </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-07-03 14:23</p>\n</div>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>On Friday morning, Iceberg Researchannouncedit had taken a short position in<b>AMC Entertainment Holdings</b>AMC 4.08%. Iceberg said options traders have lost money due to the stock trading sideways for the month of June and that the pump around the stock looks shaky.</p>\n<p>The news didn’t stop institutions from continuously hammering AMC call contracts and on Friday options traders had purchased over $2.59 million worth. The expiration dates for the contracts ranged from today up until Dec. 17 and a few traders chose a strike price of a whopping $145.</p>\n<p>AMC’s stock broke bearishly from a symmetrical triangle it had formed through its sideways trading on Friday, but held a support level at $47.91 and bounced from it. Bulls would like to see the dip continue to be bought and for AMC to end the day by printing a hammer candlestick and closing above the 21-day exponential moving average.</p>\n<p><b>Why It’s Important:</b>When a sweep order occurs, it indicates the trader wanted to get into a position quickly and is anticipating an imminent large move in stock price. A sweeper pays market price for the call or put option instead of placing a bid, which sweeps the order book of multiple exchanges to fill the order immediately.</p>\n<p>These types of call option orders are usually made by institutions, and retail investors can find watching for sweepers useful because it indicates “smart money” has entered into a position.</p>\n<p><b>The AMC Option Trades:</b>Below is a look at the notable options alerts, courtesy ofBenzinga Pro:</p>\n<ul>\n <li>At 9:42 a.m., Friday a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 265 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $59 expiring on July 9. The trade represented a $52,205 bullish bet for which the trader paid $1.97 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 9:51 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 247 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $65 expiring on Aug. 20. The trade represented a $221,065 bullish bet for which the trader paid $8.95 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 9:52 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 248 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $120 expiring on Dec. 17. The trade represented a $260,400 bullish bet for which the trader paid $10.50 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 9:53 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 356 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $65 expiring on Aug. 20. The trade represented a $311,500 bullish bet for which the trader paid $8.75 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 9:53 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 310 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $65 expiring on Aug. 20. The trade represented a $266,600 bullish bet for which the trader paid $8.60 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 9:56 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 310 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $65 expiring on Aug. 20. The trade represented a $266,600 bullish bet for which the trader paid $8.60 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 9:57 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 300 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $28 expiring on July 2. The trade represented a $221,065 bullish bet for which the trader paid $23.40 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 9:58 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 289 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $120 expiring on Dec., 17. The trade represented a $303,450 bullish bet for which the trader paid $10.50 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 9:58 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 580 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $55 expiring on July 16. The trade represented a $278,400 bullish bet for which the trader paid $4.80 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 10:07 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 258 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $80 expiring on July 16. The trade represented a $39,216 bullish bet for which the trader paid $1.52 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 10:24 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 352 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $50 expiring on July 2. The trade represented a $54,560 bullish bet for which the trader paid $1.55 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 10:26 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 234 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $145 expiring on July 23. The trade represented a $39,216 bullish bet for which the trader paid $1.31 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 10:31 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 224 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $145 expiring on Sept. 17. The trade represented a $105,280 bullish bet for which the trader paid $4.70 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 10:38 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 500 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $47 expiring on July 2. The trade represented a $146,000 bullish bet for which the trader paid $2.92 per option contract.