From: "George W. Gregory" Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: Several items Date: 31 Dec 1999 23:10:25 -0800 First of all, CS is not the only selection method. There are many others, but CS is very well thought out and if you apply yourself you can do extremely well. True, it will not get you into the internets because of no earnings, but you can consistently make money if you apply the principles. Take my word for it, an internet type play comes along once in a blue moon. Secondly, there are four factors that go into EPS rank; percentage earnings increase or decrease last quarter vs. a year ago, the same with the previous quarter, the stability rank last quarter and the stability rank the quarter before (ALL vs. the previous year). The maximum % increase considered is 100%, so if a stocks earnings go from $ .10 to $ .30, it's still calculated at a maximum of 100%. Third: NEVER use stops either way. Figure out some way to get prices during the day if you're unable to get prices - but NEVER use stops. If you do for some reason have to use a stop, make it a "stop limit". Fourth: Never use limit orders (except stop limits and then only if you have to". If a stock looks good at $60, it is just as good at $60 1/4 or $60 1/2. I'm sure you planned to make more than a quarter or half on it anyway. I've seen many people miss out on good profits because of that 1/4 point. Happy New Year investing, tiger49r - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Applying classic Elder to current Canslim "M" Date: 01 Jan 1999 08:17:08 -0500 Walter, I saved this message till I can finish the book. This way the posts will make a little sense to me. I am very interested in Elder's philosophy. I am up to Trend Lines. I hope to finish the book over the weekend. So far I have come to realize two things. First, your time frame for the specific trade has to be clear, of course not all trades need to be the same time frame. Second, there has to be a clear cut plan for entry and exit. So far I like CANSLIM, it seems pretty straight forward. Ian is IMO CANSLIM with more clear cut rules. I would really like to be at the knowledge people like yourself and others on the list are at. I guess it takes time. Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Walter Stock > Sent: Sunday, December 27, 1998 9:44 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Applying classic Elder to current Canslim "M" > > > Hi Ronald, > > Many thanks for speeding things up and finding the material. > > I had been grinding through the earlier archive months, > but you have indeed found the meat of the series, > particularly v02-n317 and v02-320. > > Walter > > > Ronald J. Russell, Jr. wrote: > > > For those (like myself) who have been searching for the series > Walter referred to, there are some posts in v02.n291 through > v02.n294. The real meat of the series seems to be a little later > in v02.n317 through v02.n320. > > Ron > > > > - > > > > > - > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Several items Date: 01 Jan 1999 09:11:01 -0500 George, EPS is more complex than you describe, it also factors into WON's proprietary formula the five year earnings history. I disagree that earnings exceeding 100% in the two latest qtrs, or during the five years, would only count as a max of 100%. They would count at whatever growth they did, and then be ranked against all other stocks accordingly. The max value for WON's "EPS" is only 99 since this is a percentile value showing the percentage of other stocks that had lesser earnings values. It is also worth noting that the two most recent qtrs earnings are weighed more heavily than the 5 year history. I would disagree with never using limits or stops. A sell stop should always be determined at time of entry, preferably even before buying. Whether a hard stop is actually entered depends in large part on the investor's access to the mkt and his acct during the trading day as well as the investor's discipline in sticking to a mental stop. Limits also depend on an investor's access to the mkt. The ideal buy stop would also include the volume, thus permitting a two fold decision making (price and volume). Such is not possible unless you use a broker and have him enter the order only if both conditions are met. I would agree that limits are not appropriate on a highly liquid stock trading with an eighth spread. However, even here if you must enter the order before opening for execution on the open, a limit order provides protection in case the stock opens too high. In this case, it may often trade back down to your limit later in the day. Using limit orders when you trade small caps, which typically have a larger spread, makes sense, at least for me. I have frequently bot at the bid or a sixteenth higher, and sold at the offer or slightly below. Yes, at times I have missed an opportunity or had to adjust my price, but far more often than not, since the implementation of the Order Display Rules, I have been executed without the penalty of a large spread. Tom W -----Original Message----- Secondly, there are four factors that go into EPS rank; percentage earnings increase or decrease last quarter vs. a year ago, the same with the previous quarter, the stability rank last quarter and the stability rank the quarter before (ALL vs. the previous year). The maximum % increase considered is 100%, so if a stocks earnings go from $ .10 to $ .30, it's still calculated at a maximum of 100%. Third: NEVER use stops either way. Figure out some way to get prices during the day if you're unable to get prices - but NEVER use stops. If you do for some reason have to use a stop, make it a "stop limit". Fourth: Never use limit orders (except stop limits and then only if you have to". If a stock looks good at $60, it is just as good at $60 1/4 or $60 1/2. I'm sure you planned to make more than a quarter or half on it anyway. I've seen many people miss out on good profits because of that 1/4 point. Happy New Year investing, tiger49r - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: rolatzi Subject: [CANSLIM] Happy New Year Date: 01 Jan 1999 06:21:29 -0800 (PST) Hi guys, Let me add my sentiments for a happy, healthy and successful New Year. Let me be the first to add that this is the first day of the last year before we celebrate the new millennium. Ciao, rolatzi _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: RICHARD BARBITO Subject: [CANSLIM] (CANSLIM) TECH Date: 01 Jan 1999 09:43:00 -0500 I have noticed that Techne (TECH) broke out 12/18 on heavy volume. Since that day it has traded in a very tight range (heavy volume some days) and is going sideways. Any opinions? Put in a buy stop at 21 9/16? High for stock is 21 1/2, therefore if it trades higher you would get in on a breakout early. Thanks. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] (CANSLIM) TECH Date: 01 Jan 1999 09:56:09 -0500 Hi Richard, Since the breakout, it has been trading on unusually heavy volume with no further price advancement, despite the typical light volume during the holiday season. This would make me wait for further evidence of a volume driven breakout before entering any order. I also note that the latest qtr showed zero earnings growth despite a 37% gain in sales. It's possible this is a result of the acquisition of Genzyme, however if this pattern repeats in the Dec qtr just ended, it will show virtually no earnings growth for a second qtr, not a good sign for a further price gain. Despite not being in the top 5 of its group, it's CS elements are otherwise respectable. But if the Dec qtr fails to show substantial earnings growth, its EPS (currently at 86) could drop sharply and take it below 80. I also note that the concensus of analyst's forecasts is for a 5% drop in earnings year to year for the year ending June 99. This negative expectation is likely to hinder any expansion of its PE ratio even if earnings do improve (and they must improve over Q1 earnings of 17 cents or it will fall far short of even this reduced expectation). Tom W -----Original Message----- I have noticed that Techne (TECH) broke out 12/18 on heavy volume. Since that day it has traded in a very tight range (heavy volume some days) and is going sideways. Any opinions? Put in a buy stop at 21 9/16? High for stock is 21 1/2, therefore if it trades higher you would get in on a breakout early. Thanks. - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com (Jeff Salisbury) Subject: [CANSLIM] Changing your canslim subscription Date: 01 Jan 1999 08:00:02 -0700 This is a monthly posting to the CANLSLIM group. Frequently, people sign up for the canslim list and then are overwhelmed by the volume of the email. There are two remedies for this problem: 1) You can leave our group, or 2) you can switch to the digest version which "conglomerates" many canslim messages into one large message. To change your configuration, email a message to: majordomo@xmission.com The remove yourself from the canslim list, write in the body of the email: unsubscribe canslim To add yourself to the digest version of the canslim list, write in the body of the email: subscribe canslim-digest For general help with majordomo commands, write in the body of the email: help If you need further clarification, write me directly at: canslim-owner@lists.xmission.com Best Regards, Jeff Salisbury - CANSLIM list admin / owner - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] (CANSLIM) TECH Date: 01 Jan 1999 10:21:10 -0500 Would this be a High tight flag? > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tom Worley > Sent: Friday, January 01, 1999 9:56 AM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] (CANSLIM) TECH > > > Hi Richard, > > Since the breakout, it has been trading on unusually heavy volume with > no further price advancement, despite the typical light volume during > the holiday season. This would make me wait for further evidence of a > volume driven breakout before entering any order. I also note that the > latest qtr showed zero earnings growth despite a 37% gain in sales. > It's possible this is a result of the acquisition of Genzyme, however > if this pattern repeats in the Dec qtr just ended, it will show > virtually no earnings growth for a second qtr, not a good sign for a > further price gain. > > Despite not being in the top 5 of its group, it's CS elements are > otherwise respectable. But if the Dec qtr fails to show substantial > earnings growth, its EPS (currently at 86) could drop sharply and take > it below 80. > > I also note that the concensus of analyst's forecasts is for a 5% drop > in earnings year to year for the year ending June 99. This negative > expectation is likely to hinder any expansion of its PE ratio even if > earnings do improve (and they must improve over Q1 earnings of 17 > cents or it will fall far short of even this reduced expectation). > > Tom W > > -----Original Message----- > From: RICHARD BARBITO > To: canslim@xmission.com > Date: Friday, January 01, 1999 9:43 AM > Subject: [CANSLIM] (CANSLIM) TECH > > > I have noticed that Techne (TECH) broke out 12/18 on heavy volume. > Since that day it has traded in a very tight range (heavy volume some > days) and is going sideways. Any opinions? Put in a buy stop at 21 > 9/16? High for stock is 21 1/2, therefore if it trades higher you > would > get in on a breakout early. Thanks. > > - > > > > - > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "james sullivan" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Several items Date: 01 Jan 1999 10:14:48 -0500 > Third: NEVER use stops either way. Figure out some way to get prices >during the day if you're unable to get prices - but NEVER use stops. If you >do for some reason have to use a stop, make it a "stop limit". okay i'll bite ;^) "NEVER use..." <--- could you explain this?? - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "james sullivan" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Several items Date: 01 Jan 1999 10:24:58 -0500 >The ideal buy >stop would also include the volume, thus permitting a two fold >decision making (price and volume). Such is not possible unless you >use a broker and have him enter the order only if both conditions are >met. Do you think a time will come that orders will be able to be contingent on volume,orders, through an E*Trade, for instance?? This would solve a MAJOR issue for me...not that I'm unhappy with my performance...it just would be nice to know, in advance, that your leaving(?) the base on increased volume. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Several items Date: 01 Jan 1999 10:49:14 -0500 Thus far, I have seen no indications of the industry adapting to this type of buy stop order. I have known many brokers that couldn't handle the concept of a combo price-volume buy order, so doubtful the industry could adopt such a concept. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- >The ideal buy >stop would also include the volume, thus permitting a two fold >decision making (price and volume). Such is not possible unless you >use a broker and have him enter the order only if both conditions are >met. Do you think a time will come that orders will be able to be contingent on volume,orders, through an E*Trade, for instance?? This would solve a MAJOR issue for me...not that I'm unhappy with my performance...it just would be nice to know, in advance, that your leaving(?) the base on increased volume. - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tony Austin" Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: ADVP (almost canslim) :-) Date: 01 Jan 1999 10:57:57 -0500 TC2000 doesn't have all the canslim criteria to search by, so I have created scans that come as close as I think I can get. While I have not checked all of the respective criteria, ADVP looks good with the exception of a low RS (62). While some of you will disagree with me, there are occasions where I will accept a lower RS when other conditions are in place. However, I am bringing it up (for those who wish to take a look) because yesterday it broke upward above short term resistance, and a seven month high on large volume. While the RS number is low, it rebounded very well from the October correction reaching a high of 33 1/8 on 11/3. It has consolidated nicely since breaking upward to 35 yesterday. Technicals look very positive. Next significant line of resistance is around 42, that represents a 20% window of possible opportunity prior to the next consolidation.....maybe. Don't know a thing. ______________________________ Tony email me at tony@radixinc.com send me a note via icq at 14719809 You can get icq at http://icq.com/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tony Austin" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Several items Date: 01 Jan 1999 11:02:29 -0500 >Do you think a time will come that orders will be able to be contingent >on volume,orders, through an E*Trade, for instance?? E*Trade, the new version, has a helpful alert tool. You can set up to 25 alerts with varying different criteria, which include both volume and price conditions. While this isn't an order, it can notify you when these conditions are met to place your order. You can set it up to notify you via email, and maybe even fax. Nice tool that I just started using, have been encouraged with it's possibilities. Don't know a thing. ______________________________ Tony Austin email me at tony@radixinc.com send me a note via icq at 14719809 You can get icq at http://icq.com/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Re: ADVP (almost canslim) :-) Date: 01 Jan 1999 15:24:22 -0500 Tony, As a chart it looks OK (to me) but the group is Med/Dent Svcs. By CANSLIM definitions, right now there are some better groups. Last week 40 this week 40. According to Roger on HGS there is no group speed. Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tony Austin > Sent: Friday, January 01, 1999 10:58 AM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: ADVP (almost canslim) :-) > > > TC2000 doesn't have all the canslim criteria to search by, so I > have created > scans that come as close as I think I can get. While I have not > checked all > of the respective criteria, ADVP looks good with the exception of a low RS > (62). While some of you will disagree with me, there are > occasions where I > will accept a lower RS when other conditions are in place. > > However, I am bringing it up (for those who wish to take a look) because > yesterday it broke upward above short term resistance, and a seven month > high on large volume. While the RS number is low, it rebounded very well > from the October correction reaching a high of 33 1/8 on 11/3. It has > consolidated nicely since breaking upward to 35 yesterday. Technicals look > very positive. Next significant line of resistance is around 42, that > represents a 20% window of possible opportunity prior to the next > consolidation.....maybe. > > Don't know a thing. > ______________________________ > Tony > email me at tony@radixinc.com > send me a note via icq at 14719809 > You can get icq at http://icq.com/ > > > > > - > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: [CANSLIM] Heavy intellectual lifting. Date: 01 Jan 1999 17:40:57 -0500 For those of you who attend to much that is not "technical" to investing, you will want to take a look at one of the best conservative policy and economic sites: http://Brookings.edu There are a couple of current articles on deflation and the euro. For some of the best conservative reading other than the content found in Brookings think tank, you will want to look at this think tank: http://aei.com The latter, the American Enterprise Institute, has absolutely some of the best conservative thought available. May all you become better investors and traders this coming year. I hope this year to have some technical-stocks that will make all of us some money. Connie Mack - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ToothDr1@aol.