[h2zizzle]

Not exactly. Word on the street is that Tesla stock was heavily short-sold at one time, as it was expected to be headed for bankruptcy. When it turned out to not be headed for bankruptcy, those who had shorted were forced to either close their positions (raising the stock price as their demand hit for shares hit the market) or cover (pay to keep their short agreements going) for an extended period of time. But it wasn't a one-time event; as the price rose, and time went on, more of those who'd shorted Tesla found their position untenable, which forced them to finally close, further raising the price.

Elon famously derided the investors who'd caused this situation. He was livid at them, and also at the SEC for allowing what he considered to be unfair, if not illegal, conduct on the part of short-sellers. A stock that is heavily short-sold can have its price drop to the point that financing is difficult to obtain, sounding the death knell for that business. But it looks like that came back to bite shorts when Tesla survived.

This is definitely a bit of a crackpot theory without some numerical analysis to back it up, but mindless "pure hype" seems a less compelling explanation for the valuation we see than financial/securities shenanigans, especially after what happened with Gamestop.

[jqpabc123]

"financial/securities shenanigans" = Pure hype

[h2zizzle]

No, they're quasi-legal positions, often between private parties and undisclosed to the public, whose stipulations require further positioning that can move markets in unexpected and unexplainable ways. Hype is emotional, this is reason, albeit flawed because of incomplete information. Tesla shorts reasoned that an electric car company, a sector segment that has never been successful, was doomed; they short-sold the stock expecting never to have to close their positions, as bankruptcy would result in cancellation of Tesla's shares. That didn't happen; they didn't understand that there was a demand for the kind of vehicle Tesla sold, how much money Musk was willing to pour into the company to keep it afloat, etc. So the price rise would be a result of reconciling their bad bet with the market.