</li>\n <li>At 12:02 p.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 500 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $45 expiring on July 9. The trade represented a $305,000 bullish bet for which the trader paid $6.10 per option contract.</li>\n</ul>\n<p><b>AMC Price Action:</b>Shares of AMC Entertainment were trading down 5.3% to $51.33 at publication time.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMC":"AMC院线"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1136694264","content_text":"On Friday morning, Iceberg Researchannouncedit had taken a short position inAMC Entertainment HoldingsAMC 4.08%. Iceberg said options traders have lost money due to the stock trading sideways for the month of June and that the pump around the stock looks shaky.\nThe news didn’t stop institutions from continuously hammering AMC call contracts and on Friday options traders had purchased over $2.59 million worth. The expiration dates for the contracts ranged from today up until Dec. 17 and a few traders chose a strike price of a whopping $145.\nAMC’s stock broke bearishly from a symmetrical triangle it had formed through its sideways trading on Friday, but held a support level at $47.91 and bounced from it. Bulls would like to see the dip continue to be bought and for AMC to end the day by printing a hammer candlestick and closing above the 21-day exponential moving average.\nWhy It’s Important:When a sweep order occurs, it indicates the trader wanted to get into a position quickly and is anticipating an imminent large move in stock price. A sweeper pays market price for the call or put option instead of placing a bid, which sweeps the order book of multiple exchanges to fill the order immediately.\nThese types of call option orders are usually made by institutions, and retail investors can find watching for sweepers useful because it indicates “smart money” has entered into a position.\nThe AMC Option Trades:Below is a look at the notable options alerts, courtesy ofBenzinga Pro:\n\nAt 9:42 a.m., Friday a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 265 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $59 expiring on July 9. The trade represented a $52,205 bullish bet for which the trader paid $1.97 per option contract.\nAt 9:51 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 247 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $65 expiring on Aug. 20. The trade represented a $221,065 bullish bet for which the trader paid $8.95 per option contract.\nAt 9:52 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 248 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $120 expiring on Dec. 17. The trade represented a $260,400 bullish bet for which the trader paid $10.50 per option contract.\nAt 9:53 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 356 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $65 expiring on Aug. 20. The trade represented a $311,500 bullish bet for which the trader paid $8.75 per option contract.\nAt 9:53 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 310 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $65 expiring on Aug. 20. The trade represented a $266,600 bullish bet for which the trader paid $8.60 per option contract.\nAt 9:56 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 310 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $65 expiring on Aug. 20. The trade represented a $266,600 bullish bet for which the trader paid $8.60 per option contract.\nAt 9:57 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 300 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $28 expiring on July 2. The trade represented a $221,065 bullish bet for which the trader paid $23.40 per option contract.\nAt 9:58 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 289 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $120 expiring on Dec., 17. The trade represented a $303,450 bullish bet for which the trader paid $10.50 per option contract.\nAt 9:58 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 580 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $55 expiring on July 16. The trade represented a $278,400 bullish bet for which the trader paid $4.80 per option contract.\nAt 10:07 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 258 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $80 expiring on July 16. The trade represented a $39,216 bullish bet for which the trader paid $1.52 per option contract.\nAt 10:24 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 352 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $50 expiring on July 2. The trade represented a $54,560 bullish bet for which the trader paid $1.55 per option contract.\nAt 10:26 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 234 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $145 expiring on July 23. The trade represented a $39,216 bullish bet for which the trader paid $1.31 per option contract.\nAt 10:31 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 224 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $145 expiring on Sept. 17. The trade represented a $105,280 bullish bet for which the trader paid $4.70 per option contract.\nAt 10:38 a.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 500 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $47 expiring on July 2. The trade represented a $146,000 bullish bet for which the trader paid $2.92 per option contract.