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Re:Trading styles Date: 01 Jan 1999 18:04:16 EST I have been on this list for quite some time and have learned much from the gray-bearded gurus for which i thank truly. I for one have never traded sucessfully until 1998 although I have tried to fully understand canslim. I now realize that there are few canslim purists, even on this board. Personal bias has to enter the picture, allowing one to develope his or her own trading style. I know at least one other member, "Dr. John A", who uses Advanced Get software for Technical analysis of the market. Connie uses his own brand of technicial analysis which works for him and his tips have helped me a great deal. I currently am more sucessful trading using the advance Get software and keeping my eyes peeled on canslim candidates which can be evaluated for winners. This works for me. The reason I am posting is to mention Dr Bill Williams and his book New Trading Dimensions. I have read the book several times and many good ideas are there for entry and exit of good candidates. I have the good fortune to have a female friend who is a professional intraday trader who manages one account of many,of a very wealthy individual. I mentioned Dr Williams and the book including his use of the alligator(a system of moving averages) the AOS and fractels etc etc to her and she told me that she attended his seminars, has his tapes and paper traded his methods extensively. Its her opionion that although much of his philosophy, as it applys to trading may be beneficial, his overall methods just plain don't work. It may be just her, and after her own personality is entered into the equation the system can't work. She has a similiar opinion of Robert M and the Dynamic Trader. She subscribed to his service, and doing careful reasearch discovered that many times he didn't enter the very trades he was recommending. I just wanted the board members to realize that this is a great group and although we seek the holy grail of trading. THERE IS NO EASY WAY. Thanks for listening to my pontification. Back to lurking Doc Jim - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Dean Edwards" Subject: Fw: [CANSLIM] Re:Trading styles Date: 02 Jan 1999 15:45:10 +1300 Thank you for posting those interesting comments on this matter regarding trading styles. There was a recent article in Street com where the SEC was investigating bogus advertising claims made by a Day Trading firm. They were making false statements on how successful their clients were making money, day trading with this particular firm. After careful investigation it was discovered by the SEC that 75 out of a total of 76 people, were actually losing money day trading. Only one person was successfully making money day trading with this firm. Apparently he was an insider, who was actually working for the company. Caveat Emptor - Let the buyer be aware! Careful research should be mandatory. -----Original Message----- canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Its her opionion that >although much of his philosophy, as it applys to trading may be beneficial, >his overall methods just plain don't work. It may be just her, and after her >own personality is entered into the equation the system can't work. She has a >similiar opinion of Robert M and the Dynamic Trader. She subscribed to his >service, and doing careful reasearch discovered that many times he didn't >enter the very trades he was recommending. >I just wanted the board members to realize that this is a great group and >although we seek the holy grail of trading. THERE IS NO EASY WAY. > >Thanks for listening to my pontification. Back to lurking > >Doc Jim > >- > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "George W. Gregory" Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: My memo on 1/1/99 Date: 01 Jan 1999 20:11:02 -0800 Tom: I happen to know that 100% is the maximum used in computing EPS rank. Yes, you are correct that the five year earnings are important, but, as you know, there are many new issues with only 2 or 3 years earnings history. Believe me, 100% is the maximum earnings differential taken into consideration when figuring EPS rank. I have seen many, many people get their head handed to them using stops. As you know, the minute the stock hits the stop price. the order becomes a market order. There are times trading will be halted and open far below your stop price. It sets your order off which may be 10 points lower than your stop. That is why I mentioned "stop limits" as an alternative. I realize that at times it is very difficult to keep right on top of your investments, however, there are small, hand=held units on the market which will allow you to keep closer track of your stocks. I would never buy a stock on the opening. I'd rather wait for the opening and then decide what to do. I've never known Bill O'Neil to buy (or sell) prior to the opening. I reiterate my statement about buying or selling at the market. Again, I say that if it's worth 60, it's worth 60 1/4 or 60 1/2. You mention thinly traded stocks. If you're dealing in these, you be the judge. When IBD institutes several new groups, it will be interesting to see what happens. One will be Internet-E*Commerce, another Internet-ISP's and so on. I don't know that it will make a big difference because none of the internet stocks are earning money. That does away with C and A. Happy New Year to all. tiger49er - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Happy New Year, and small caps KICK BUTT Date: 02 Jan 1999 05:14:34 GMT On Thu, 31 Dec 1998 16:38:39 -0500, you wrote: :Don't have the final figures yet, but I sure like the way the Russell :2000 finished the year. Looks like a 2.5% gain for New Year's Eve, :again beating the rest of the indexes. My only regret is not being :more aggressive with my #1 buy, would have made me over 10% today :alone. : :At this point, appears that R2000 is passing thru resistance and ready :to strive for new records early in 1999, which would fit with the :models. : :Tom W : Unfortunately, it's only one day's performance and I don't think it can be considered a trend yet. The R2000, if I'm not mistaken, was the only index to show a loss (-3%) for 1998. Midcaps did OK Thursday too.=20 What models are you referring to, Tom? Dan - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "james sullivan" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Heavy intellectual lifting. Date: 02 Jan 1999 05:34:42 -0500 > http://Brookings.edu > >There are a couple of current articles on deflation and the euro. I love to read anything on deflation!...had to add the www to the url > http://aei.com > >The latter, the American Enterprise Institute, has absolutely some of >the best conservative thought available. This url brought me to Advanced Energy (?)....that's power conversion.....for AEI, it's http://www.aei.org Thank you for the lifting, Connie! A prosperous new year to you!! - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: My memo on 1/1/99 Date: 02 Jan 1999 07:04:51 -0500 George, Can you share your source on the 100% aspect? I realize WON uses a proprietary formula for the EPS ranking, however this is the first I've heard of this in nearly 8 years of using CANSLIM and several years of working with and being trained by WON staffers. I do agree with you on the issue of using sell stop limits vs simpler sell stops. In running a back office and executing all trades for a securities firm, I have seen occasions in which the brokers had entered substantial sell stop orders on a NYSE stock, only to see the mkt (or floor specialist) drop the mkt sharply, take out their sell orders, then rally right back up. And their sell price (since they didn't use a limit) was several pts below their stop price. Even on a Naz stock, where there isn't a single "floor specialist" who can see all stop orders, there are enough investors, including institutionals, that look at charts and determine a similar sell point that you can hit a critical price where an avalanche of sell orders can occur. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- Tom: I happen to know that 100% is the maximum used in computing EPS rank. Yes, you are correct that the five year earnings are important, but, as you know, there are many new issues with only 2 or 3 years earnings history. Believe me, 100% is the maximum earnings differential taken into consideration when figuring EPS rank. I have seen many, many people get their head handed to them using stops. As you know, the minute the stock hits the stop price. the order becomes a market order. There are times trading will be halted and open far below your stop price. It sets your order off which may be 10 points lower than your stop. That is why I mentioned "stop limits" as an alternative - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] DGO New Highs Date: 02 Jan 1999 07:08:03 -0500 Don't know if I will be able to post the weekly list as DGO apparently has a glich and the programmer is working on it. The list there shows as the new list, but is actually from the prior week. They are aware of the problem and working on it, but can't say when it will be fixed. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Happy New Year, and small caps KICK BUTT Date: 02 Jan 1999 07:24:30 -0500 Hi Dan, It's more than just a day actually, for the week the Dow was down 0.3%; Nasdaq was up 1.3%; and the Russell 2000 was up 4.0%. S&P 100 and 500 were down 1.0% and up 0.2% respectively. I agree that the small caps continued their under performance throughout 1998, however my experience (and historical patterns) has been that the January/February period is often favorable to them. When the new bull mkt started (or bull rally in a bear mkt) late in the year, the R2000 failed to move back to the highs set back in July, unlike the rest of the indexes. This continued the pattern we have seen for a number of years now. Liquidity, not earnings, has been the calling card for the institutional players for a long time. But as I read "M", CANSLIM, economics, and a bunch of other stuff, a stable mkt without high volatility (note that VIX once again moving back up, a plus 15.1% last week to 25.41 which is not a good sign) could result in more favorable conditions for the small caps. For that to succeed, they needed to break thru resistance at 420. They did that Friday, and however 1999 fares, it was a positive way to end the year even if holiday lightened trading means the trend can't be trusted. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- On Thu, 31 Dec 1998 16:38:39 -0500, you wrote: :Don't have the final figures yet, but I sure like the way the Russell :2000 finished the year. Looks like a 2.5% gain for New Year's Eve, :again beating the rest of the indexes. My only regret is not being :more aggressive with my #1 buy, would have made me over 10% today :alone. : :At this point, appears that R2000 is passing thru resistance and ready :to strive for new records early in 1999, which would fit with the :models. : :Tom W : Unfortunately, it's only one day's performance and I don't think it can be considered a trend yet. The R2000, if I'm not mistaken, was the only index to show a loss (-3%) for 1998. Midcaps did OK Thursday too. What models are you referring to, Tom? Dan - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Heavy intellectual lifting. Date: 02 Jan 1999 07:39:50 -0500 James-- Thanks for correcting the AEI site. Connie Mack james sullivan wrote: > > http://Brookings.edu > > > >There are a couple of current articles on deflation and the euro. > > I love to read anything on deflation!...had to add the www to > the url > > > http://aei.com > > > >The latter, the American Enterprise Institute, has absolutely some of > >the best conservative thought available. > > This url brought me to Advanced Energy (?)....that's > power conversion.....for AEI, it's http://www.aei.org > > Thank you for the lifting, Connie! A prosperous > new year to you!! > > - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com (Jeff Salisbury) Subject: [CANSLIM] Sending large files to the canslim group Date: 02 Jan 1999 08:00:02 -0700 Everyone, There are times when you may wish to share large files with our group (i.e. gif, jpeg, spreadsheets, etc). Our list is configured to reject large postings (even if they are properly encoded) since the sheer volume has caused problems in the past. As an alternative, we have provided an anonymous ftp site. To provide your file to the group, please follow these instructions: 1. Send your file to: ftp://ftp.xmission.com/pub/users/m/mcjathan/incoming/ If you need some help doing this step, there are ftp instructions below. 2. Send mail to me directly at "owner-canslim@xmission.com" telling me the name of the file that you uploaded. I will move the file from the incoming directory, to the canslim directory where people will be able to download your file. 3. After I notify you that the file has been moved to the canslim directory, you should send an email to the canslim group describing your file, and its URL (i.e. ftp://ftp.xmission.com/pub/users/m/mcjathan/GreatBoom.gif). Although this may seem unwieldy at first, it really isn't too bad and it solves more problems than it creates. You should note that I do not monitor my email on the weekends as closely as during the week. Therefore, steps 2-3 may take longer over a weekend. Best Regards, Jeff Salisbury =========================================================================== FTP Instructions: 1. Using Netscape, go to the URL: ftp://ftp.xmission.com/pub/users/m/mcjathan/incoming/ 2. On the Netscape "File" menu, select "Upload File..." This will open a file selection widget on your hard-drive. Select the file you wish to upload and hit the "Ok" button. At this point, your file will be uploaded. 3. Eventhough your file has been uploaded, you will not be able to see the file in your netscape browser. The reason for this is that the "incoming" directory is set to write-only for security reasons. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: [CANSLIM] More heavy lifting [Connie Mack] Date: 02 Jan 1999 10:12:57 -0500 Am surprised how many members have told me that they do like heavy intellectual lifting. Here is an essay on Adam Smith's "invisible hand" and the stock market. http://www.intellectualcapital.com/issues/98/1224/icbusiness3.asp If you're interested in other mainly conservative "think tanks," try this site: http://www.libertymatters.org/think.htm Almost every site will have a financial section. A couple of members have asked me if there is a way to avoid having to copy every URL manually. There is. Any URL window can be copied and pasted. E.g., once you have an address in the URL, you can click on it until becomes selected [turns blue]. Go to the Edit button and click Copy. From there you can paste this URL anywhere you like. With the "http://" prefix included, anyone can just click and the site will appear. The pasted URL will not appear on your screen as selected [blue], but it will on anyone whom you sent it to. You can see if everything is as you want it by sending a copy to yourself. The copy you receive should appear as selected. Connie Mack - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Happy New Year Date: 02 Jan 1999 05:20:18 GMT On Fri, 1 Jan 1999 06:21:29 -0800 (PST), you wrote: :Hi guys, : :Let me add my sentiments for a happy, healthy and successful New Year. : Let me be the first to add that this is the first day of the last :year before we celebrate the new millennium. :Ciao, :rolatzi Well, I think you can start celebrating now ("any excuse to party!"). Interesting thing I heard today is that there is some controversy when the next millenium starts. You see 1/1/2000 is not really the start of the next millenium, but rather 1/1/2001 is! So, you will spend the whole year 1/1/2000 to 12/31/2000 wondering whether you should indeed be waiting another year before popping the corks, etc., etc. Hell, may as well start a year early a year early. The infamous Y2K zero hour WILL be a year early. Computers are dumb, aren't they? Happy New Year all! Dan - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: rolatzi Subject: [CANSLIM] State of the Market Date: 02 Jan 1999 07:41:07 -0800 (PST) Index,Date, Close, Hi, Lo, Vol, MACD !DJ30,12/01/1998,9214.66,8934.52,9133.54,104.50,130.54 !DJ30,12/02/1998,9154.40,8922.94,9064.54, 92.35,130.31 !DJ30,12/03/1998,9112.69,8839.78,8879.68, 78.46,126.69 !DJ30,12/04/1998,9078.70,8873.76,9016.14, 69.61,125.37 !DJ30,12/07/1998,9146.93,8946.11,9070.47, 53.31,124.77 !DJ30,12/08/1998,9153.63,8903.37,9027.98, 79.24,123.21,Reversal !DJ30,12/09/1998,9138.18,8881.23,9009.19, 80.31,121.15,Compress !DJ30,12/10/1998,9034.42,8795.24,8841.58, 76.63,116.17 !DJ30,12/11/1998,8916.24,8680.41,8821.76, 71.70,111.00 !DJ30,12/14/1998,8868.10,8610.63,8695.60, 71.52,103.90 !DJ30,12/15/1998,8878.40,8614.75,8823.30, 77.34, 99.29 !DJ30,12/16/1998,8922.94,8675.52,8790.60, 70.31, 94.29 !DJ30,12/17/1998,8959.76,8725.21,8875.82, 71.75, 90.92 !DJ30,12/18/1998,9012.28,8789.31,8903.63, 95.15, 88.07 !DJ30,12/21/1998,9150.54,8874.28,8988.85, 77.84, 86.66 !DJ30,12/22/1998,9122.99,8909.29,9044.46, 58.51, 86.08 !DJ30,12/23/1998,9255.84,9022.58,9202.03, 58.32, 87.95 !DJ30,12/24/1998,9289.57,9146.42,9217.99, 20.21, 89.69 !DJ30,12/28/1998,9330.50,9133.54,9226.75, 45.91, 91.16 !DJ30,12/29/1998,9375.30,9152.34,9320.98, 51.15, 93.83 !DJ30,12/30/1998,9326.39,9268.20,9274.64, 54.82, 95.23,Compress !DJ30,12/31/1998,9342.61,9107.28,9181.43, 61.97, 94.67,Reversal !NYA ,12/01/1998,573.74,564.56,573.33, 7.88, 7.10 !NYA ,12/02/1998,573.33,566.29,571.79, 7.30, 7.20 !NYA ,12/03/1998,573.84,563.14,563.45, 8.03, 7.14,Reversal !NYA ,12/04/1998,573.64,563.45,573.49, 7.12, 7.23 !NYA ,12/07/1998,577.72,573.19,577.33, 6.60, 7.37 !NYA ,12/08/1998,579.36,571.38,574.92, 7.28, 7.43,Reversal !NYA ,12/09/1998,575.94,572.30,574.79, 7.00, 7.47 !NYA ,12/10/1998,574.79,565.35,566.08, 7.53, 7.34,Compress !NYA ,12/11/1998,566.08,559.72,564.82, 6.88, 7.19 !NYA ,12/14/1998,564.82,552.83,554.53, 7.02, 6.85,Compress !NYA ,12/15/1998,562.74,554.53,562.74, 7.81, 6.67,Up 1% wVol !NYA ,12/16/1998,564.31,559.95,562.89, 7.36, 6.49 !NYA ,12/17/1998,570.16,562.84,570.15, 7.44, 6.44,Up 1% wVol !NYA ,12/18/1998,572.54,568.77,572.07, 8.42, 6.40 !NYA ,12/21/1998,581.01,571.79,577.70, 7.45, 6.45 !NYA ,12/22/1998,580.82,574.13,578.75, 7.45, 6.49 !NYA ,12/23/1998,589.58,578.66,588.95, 6.88, 6.68 !NYA ,12/24/1998,589.94,587.82,589.07, 2.47, 6.84 !NYA ,12/28/1998,591.05,587.18,589.01, 5.33, 6.97,Reversal !NYA ,12/29/1998,597.05,587.32,597.05, 5.89, 7.20,Up 1% wVol !NYA ,12/30/1998,597.86,593.68,594.27, 6.00, 7.35,Reversal !NYA ,12/31/1998,597.82,592.70,595.81, 7.55, 7.49 !COMP,12/01/1998,2003.80,1924.10,2003.70, 1.03, 33.77 !COMP,12/02/1998,2005.70,1973.20,1995.20, 0.99, 35.23 !COMP,12/03/1998,2012.70,1954.30,1954.30, 1.05, 35.79,Reversal !COMP,12/04/1998,2003.10,1975.00,2003.10, 0.89, 37.03 !COMP,12/07/1998,2040.80,2007.30,2040.60, 0.81, 38.70 !COMP,12/08/1998,2060.98,2018.16,2034.75, 0.92, 40.02,Reversal !COMP,12/09/1998,2052.70,2031.80,2050.40, 0.86, 41.39 !COMP,12/10/1998,2058.38,2015.73,2015.96, 0.87, 41.95,Reversal !COMP,12/11/1998,2035.00,2004.90,2029.30, 0.79, 42.57 !COMP,12/14/1998,2029.30,1962.00,1966.90, 0.75, 41.98 !COMP,12/15/1998,2012.60,1981.20,2012.60, 0.77, 42.10,Up 1% wVol !COMP,12/16/1998,2027.10,1996.80,2009.30, 0.85, 42.05,Reversal !COMP,12/17/1998,2043.80,2014.70,2043.80, 0.80, 42.46 !COMP,12/18/1998,2086.10,2055.80,2086.10, 0.91, 43.43,Up 1% wVol !COMP,12/21/1998,2143.80,2104.10,2138.00, 0.96, 45.07,Up 1% wVol !COMP,12/22/1998,2144.60,2105.50,2120.90, 0.91, 46.15 !COMP,12/23/1998,2172.50,2134.20,2172.50, 0.97, 47.87,Up 1% wVol !COMP,12/24/1998,2171.30,2162.60,2163.00, 0.45, 49.15 !COMP,12/28/1998,2190.10,2163.00,2180.30, 0.87, 50.47 !COMP,12/29/1998,2186.10,2161.80,2181.70, 0.92, 51.55 !COMP,12/30/1998,2196.60,2160.90,2166.90, 0.93, 52.15,Reversal !COMP,12/31/1998,2200.63,2165.74,2192.69, 0.89, 52.97 !DJ20,12/01/1998,3089.36,2977.77,3047.84, 14.07, 42.32 !DJ20,12/02/1998,3119.46,3022.43,3101.95, 13.25, 45.32 !DJ20,12/03/1998,3123.87,3022.15,3039.15, 11.73, 46.96 !DJ20,12/04/1998,3116.61,3028.64,3052.25, 9.19, 48.62 !DJ20,12/07/1998,3189.79,3051.11,3115.83,15.82, 51.13,Up 1% wVol !DJ20,12/08/1998,3187.45,3066.52,3105.45, 14.62, 53.18 !DJ20,12/09/1998,3131.14,3024.87,3063.80, 11.45, 54.28 !DJ20,12/10/1998,3091.18,2993.09,3012.55, 8.75, 54.34 !DJ20,12/11/1998,3010.99,2886.43,2929.51, 15.30, 52.92,Compress !DJ20,12/14/1998,2949.15,2835.31,2858.66, 10.93, 50.37 !DJ20,12/15/1998,2919.65,2815.33,2883.32, 11.94, 48.39 !DJ20,12/16/1998,2933.40,2840.24,2869.82, 11.77, 46.28 !DJ20,12/17/1998,3003.47,2862.30,2970.64,15.34, 46.00,Up 1% wVol !DJ20,12/18/1998,3045.80,2934.96,3009.04, 14.69, 46.32 !DJ20,12/21/1998,3088.06,2987.90,3025.52, 11.66, 46.82 !DJ20,12/22/1998,3084.69,2950.79,3036.16, 12.18, 47.39 !DJ20,12/23/1998,3102.85,2999.05,3054.59, 9.39, 48.14 !DJ20,12/24/1998,3081.06,3020.59,3044.08, 3.09, 48.58 !DJ20,12/28/1998,3098.70,3005.28,3040.83, 8.44, 48.85,Reversal !DJ20,12/29/1998,3098.18,3012.55,3066.39, 7.19, 49.45 !DJ20,12/30/1998,3130.10,3065.36,3129.84,11.32, 50.98,Up 1% wVol !DJ20,12/31/1998,3200.94,3082.09,3149.30, 9.06, 52.62 _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: My memo on 1/1/99 Date: 02 Jan 1999 08:50:12 -0800 That doesn't make any sense statistically, since all co's doing better than 100% SQLY will be bunched up at rank 99. Makes comparisons between them meaningless. IBD's rank is a nonparametric percentile ranking statistic where the best number gets a 100 and the worst gets a zero. It doesn't matter what the actual earnings # is, i.e. the worst could be -500% and the best could be +400%, they still get a 0 and 100 score respectively. It's not impossible to get 5-yr earnings on 2 or 3 year old co's; I do it all the time. In many cases data from before they went public is available; in other cases when this is not avalable use you can use what you have and just have less data points in the trend. After all it's just a fitted regression and all you need for that is two data points (which of course I don't recommend doing). At 08:11 PM 1/1/99 -0800, you wrote: >Tom: > > I happen to know that 100% is the maximum used in computing EPS rank. Yes, >you are correct that the five year earnings are important, but, as you know, >there are many new issues with only 2 or 3 years earnings history. Believe >me, 100% is the maximum earnings differential taken into consideration when >figuring EPS rank. > I have seen many, many people get their head handed to them using stops. >As you know, the minute the stock hits the stop price. the order becomes a >market order. There are times trading will be halted and open far below your >stop price. It sets your order off which may be 10 points lower than your >stop. That is why I mentioned "stop limits" as an alternative. I realize >that at times it is very difficult to keep right on top of your investments, >however, there are small, hand=held units on the market which will allow you >to keep closer track of your stocks. > I would never buy a stock on the opening. I'd rather wait for the opening >and then decide what to do. I've never known Bill O'Neil to buy (or sell) >prior to the opening. I reiterate my statement about buying or selling at >the market. Again, I say that if it's worth 60, it's worth 60 1/4 or 60 1/2. >You mention thinly traded stocks. If you're dealing in these, you be the >judge. > When IBD institutes several new groups, it will be interesting to see what >happens. One will be Internet-E*Commerce, another Internet-ISP's and so on. >I don't know that it will make a big difference because none of the internet >stocks are earning money. That does away with C and A. > Happy New Year to all. > >tiger49er > >- > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Reid Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Happy New Year, and small caps KICK BUTT Date: 02 Jan 1999 12:56:51 -0800 some small caps have been kicking butt since october. I bought a small