To The Moon

$Tesla Motors(TSLA)$ $NVIDIA(NVDA)$ $Micron Technology(MU)$ Why sentiment, structure, and long-dated options are telling two very different stories I’m looking at $TSLA the same way I always have, by separating opinion from positioning and narrative from capital. The downgrade noise is loud, but the tape is louder. 📉 Analyst pessimism versus what price is actually doing GLJ Research raising its Tesla price target to $25.28 from $19.05 while reiterating a Sell borders on satire. A $6 increase that still implies a near-total collapse from ~$437 tells me this is less about updated math and more about anchoring. The justification, Q4 delivery mix skewing toward discounted Model Ys outside China, the loss of U.S. ZEV credit tailwinds, and a projected 15.0% year-over-year delivery decline in 2026, is not new information. It’s a recycling of known pressures. What matters is whether the market agrees. So far, it doesn’t. 📊 Momentum score, volatility regime, and the inflection zone Tesla’s momentum score has dropped to 1, confirming sharp deterioration in short-term sentiment. I take that seriously. But these readings matter most at structural decision points, not in isolation. On the 4H chart, price has pulled back into the $430–440 zone, where prior demand, moving averages, and compressed Keltner and Bollinger bands converge. This is not free-fall territory. This is where continuation and failure separate. Volume contraction on the downside signals digestion, not liquidation. 🧮 Options flow, the tell analysts keep missing While price targets scream collapse, someone just committed ~$1.7M to $TSLA 500 strike calls with spot near ~$437. Alongside that are longer-dated call blocks and sweeps extending into 2026 and 2027. This is not emotional positioning. This is convexity being accumulated. At the same time, selective downside hedging and put selling show exposure being structured, not abandoned. That divergence between commentary and capital is the real signal. 🤖 Nvidia’s autonomy announcement, narrative shock versus reality Nvidia’s unveiling of its Alpamayo autonomous-driving models matters less as immediate competition and more as a narrative catalyst. The market briefly priced the idea that autonomy is becoming modular and commoditised, which helps explain the timing of Tesla’s ~4% drawdown. Elon Musk’s response was telling. He framed Nvidia’s push as a competitive pressure measured in years, not quarters, noting that legacy manufacturers still face long delays integrating cameras, AI compute, and software at scale. His estimate of a 5–6 year horizon aligns with what the tape is already saying, short-term sentiment shock, long-term capital patience. That distinction matters. Nvidia wants to sell chips and tools. Tesla wants to own the full stack. Those are very different economic models, and the market is still reconciling that difference. ⚙️ Nvidia compute, Rubin, and the timing mismatch Nvidia’s broader AI roadmap reinforces why this is a timing issue, not an existential one. Alongside Alpamayo, Nvidia introduced its next-generation Vera Rubin platform, which Musk described as a “rocket engine” for AI. He also noted it will take roughly nine months before the hardware is operational at scale and the software works well. Tesla continues to use Nvidia silicon today while actively reducing dependency over time, and xAI is partnering with Nvidia on a large data-centre build in Saudi Arabia that is expected to adopt the Rubin platform. That overlap matters. It highlights coopetition, not displacement, and helps explain the asymmetric market reaction, Tesla sold off ~4.1% while Nvidia barely moved. ⏱️ Short-term weakness versus long-term geometry Short-term, the tape is heavy. Momentum is cooling, and autonomy headlines hit at exactly the wrong moment for sentiment. Long-term, the structure that matters most remains intact. I’m anchoring this to the long-term Gann Square that maps Tesla’s entire advance since 2011. Price continues to respect rising time–price arcs rather than violating them, with current action holding above dominant long-cycle support bands. The next major Gann intersections project into the 2026–2028 window. According to this 15-year Gann framework, Tesla remains in a zone that historically resolves through time expansion rather than trend failure. That’s where the $700–$1,000 projections originate, not from narrative enthusiasm, but from time symmetry and price geometry. That distinction matters. Gann work doesn’t predict exact timing. It defines where probability clusters as time advances. At this point in the cycle, those probabilities still slope higher. 🏭 Giga Texas, Optimus, and first-principles execution Elon Musk’s recent discussion with Peter Diamandis and Dave Blundin explains why Tesla refuses to trade like a conventional auto company. Giga Texas isn’t just a factory. It’s a system. One vehicle every minute or two is a production constraint solved at scale, and Musk is explicitly applying that logic to Optimus. The planned 8-million-square-foot Optimus expansion signals intent. The bottleneck is supply chain and atom movement, not intelligence. When one Optimus learns, all learn. 🔋 Chips, energy, and second-order effects From AI 6 logic designs to discussion around an in-house 2-nanometer fab, Tesla continues to challenge industry assumptions through physics rather than convention. Pair that with Megapacks buffering power for AI clusters like Cortex 2, and energy becomes the quiet enabler of autonomy and robotics. This isn’t about selling more cars next quarter. It’s about controlling throughput across energy, compute, and autonomy simultaneously. 🕰️ A historical note, for perspective only For perspective, not projection, it’s worth remembering how this stock has behaved before. In early 2013, $TSLA gapped up on the first trading day of the year, then printed seven consecutive red sessions, setting the low for the entire year. That same year finished +344%. I’m not suggesting repetition. I’m highlighting that early-year tape weakness has historically been a poor standalone signal for Tesla. 🎯 The contradiction that defines Tesla I’m seeing collapsing momentum scores, aggressive bearish analyst rhetoric, autonomy-driven narrative shocks, and at the same time, long-dated call accumulation and a monthly structure that refuses to break. That tension is Tesla. It always has been. 📌 My takeaway I’m watching $430–440 as the line that decides whether the bear case earns confirmation or whether this reset becomes fuel. Analysts can anchor at $25.28 if they want. Capital is telling a more complex story. 📢 Don’t miss out! Like, Repost and Follow me for exclusive setups, cutting-edge trends, and insights that move markets 🚀📈 I’m obsessed with hunting down the next big movers and sharing strategies that crush it. Let’s outsmart the market and stack those gains together! 🍀 Trade like a boss! Happy trading ahead, Cheers, BC 📈🚀🍀🍀🍀 @Tiger_comments @TigerPicks @TigerStars @TigerObserver @Daily_Discussion @TigerWire