\nAt 12:02 p.m., a trader executed a call sweep near the bid of 500 AMC Entertainment options with a strike price of $45 expiring on July 9. The trade represented a $305,000 bullish bet for which the trader paid $6.10 per option contract.\n\nAMC Price Action:Shares of AMC Entertainment were trading down 5.3% to $51.33 at publication time.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":70,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121695361,"gmtCreate":1624460817653,"gmtModify":1703837523361,"author":{"id":"3585217871620120","authorId":"3585217871620120","name":"jaz09","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585217871620120","authorIdStr":"3585217871620120"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Cool","listText":"Cool","text":"Cool","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/121695361","repostId":"1145825451","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1145825451","pubTimestamp":1624433586,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1145825451?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-23 15:33","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Why I Believe NIO Will Beat Out Tesla","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1145825451","media":"InvestorPlace","summary":"The fact that Tesla scrapped its Model S Plaid Plus release is just part of it.Super fans of the latest and greatest high-endTesla, Inc. model received some disappointing news a week ago when CEO Elon Musk abruptly canceled the release of its highly anticipated Model S Plaid Plus with a tweet on June 6.Instead, the company has begun delivering a new Model S Plaid that has only a 390-mile range and 1,020 horsepower, though it still sprints to from 0 to 60 miles per hour in just two seconds.The go","content":"<blockquote>\n <b>The fact that Tesla scrapped its Model S Plaid Plus release is just part of it.</b>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Super fans of the latest and greatest high-end<b>Tesla, Inc.</b>(NASDAQ:<b>TSLA</b>) model received some disappointing news a week ago when CEO Elon Musk abruptly canceled the release of its highly anticipated Model S Plaid Plus with a tweet on June 6.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b294a3604c7ba82bd19b3c70be3a4020\" tg-width=\"300\" tg-height=\"169\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Source: nrqemi / Shutterstock.com</p>\n<p>Musk wrote there was… “No need, as Plaid is just so good.”</p>\n<p>The Model S Plaid Plus was supposed to be the fastest, most powerful and priciest version of the company’s Model S. Priced at $149,990, it was to feature a range of 520 miles, thanks to its innovative 4680 battery cells, 1,100 horsepower and the ability to speed from 0 to 60 mph in less than two seconds.</p>\n<p>Instead, the company has begun delivering a new Model S Plaid that has only a 390-mile range and 1,020 horsepower, though it still sprints to from 0 to 60 miles per hour in just two seconds.</p>\n<p>As a way to “sugar coat” its flip flop, Tesla said the Model S Plaid is just as fast as the Model S Plaid Plus and $20,000 cheaper. Humm.</p>\n<p>This “bait and switch” has some Tesla fans worried, since they had deposits on the Model S Plaid Plus and wanted the innovative 4680 battery cells that Tesla had been touting as the key to longer range and more power. Essentially, the 4680 battery cells were the latest great Tesla development, since they were the first batteries to also be a structural component that supposedly allowed Tesla to lower the weight of its vehicles.</p>\n<p>Both the company’s Austin and Berlin manufacturing plants now under construction are supposed to also be making the 4680 batteries for new Tesla vehicles. If there is a problem with the engineering associated with utilizing the 4680 batteries or making them a structural component, then Tesla has grossly miscalculated, which is now worrying investors.</p>\n<p>Clearly something happened to delay the 4680 batteries that were supposed to provide Tesla with a competitive and engineering edge. For Tesla’s sake, I hope they figure out the problems associated with their much hyped 4680 battery cells, otherwise concerns about its two new manufacturing plants will emerge, as well as the stock losing more of its “mojo.”</p>\n<p>As someone who owns more than a few high-performance vehicles, I can tell you that the engineering geeks I know do<i>not</i>want to get a new Model S Plaid instead of a Model S Plaid Plus and will likely ask for their deposits back.</p>\n<p>What Tesla did is like Ferrari or Porsche telling its customers that one of their much-hyped new performance models is now not being sold because the base model was just as good! Car fanatics, like myself, like the latest and greatest engineering tidbits, so we would rather cancel our orders versus settle for a base model.</p>\n<p>The good news for Tesla is that its China sales in May resurged to 21,936, up sharply from 11,671 in April. The company’s sales tend to spike at the end of each quarter. For example, Tesla sold 35,478 vehicles in China in March, which was the strongest month ever in China.</p>\n<p>This is raising expectations for very strong China sales in June, especially now that the Model Y is being manufactured in Shanghai. Interestingly, since most Chinese Teslas are now made with iron phosphate batteries, these vehicles have lower range than its lithium cobalt vehicles, but its iron phosphate vehicles are cheaper and now increasingly being exported to Europe.