cap mutual fund that was pretty beat up on Oct 12. and as of yesterday it is up 36%. I consider that to be kicking butt. David Tom Worley wrote: > Hi Dan, > > It's more than just a day actually, for the week the Dow was down > 0.3%; Nasdaq was up 1.3%; and the Russell 2000 was up 4.0%. S&P > 100 and 500 were down 1.0% and up 0.2% respectively. > > I agree that the small caps continued their under performance > throughout 1998, however my experience (and historical patterns) > has been that the January/February period is often favorable to > them. When the new bull mkt started (or bull rally in a bear mkt) > late in the year, the R2000 failed to move back to the highs set > back in July, unlike the rest of the indexes. This continued the > pattern we have seen for a number of years now. Liquidity, not > earnings, has been the calling card for the institutional players > for a long time. > > But as I read "M", CANSLIM, economics, and a bunch of other > stuff, a stable mkt without high volatility (note that VIX once > again moving back up, a plus 15.1% last week to 25.41 which is > not a good sign) could result in more favorable conditions for > the small caps. For that to succeed, they needed to break thru > resistance at 420. They did that Friday, and however 1999 fares, > it was a positive way to end the year even if holiday lightened > trading means the trend can't be trusted. > > Tom W > stkguru@netside.net > ICQ # 5568838 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dan Musicant > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Date: Saturday, January 02, 1999 12:15 AM > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Happy New Year, and small caps KICK BUTT > > On Thu, 31 Dec 1998 16:38:39 -0500, you wrote: > > :Don't have the final figures yet, but I sure like the way the > Russell > :2000 finished the year. Looks like a 2.5% gain for New Year's > Eve, > :again beating the rest of the indexes. My only regret is not > being > :more aggressive with my #1 buy, would have made me over 10% > today > :alone. > : > :At this point, appears that R2000 is passing thru resistance and > ready > :to strive for new records early in 1999, which would fit with > the > :models. > : > :Tom W > : > Unfortunately, it's only one day's performance and I don't think > it can > be considered a trend yet. The R2000, if I'm not mistaken, was > the only > index to show a loss (-3%) for 1998. Midcaps did OK Thursday too. > > What models are you referring to, Tom? > > Dan > > - > > - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Craig Griffin Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Happy New Year, and small caps KICK BUTT Date: 02 Jan 1999 15:07:40 -0500 At 12:56 PM 1/2/99 -0800, you wrote: >some small caps have been kicking butt since october. >I bought a small cap mutual fund that was pretty beat up on Oct 12. >and as of yesterday it is up 36%. >I consider that to be kicking butt. In the time frame since October 12th: the large cap industrials (S&P500 up 25%) have been lagging the small caps (Russell 2000 up 28%) which have been lagging the large cap technology/growth (NASDAQ up 41%). Your fund is doing quite well relative to its benchmark (the Russell 2000) in the time frame you specified, but it has not kept up with the NASDAQ. This is not to say that the NASDAQ will continue to lead, the Russell 2000 advance looks powerful this week. But only time will tell if it is sustainable. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: [CANSLIM] short sales Date: 02 Jan 1999 15:43:29 -0500 Hi, Does anyone know of any books that describe the proper way to short. Thanks Charlie - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "The Jacksons" Subject: [CANSLIM] My Breakout Watchlist Date: 02 Jan 1999 15:48:49 -0500 Hello All, On my breakout watchlist for monday are; APEX, CELL, FYII, TCPS, BSYS, MMGR, RCGI, UNBC, LM, SSW, PPDI. Will consider a buy on high volume price advance. Any comments on these? Thanks, Mark - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "The Jacksons" Subject: [CANSLIM] My Breakout Watchlist Date: 02 Jan 1999 15:48:49 -0500 Hello All, On my breakout watchlist for monday are; APEX, CELL, FYII, TCPS, BSYS, MMGR, RCGI, UNBC, LM, SSW, PPDI. Will consider a buy on high volume price advance. Any comments on these? Thanks, Mark - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] short sales Date: 02 Jan 1999 20:52:18 GMT On Sat, 2 Jan 1999 15:43:29 -0500, you wrote: :Hi, :Does anyone know of any books that describe the proper way to short. :Thanks :Charlie : You can try Stan Weinstein's "How to Profit in Bull and Bear Markets".=20 Dan - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Brooke Besser" Subject: [CANSLIM] Brooke Besser introduction Date: 02 Jan 1999 14:46:53 PST Hello, My name is Brooke Besser and I live in Denver, CO. I started reading William O'neil's book several years ago and have recently picked it back up. My biggest question at this point is where can you find data on the internet to support the CANSLIM methodology? I would like to be looking at this data as I read through the book. Thanks ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: [CANSLIM] some non-canslim stocks Date: 02 Jan 1999 17:09:14 -0800 Here are two lists from a couple of sources. I scanned a list of about 300+ charts that were the result of a Quotes Plus scan, this first list are the ones I thought looked constructive out of those 300, either immediate buys or worth watching for the next few weeks - Amtran (AMTR) Aspect ASDV Alza Cybex CBXC Check Point CHKPF Ford F Imax IMAXF Breakout from excellent C&H formation Ionay Lafarge LAF Telecom-TCI LBTYA Neomagic NMGC Office Depot ODP Peregrine PRGN List 2 is from a couple of year end business shows I saw this weekend, picks from some of the guests for 1999. Probably suitable for longer term conservative type accounts. CPQ Staples SPLS mentioned by several Ford AOL Citigroup Rite Aid Kansas City Southern AMAT Nationwide Financial EDS Carnival Cruise Dollar General T Rowe Price BMCS - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "anthony boone" Subject: [CANSLIM] OFF TOPIC - WARRANTS Date: 02 Jan 1999 19:25:05 -0500 Hi, I am considering 'warrants" as an investment. If you guys know something, have had experiences with warrants, have an opinion, anything? please respond. Thanks anthony boone boonean@nwga.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dbphoenix Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Brooke Besser introduction Date: 02 Jan 1999 17:46:10 -0800 (PST) <> If you mean data that will help you use canslim, check the Mailbag at my website and use the Find function on your Edit menu or [Ctrl+F] with "source" or "resource" (without the quotes) and you'll get a number of places on the Net that will help you, as well as books, journals, newspapers, etc. Answers to any other questions you may have about stops or charts or whatever can be found using the same functions. Other pages, including the Journal (accessible through the Workshop), also have links. If you have any trouble, just let me know. --Db == "Lessons are repeated until they are learned." http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/ _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: carolreynolds@juno.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Stop-limit Date: 02 Jan 1999 18:53:45 -0700 Would someone explain what a stop-limit sell order is? ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Brooke Besser introduction Date: 02 Jan 1999 22:14:28 -0500 Hi, Welcome to the list. This page refers to a lot of other pages. Hope it helps. http://www.investorama.com/canslim.html Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Brooke Besser > Sent: Saturday, January 02, 1999 5:47 PM > To: canslim@xmission.com > Subject: [CANSLIM] Brooke Besser introduction > > > Hello, > > My name is Brooke Besser and I live in Denver, CO. I started reading > William O'neil's book several years ago and have recently picked it back > up. My biggest question at this point is where can you find data on the > internet to support the CANSLIM methodology? I would like to be looking > at this data as I read through the book. > > Thanks > > ______________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com > > > > - > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Stop-limit Date: 02 Jan 1999 22:20:44 -0500 Hi, Dont know if this is what you need but I copied this from the E-Trade instruction page. Stop Limit Order The stop limit order can be used to buy or sell. It is a regular stop order that becomes a limit order rather than a market order when the stock hits the stop price. With the stop limit order, an investor is trying to be even more precise about what price is acceptable. In the E*TRADE system you must place your stop and your limit at the same price. Thus, a sell stop limit order in the sell limit example for Disney above would be placed as "sell Disney at 88 stop, 88 limit" meaning: "I want out at 88 and not less than 88". Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of > carolreynolds@juno.com > Sent: Saturday, January 02, 1999 8:54 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: [CANSLIM] Stop-limit > > > Would someone explain what a stop-limit sell order is? > ___________________________________________________________________ > You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. > Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html > or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] > > - > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Joe Scott" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stop-limit Date: 02 Jan 1999 22:32:05 -0500 From the Schwab site;; Stop Limit A Stop Limit order instructs Schwab to buy or sell a security at a specific price or better (the stop limit price) but only after a given stop price has been reached or passed. To enter a sell Stop Limit order, you must enter a price below the current bid price and the limit price must be less than or equal to the stop price. If the security drops to or below the stop price, Schwab will enter a limit order for the security at the limit price. To enter a buy Stop Limit order, you must enter a price above the current ask price and the limit price must be above or equal to the stop price. If the price moves to or above the stop price, Schwab will enter a limit order to buy the security at the limit price. For example, if you enter a Sell Stop Limit order at 25 when the stock is at 30 and the stock price dropped to 25, a Limit order to sell at 25 would be entered. This means that your stock would not be sold for less than 25. joe - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] OFF TOPIC - WARRANTS Date: 03 Jan 1999 07:04:55 -0500 Hi Anthony, I am assuming you understand warrants and how they work. For those that don't, here's a quick sketch. Warrarts are similar to long term options. Typically they were created when a company went public, usually a lower priced stock tho not always. A warrant has a finite life, usually five years, and permits an exchange of the warrants and a specified amount of cash for shares in the same company. The actual exchange rate varys from warrant to warrant of different cos, thus you need to know the exchange rate to determine fair value. In addition, the warrant can be called by the co under specified terms, usually the price of the underlying stock. When the stock is trading below the exercise price of the warrant, then the trading price of the warrant represents pure premium, e.g. no intrinsic value, representing the time value remaining and the speculation that the stock price will go higher. As a warrant holder you are not a shareholder and thus have little if any rights or voting power unless you convert the warrants into shares. A co will issue warrants as they are a cheap way to raise future additional capital, assuming the stock price goes up and allows them to call the warrants. This feature, however, also means that the "investment" quality of a warrant is dubious as your potential gain can be capped at the company's choosing by calling the warrant. And when a warrant is called, the time value immediately drops to near zero, and it trades on only intrinsic value. To top this off, typically there are some holders of both stocks and warrants but without the cash to exercise the called warrants. Common practice is to sell the stock to raise the cash to exercise the warrants, thus depressing the stock price and the intrinsic value in the warrant. In addition, there will be some holders of warrants not able or willing to pump in the cash to exercise, and they will sell their warrants rather than let them expire. So you get a double downward pressure on the price of the warrants. Warrants "in the money" must be counted in the fully diluted total nr of shares for purposes of calculating earnings per share. Because a warrant can potentially expire out of the money, and thus worthless, I would not consider it to be an "investment" as I understand that word. They are a speculation on the future pricing of the stock, but unlike a call option, can be called by the company and their value capped. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- Hi, I am considering 'warrants" as an investment. If you guys know something, have had experiences with warrants, have an opinion, anything? please respond. Thanks anthony boone boonean@nwga.com - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stop-limit Date: 03 Jan 1999 07:13:02 -0500 Hello Carol, Of the two responses posted so far, the Schwab explanation is far better. However, even there one restriction is a "house rule", that of requiring the limit to be the same as or higher (for a buy) or lower (for a sale) than the stop. Some firms impose this, others do not. The key to remember is that you want a particular action taken (buy, buy limit, sell, sell limit) ONLY IF a particular price (the stop) is traded. Entering a stop limit simply means that the action taken will be a limit order rather than a market order, ensuring that if execution occurs it will be at your limit price or better. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- Would someone explain what a stop-limit sell order is? _________________________________________________________________ __ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Brooke Besser introduction Date: 03 Jan 1999 07:14:39 -0500 Welcome to the group, Brooke. The best source of CANSLIM data online for me is the Daily Graphs Online (DGO) site, which is a commercial site costing currently $530 per year. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- Hello, My name is Brooke Besser and I live in Denver, CO. I started reading William O'neil's book several years ago and have recently picked it back up. My biggest question at this point is where can you find data on the internet to support the CANSLIM methodology? I would like to be looking at this data as I read through the book. Thanks ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] DGO New Highs Date: 03 Jan 1999 07:56:20 -0500 Good morning, and Happy New Year for all (go Dolphins!!) Great weekend for football lovers, don't know how much time I'll get for studying charts, but did finally get the list of new highs in the Daily Graphs books. The total for last week, despite only 4 trading days, was 424, of these 213 had both RS and EPS of 80 or better. Worth noting as well that a whooping 131 of these hit a high on Thursday alone. Some of this may be due to the thin trading last week, however volume was quite high on 12/31. Nasdaq did 886 million shares, NYSE 754 mil, and R2000 did 388 million. In each case this was approx equal to the current ADV. In looking over this list, there are still a surprisingly large nr of big name, big cap stocks making the 80/80 cut. I also noted that last week was, I believe, the first time since this rally started several months ago that the 10 day average of new highs solidly broke thru 100 on both NYSE and NASDAQ. Here goes in chronological order: DELL, MHP, IBM, YHOO, RAIL, SCH, LEVL, NOKA, BBK, ORLY, ESRX, DDDDF, GISX, TAGS, TSFW, OVRL, NETA, CTEA, IONAY, FISV, ORBKF, IPG, ORCL, PVN, ELK, KROG, TYC, WMT, PEGS, T, ECL, NTRS, GPS, NSIT, FDS, GE, CEBC, LU, SWY, EL, MYG, AEG, AFL, MDT, PBI, XRX, SDG, RCCK, ALSI, HH, MNMD, NVR, FITB, ASND, FSR, DV, DY, CRFT, COST, LIN, PRGX, KRON, SLR, PGR, INTV, PDX, ANF, KNGT, WCOM, LOW, CNMD, CTX, PZZA, JP, OCLI, EAGL, IBI, HD, AMWD, KRB, FRE, SBC, Here's where 12/31 starts: CREE, CMRO, BBBY, OXE, PLT, CPRT, FDO, SYKE, MMS, PRGN, EXAC, IPL, ATI, BMET, SEC, PHCC, METZ, BDY, DHR, JEC, APCC, SBL, BK, WSM, RLC, RESM, BHW, HDI, TMPW, CRDT, CTS, PFGC, SWD, MELI, BBC, RGIS, MEGA, CLFY, POS, KR, ABCW, BJ, JJSF, SANM, SGA, KING, FPIC, AIB, LGTO, PLCE, JWA, LLTC, TJX, KSS, FCBK, ACS, DTEK, NDN, OK, MYE, CYN, CCRD, DH, SALT, SNPS, FMY, TGO, AXA, IMAXF, PFE, MNC, LXK, MHK, MCRL, ASO, ICUI, WAT, SYK, CTAS, CCL, INF, RX, MLM, WHIT, PRY, CINRF, CGO, SNRZ, CAH, AHO, RAD, BEBE, AEH, WPI, CTL, AMSY, FM, IDGB, CGX, JWB, INSS, VCI, MEDQ, OMC, ZION, GENZ, EWB, BELFB, ALTR, CSGS, HHS, CTXS, FLEX, ACXM, CPS, CEFT, PPDI, FORR, RI, BVEW, TSAI, BSYS, CBXC, CBUK, SNSR, BOBJY, PSDI, CPWR, NCOG, ITGI, XLSW. Happy hunting. As always, you're on your own from here for research or typos. I can only say these stocks meet basic RS/EPS criteria, haven't looked at the charts, and many (most?) probably don't meet the traditional size requirements. I have also not looked at prices, so some may be under $12/share. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "james sullivan" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] More heavy lifting [Connie Mack] Date: 03 Jan 1999 08:25:58 -0500 >Am surprised how many members have told me that they do like heavy >intellectual lifting. I feel this type of reading is essential to having a better "grip" on Market(past, present, and/or future), Industry(where/how/when the particular industry will benefit), and New. New is one, that I've been focusing on lately. It helps me to evaluate my view, which facilitates better results/returns. Reading various points of views permits me to more easily accept when I'm wrong. Accepting the wrong ("chewing and swallowing") and moving on is VERY important for me, it allows me to stick with winners. Coupled with margin and options, when appropriate, "intellectual lifting" makes CANSLIM a very valuable tool. >http://www.intellectualcapital.com/issues/98/1224/icbusiness3.asp >http://www.libertymatters.org/think.htm Thanking you again, Connie!! BTW...anyone have thoughts/comments on IMAX?? - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com (Jeff Salisbury) Subject: [CANSLIM] Accessing the discussion canslim archives... Date: 03 Jan 1999 08:00:02 -0700 From time to time, CANSLIM members may wish to browse the discussion archives. This posting provides instructions on how to access the archives. Thanks to David Cameron for compiling the essentials of this message. Here are the two ways to access the archives: 1. The best way is to use your web browser. To browse the archives, point your browser to: http://www.xmission.com/~mcjathan/cgi/lwgate.cgi/CANSLIM/ You can do simple key-word searches on the archive by going to: http://www.xmission.com/~mcjathan/canslim/search.html 2. (Not as convenient) via email: Send an email to majordomo@xmission.com with the following as the body of your message: "index canslim". Then send a follow up email to request an old email from either the "archive" or "latest" directory. Note that your request must be in the body of your email. For example: "get canslim latest/001" will retrieve file "001" from the "latest" directory. "get canslim archive/v01.n066" will retrieve file "v01.n066" from the "archive" dir. Best Regards, Jeff Salisbury - CANSLIM list owner/admin - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FBNAirPlt@aol.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Acc-Dis Numbers Date: 03 Jan 1999 14:48:14 EST Here are the newest Acc/Dis Numbers: Date A B C D E A+B/A:E %E 12/1/98 1413 3049 1240 789 256 66% 4% 12/2/98 1276 3063 1283 838 274 64% 4% 12/3/98 1252 3050 1295 823 290 64% 4% 12/4/98 1239 3035 1256 848 318 64% 5% 12/7/98 1185 2994 1278 881 345 63% 5% 12/8/98 1212 3023 1250 871 330 63% 5% 12/9/98 1241 2983 1260 874 323 63% 5% 12/10/98 1213 2978 1279 884 329 63% 5% 12/11/98 1204 2959 1279 898 341 62% 5% 12/14/98 1140 2914 1304 948 357 61% 5% 12/15/98 1093 2896 1304 1016 355 60% 5% 12/16/98 1019 2757 1342 1089 405 57% 6% 12/17/98 1009 2790 1347 1054 420 57% 6% 12/18/98 1009 2797 1326 1057 417 58% 6% 12/21/98 1030 2819 1315 1034 410 58% 6% 12/22/98 1085 2804 1304 1024 495 58% 7% 12/23/98 1126 2748 1297 1025 393 59% 6% 12/24/98 1094 2744 1303 1025 407 58% 6% 12/28/98 1126 2774 1290 1005 390 59% 6% 12/29/98 1148 2776 1307 992 381 59% 6% 12/30/98 1160 2740 1269 1035 391 59% 6% 12/31/98 1186 2730 1278 1016 390 59% 6% 1/4/99 1163 2797 1267 1002 377 60% 6% Spreed sheet version: Date,A,B,C,D,E,A+B/A:E,%E 12/1/98,1413,3049,1240,789,256,66%,4% 12/2/98,1276,3063,1283,838,274,64%,4% 12/3/98,1252,3050,1295,823,290,64%,4% 12/4/98,1239,3035,1256,848,318,64%,5% 12/7/98,1185,2994,1278,881,345,63%,5% 12/8/98,1212,3023,1250,871,330,63%,5% 12/9/98,1241,2983,1260,874,323,63%,5% 12/10/98,1213,2978,1279,884,329,63%,5% 12/11/98,1204,2959,1279,898,341,62%,5% 12/14/98,1140,2914,1304,948,357,61%,5% 12/15/98,1093,2896,1304,1016,355,60%,5% 12/16/98,1019,2757,1342,1089,405,57%,6% 12/17/98,1009,2790,1347,1054,420,57%,6% 12/18/98,1009,2797,1326,1057,417,58%,6% 12/21/98,1030,2819,1315,1034,410,58%,6% 12/22/98,1085,2804,1304,1024,495,58%,7% 12/23/98,1126,2748,1297,1025,393,59%,6% 12/24/98,1094,2744,1303,1025,407,58%,6% 12/28/98,1126,2774,1290,1005,390,59%,6% 12/29/98,1148,2776,1307,992,381,59%,6% 12/30/98,1160,2740,1269,1035,391,59%,6% 12/31/98,1186,2730,1278,1016,390,59%,6% 1/4/99,1163,2797,1267,1002,377,60%,6% Robert - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: [CANSLIM] SEEK Date: 03 Jan 1999 16:23:30 -0500 I have been working on a decision on the fate of SEEK. I purchased it wrong. I put in a limit order for 50 when the stock was slightly below 50. That got snapped up fast. The 17 day EMA is around 47. The stock is just short of 50. I put my stop at 44. I have been reading and trying to teach myself charting. Conclusions: No mater if it is weekly or daily in early Dec. the trend line got steeper. Still an up trend however. It broke below the trend line on Dec 28th. I have been trying to use trend type indicators to see what is happening. All the indicators I use MACD/histogram, ADX among others indicate to me that this stock is on thin ice. As Dr. Elder points out, emotion has to be out of it. I think it is I would like to keep the stock but I now have reservations. I had considered putting the stop at 46.50 and Buy Short at 46.00. Of course the problem is that if I am not at my computer to put the stop for the short back at about 47 I get whammed. I think I will pass on this complicated maneuver. ETrade would make more on that than I do even if it works. Guess I will wait till tomorrow morning to make my decision what to do. Suggestions are welcome. Thanks Charlie - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Joe Scott" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] SEEK Date: 03 Jan 1999 16:29:25 -0500 First good base, support is down at about 35.00.. I wouldn't be surprised that you get stopped out, especially with a hard stop.. Your right you couldn't have bought it at a worse time.. It was overbought and way extended,, look for it to pull back, put in a small base then if it continues with this three month uptrend that it is in, it may go on to new highs.. First few days of Dec,, that was the time to buy for that ride.. just my thoughts on strong trending stocks joe - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] My Breakout Watchlist Date: 03 Jan 1999 20:16:23 -0800 > APEX, CELL, FYII, TCPS, BSYS, MMGR, RCGI, UNBC, LM, SSW, PPDI. > Will consider a buy on high volume price advance. > Any comments on these? MMGR broke out on Wednesday, but the volume wasn't very impressive. I don't know if this can attibuted to a slower week or not. However, I overall like the stock, very good ROE. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Ronald J. Russell, Jr." Subject: [CANSLIM] Weekly Stock List - 12/31/98 Date: 03 Jan 1999 23:48:55 -0500 All, Moved up a few to 223 this week. Happy New Year! Ron Symbol EPS RS GRS ERG A/D Close 30 ADV ACS 93 92 95 280 B $ 45.000 108,820 ACXM 94 89 95 278 A $ 31.000 533,913 ADCT 94 90 74 258 A $ 34.750 1,433,650 AEOS 76 98 91 265 A $ 66.630 345,927 AGN 86 90 89 265 B $ 64.750 264,870 AGPH 75 96 86 257 A $ 58.750 603,003 AHAA 76 99 84 259 A $ 36.000 194,447 AIT 77 85 64 226 A $ 63.380 1,212,427 ALTR 82 96 84 262 A $ 60.880 1,968,097 AMGN 87 94 86 267 A $ 104.560 3,070,393 ANF 99 97 91 287 A $ 70.750 477,633 AOL 76 99 99 274 A $ 155.130 17,053,108 APCC 90 93 78 261 A $ 48.440 601,913 APCO 96 90 92 278 A $ 11.750 78,497 ASMLF 76 88 79 243 A $ 30.500 711,520 ASND 91 96 87 274 A $ 65.750 4,655,510 AT 78 86 64 228 A $ 59.810 664,417 AVEI 99 93 90 282 A $ 52.500 1,955,347 AXNT 72 94 89 255 A $ 30.560 362,637 AZA 72 85 78 235 A $ 52.250 708,127 BBBY 96 92 80 268 A $ 34.130 1,271,607 BBOX 88 86 94 268 A $ 37.880 79,687 BBRC 83 86 84 253 B $ 23.440 219,040 BGEN 74 94 86 254 A $ 83.000 1,814,683 BJ 89 86 82 257 B $ 46.310 126,783 BK 83 89 66 238 A $ 40.250 1,362,430 BMET 83 86 90 259 A $ 40.250 630,917 BMY 76 85 77 238 A $ 133.810 1,577,743 BOOL 92 88 93 273 A $ 29.440 347,810 BPI 80 87 67 234 A $ 20.130 156,807 BRL 88 88 85 261 A $ 48.000 112,803 BSYS 85 87 95 267 A $ 51.630 152,480 CAKE 85 94 67 246 B $ 29.660 182,470 CBSI 97 86 95 278 A $ 33.880 250,060 CBUK 98 94 79 271 A $ 37.250 85,940 CBXC 97 97 78 272 A $ 29.380 108,147 CCL 91 94 66 251 A $ 48.000 2,562,083 CDWC 97 96 86 279 A $ 95.940 124,507 CEFT 98 97 67 262 A $ 42.380 787,327 CEN 79 86 95 260 B $ 69.810 331,217 CHCS 79 98 91 268 A $ 23.380 100,513 CHKPF 99 96 89 284 A $ 45.810 1,056,173 CINRF 96 86 61 243 B $ 25.380 92,597 CLFY 87 98 93 278 B $ 24.440 296,790 CLX 85 88 73 246 A $ 116.810 354,133 CMED 97 96 90 283 A $ 13.250 209,727 CMGI 77 99 92 268 A $ 106.500 1,301,763 CMVT 97 94 74 265 A $ 71.000 715,023 CNMD 93 88 81 262 A $ 33.000 86,997 COF 91 88 67 246 A $ 115.000 416,077 CPWR 98 96 93 287 A $ 78.130 2,776,856 CREE 99 99 84 282 A $ 47.880 378,430 CSCO 97 97 87 281 A $ 92.810 13,365,058 CTAS 90 92 94 276 A $ 70.440 275,150 CTL 87 93 91 271 A $ 67.500 243,640 CTXS 98 95 93 286 A $ 97.060 692,510 CUBE 89 92 83 264 B $ 27.130 914,837 DCTM 99 90 93 282 A $ 53.440 155,030 DDDDF 99 97 93 289 A $ 48.130 129,953 DELL 99 97 93 289 A $ 73.190 16,108,964 DH 84 89 82 255 B $ 54.250 2,257,813 DL 80 87 61 228 B $ 28.880 447,223 DLTR 98 86 80 264 A $ 43.690 442,780 DMMC 73 95 94 262 B $ 19.000 134,350 DRTE 76 94 88 258 B $ 24.970 301,187 DSP 98 95 84 277 A $ 15.310 387,077 DTPI 73 91 92 256 A $ 19.130 111,157 DV 87 94 63 244 A $ 30.630 129,453 EAII 99 85 93 277 A $ 54.000 238,603 ECILF 93 86 74 253 A $ 35.630 484,063 EDMC 99 90 63 252 A $ 23.630 172,067 EL 88 92 61 241 B $ 85.500 187,767 EMC 96 98 83 277 A $ 85.000 2,902,314 ERTS 88 87 81 256 A $ 56.130 754,147 ESRX 95 96 98 289 A $ 67.130 115,890 ETEC 91 85 79 255 A $ 40.000 459,913 FFTI 88 85 95 268 A $ 11.060 87,560 FISV 90 85 95 270 A $ 51.440 360,803 FLEX 98 98 84 280 A $ 85.630 957,413 FM 96 88 67 251 A $ 22.060 150,080 FMY 90 91 92 273 A $ 60.250 713,163 GDT 98 94 89 281 A $ 110.000 637,573 GENZ 90 95 86 271 B $ 49.750 969,767 GEOC 72 98 93 263 A $ 37.250 235,330 GILTF 96 92 74 262 A $ 55.130 146,470 GML 74 95 94 263 A $ 23.380 114,387 GPS 96 96 91 283 A $ 56.130 1,962,375 HLI 87 85 65 237 A $ 58.250 83,810 HLYW 83 98 80 261 B $ 27.250 629,787 HMK 99 87 68 254 A $ 37.630 139,110 IBM 85 94 99 278 B $ 184.380 3,118,820 IMAXF 97 90 61 248 A $ 31.630 170,273 INSS 99 98 95 292 A $ 66.500 255,127 INTL 94 92 74 260 B $ 23.380 167,280 IONAY 96 94 93 283 A $ 38.000 144,160 IPG 89 92 68 249 A $ 79.750 300,630 ITWO 99 94 93 286 A $ 30.380 830,573 JKHY 99 90 75 264 A $ 49.750 114,033 JP 84 85 65 234 B $ 75.000 171,963 JVLN 76 94 75 245 B $ 15.000 75,707 KROG 80 97 72 249 A $ 39.440 98,283 LAF 93 86 73 252 A $ 40.500 105,600 LEVL 98 95 84 277 A $ 35.500 956,217 LGTO 99 97 93 289 A $ 65.940 582,570 LLTC 89 94 84 267 A $ 89.560 912,127 LSON 93 90 92 275 A $ 58.190 216,573 LU 97 96 74 267 A $ 109.940 5,851,763 LXK 97 97 78 272 A $ 100.500 441,570 MAST 98 86 95 279 A $ 28.630 223,843 MBRS 82 91 92 265 B $ 29.500 84,233 MCD 75 86 67 228 A $ 76.810 1,599,020 MCHP 70 92 83 245 A $ 37.000 758,203 MCRL 98 96 84 278 A $ 55.000 261,860 MCSC 98 95 76 269 B $ 24.630 86,083 MDT 80 86 90 256 A $ 74.280 1,705,840 MEDQ 95 95 92 282 B $ 39.500 247,393 MELI 94 96 74 264 A $ 21.000 80,983 MERQ 72 98 93 263 A $ 63.250 197,617 METG 96 90 95 281 A $ 29.750 102,950 METZ 99 93 92 284 A $ 48.690 544,130 MHP 83 85 96 264 B $ 101.880 281,387 MLM 85 90 73 248 A $ 62.190 127,100 MMGR 98 89 88 275 A $ 31.380 144,947 MMS 87 86 92 265 A $ 37.000 165,847 MNMD 98 98 89 285 B $ 104.750 115,723 MNTR 84 88 81 253 B $ 23.440 170,837 MRX 93 90 78 261 A $ 59.880 114,363 MSFT 97 92 90 279 A $ 138.690 13,229,827 MTP 82 92 88 262 B $ 56.560 196,750 MTRS 97 89 67 253 A $ 50.310 397,610 MXIM 95 90 84 269 A $ 43.690 1,317,387 MXWL 70 96 60 226 B $ 40.250 92,580 MYG 95 88 74 257 A $ 62.250 465,330 NCOG 98 96 92 286 A $ 45.000 161,777 NDC 96 90 95 281 A $ 48.690 181,090 NEG 85 86 88 259 B $ 56.500 151,720 NETA 99 97 89 285 A $ 66.250 2,248,053 NFS 72 86 65 223 B $ 51.690 114,660 NLCS 88 94 93 275 B $ 37.000 162,853 NSIT 98 98 86 282 B $ 50.880 293,000 NSOL 84 99 95 278 A $ 130.880 781,500 NTAP 99 98 83 280 A $ 44.840 905,290 ODP 90 92 76 258 B $ 37.060 1,282,827 OMC 91 87 68 246 A $ 58.000 425,660 ORBKF 90 91 79 260 A $ 47.380 136,077 ORCL 97 96 93 286 A $ 43.130 8,062,484 OSI 72 93 68 233 B $ 30.000 340,147 OSSI 90 86 67 243 A $ 39.880 420,287 OSTE 70 98 89 257 A $ 46.500 124,720 PAYX 97 85 92 274 A $ 51.440 902,010 PBI 84 86 69 239 A $ 66.060 434,933 PE 78 91 88 257 B $ 41.750 601,613 PFE 87 86 78 251 A $ 125.000 2,705,130 PLCE 94 99 91 284 A $ 25.130 217,063 PLXS 91 96 84 271 B $ 33.880 133,437 PMS 90 90 75 255 B $ 50.500 174,320 PPD 97 89 67 253 A $ 33.000 129,310 PPDI 87 90 70 247 B $ 30.060 280,780 PRGS 78 93 93 264 B $ 33.750 146,563 PRGX 90 93 92 275 A $ 37.440 122,560 PSEM 87 97 84 268 B $ 10.810 159,147 PSSI 95 85 81 261 B $ 23.000 392,430 PVN 96 96 67 259 A $ 75.000 842,500 PZZA 99 85 67 251 A $ 44.130 168,627 RCL 89 87 66 242 A $ 37.000 516,367 RDHS 93 86 67 246 A $ 23.500 111,267 RESM 97 98 89 284 A $ 45.380 236,370 RGIS 85 89 80 254 B $ 40.000 87,300 RMBS 84 96 84 264 A $ 96.250 653,153 RX 90 87 95 272 A $ 75.440 440,980 SAI 95 93 67 255 A $ 82.000 838,533 SALT 99 98 74 271 A $ 25.630 79,747 SANM 97 97 84 278 A $ 62.500 1,068,317 SAPE 99 95 93 287 A $ 56.000 289,157 SBUX 97 88 67 252 B $ 56.130 1,070,400 SCAI 96 88 77 261 A $ 29.250 129,243 SCH 91 98 84 273 A $ 56.190 1,837,038 SDG 86 92 90 268 A $ 121.750 215,920 SDS 92 89 95 276 A $ 39.690 382,530 SDTI 71 92 78 241 B $ 23.000 1,913,363 SE 95 88 95 278 A $ 45.000 846,867 SEBL 99 92 93 284 A $ 33.940 1,184,653 SERO 92 90 70 252 A $ 30.000 109,150 SIPX 72 91 84 247 A $ 35.130 214,133 SLR 93 98 85 276 A $ 92.940 1,046,270 SLVN 97 85 63 245 A $ 30.500 908,603 SNPS 93 95 93 281 A $ 54.250 587,487 SNRZ 84 89 62 235 B $ 51.880 225,450 SONC 86 86 67 239 A $ 24.880 80,520 SORC 74 97 92 263 A $ 11.630 124,603 SPLS 98 96 76 270 B $ 43.690 2,288,643 SUIT 94 89 91 274 B $ 31.750 188,437 SUNW 94 97 93 284 A $ 85.630 7,474,854 SWY 95 92 92 279 A $ 60.940 1,358,333 SYK 88 90 90 268 A $ 55.060 164,833 SYKE 99 95 92 286 B $ 30.500 268,093 TGO 90 95 91 276 B $ 36.000 352,630 THQI 99 95 81 275 A $ 28.000 265,680 TIER 98 90 95 283 A $ 17.250 78,737 TJX 92 92 91 275 B $ 29.000 1,118,650 TLAB 98 88 74 260 A $ 68.560 2,957,943 TMPW 84 92 68 244 B $ 42.000 307,927 TOM 99 86 79 264 A $ 60.000 415,047 TSAI 96 89 77 262 A $ 50.000 148,353 TSG 70 90 66 226 A $ 44.500 96,810 UVSGA 93 92 83 268 A $ 23.630 131,473 VISX 78 98 71 247 A $ 87.440 315,433 VRTS 99 90 93 282 A $ 59.940 634,120 VSIO 98 86 93 277 A $ 36.560 302,163 VTSS 97 98 84 279 A $ 45.630 1,258,447 WAG 85 93 97 275 B $ 58.560 871,713 WCOM 81 95 91 267 B $ 71.750 10,045,600 WHIT 97 94 95 286 A $ 27.630 405,947 WMT 87 93 82 262 B $ 81.440 2,757,524 WPI 93 92 85 270 A $ 62.880 302,790 WSM 91 95 94 280 A $ 40.310 190,090 WTSLA 89 85 91 265 A $ 30.190 139,160 XIRC 76 98 87 261 A $ 34.000 516,507 XLSW 98 95 74 267 A $ 38.000 159,750 XOMD 99 93 90 282 B $ 32.000 107,315 XRX 87 86 69 242 B $ 118.000 945,443 YHOO 84 99 99 282 B $ 236.940 7,187,791 ZQK 95 95 79 269 B $ 30.000 102,647 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Oli" Subject: [CANSLIM] cogif & ibi. Date: 04 Jan 1999 01:53:49 -0500 Greetings. Here are a couple of stocks that are showing signs of breakout. Their canslim stats (a few days old) as per IBD (last letter is sponsorship) ibi 85 80 a a b b=20 cogif 93 98 a a a=20 I guess we are waiting for ibi to break through the 30 mark on volume. I am not sure how to interpret the minicup that has been forming in december, I do not think it qualifies as a handle (due to price & volume action). I guess however, it must be a bullish sign that at the bottom of that cup the volume is small compared to the right hand side of that cup. cogif is a small cap, which has been a handycap, but is emerging from a nice cup - NO HANDLE YET. I seem to recall WON always mentioning cups and handles are bases, never just cups. Am I correct on this..... ? Obviously the CANSLIM stats for these guys look very good, so what do you chart experts out there think about the charts ? Are these guys, from a charting standpoint, buys if we see a positive increase of a volume increase of 50% ? Oli. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Oli" Subject: [CANSLIM] chkpf : bogus or valid base ? Date: 04 Jan 1999 01:56:34 -0500 Greetings again. CHKPF was mentioned on this list the other day. It is a stock I have been watching for a while. It appears to have done some sort of a breakout thursday, with a 14% rise. However, I can not justify that the price pattern over the last months constitutes a valid base, at least not accoring to my reading of HTMMIS. The correction/bear market of late fall did of course affect the base formation; it probably made it look more v shape than otherwise would have happened. Do members take the correction into account when reading bases these days, and if so does CHKPF present a valid cup formation (again no handle), or is the pattern that CHKPF is exhibiting a non constructive base (I personally have a problem with the steep linear advance since the stock bottomed)...... Any comments welcome.... Oli. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: [CANSLIM] SEEK Date: 04 Jan 1999 05:25:29 -0500 Final decision on SEEK. I was reading Elder's triple screen in the middle of the night. I have decided that I am out at 47.50. I put a stop sell. I also put a short sell limit order at 47.375. It is a limit order so if it is executed it will be at my price. If not it wont be. I purchased this stock on a purely internet emotional basis. As a result had to spend about half of Sunday deciding what to do about what I already bought instead of working on what I can buy. Had I used CANSLIM to start with I would not have been in that position. I like the triple screen and intend to use it as confirmation on CANSLIM purchases in the future. Hope this works. Charlie - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: mglieske@us.ibm.com Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Brooke Besser introduction Date: 03 Jan 1999 09:01:05 -0600 Welcome-- I am also a new subscriber and learning about CANSLIM. I asked the same question when I joined. So, I cut and pasted the great response I got back from DB. DB, I hope you do not mind me sharing this info. It was useful to me and thought I save you the time. Also, I just found the below internet site. Worth taking look. "http://www.growthstockanalytics.com/canslim.html" ======= Previous posting from DB ================ For financial information, go to http://www.stocksite.com/. If you select "Financials", you'll receive up to three years' earnings--basic, diluted and before charges (if you click "Income Statement"). The usual information such as institutional sponsorship, etc., is provided under Profile, Estimates, etc. If you want SQLY and/or rolling quarter percentage increases, you can easily set up formula blocks in a spreadsheet to do this for you. For screening, select Advanced Screening at http://www.dailystocks.com/. This is the only site I know of that allows you to screen not only for earnings increases but earnings acceleration as well. For RS, EPS, GRS, A/D and other information, go to http://members.aol.com/RANord/ All the EPS, RS, GRS, etc. numbers are there and it's all downloadable to Excel. You can sort and rearrange and track to your hearts' content. He updates the list once a week. or http://www.delphi.com/invest/ Regarding the latter, you must register, but it's free. Select Investor's Forum or "forum", then go to the CANSLIM list (this comprises the bulk of the discussion). Select the "Weekly Stock List" or "Top ERG List" or "Box 7 List" for stocks, or the "Weekly IBD Calculated Group RS List" for groups. http://www1.FreeEDGAR.com/home.htm This is like EDGAR, but faster, easier, and friendlier. If you've avoided SEC filings in the past, give it one more try. For charts, for percentage gainers in price and volume, and for stocks reaching new highs and lows (among other things), go to BigCharts (http://www.bigcharts.com/). If you're an intermediate-term investor, as I am, use the following settings: Time: YTD (then six-month and three-month, if you like) Frequency: Daily (or Weekly, if you prefer) Moving Averages: EMA(3-Line). Type in 17 or 20, 50, 200. Upper Indicators: None Lower Indicators: Volume+ Chart Style: Change "Chart Size" to "large". If you want it even larger, select "Print Chart" and "OK". Then you can print or not, as you prefer. Make these your defaults. You can change your settings, such as Time, as you wish, but as long as you don't save the changes, the default settings will remain as they are. What to do with all this information is the trick, but, at a minimum, all you need to know is contained within these sites. For keeping up with news, upgrades/downgrades, price movement, etc., you can't do better than a Yahoo portfolio, which is also free. But setting that up is a whole 'nother post, and the instructions at Yahoo are pretty clear. - --Db == "Lessons are repeated until they are learned." http://home.talkcity.com/MoneySt/dbphoenix/ ========= End previous posting from DB ============== Regards, Mike L. ____________________________________________________________________ Michael G. Lieske / IBM Field Applications Engineer (847) 981-6458 t/l 788 - 6458 e-mail: mglieske@us.ibm.com ____________________________________________________________________ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Peter Newell" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] chkpf : bogus or valid base ? Date: 04 Jan 1999 09:51:33 -0800 There is significant volume dry up but, I agree its going up to fast from a canslim point of view I'd wait for a valid base to form, note it may be short this stock is 99 94 AAA and a leader in the internet firewall group and ont the DOT index it's also a small cap. Peter Newell -----Original Message----- >Greetings again. >CHKPF was mentioned on this list the other day. It is a stock I have >been watching for a while. It appears to have done some sort of a breakout >thursday, with a 14% >rise. However, I can not >justify that the price pattern over the last months constitutes a valid >base, at least not >accoring to my reading of HTMMIS. The correction/bear market of late >fall did of course >affect the base formation; it probably made it look more v shape than >otherwise would have >happened. Do members take the correction into account when reading >bases these days, and if >so does CHKPF present a valid cup formation (again no handle), or is the >pattern that CHKPF is >exhibiting a non constructive base (I personally have a problem with the >steep linear advance since >the stock bottomed)...... Any comments welcome.... > >Oli. > > > > >- > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tim Fisher Subject: [CANSLIM] WOW! Some impressive shakeouts Date: 04 Jan 1999 14:25:07 -0800 Boy did I get burned on some shakeouts today. I guess time will tell if they're true breakout failures but INSS and AEOS turned over and died today, at least intraday for INSS. Looks to me like a pettern is developing wherein my stops are just a hair too high on these "movements" - guess the VectorVest stop is being used by too many investors and that is becoming a target for the MM's with big institutional clients looking for cheap shares. If you don't believe this theory look at the 1-day chart for INSS and notice the huge spike in volume at the intraday low of 60, which is just below the VV stop. Tim Fisher Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites Tim@OreRockOn.com WWW: http://OreRockOn.com See naked fish and rocks! - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: rolatzi Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WOW! Some impressive shakeouts Date: 04 Jan 1999 16:04:16 -0800 (PST) Tim: What's the VV stop? Thanks? Ciao, Rolatzi ---Tim Fisher wrote: > > Boy did I get burned on some shakeouts today. I guess time will tell if they're > true breakout failures but INSS and AEOS turned over and died today, at least > intraday for INSS. Looks to me like a pettern is developing wherein my stops > are just a hair too high on these "movements" - guess the VectorVest stop is > being used by too many investors and that is becoming a target for the MM's > with big institutional clients looking for cheap shares. If you don't believe > this theory look at the 1-day chart