</p>\n<p>However, I’m convinced another electric vehicle (EV) company will eventually displace Tesla as the biggest manufacturer of EVs in China.</p>\n<p><b>Taking Advantage of the EV Revolution’s Profit Potential</b></p>\n<p>I’m talking about&nbsp;<b>Nio, Inc.</b>(NYSE:<b>NIO</b>). The reality is that this company is on the verge of dominating the EV market in China and Hong Kong. It’s why I put NIO on my<b><i>Platinum Growth Club</i></b>Model Portfolio back in February.</p>\n<p>The company boasts that it is the “next-generation car company,” as it designs and manufactures electric vehicles that utilize the latest technologies in connectivity, autonomous driving and artificial intelligence (AI). NIO currently offers an electric seven-seater SUV (ES8) and a five-seater electric SUV (ES6) and recently introduced an attractive electric sedan (ET7). Its vehicles utilize NOMI, an in-vehicle artificial intelligence assistant.</p>\n<p>The company is also partnering with cutting-edge chip companies like<b>NVIDIA Corporation</b>(NASDAQ:<b>NVDA</b>), another one of my<b><i>Platinum Growth Club</i></b>Model Portfolio stocks. NIO plans to use the NVIDIA DRIVE Orin system-on-a-chip for its electric vehicles that will provide autonomous driving capabilities. The NVIDIA DRIVE Orin-powered supercomputer, which is being called Adam, will be launched in the ET7 sedan in China in 2022. Announcements like this are very positive, so NIO has been stealing some of Tesla’s thunder lately.</p>\n<p>Now, it’s important to note that NIO was bailed out by the Chinese government. Last year, the Chinese government injected $1 billion and now has a 24% ownership in the company. The reality is that China wants to dominate at least five major industries by 2025, and NIO is now its ticket to dominate EV manufacturing.</p>\n<p>With the backing of the Chinese government, some Wall Street firms are eager to help NIO by issuing new debt or equity. So, I wouldn’t be surprised if NIO surpasses Tesla, which is currently number-two in China, for market share in the upcoming years.</p>\n<p>That means, if you missed Tesla’s parabolic run like I did, NIO is essentially giving us a “second chance” to make money in a potentially explosive electric vehicle company.</p>\n<p>Shares of NIO climbed nearly 13% since the company’s June 4 announcement of its May delivery report and positive analyst comments, while Tesla shares rose almost 3%. First, NIO revealed that the global chip shortage is starting to take a toll on its business. NIO only delivered 6,711 vehicles in May, or a 5.5% decline from April’s deliveries. Company management noted that deliveries were “adversely impacted for several days due to the volatility of semiconductor supply and certain logistical adjustments.”</p>\n<p>Interestingly, despite the month-to-month dip, NIO’s deliveries were still up 95.3% year-over-year. Strong demand in China even inspired a Citigroup analyst to upgrade NIO to a buy rating, as he expects demand to accelerate in the coming months.</p>\n<p>In other words, NIO represents the<b>crème de la crème</b>of EV stocks right now.</p>","source":"lsy1606302653667","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Why I Believe NIO Will Beat Out Tesla</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nWhy I Believe NIO Will Beat Out Tesla\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-23 15:33 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://investorplace.com/2021/06/why-i-believe-nio-will-beat-out-tesla/><strong>InvestorPlace</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The fact that Tesla scrapped its Model S Plaid Plus release is just part of it.\n\nSuper fans of the latest and greatest high-endTesla, Inc.(NASDAQ:TSLA) model received some disappointing news a week ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://investorplace.com/2021/06/why-i-believe-nio-will-beat-out-tesla/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"NIO":"蔚来","TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://investorplace.com/2021/06/why-i-believe-nio-will-beat-out-tesla/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1145825451","content_text":"The fact that Tesla scrapped its Model S Plaid Plus release is just part of it.\n\nSuper fans of the latest and greatest high-endTesla, Inc.(NASDAQ:TSLA) model received some disappointing news a week ago when CEO Elon Musk abruptly canceled the release of its highly anticipated Model S Plaid Plus with a tweet on June 6.\nSource: nrqemi / Shutterstock.com\nMusk wrote there was… “No need, as Plaid is just so good.”\nThe Model S Plaid Plus was supposed to be the fastest, most powerful and priciest version of the company’s Model S. Priced at $149,990, it was to feature a range of 520 miles, thanks to its innovative 4680 battery cells, 1,100 horsepower and the ability to speed from 0 to 60 mph in less than two seconds.\nInstead, the company has begun delivering a new Model S Plaid that has only a 390-mile range and 1,020 horsepower, though it still sprints to from 0 to 60 miles per hour in just two seconds.\nAs a way to “sugar coat” its flip flop, Tesla said the Model S Plaid is just as fast as the Model S Plaid Plus and $20,000 cheaper. Humm.