for INSS and notice the huge spike in > volume at the intraday low of 60, which is just below the VV stop. > > > Tim Fisher > Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites > > Tim@OreRockOn.com > WWW: http://OreRockOn.com > See naked fish and rocks! > > - > > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "anthony boone" Subject: [CANSLIM] 90 90 90 A A A Date: 05 Jan 1999 00:14:14 -0500 I saw the phrase "90 90 90 A A A" in a recent CANSLIM email. Anyone, care to explain what that should mean to a CANSLIMer? Anthony - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] SEEK Date: 05 Jan 1999 05:22:42 GMT On Sun, 3 Jan 1999 16:23:30 -0500, you wrote: : I have been working on a decision on the fate of SEEK. I purchased it :wrong. I put in a limit order for 50 when the stock was slightly below = 50. :That got snapped up fast. : The 17 day EMA is around 47. The stock is just short of 50. I put my = stop :at 44. I have been reading and trying to teach myself charting. : Conclusions: No mater if it is weekly or daily in early Dec. the trend = line :got steeper. Still an up trend however. It broke below the trend line on= Dec :28th. I have been trying to use trend type indicators to see what is :happening. All the indicators I use MACD/histogram, ADX among others :indicate to me that this stock is on thin ice. : As Dr. Elder points out, emotion has to be out of it. I think it is I = would :like to keep the stock but I now have reservations. : I had considered putting the stop at 46.50 and Buy Short at 46.00. Of :course the problem is that if I am not at my computer to put the stop = for :the short back at about 47 I get whammed. I think I will pass on this :complicated maneuver. ETrade would make more on that than I do even if = it :works. : Guess I will wait till tomorrow morning to make my decision what to do. : Suggestions are welcome. : :Thanks :Charlie : InfoSEEK is almost controlled by Disney now, who have around a 40 - 45% ownership of shares. I think that Disney put in an offer of $50/share for SEEK, but I don't have the news story. SEEK had a long 6 months plus base from which it broke out in December pretty powerfully. If you are not out of SEEK now, I'd watch it closely and sell if it violates the 20 DMA on a closing basis. Personally, I think it's more likely to advance than decline at this point. A lot depends on the general condition on the markets, however. Dan - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] SEEK Date: 05 Jan 1999 05:11:48 -0500 Dan, I did get stopped out yesterday. I had the stop at the 17 day EMA. I too think this one is headed down a few more points. I am trying the short experiment. Probably will get my lunch eaten again. I like Dr. Elders entering and exit strategy (triple screen). I feel it is totally compatible with CANSLIM. Of course writing a good book is one thing. Having it work is another. Still it sounds reasonable so I am giving it a try. I believe the strategy is generally correct. Of course SEEK may not have read the book. Wish me luck Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Dan Musicant > Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 1999 12:23 AM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] SEEK > > > On Sun, 3 Jan 1999 16:23:30 -0500, you wrote: > > : I have been working on a decision on the fate of SEEK. I > purchased it > :wrong. I put in a limit order for 50 when the stock was slightly > below 50. > :That got snapped up fast. > : The 17 day EMA is around 47. The stock is just short of 50. > I put my stop > :at 44. I have been reading and trying to teach myself charting. > : Conclusions: No mater if it is weekly or daily in early > Dec. the trend line > :got steeper. Still an up trend however. It broke below the trend > line on Dec > :28th. I have been trying to use trend type indicators to see what is > :happening. All the indicators I use MACD/histogram, ADX among others > :indicate to me that this stock is on thin ice. > : As Dr. Elder points out, emotion has to be out of it. I > think it is I would > :like to keep the stock but I now have reservations. > : I had considered putting the stop at 46.50 and Buy Short at > 46.00. Of > :course the problem is that if I am not at my computer to put the stop for > :the short back at about 47 I get whammed. I think I will pass on this > :complicated maneuver. ETrade would make more on that than I do even if it > :works. > : Guess I will wait till tomorrow morning to make my decision > what to do. > : Suggestions are welcome. > : > :Thanks > :Charlie > : > > InfoSEEK is almost controlled by Disney now, who have around a 40 - 45% > ownership of shares. I think that Disney put in an offer of $50/share > for SEEK, but I don't have the news story. SEEK had a long 6 months plus > base from which it broke out in December pretty powerfully. If you are > not out of SEEK now, I'd watch it closely and sell if it violates the 20 > DMA on a closing basis. Personally, I think it's more likely to advance > than decline at this point. A lot depends on the general condition on > the markets, however. > > Dan > > > - > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Walter Stock Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] SEEK Date: 05 Jan 1999 06:56:26 -0500 Hi Charlie, Assuming an intermediate-term investing horizon, Elder's Triple Screen would have had you start looking to exit SEEK back in November, with a clear sell signal in the fourth week of December. I combine Elder with Canslim. I go long Canslim stocks that are also good technical buys according to triple screen, and the other technical analysis that Elder goes through (most of it classic TA). Be careful shorting this one. You are shorting internet. I would not short a stock because of Triple Screen alone. Walter Charles Cangialosi wrote: > Dan, > I did get stopped out yesterday. I had the stop at the 17 day EMA. I too > think this one is headed down a few more points. I am trying the short > experiment. Probably will get my lunch eaten again. > I like Dr. Elders entering and exit strategy (triple screen). I feel it is > totally compatible with CANSLIM. Of course writing a good book is one thing. > Having it work is another. Still it sounds reasonable so I am giving it a > try. I believe the strategy is generally correct. Of course SEEK may not > have read the book. > > Wish me luck > Charlie - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] My CANSLIM subscription was terminated?? Date: 05 Jan 1999 05:29:16 GMT Hi Jeff, I have been subscribed to the CANSLIM list for almost 2 years. I stopped getting posts on 1/2/99, and have no idea why. I did not cancel or send anything to the server. I attempted to get a list of the subscribers today but failed (I haven't looked into why), but figured it might be easiest to resubscribe, which is what I did. Obviously, this shouldn't be necessary. Can you tell me what may have happened. Thanks. Dan Musicant - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jeff Salisbury" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] My CANSLIM subscription was terminated?? Date: 05 Jan 1999 06:06:37 -0700 Dan, I don't know what happened... What commonly happens is that subscribers' addresses begin bouncing (a large percentage of my time is spent dealing with bouncing email). When this happens, I remove the address from the canslim list and put it on a temporary "bounces" list. People on this list receive a notice once a day for 90 days before they are removed from the bounces list. I keep track of anyone who has ever been on the bounces list. There is no record of you being put on the bounce list. So, I don't know what happened. Please let me know if you get unsubscribed again. Jeff - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thomas A. Moulton" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] SEEK Date: 05 Jan 1999 08:33:12 -0500 Also remember that many brokerage houses have reduced the margin allowed for Internet stocks. Some have moved from 100% down to 25% and others are not marginable at all due t high volatility. This varies from house to house. tom m -----Original Message----- >Hi Charlie, > >Assuming an intermediate-term investing horizon, Elder's Triple Screen >would have had you start looking to exit SEEK back in November, with >a clear sell signal in the fourth week of December. > >I combine Elder with Canslim. I go long Canslim stocks that are also good >technical buys according to triple screen, and the other technical analysis that >Elder goes through (most of it classic TA). > >Be careful shorting this one. You are shorting internet. I would not >short a stock because of Triple Screen alone. > >Walter > > >Charles Cangialosi wrote: > >> Dan, >> I did get stopped out yesterday. I had the stop at the 17 day EMA. I too >> think this one is headed down a few more points. I am trying the short >> experiment. Probably will get my lunch eaten again. >> I like Dr. Elders entering and exit strategy (triple screen). I feel it is >> totally compatible with CANSLIM. Of course writing a good book is one thing. >> Having it work is another. Still it sounds reasonable so I am giving it a >> try. I believe the strategy is generally correct. Of course SEEK may not >> have read the book. >> >> Wish me luck >> Charlie > > > > >- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dbphoenix Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Brooke Besser introduction Date: 05 Jan 1999 05:47:03 -0800 (PST) <> Not at all. I had forgotten about it. I'm glad you found it useful. I should file it away somewhere. One of the delphi contributors, Ron Russell, now provides his spreadsheet to us directly, so that saves some time. Otherwise, the information is still all good. --Db == "Lessons are repeated until they are learned." http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/ _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] My CANSLIM subscription was terminated?? Date: 05 Jan 1999 15:21:36 GMT On Tue, 5 Jan 1999 06:06:37 -0700, you wrote: :Dan, : :I don't know what happened... What commonly happens is that = subscribers' :addresses begin bouncing (a large percentage of my time is spent dealing :with bouncing email). When this happens, I remove the address from the=20 :canslim list and put it on a temporary "bounces" list. People on this = list :receive a notice once a day for 90 days before they are removed from the :bounces list. I keep track of anyone who has ever been on the bounces = list. :There is no record of you being put on the bounce list. So, I don't :know what happened. Please let me know if you get unsubscribed again. : :Jeff : All I can think of, Jeff, is that I subscribed my cousin Mark a couple of months ago and he may have unsubscribed. His address is: musicant@silcom.com I wouldn't think that would get me unsubscribed though. Well, I'm OK now, presumably because I subscribed again. Thanks for the reply, the help, and the great list! Good success and happiness to you in the new year! Dan - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WOW! Some impressive shakeouts Date: 04 Jan 1999 22:05:44 -0800 VectorVest.com. They give out free analysis which includes the only free stop reccomendations I can find on the net. I even lowered my stop from their reccomended level on INSS to be about halfway to the 30d EMA but to no avail. Anyway it's just sour grapes cause I took a 20% profit and WON says to never let a 20% profit turn into a loss. So with this rule I would be out anyway. Intraday that is. AEOS did close at my stop so I would have had to sell it tomorrow morning anyway even if I had a soft stop. I lost 10% on that one. What I was looking for is a reaction to today's market which seemed like compression to me esp. in recent breakouts. Guess this list is dead except for you and me today. At 04:04 PM 1/4/99 -0800, you wrote: >Tim: > >What's the VV stop? Thanks? >Ciao, >Rolatzi > >---Tim Fisher wrote: >> >> Boy did I get burned on some shakeouts today. I guess time will tell >if they're >> true breakout failures but INSS and AEOS turned over and died today, >at least >> intraday for INSS. Looks to me like a pettern is developing wherein >my stops >> are just a hair too high on these "movements" - guess the VectorVest >stop is >> being used by too many investors and that is becoming a target for >the MM's >> with big institutional clients looking for cheap shares. If you >don't believe >> this theory look at the 1-day chart for INSS and notice the huge >spike in >> volume at the intraday low of 60, which is just below the VV stop. >> >> >> Tim Fisher >> Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites >> >> Tim@OreRockOn.com >> WWW: http://OreRockOn.com >> See naked fish and rocks! >> >> - >> >> > >_________________________________________________________ >DO YOU YAHOO!? >Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > >- > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] SEEK Date: 05 Jan 1999 12:04:45 -0500 Walt, I know I missed the boat on this one. I just purchased it wrong. Fortunately the loss was minimal, another tuition payment. I am nervous about the short too. I have a tight buy to cover stop on it if it goes against me. It is lower today, I am thinking it is churning around, going through distribution. It seems to be going counter to the other internet stocks. In my totally limited experience I think CANSLIM and Elder's triple screen are a perfect match as far as validating what I might think is happening with a stock. Of course WON would point out what I think or what I may want does not matter to the market. Thanks Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Walter Stock > Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 1999 6:56 AM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] SEEK > > > Hi Charlie, > > Assuming an intermediate-term investing horizon, Elder's Triple Screen > would have had you start looking to exit SEEK back in November, with > a clear sell signal in the fourth week of December. > > I combine Elder with Canslim. I go long Canslim stocks that are also good > technical buys according to triple screen, and the other > technical analysis that > Elder goes through (most of it classic TA). > > Be careful shorting this one. You are shorting internet. I would not > short a stock because of Triple Screen alone. > > Walter > > > Charles Cangialosi wrote: > > > Dan, > > I did get stopped out yesterday. I had the stop at the > 17 day EMA. I too > > think this one is headed down a few more points. I am trying the short > > experiment. Probably will get my lunch eaten again. > > I like Dr. Elders entering and exit strategy (triple > screen). I feel it is > > totally compatible with CANSLIM. Of course writing a good book > is one thing. > > Having it work is another. Still it sounds reasonable so I am > giving it a > > try. I believe the strategy is generally correct. Of course SEEK may not > > have read the book. > > > > Wish me luck > > Charlie > > > > > - > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] Fw: Calculating EPS percentile ranking Date: 05 Jan 1999 21:09:36 -0500 From WON's Daily Graphs Online - the straight scoop. Guess this is a protection against enormous percentage gains on stocks just entering profitability. Doesn't seem fair, but what can you do? Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- Hi Tom, Thank you for your recent email to Daily Graphs Online. In response to your question, our head programmer informed me that the statement made to you is NOT true. He indicated that there is a limit of 100% increase if either quarter is less than .11, otherwise, the cap is 300% if both quarters are greater than or equal to .11. I hope that this answers your question. Please let me know if you require additional clarification. Best regards, Dan Daily Graphs Online -----Original Message----- Sent: Saturday, January 02, 1999 3:56 AM Good morning, Got a technical question to ask. I realize that the calculation of the EPS rank percentile is a proprietary formula, so I am not asking you for the actual formula. However, one member of my online CANSLIM discussion group is stating to the members that in performing this calculation, only earnings growth of 100% max year to year are taken into account. In other words, a company with earnings growth of 110% year to year and another with growth of 300% would be each treated in the formula calculations as if the growth was only 100%. Can you confirm or deny this?? If true, it's news to me, and if false would like to inform the 700 or so members so they don't take it as correct info. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Eatstock@aol.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Index - Calculating Date: 05 Jan 1999 22:23:32 EST Could some one please help me with this question? are indexes weighted based on outstanding shares? I mean, the DOW for example, if a stock splits does that price drop (not taking into account twice as many shares) show in the dow or is it adjusted for the shares, and therefore the Index goes unchanged. If someone knows the logistics, that would be much appreciated Something I have been toying with.. Thanks Chris - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Index - Calculating Date: 05 Jan 1999 22:58:12 -0500 At 22:23 1/5/99 EST, Eatstock@aol.com wrote: >Could some one please help me with this question? > >are indexes weighted based on outstanding shares? Yes. > I mean, the DOW for >example, if a stock splits does that price drop (not taking into account twice >as many shares) show in the dow or is it adjusted for the shares, and >therefore the Index goes unchanged. The Index goes unchanged as the divisor is recomputed based on the new distributions of capitalization. When this happens, Barrons weekly publishes the new divisor. Other publications may also publish the new divisor, I can't say which ones. The current published divisors are 0.24275214, 0.24084679, 2.0859524 and 1.2674905 for the DJ Industrials, Transportation, Utility and Composite averages. > If someone knows the logistics, that >would be much appreciated > >Something I have been toying with.. > >Thanks >Chris > Regards, Frank Wolynski - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Index - Calculating Date: 05 Jan 1999 21:01:57 -0800 Date sent: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 22:23:32 EST > are indexes weighted based on outstanding shares? I mean, the DOW for > example, if a stock splits does that price drop (not taking into account twice I know very little about this, except that the Dow is price weighted, and the S&P is cap weighted. If a stock splits, there is a multiplier for the Dow calculation that is used, and it is adjusted. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: [CANSLIM] market predections Date: 05 Jan 1999 21:04:08 -0800 Someone who uses cycles in a pretty sophisticated manner has a market analysis at - http://www.sciapp.com/tradelab/fft.html - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: [CANSLIM] Technical Stuff [Connie Mack] Date: 06 Jan 1999 08:54:17 -0500 For those still holding MU, you would not be remiss to take some margin of your profit. I sold 1/3 of my position at yesterday's close. I will sell another 1/3 if MU reaches its most recent high, which is now its overhead resistance. I will, however, be ready to re-buy MU after I have seen its first 30 minute action. There is not much distance between yesterday's close and the recent high. Trade carefully. The most difficult move for a trader is to repurchase a position sold only a few hours earlier. I will be looking closely at AMD. Its MF is not positively divergent, but nevertheless strong; OBV is, however, positively divergent. AMD is one of those stocks on which I am relaxing my OBV/MF criteria. I have traded the stock for the past three months and just have a feel for its action. Be careful about entering market orders. You can receive a flat-line surprise at elevated fills. Too, I have been watching ADPT and will try to initiate a modest position. Remember that the most sophisticated trader/investor usually does not make his move until he has looked at the opening minutes of trading. Greed is the superlative leveller. Don't concern yourself about getting in at the bottom or out at the top, which is a metaphor for don't be greedy. The real money is made by taking pieces out of the wide middle. Now is an opportune time to look at those stocks that haven't performed as you had hoped. Ease out of them and look for better rides even if you've none in mind. Have some cash on hand. Connie - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dbphoenix Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] SEEK Date: 06 Jan 1999 06:33:57 -0800 (PST) <> SEEK is a good example of why I believe Elder must be combined with overall pattern in order to get the best out of the trade (I went into all this last spring during the triple screen discussion). There were several places to buy in Sept/Oct (that were also very non-CS), but when the MACD-H crossed the 0 line, it was worth noting that the stock was riding its 17d. On my site and elsewhere, I've suggested using the 17d or a 10-15% drop (whichever is less) as a stop on profitable trades. Applied here, that would have kept one in the stock until it rolled over in December. At that time, it not only declined more than 15%, but also broke below its 17d. It may recover, but that's beside the point. If one adopts these rules, he sells and asks questions later. I've used the MACDw for a long time, but if the pattern's not there, I don't buy on the basis of MACD alone. Demand and supply still rule. --Db == "Lessons are repeated until they are learned." http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/ _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] SEEK Date: 06 Jan 1999 12:05:03 -0500 As I said I blew it on the purchase on this one. I tried to short it so if it went down a little I could get a little money back. Guess what. I just got to make another tuition payment. This was not a very financially devastating deal. I had tight stops and practiced good asset management (means I loss less then I could have). I dont know if this is so, I read your Demand/Supply again last night and got very suspicious about SEEK as far as accumulation. I will post on your sight regarding that. What really bothers me is that I have not been a very big participant in this bull market or phase. Just like the guy in "How I made 2M in Stocks" He made the comment at the beginning that he came out of the biggest bull market in history with next to nothing. If the market is never wrong. So far I am always wrong. Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of dbphoenix > Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 1999 9:34 AM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] SEEK > > > > > < would have had you start looking to exit SEEK back in November, with > a clear sell signal in the fourth week of December. > > I combine Elder with Canslim. I go long Canslim stocks that are also > good > technical buys according to triple screen, and the other technical > analysis that Elder goes through (most of it classic TA).>> > > SEEK is a good example of why I believe Elder must be combined with > overall pattern in order to get the best out of the trade (I went into > all this last spring during the triple screen discussion). There were > several places to buy in Sept/Oct (that were also very non-CS), but > when the MACD-H crossed the 0 line, it was worth noting that the stock > was riding its 17d. On my site and elsewhere, I've suggested using > the 17d or a 10-15% drop (whichever is less) as a stop on profitable > trades. Applied here, that would have kept one in the stock until it > rolled over in December. At that time, it not only declined more than > 15%, but also broke below its 17d. It may recover, but that's beside > the point. If one adopts these rules, he sells and asks questions > later. > > I've used the MACDw for a long time, but if the pattern's not there, I > don't buy on the basis of MACD alone. Demand and supply still rule. > > --Db > > > == > > "Lessons are repeated until they are learned." > http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/ _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Quan Tran Subject: [CANSLIM] Newbie question Date: 06 Jan 1999 10:06:44 -0800 Hi all, I am new to CANSLIM and also new to this list. The reason I am lurking on this list is wanting to learn more about CANSLIM. Please, excuse the very newbie question. I see many thread refer to Dr. Elder's Triple Screen and his book. Searching for Elder on Amazon show a book titled "Trading for a Living : Psychology, Trading Tactics, Money Management" ISBN 0471592242 Is this THE book? Regards, Quan Tran qt@qware.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Reid Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] SEEK Date: 06 Jan 1999 13:28:43 -0800 charles that is the reason I leave the vast majority of my money in mutual funds.That way I wont miss the big moves of the market . I use a little play money to trade with. Charles Cangialosi wrote: > As I said I blew it on the purchase on this one. I tried to short it so if > it went down a little I could get a little money back. Guess what. I just > got to make another tuition payment. This was not a very financially > devastating deal. I had tight stops and practiced good asset management > (means I loss less then I could have). > I dont know if this is so, I read your Demand/Supply again last night and > got very suspicious about SEEK as far as accumulation. I will post on your > sight regarding that. > What really bothers me is that I have not been a very big participant in > this bull market or phase. Just like the guy in "How I made 2M in Stocks" > He made the comment at the beginning that he came out of the biggest bull > market in history with next to nothing. > If the market is never wrong. So far I am always wrong. > > Charlie > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of dbphoenix > > Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 1999 9:34 AM > > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] SEEK > > > > > > > > > > < > would have had you start looking to exit SEEK back in November, with > > a clear sell signal in the fourth week of December. > > > > I combine Elder with Canslim. I go long Canslim stocks that are also > > good > > technical buys according to triple screen, and the other technical > > analysis that Elder goes through (most of it classic TA).>> > > > > SEEK is a good example of why I believe Elder must be combined with > > overall pattern in order to get the best out of the trade (I went into > > all this last spring during the triple screen discussion). There were > > several places to buy in Sept/Oct (that were also very non-CS), but > > when the MACD-H crossed the 0 line, it was worth noting that the stock > > was riding its 17d. On my site and elsewhere, I've suggested using > > the 17d or a 10-15% drop (whichever is less) as a stop on profitable > > trades. Applied here, that would have kept one in the stock until it > > rolled over in December. At that time, it not only declined more than > > 15%, but also broke below its 17d. It may recover, but that's beside > > the point. If one adopts these rules, he sells and asks questions > > later. > > > > I've used the MACDw for a long time, but if the pattern's not there, I > > don't buy on the basis of MACD alone. Demand and supply still rule. > > > > --Db > > > > > > == > > > > "Lessons are repeated until they are learned." > > > http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/ > > _________________________________________________________ > DO YOU YAHOO!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > - > > - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: PWahl@sysinn.com Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Newbie question Date: 06 Jan 1999 11:43:29 -0700 > -----Original Message----- > From: Quan Tran [SMTP:qt@qware.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 1999 11:07 AM > I am new to CANSLIM and also new to this list. The reason I am > lurking on this list is wanting to learn more about CANSLIM. > Please, excuse the very newbie question. > > I see many thread refer to Dr. Elder's Triple Screen and his book. > Searching for Elder on Amazon show a book titled "Trading for a > Living : Psychology, Trading Tactics, Money Management" > ISBN 0471592242 > > Is this THE book? > [Wahl, Patrick] THat is the book everyone is referring to, but I think there are other books you should read first. A few I would read first are - How to make money in stocks - w. o'neil How I made 2 million dollars in the stock market - Nicholas Darvas One up on Wall Street - Peter Lynch Reminiscences of a Stock Operator - Edwin Lefevre - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Craig Griffin Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] SEEK Date: 06 Jan 1999 14:05:45 -0500 Charlie, A couple of lessons I have learned (the hard way) struck me in your post. 1. Don't get emotionally attached to a stock. Just because you entered it and lost money ... or made money ... don't get attached. Learn how to develop "fresh eyes". Look at the stock new - as though it is a different chart for a new company. Now what would you do? 2. Don't ever try to make back money lost, whether in the same stock or another. Also - don't worry about lost opportunities (ie. not participating to the level you think you should in the profits of this market, or missing a breakout, or selling on a stop and then seeing the stock turn and run back up). None of those things matter. Easy for me to say, right? But, seriously, they don't. I look at it as: look at all of the opportunities I missed over the last 10 years. Heck if I had owned the very best stocks and bought them all at the very best moment and held them for the optimum number of years, I would have a bazillion dollars. So forget it. Start fresh. Get into the Zen of the market. Start trying to hit some singles. That is, learn the system and try to execute your trades exactly right. When one of them doesn't work try to look back and see what you did wrong by marking your buy and sell on a chart a few weeks later. Did you buy close to the pivot point? Did you sell at your stop or did you get shaken out on a pullback that never came close to your stop because it was fast or sudden? Did you sell too early without giving the stock enough room to breath? Now to your specific trading errors on SEEK (ala CANSLIM - if daytrading, you are in a whole other ballgame - and for most people, the wrong one because it is so hard to do successfully - Connie and Johan being exceptions). So - to review SEEK. The buy point (pivot point) is at 39 1/4 (highest point in the handle was 39 1/8). If you do not see the handle on the chart, you are not ready yet and need more chart reading experience. Here is the base: * begins 04/16/98 at the old high of 45. * bases for months with resistance showing up at about 39 (see the dates 06/18, 07/02, 07/03, 07/06, 11/09, 11/10, 11/18, 11/30). * net stocks are VERY volatile so whereas a normal base is 20-40% from top to bottom with a handle (if there is one) of no more than 10% top to bottom, SEEK's base is 100% with a handle of 20% top to bottom. * SEEK's "handle" begins on 11/09 and ends on 12/07. * I know it ends on 12/07 because the next day it breaks out - you had to be watching it and catch it that day to buy it correctly. If you do not buy correctly, then all of the other rules and safeguards of CANSLIM go out the window and you are uncharted water. Stocks rarely drop more than 8% from your buy point when bought correctly and this protects you. This is another way of saying that stocks rarely dip back into the base by more than 3 or 4% after a valid breakout. So - if you buy the stock within 5% of the top of the base you are pretty safe. This means that with the pivot point for SEEK at 39 1/4 (the top of the handle). Ideally you must buy within 5% of that number (max 10%). 39.25 X 1.05 = 41.21 and 39.25 X 1.10 = 43.175. So even if you wanted to stretch it 43 1/4 is your highest buy. If you did stretch it and set your stop at the top of the handle (39 1/4) on a closing basis, then your max loss is 10%. But wait a minute you say, the stock advanced 22% or so on the breakout day. How could I catch it within 10%? Answer: 1) have a watch list of 10 stocks with good bases that you want to own and which have good CS characteristics, 2) watch them by checking quotes 3 times daily or have a paging service such as http://www.datalink.net/ notify you (about $35 monthly) or get an email service to do it or use a broker that accepts buy stop orders for NASDAQ stocks and NYSE, 3) wait for a pullback, often they do give you a second chance to buy (just as those who chased it too high are getting stopped out - look at SEEK after the breakout to see this happening on the chart - 12/10, 12/11, and 12/14). If you bought SEEK higher than 43 1/4 then you are almost assured of failure. You MUST be able to read the chart and see that this is the buy point by second nature. Also note, without the volume on 12/08 - you do not have a valid breakout (and buying on pullbacks is very dangerous). Remember, each day you can look at a base that is longer than 8 weeks and point out to yourself where the stock must go to breakout. If you had been watching SEEK on 10/23/98 to choose a date and only had the chart up till then, you would have said to yourself, "the chart is not yet fleshed out, but I can see that to breakout SEEK will need to trade in the area somewhere between 39 and 45". You could also predict that there would probably be some price action close to or within this area for at least a week or two before the actual breakout occurred. A month later on 11/23 it was pretty clear that 39 was resistance and that a breach of that level on good volume (150%+ of ADV) would be the trigger. As to shorting SEEK, a few don'ts: 1) don't short stocks in a bull market 2) don't short stocks in an uptrend (with the 50dma pointing up) 3) don't short stocks based on valuation (leaders generally seem too expensive by traditional measures). Best Regards, Craig PS. Take your time. Find some good bases on stocks with good CS fundamentals. Put them on a watch list. Buy some of one on a breakout at the right point. Then sit with it a few days. Once you are ahead and get the feeling that the stock is doing ok, maybe buy another one. Keep a wary eye on the market for any sell signals. Plan on holding your stocks for 20-30% gains and assume it could take months, and then decide whether to take some (and let the rest ride through the basing period as a long term hold) or all of your profits. That is Canslim. Fast money in the internets has got a lot of people's vision out of whack. Don't daytrade. Don't overtrade. Don't get attached. Look for the best of the best. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] SEEK Date: 06 Jan 1999 19:11:40 GMT On Wed, 6 Jan 1999 12:05:03 -0500, you wrote: : :As I said I blew it on the purchase on this one. I tried to short it so = if :it went down a little I could get a little money back. Guess what. I = just :got to make another tuition payment. This was not a very financially :devastating deal. I had tight stops and practiced good asset management :(means I loss less then I could have). :I dont know if this is so, I read your Demand/Supply again last night = and :got very suspicious about SEEK as far as accumulation. I will post on = your :sight regarding that. :What really bothers me is that I have not been a very big participant in :this bull market or phase. Just like the guy in "How I made 2M in = Stocks" :He made the comment at the beginning that he came out of the biggest = bull :market in history with next to nothing. :If the market is never wrong. So far I am always wrong. : :Charlie Hang in there, Charlie. I know the feeling, believe me.=20 Dan : :> -----Original Message----- :> From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com :> [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of dbphoenix :> Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 1999 9:34 AM :> To: canslim@lists.xmission.com :> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] SEEK :> :> :> :> :> < would have had you start looking to exit SEEK back in November, with :> a clear sell signal in the fourth week of December. :> :> I combine Elder with Canslim. I go long Canslim stocks that are also :> good :> technical buys according to triple screen, and the other technical :> analysis that Elder goes through (most of it classic TA).>> :> :> SEEK is a good example of why I believe Elder must be combined with :> overall pattern in order to get the best out of the trade (I went into :> all this last spring during the triple screen discussion). There were :> several places to buy in Sept/Oct (that were also very non-CS), but :> when the MACD-H crossed the 0 line, it was worth noting that the stock :> was riding its 17d. On my site and elsewhere, I've suggested using :> the 17d or a 10-15% drop (whichever is less) as a stop on profitable :> trades. Applied here, that would have kept one in the stock until it :> rolled over in December. At that time, it not only declined more than :> 15%, but also broke below its 17d. It may recover, but that's beside :> the point. If one adopts these rules, he sells and asks questions :> later. :> :> I've used the MACDw for a long time, but if the pattern's not there, I :> don't buy on the basis of MACD alone. Demand and supply still rule. :> :> --Db :> :> :> =3D=3D :> :> "Lessons are repeated until they are learned." :> :http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/ : : : :_________________________________________________________ :DO YOU YAHOO!? :Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com : : :- : : : :- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] SEEK Date: 06 Jan 1999 14:36:43 -0500 Craig, That was a great response. If there are any other less vocal newbies out there, read it. This is print out and study material. I fully intend to go back through each date you outlined and look it over. Thanks again for the help. Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Craig Griffin > Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 1999 2:06 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] SEEK > > > Charlie, > > A couple of lessons I have learned (the hard way) struck me in your post. > > 1. Don't get emotionally attached to a stock. Just because you entered it > and lost money ... or made money ... don't get attached. Learn how to > develop "fresh eyes". Look at the stock new - as though it is a different > chart for a new company. Now what would you do? > > 2. Don't ever try to make back money lost, whether in the same stock or > another. Also - don't worry about lost opportunities (ie. not > participating to the level you think you should in the profits of this > market, or missing a breakout, or selling on a stop and then seeing the > stock turn and run back up). None of those things matter. Easy for me to > say, right? But, seriously, they don't. I look at it as: look at all of > the opportunities I missed over the last 10 years. Heck if I had > owned the > very best stocks and bought them all at the very best moment and held them > for the optimum number of years, I would have a bazillion dollars. So > forget it. Start fresh. Get into the Zen of the market. > > Start trying to hit some singles. That is, learn the system and try to > execute your trades exactly right. When one of them doesn't work try to > look back and see what you did wrong by marking your buy and sell on a > chart a few weeks later. Did you buy close to the pivot point? Did you > sell at your stop or did you get shaken out on a pullback that never came > close to your stop because it was fast or sudden? Did you sell too early > without giving the stock enough room to breath? > > Now to your specific trading errors on SEEK (ala CANSLIM - if daytrading, > you are in a whole other ballgame - and for most people, the wrong one > because it is so hard to do successfully - Connie and Johan being > exceptions). > > So - to review SEEK. The buy point (pivot point) is at 39 1/4 (highest > point in the handle was 39 1/8). If you do not see the handle on the > chart, you are not ready yet and need more chart reading experience. Here > is the base: > * begins 04/16/98 at the old high of 45. > * bases for months with resistance showing up at about 39 > (see the dates 06/18, 07/02, 07/03, 07/06, 11/09, 11/10, 11/18, 11/30). > * net stocks are VERY volatile so whereas a normal base is 20-40% from top > to bottom with a handle (if there is one) of no more than 10% top to > bottom, SEEK's base is 100% with a handle of 20% top to bottom. > * SEEK's "handle" begins on 11/09 and ends on 12/07. > * I know it ends on 12/07 because the next day it breaks out - you had to > be watching it and catch it that day to buy it correctly. If you do not > buy correctly, then all of the other rules and safeguards of > CANSLIM go out > the window and you are uncharted water. Stocks rarely drop more than 8% > from your buy point when bought correctly and this protects you. This is > another way of saying that stocks rarely dip back into the base by more > than 3 or 4% after a valid breakout. So - if you buy the stock within 5% > of the top of the base you are pretty safe. This means that with > the pivot > point for SEEK at 39 1/4 (the top of the handle). Ideally you must buy > within 5% of that number (max 10%). 