\nThis “bait and switch” has some Tesla fans worried, since they had deposits on the Model S Plaid Plus and wanted the innovative 4680 battery cells that Tesla had been touting as the key to longer range and more power. Essentially, the 4680 battery cells were the latest great Tesla development, since they were the first batteries to also be a structural component that supposedly allowed Tesla to lower the weight of its vehicles.\nBoth the company’s Austin and Berlin manufacturing plants now under construction are supposed to also be making the 4680 batteries for new Tesla vehicles. If there is a problem with the engineering associated with utilizing the 4680 batteries or making them a structural component, then Tesla has grossly miscalculated, which is now worrying investors.\nClearly something happened to delay the 4680 batteries that were supposed to provide Tesla with a competitive and engineering edge. For Tesla’s sake, I hope they figure out the problems associated with their much hyped 4680 battery cells, otherwise concerns about its two new manufacturing plants will emerge, as well as the stock losing more of its “mojo.”\nAs someone who owns more than a few high-performance vehicles, I can tell you that the engineering geeks I know donotwant to get a new Model S Plaid instead of a Model S Plaid Plus and will likely ask for their deposits back.\nWhat Tesla did is like Ferrari or Porsche telling its customers that one of their much-hyped new performance models is now not being sold because the base model was just as good! Car fanatics, like myself, like the latest and greatest engineering tidbits, so we would rather cancel our orders versus settle for a base model.\nThe good news for Tesla is that its China sales in May resurged to 21,936, up sharply from 11,671 in April. The company’s sales tend to spike at the end of each quarter. For example, Tesla sold 35,478 vehicles in China in March, which was the strongest month ever in China.\nThis is raising expectations for very strong China sales in June, especially now that the Model Y is being manufactured in Shanghai. Interestingly, since most Chinese Teslas are now made with iron phosphate batteries, these vehicles have lower range than its lithium cobalt vehicles, but its iron phosphate vehicles are cheaper and now increasingly being exported to Europe.\nHowever, I’m convinced another electric vehicle (EV) company will eventually displace Tesla as the biggest manufacturer of EVs in China.\nTaking Advantage of the EV Revolution’s Profit Potential\nI’m talking about Nio, Inc.(NYSE:NIO). The reality is that this company is on the verge of dominating the EV market in China and Hong Kong. It’s why I put NIO on myPlatinum Growth ClubModel Portfolio back in February.\nThe company boasts that it is the “next-generation car company,” as it designs and manufactures electric vehicles that utilize the latest technologies in connectivity, autonomous driving and artificial intelligence (AI). NIO currently offers an electric seven-seater SUV (ES8) and a five-seater electric SUV (ES6) and recently introduced an attractive electric sedan (ET7). Its vehicles utilize NOMI, an in-vehicle artificial intelligence assistant.\nThe company is also partnering with cutting-edge chip companies likeNVIDIA Corporation(NASDAQ:NVDA), another one of myPlatinum Growth ClubModel Portfolio stocks. NIO plans to use the NVIDIA DRIVE Orin system-on-a-chip for its electric vehicles that will provide autonomous driving capabilities. The NVIDIA DRIVE Orin-powered supercomputer, which is being called Adam, will be launched in the ET7 sedan in China in 2022. Announcements like this are very positive, so NIO has been stealing some of Tesla’s thunder lately.\nNow, it’s important to note that NIO was bailed out by the Chinese government. Last year, the Chinese government injected $1 billion and now has a 24% ownership in the company. The reality is that China wants to dominate at least five major industries by 2025, and NIO is now its ticket to dominate EV manufacturing.\nWith the backing of the Chinese government, some Wall Street firms are eager to help NIO by issuing new debt or equity. So, I wouldn’t be surprised if NIO surpasses Tesla, which is currently number-two in China, for market share in the upcoming years.\nThat means, if you missed Tesla’s parabolic run like I did, NIO is essentially giving us a “second chance” to make money in a potentially explosive electric vehicle company.\nShares of NIO climbed nearly 13% since the company’s June 4 announcement of its May delivery report and positive analyst comments, while Tesla shares rose almost 3%. First, NIO revealed that the global chip shortage is starting to take a toll on its business. NIO only delivered 6,711 vehicles in May, or a 5.5% decline from April’s deliveries. Company management noted that deliveries were “adversely impacted for several days due to the volatility of semiconductor supply and certain logistical adjustments.”\nInterestingly, despite the month-to-month dip, NIO’s deliveries were still up 95.3% year-over-year. Strong demand in China even inspired a Citigroup analyst to upgrade NIO to a buy rating, as he expects demand to accelerate in the coming months.\nIn other words, NIO represents thecrème de la crèmeof EV stocks right now.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":134,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"defaultTab":"posts","isTTM":true}