39.25 X 1.05 = 41.21 and 39.25 X 1.10 > = 43.175. So even if you wanted to stretch it 43 1/4 is your highest buy. > If you did stretch it and set your stop at the top of the handle (39 1/4) > on a closing basis, then your max loss is 10%. > > But wait a minute you say, the stock advanced 22% or so on the breakout > day. How could I catch it within 10%? > Answer: 1) have a watch list of 10 stocks with good bases that you want to > own and which have good CS characteristics, > 2) watch them by checking quotes 3 times daily or have a paging service > such as http://www.datalink.net/ notify you (about $35 monthly) or get an > email service to do it or use a broker that accepts buy stop orders for > NASDAQ stocks and NYSE, > 3) wait for a pullback, often they do give you a second chance to > buy (just > as those who chased it too high are getting stopped out - look at SEEK > after the breakout to see this happening on the chart - 12/10, 12/11, and > 12/14). > > If you bought SEEK higher than 43 1/4 then you are almost assured of > failure. You MUST be able to read the chart and see that this is the buy > point by second nature. Also note, without the volume on 12/08 - > you do not > have a valid breakout (and buying on pullbacks is very dangerous). > > Remember, each day you can look at a base that is longer than 8 weeks and > point out to yourself where the stock must go to breakout. If > you had been > watching SEEK on 10/23/98 to choose a date and only had the chart up till > then, you would have said to yourself, "the chart is not yet fleshed out, > but I can see that to breakout SEEK will need to trade in the area > somewhere between 39 and 45". You could also predict that there would > probably be some price action close to or within this area for at least a > week or two before the actual breakout occurred. A month later > on 11/23 it > was pretty clear that 39 was resistance and that a breach of that level on > good volume (150%+ of ADV) would be the trigger. > > As to shorting SEEK, a few don'ts: > 1) don't short stocks in a bull market > 2) don't short stocks in an uptrend (with the 50dma pointing up) > 3) don't short stocks based on valuation (leaders generally seem too > expensive by traditional measures). > > Best Regards, > Craig > > PS. Take your time. Find some good bases on stocks with good CS > fundamentals. Put them on a watch list. Buy some of one on a breakout at > the right point. Then sit with it a few days. Once you are ahead and get > the feeling that the stock is doing ok, maybe buy another one. > Keep a wary > eye on the market for any sell signals. Plan on holding your stocks for > 20-30% gains and assume it could take months, and then decide whether to > take some (and let the rest ride through the basing period as a long term > hold) or all of your profits. That is Canslim. Fast money in the > internets has got a lot of people's vision out of whack. Don't daytrade. > Don't overtrade. Don't get attached. Look for the best of the best. > > > - > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] SEEK Date: 06 Jan 1999 20:38:40 +0100 Charlie, Craig wrote: >3) don't short stocks based on valuation (leaders generally seem too >expensive by traditional measures). Prime example: AMZN. Herds of shorters getting killed by AMZN(s) time and time again. Johan - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tony Austin" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] SEEK Date: 06 Jan 1999 14:43:35 -0500 >>3) don't short stocks based on valuation (leaders generally seem too >>expensive by traditional measures). >Prime example: AMZN. >Herds of shorters getting killed by AMZN(s) time and time again. >Johan In general, it is good practice to short with the market. The particulars of an issue are important, of course, but when the market decides to correct, thats the time to short. You seldom win trying to argue with the market. ______________________________ Tony Austin email me at tony@radixinc.com send me a note via icq at 14719809 You can get icq at http://icq.com/ > >>3) don't short stocks based on valuation (leaders generally seem too >>expensive by traditional measures). > >Prime example: AMZN. > >Herds of shorters getting killed by AMZN(s) time and time again. > > > >Johan > > > > > > >- > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] SEEK Date: 06 Jan 1999 14:50:45 -0500 It was a failed experiment. Lesson learned Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Johan Van Houtven > Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 1999 2:39 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] SEEK > > > Charlie, > > Craig wrote: > > >3) don't short stocks based on valuation (leaders generally seem too > >expensive by traditional measures). > > Prime example: AMZN. > > Herds of shorters getting killed by AMZN(s) time and time again. > > > > Johan > > > > > > > - > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Craig Griffin Subject: [CANSLIM] -[Off Topic] Internet stocks Date: 06 Jan 1999 17:46:56 -0500 Yes, they are too volatile. Yes, they have no earnings (mostly). Certainly, not Canslim in its pure form with C and A. But, they are Leaders. So one should be aware and perhaps participate ... With that in mind, here is a summary of ideas by Steve Harmon. At the same time, beware of "tulip mania" ;^) http://isdex.yahoo.com/isdex/morning.html - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Craig Griffin Subject: [CANSLIM] AMZN Lemonade Stand Analysis Date: 06 Jan 1999 18:05:51 -0500 This was posted on Misc.Invest.Stocks by someone named alex@cts.com (Stev= e Alexander). =20 Common Stock 15,810 million shares at $124.50 =3D $19.7 billion market = cap FOR THE PERIOD NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1998, and prior years 1998 1997 1996 = 1995 OPERATIONS: Net sales........................ 153,698 147,758 15,746 511 Cost of sales............... 118,823 118,945 12,287 409 Gross profit............. 34,875 28,813 3,459 102 Operating expenses: 76,381 58,022 9,438 406 Loss from operations... (41,506) (29,209) (5,979) (304) Interest income.......... 4,754 1,898 202 = 1 Interest expense.......... (8,419) (279) -- = --=20 Net loss.................. (45,171) (27,590) (5,777) (303) Total assets........... 619,714 149,006 8,271 1,084 Total debt.............. 439,847 78,202 -- -- Lemonade stand analysis (omit the zeros): Your friend offers to sell you = his lemonade stand for $19,700. The stand, cups, pitcher and stuff is worth $= 619, and the business owes $439 to creditors, so if you bought it and sold all= that stuff, you=92d have $180 cash. He has been running this stand for 4 years= and he has lost money every year. He sold $153 worth of lemonade (for a loss of $45) in the first 9 months this year. You have been to this lemonade stand quite a few times and it is a great place. The business seems to be growing fast. Your friends say lemonade stands are the hot thing right now. Many of the= m are buying lemonade stands. The price of lemonade stands is skyrocketing! Why= , only four months ago, you could have bought this very same stand for only abou= t $7,000. If you had done that you could sell it now for more than twice your investment. Would you pay $19,700 for this lemonade stand? This lemonade stand is Amazon.com - (figures from SEC - Edgar site) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: [CANSLIM] CELL Date: 06 Jan 1999 19:15:41 -0500 I see +'s and -'s in this one. V bottom from July to mid Nov. and then formed a six week handle. Volume dried up in mid to end of Dec. Then the volume really picked up. The price did not do much so I wonder if that could have been some distribution. There is overhead resistance, 52 week high is around 21. The resistance looks like around 17 which up till May was support. Broke above resistance today on good volume. Crossed above the 17 day EMA and 200 day EMA, the 50 is turning up still a little low due to recent overhead. The institutional ownership is 80 percent according to QP2. That and the overhead is what I dont like. Any opinions. I just want to know if I am looking at this properly. Charlie - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] SEEK Date: 06 Jan 1999 16:13:30 -0800 (PST) Thanks for the great post, Craig. I've printed out and made notes on the chart. You write, "3) wait for a pullback, often they do give you a second chance to buy (just as those who chased it too high are getting stopped out - look at SEEK after the breakout to see this happening on the chart - 12/10, 12/11, and12/14)." How at the time will I be able to tell these are second chances vs. false breakouts. TM ---Craig Griffin wrote: > > Charlie, > > A couple of lessons I have learned (the hard way) struck me in your post. > > 1. Don't get emotionally attached to a stock. Just because you entered it > and lost money ... or made money ... don't get attached. Learn how to > develop "fresh eyes". Look at the stock new - as though it is a different > chart for a new company. Now what would you do? > > 2. Don't ever try to make back money lost, whether in the same stock or > another. Also - don't worry about lost opportunities (ie. not > participating to the level you think you should in the profits of this > market, or missing a breakout, or selling on a stop and then seeing the > stock turn and run back up). None of those things matter. Easy for me to > say, right? But, seriously, they don't. I look at it as: look at all of > the opportunities I missed over the last 10 years. Heck if I had owned the > very best stocks and bought them all at the very best moment and held them > for the optimum number of years, I would have a bazillion dollars. So > forget it. Start fresh. Get into the Zen of the market. > > Start trying to hit some singles. That is, learn the system and try to > execute your trades exactly right. When one of them doesn't work try to > look back and see what you did wrong by marking your buy and sell on a > chart a few weeks later. Did you buy close to the pivot point? Did you > sell at your stop or did you get shaken out on a pullback that never came > close to your stop because it was fast or sudden? Did you sell too early > without giving the stock enough room to breath? > > Now to your specific trading errors on SEEK (ala CANSLIM - if daytrading, > you are in a whole other ballgame - and for most people, the wrong one > because it is so hard to do successfully - Connie and Johan being exceptions). > > So - to review SEEK. The buy point (pivot point) is at 39 1/4 (highest > point in the handle was 39 1/8). If you do not see the handle on the > chart, you are not ready yet and need more chart reading experience. Here > is the base: > * begins 04/16/98 at the old high of 45. > * bases for months with resistance showing up at about 39 > (see the dates 06/18, 07/02, 07/03, 07/06, 11/09, 11/10, 11/18, 11/30). > * net stocks are VERY volatile so whereas a normal base is 20-40% from top > to bottom with a handle (if there is one) of no more than 10% top to > bottom, SEEK's base is 100% with a handle of 20% top to bottom. > * SEEK's "handle" begins on 11/09 and ends on 12/07. > * I know it ends on 12/07 because the next day it breaks out - you had to > be watching it and catch it that day to buy it correctly. If you do not > buy correctly, then all of the other rules and safeguards of CANSLIM go out > the window and you are uncharted water. Stocks rarely drop more than 8% > from your buy point when bought correctly and this protects you. This is > another way of saying that stocks rarely dip back into the base by more > than 3 or 4% after a valid breakout. So - if you buy the stock within 5% > of the top of the base you are pretty safe. This means that with the pivot > point for SEEK at 39 1/4 (the top of the handle). Ideally you must buy > within 5% of that number (max 10%). 39.25 X 1.05 = 41.21 and 39.25 X 1.10 > = 43.175. So even if you wanted to stretch it 43 1/4 is your highest buy. > If you did stretch it and set your stop at the top of the handle (39 1/4) > on a closing basis, then your max loss is 10%. > > But wait a minute you say, the stock advanced 22% or so on the breakout > day. How could I catch it within 10%? > Answer: 1) have a watch list of 10 stocks with good bases that you want to > own and which have good CS characteristics, > 2) watch them by checking quotes 3 times daily or have a paging service > such as http://www.datalink.net/ notify you (about $35 monthly) or get an > email service to do it or use a broker that accepts buy stop orders for > NASDAQ stocks and NYSE, > 3) wait for a pullback, often they do give you a second chance to buy (just > as those who chased it too high are getting stopped out - look at SEEK > after the breakout to see this happening on the chart - 12/10, 12/11, and > 12/14). > > If you bought SEEK higher than 43 1/4 then you are almost assured of > failure. You MUST be able to read the chart and see that this is the buy > point by second nature. Also note, without the volume on 12/08 - you do not > have a valid breakout (and buying on pullbacks is very dangerous). > > Remember, each day you can look at a base that is longer than 8 weeks and > point out to yourself where the stock must go to breakout. If you had been > watching SEEK on 10/23/98 to choose a date and only had the chart up till > then, you would have said to yourself, "the chart is not yet fleshed out, > but I can see that to breakout SEEK will need to trade in the area > somewhere between 39 and 45". You could also predict that there would > probably be some price action close to or within this area for at least a > week or two before the actual breakout occurred. A month later on 11/23 it > was pretty clear that 39 was resistance and that a breach of that level on > good volume (150%+ of ADV) would be the trigger. > > As to shorting SEEK, a few don'ts: > 1) don't short stocks in a bull market > 2) don't short stocks in an uptrend (with the 50dma pointing up) > 3) don't short stocks based on valuation (leaders generally seem too > expensive by traditional measures). > > Best Regards, > Craig > > PS. Take your time. Find some good bases on stocks with good CS > fundamentals. Put them on a watch list. Buy some of one on a breakout at > the right point. Then sit with it a few days. Once you are ahead and get > the feeling that the stock is doing ok, maybe buy another one. Keep a wary > eye on the market for any sell signals. Plan on holding your stocks for > 20-30% gains and assume it could take months, and then decide whether to > take some (and let the rest ride through the basing period as a long term > hold) or all of your profits. That is Canslim. Fast money in the > internets has got a lot of people's vision out of whack. Don't daytrade. > Don't overtrade. Don't get attached. Look for the best of the best. > > > - > > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Craig Griffin Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] SEEK Date: 06 Jan 1999 20:23:43 -0500 TM wrote: >How at the time will I be able to tell these are second >chances vs. false breakouts. There is no way to be sure of course. They are frightening things to those who are long (especially at higher prices), as well as to those who wish to establish a new postion. Generally, look for price and volume clues or, just hold your nose and jump (and set your stop just as you would on the breakout). If the pullback is on lower volume than the breakout, that is promising (but sometimes high volume pullbacks are just shakeouts). If the down and up days seem to be positive from a volume standpoint (down days on lower volume than up days, preferably "significantly" lower), then that helps. Let's look at the specific case of SEEK: On 12/8 there is the breakout on very high volume and a 15% gain. The pullback on 12/9 is not unusual after such a big gain. The volume is a reasonable amount lower. Lots of buyers out there on the pullback or it would have fallen even further and faster. If the pullback had retraced the greater majority (say 80%) of the prior days gains, then the warning flag is out. In this case it was not nearly that dramatic ... so ok, so far. On 12/10 it gapped down on much lower volume (good sign) and never traded below the pivot point (39 1/4). However, it gave up almost all of 12/08's gains in two days (not too hot, but it happens more than you might guess). Closed at 40. The 10% buying range is from 39 1/4 to 43 1/4, but I would not be ready to buy yet (although I might have taken a very small position). At this point (12/10), the next day's action might be telling. There are about 5 scenarios for 12/11 that come to mind, most of which are decisive: 1) it might gap up or trade up quickly up from 40 to 42 in which case I would probably buy at 41 1/4 to 42, at least a starting position. Later in the day if it was still trading ok (above 41 1/2 say) and still less than 43 1/4, I might add to my position. 2) it might gap up or trade up quickly and I might miss it as it rocketed through 43 1/4 (no position established). 3) it might trade up quickly and then pull back quickly below 40 (like in #1 above, but in this case I might have gotten "suckered" into buying just before it dives). I would simply follow my Canslim stop as though I had bought on the breakout day. I have established the position and we will see what develops. I will refuse to be shaken out by the volatility. But the warning flag will be out and I will have a tight stop (I would probrably sell it, no questions asked, if it closed below 39 in this case, a bit tighter than 8%, but definitely back in the base. Sometimes they do this and then collapse the next day. Sometimes they do this and rocket back out the next day - I hate it when that happens ;0 ). 4) it might gap down or trade down quickly back into the base and not look back as it drops below support (in which case forget it, unless it comes back out of there on strong volume a day or two later). 5) it might gap down or trade down quickly back into the base and then reverse and come back up through today's close (40). If it does that, as it passes say 40 1/2, if the volume looks decent, I would probably take a partial position. And if it continues up to say 41 1/2 towards the end of the day, I might buy a bit more. Once again, using a standard 8% stop. Obviously, 12/11 developed exactly as scenario 5 which was the best possible outcome. This is not only a chance to establish a new position, but a chance to pyramid (add to your original position a little bit) if you are already in. On 12/12 you had to sweat through a fairly volatile down day, but your stop from any position established in the 10% buying zone would not have been threatened. But 12/12 was the last chance for gutsy buyers, because it gapped up the next day and never looked back. Basicly, if you were a "hold the nose and jump" type of buyer you could have bought anytime it was in the 10% range, or even better, within the 5% range near the pivot. Otherwise, your only real chance to buy on a "signal" of some sort would have been on 12/11 based on one of the "good" scenarios (#1 or #5) working out. That is the way I would have approached it: let it "tell" me it still wants to go up, and that this is "unlikely" to be a failed breakout. Aside from all of that, more food for thought: I might argue that you could also add to a position in SEEK on 12/15 based on the extremely high volume and the fact that the action from 12/08 to 12/14 looks like it created a "high handle" on the chart with a pivot at about $46. This corresponds with the left side of the base at $45 back in 04/98. This is a much more risky buy point, however, especially given the volatility in the "high handle" of 15%. If the handle had a nice smooth droop down of about 8% over 5 or 6 days, buying more on 12/15 would feel less risky. Paradoxically, a buy on that day would never have been threated with an 8% stop. Well, out of time for tonight. Thanks for asking. Best Regards, Craig - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Carter Diggs Subject: [CANSLIM] Craig and Db on SEEK in #493 Date: 07 Jan 1999 10:29:55 -0500 I second Charlie's response to your answers on SEEK! Very helpful to newbies, Gentlemen. I will study them carefully. Thank you very much. Carter. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Newbie question Date: 06 Jan 1999 23:06:16 -0500 Tran, while this is a CANSLIM board, many topics get posted that are not pure CANSLIM, or even vaguely CANSLIM. While Elder's system isn't that far astray, it's still not Wm O'Neil's CANSLIM. If you are trying to focus, concentrate, and improve your skills and understanding of CANSLIM, then it's too early for you to be distracted by other trading approaches and theories. It's sometimes difficult here to recognize what is and is not CANSLIM, for example all the recent posts on SEEK ignore the fact that this was never a valid CANSLIM stock with an EPS of 49, it's another volatile internet stock. Read Wm O'Neil's "How To Make Money In Stocks" (HTMMIS) like a novel, then go back and read each chapter like a college textbook. Feel free to make many margin notes and highlight stuff. Then start actually studying it. Read it again every few months after you have either paper traded, or traded with real money. Try to apply as fully as possible all the rules, it's most difficult. Eventually you will start finding the "style" of CANSLIM that meets most of the rules, and still fits your personality. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- Hi all, I am new to CANSLIM and also new to this list. The reason I am lurking on this list is wanting to learn more about CANSLIM. Please, excuse the very newbie question. I see many thread refer to Dr. Elder's Triple Screen and his book. Searching for Elder on Amazon show a book titled "Trading for a Living : Psychology, Trading Tactics, Money Management" ISBN 0471592242 Is this THE book? Regards, Quan Tran qt@qware.com - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] AMZN Lemonade Stand Analysis Date: 06 Jan 1999 23:36:50 -0500 At 18:05 1/6/99 -0500, Craig Griffin wrote: > >Would you pay $19,700 for this lemonade stand? > > I would have to say that all depends on the location of the stand! Is the comparison to tulips fair? I know alot are doing so, but I think this trivializes the Internet as a fad. You and I both know how fundamentally different our lives are due to technological advances of late. We can also measure the differences in terms of time saved, or information gained, as fast as it is happening. Our lives are affected immensely due to our participation, for good or bad. I don't believe such parallels exist with the tulip craze. The Net is here to stay. It will only get bigger, better, faster, simpler and cheaper. ( Cable Modems, ADSL, Fiber Optics, Wireless Internet, yadda, yadda...) I'm not ready to call an end to the mania, and I agree it appears to be just that, based at least on the fundamentals. But the market isn't as smart as I am and it just doesn't know any better. In October of 1987 when the markets lost over 30% in one day, my boss asked me what I was buying. I said Microsoft. He liked IBM cause it had a track record and earnings. Regards, Frank Wolynski - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] AMZN Lemonade Stand Analysis Date: 06 Jan 1999 23:36:50 -0500 At 18:05 1/6/99 -0500, Craig Griffin wrote: > >Would you pay $19,700 for this lemonade stand? > > I would have to say that all depends on the location of the stand! Is the comparison to tulips fair? I know alot are doing so, but I think this trivializes the Internet as a fad. You and I both know how fundamentally different our lives are due to technological advances of late. We can also measure the differences in terms of time saved, or information gained, as fast as it is happening. Our lives are affected immensely due to our participation, for good or bad. I don't believe such parallels exist with the tulip craze. The Net is here to stay. It will only get bigger, better, faster, simpler and cheaper. ( Cable Modems, ADSL, Fiber Optics, Wireless Internet, yadda, yadda...) I'm not ready to call an end to the mania, and I agree it appears to be just that, based at least on the fundamentals. But the market isn't as smart as I am and it just doesn't know any better. In October of 1987 when the markets lost over 30% in one day, my boss asked me what I was buying. I said Microsoft. He liked IBM cause it had a track record and earnings. Regards, Frank Wolynski - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CELL Date: 06 Jan 1999 23:36:49 -0500 Hi Charlie, The basic CANSLIM stuff looks good (RS 95, EPS 99, A/D B, Timeliness B, Up/Down 1.6, GRS 86). On the other hand, it's not in the top 5 of its group, ROE is only 17%, Funds already own 30% while management only own 7% so they're not voting with their holdings. Chart wise a decent case can be made for a cup and handle, certainly today's huge volume argues a breakout. Earnings have been stagnant for the past 4 qtrs, and sales for 3 of the past 4 qtrs. To me it's not a top candidate, and the underlying "fundies" and technicals would concern me. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- I see +'s and -'s in this one. V bottom from July to mid Nov. and then formed a six week handle. Volume dried up in mid to end of Dec. Then the volume really picked up. The price did not do much so I wonder if that could have been some distribution. There is overhead resistance, 52 week high is around 21. The resistance looks like around 17 which up till May was support. Broke above resistance today on good volume. Crossed above the 17 day EMA and 200 day EMA, the 50 is turning up still a little low due to recent overhead. The institutional ownership is 80 percent according to QP2. That and the overhead is what I dont like. Any opinions. I just want to know if I am looking at this properly. Charlie - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] CELL Date: 07 Jan 1999 04:42:20 -0500 QP2 gives a different picture of institutional holdings they say 80 percent. Wonder why there is such a difference. Thanks Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tom Worley > Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 1999 11:37 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CELL > > > Hi Charlie, > > The basic CANSLIM stuff looks good (RS 95, EPS 99, A/D B, > Timeliness B, Up/Down 1.6, GRS 86). On the other hand, it's > not in the top 5 of its group, ROE is only 17%, Funds > already own 30% while management only own 7% so they're not > voting with their holdings. Chart wise a decent case can be > made for a cup and handle, certainly today's huge volume > argues a breakout. > > Earnings have been stagnant for the past 4 qtrs, and sales > for 3 of the past 4 qtrs. > > To me it's not a top candidate, and the underlying "fundies" > and technicals would concern me. > > Tom W > stkguru@netside.net > ICQ # 5568838 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Charles Cangialosi > To: canslim > Date: Wednesday, January 06, 1999 7:13 PM > Subject: [CANSLIM] CELL > > > I see +'s and -'s in this one. V bottom from July to mid > Nov. and then > formed a six week handle. Volume dried up in mid to end of > Dec. Then the > volume really picked up. The price did not do much so I > wonder if that could > have been some distribution. There is overhead resistance, > 52 week high is > around 21. The resistance looks like around 17 which up till > May was > support. Broke above resistance today on good volume. > Crossed above the 17 > day EMA and 200 day EMA, the 50 is turning up still a little > low due to > recent overhead. The institutional ownership is 80 percent > according to QP2. > That and the overhead is what I dont like. > Any opinions. I just want to know if I am looking at this > properly. > Charlie > > > - > > > > - > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: mckeener@ix.netcom.com Subject: [CANSLIM] SEEK Date: 07 Jan 1999 07:44:41 -0600 (CST) Craig, Your analysis of the above stock in response to Charlie's message was just superb. I've printed it, and will follow each point with the chart. I don't always see cup with handles, in fact, I find that pattern the hardest to spot. This is very helpful. Thanks, Mary - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Craig Griffin Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] AMZN Lemonade Stand Analysis Date: 07 Jan 1999 09:03:58 -0500 Frank, I was simply presenting an interesting alternate perspective (from my concurrent post (Internet Stocsk) with a link to an article. Actually, I do think the recent run-up (a triple in a couple of months) is overdone. But, I do not think AMZN's business model is anything like a lemonade stand. The market is discounting the next 3-5 years of growth IMHO. It is a very extended and risky stock. Eventually it will have another 30-40% correction, and I would not particularly like to join the fray just before that happens, but would, of course, wait for a new base and breakout if I was looking to establish a new position. Someone else posted in reply to the lemonade message, something like " your perspective would change if that lemonade stand just happened to be on a motherlode of gold ". And indeed, AMZN is not trading at these lofty valuations because of the lemonade (books) that it sells, but because the brand name and software development that it has already give it a huge lead in its attempt to become the "Walmart of the Internet" (general store) and to capture huge amounts of the internet's retail revenue in the future. It's current revenue growth rate is truely astonishing - and so is its valuation. But, to paraphrase what I said in a recent post, never short based on valuation (only), the leaders often appear overvalued by traditional measures. And AMZN is certainly a hold, for any current owners with a long term pserspective. Best Regards, Craig At 11:36 PM 1/6/99 -0500, you wrote: >At 18:05 1/6/99 -0500, Craig Griffin wrote: >> >>Would you pay $19,700 for this lemonade stand? >> >> > >I would have to say that all depends on the location of the stand! > >Is the comparison to tulips fair? I know alot are doing so, but I think >this trivializes the Internet as a fad. You and I both know how >fundamentally different our lives are due to technological advances of late. >We can also measure the differences in terms of time saved, or information >gained, as fast as it is happening. Our lives are affected immensely due to >our participation, for good or bad. I don't believe such parallels exist >with the tulip craze. > >The Net is here to stay. It will only get bigger, better, faster, simpler >and cheaper. ( Cable Modems, ADSL, Fiber Optics, Wireless Internet, yadda, >yadda...) >I'm not ready to call an end to the mania, and I agree it appears to be >just that, based at least on the fundamentals. But the market isn't as >smart as I am and it just doesn't know any better. >In October of 1987 when the markets lost over 30% in one day, my boss asked >me what I was buying. I said Microsoft. He liked IBM cause it had a track >record and earnings. > >Regards, >Frank Wolynski > > >- > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dbphoenix Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: Craig and SEEK Date: 07 Jan 1999 06:01:33 -0800 (PST) If there are any newcomers out there who haven't started a Craig folder yet, now's as good a time as any. --Db == "Lessons are repeated until they are learned." http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/ _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: Delivery failure Date: 07 Jan 1999 09:29:40 -0500 > > > Yesterday was a most profitable day for those who have been making a > living on MU. > > As a probably course mentioned yesterday, I did buy back into MU at > 54.25 [open price]. Too, I left over a point on the table because I > sold 1/3 of my position the day before. I again sold 1/3 of my position > at yesterday's close. From the looks of things this morning, I should > have sold more. > > But remember that greed and sleepless nights are inbred relatives that > produce genetic mutations [in traders and investors]. > > As I mentioned yesterday, I took positions in ADPT for a nice gain. > This morning there appears to be a big up gap in the opening. That it > is going to be a fairly juicy up gap is not the result of my being smart > or prescient of some external news. I do not know what might have > caused the gap, nor do I particularly care. I bought the stock on pure > technical indicators; I will sell it using the same criteria. > > AMD wobbled about. I am down a quarter point. Yesterday's close > indicated some strength. However, the 3/7/10 EMA broke down. I won't > take more than another 3/8th loss. > > Connie - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dbphoenix Subject: [CANSLIM] Little Green Men Date: 07 Jan 1999 07:54:24 -0800 (PST) I'm becoming concerned. I hadn't visited the Success series for a while and just finished catching up. In HTMMIS, O'N pooh-poohs PEs for a variety of reasons, yet he now advocates using them as a source of sell signals. He has also repeatedly pooh-poohed the use of moving averages and trendlines, yet he now suggests that one pay close attention to them. Clearly, O'N is a victim of alien abduction, and the person who is now providing all this advice is not O'N, but an alien impostor. If you doubt this, I heard that there's an article in IBD stating that the best way to make money in this market is to buy HTFs. Enough said. --Db == "Lessons are repeated until they are learned." http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/ _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Little Green Men Date: 07 Jan 1999 16:29:54 GMT On Thu, 7 Jan 1999 07:54:24 -0800 (PST), you wrote: : : :I'm becoming concerned. : :I hadn't visited the Success series for a while and just finished :catching up. In HTMMIS, O'N pooh-poohs PEs for a variety of reasons, :yet he now advocates using them as a source of sell signals. He has :also repeatedly pooh-poohed the use of moving averages and trendlines, :yet he now suggests that one pay close attention to them. : :Clearly, O'N is a victim of alien abduction, and the person who is now :providing all this advice is not O'N, but an alien impostor. : :If you doubt this, I heard that there's an article in IBD stating that :the best way to make money in this market is to buy HTFs. : :Enough said. : :--Db Umm, not quite "enough", Db. What's HTF's? Dan : :"Lessons are repeated until they are learned." : :http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/ : : : :_________________________________________________________ :DO YOU YAHOO!? :Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com : : :- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: [CANSLIM] Big/Mid/Small Cap. Date: 07 Jan 1999 15:55:07 -0500 This is just an observation. It seems to me that I have not done to well with the mid and smaller cap stuff the gains I have had have been on gorillas like AOL and INTC. Also I keep hearing and reading about how larger stocks are doing better now. It has occurred to me that when you consider "M", it is nice to consider where the "M" is and where "M" isn't. I am sure that this must change but for now I am thinking that missing the boat=not being in the larger cap tech stocks. I am a little reluctant to get in at this point but probably will anyway. Charlie - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Little Green Men Date: 07 Jan 1999 19:31:22 -0800 > :If you doubt this, I heard that there's an article in IBD stating that > :the best way to make money in this market is to buy HTFs. > : > :Enough said. > : > :--Db > > > Umm, not quite "enough", Db. What's HTF's? High Tight Flags, I'm guessing. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Big/Mid/Small Cap. Date: 07 Jan 1999 18:47:33 -0800 My mid- and small- caps are also sucking rocks lately and over the long run. Since June 97 my large caps have had a 34% IRR while my small caps have done a lousy 1%. No reason not to get in now. There has been no significant sell signal for a while, while plenty of signs that the uptrend is continuing are being generated. At 03:55 PM 1/7/99 -0500, you wrote: > > This is just an observation. It seems to me that I have not done to well >with the mid and smaller cap stuff the gains I have had have been on >gorillas like AOL and INTC. Also I keep hearing and reading about how larger >stocks are doing better now. > It has occurred to me that when you consider "M", it is nice to consider >where the "M" is and where "M" isn't. I am sure that this must change but >for now I am thinking that missing the boat=not being in the larger cap tech >stocks. > I am a little reluctant to get in at this point but probably will anyway. > >Charlie > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Craig Griffin Subject: [CANSLIM] M - Dow Cup w/Handle b/o Weds Date: 08 Jan 1999 08:50:41 -0500 The DJIA broke out of a large cup w/handle formation on Wednesday, 01/06/99, on big volume. The cup runs from 07/17/98 to 11/24/98 on the chart. The handle runs from 11/24/98 to 01/05/99 on the chart. The handle on the big cup is also a smaller cup w/handle. The cup runs from 11/24/98 to 12/30/98 on the chart. And the little handle runs from 12/30/98 to 01/05/99. This big cup w/handle with the big handle also forming a cup w/handle is also a fairly common formation found on individual issues. This market showed amazing weakness to drop so far so fast in September. But it also showed amazing power to come back so quickly. Now all three major indexes have formed up cup w/handles and broken out one after the other (the DOW being the last to breakout). And the volume on the breakout for the DOW was very large. This bodes well for the continued strength of this bull move (although there are no guarantees in this business). Yesterdays attempt to sell off with profit taking and quick recovery also bodes well. One day at a time of course, but so far, one word best describes it: "powerful". PS. Russell 2000 continues to be the laggard (fourth index), which says to me, stay with the larger and mid-sized companies for now. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Craig Griffin Subject: [CANSLIM] Another Second Chance Buy Example Date: 08 Jan 1999 08:48:36 -0500 Another second chance buy example: AAPL gave a second chance buy on the pullback on Weds (it ran counter to the market that day, bigtime). Then relaunched yesterday. It had a much riskier look to it than SEEK in our discussions yesterday because in one day it retraced all the way to the top of the base. Then when it recovered yesterday, the second chance buy signal was at 42 3/8's. I love it when they do this and recover because it makes the stock look great on a weekly chart. The retracement day gets masked out (as it should) and all you see is the strong spike up with big volume. The retracement day's volume simply contributes to the weeks big up volume. When you think about it all of the brave souls buying that big volume as it pulled back turned out to be 1) right so far, and 2) strong holders of the stock (vs weak holders) and thus, on that day, even though it was a down day, the stock was moving into strong hands. If something was wrong the stock would have continued to pullback well into its base and they would have all been going "oh, no!". But, if it was just a shakeout, the action on Thursday is one of several possible results (another is a dribbling few days along the top of the base before moving back up). Thursday's recovery on equally big volume is the best possible response, of course. Once again, the stock was moving counter to the market most of the day Thursday. AAPL is a turnaround in more ways than one ;^). - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: [CANSLIM] M Date: 08 Jan 1999 09:46:53 -0500 I am trying to get back into the market. My stock picking prowess leaves me 100% in cash while all of my great picks that I was stopped out of are out of the blue and into the black. OK so if you dont use CANSLIM principles on the way in your stops cant be CANSLIM either. Got that one figured out at last. I would love to buy ATT (T) today it took off two points at the open. I also like MSFT. Only up one. I dont want to buy when the market first opens according to some reading I have been doing it is best to let the day settle in. We will see how that works today. Charlie - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Craig Griffin Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] M - Charlie Date: 08 Jan 1999 10:22:21 -0500 Charlie, If you are buying these stocks, NON-Canslim, so to speak. You need very clear goals / purpose in your head. Is this a long term, no matter what hold? In which case - stuff them in a mattress and check on them in 5 years? Is this daytrading, but you haven't told yourself yet? - very dangerous if that is the case. Is this a vague, I'll participate, make some money and then we'll see? If so, odds are you will not make money, quite the reverse. Many stocks are extended now. Monday could as easily advance another percent or two as pullback a percent or two. If it pulls back a percent or two, what you buy today could pullback 5%. Don't be in too much of a rush. Missed profits are better than losses. There are more breakouts happening daily (for example MSPG, AAPL, and many others broke out in the last 2 or 3 days). Buy the breakouts and stick with Canslim /OR/ put your money in a mutual fund and keep out 10% to practice Canslim with. Your problem is not that there are no breakouts left, there will be many many more over the coming days and weeks if the market continues up. Your problem is finding the good bases and catching them in a timely fashion (on the breakout day or on a pullback bounce). Learn to find the bases. Someone else asked me about this recently. I do not have a formal system for doing it. I keep a watchlist of about 200 good candidates selected from RS / EPS rankings, or things that I have read about the company, and other sources and go from there. It is a long laborious process that I need to improve on. Here are some methods that work: 1) (Hard work) Look at Friday's IBD and each week keep all of the symbols from "Your Weekend Review" in a list. That is the 150 to 200 stocks you should probably be interested in. Then review all of those charts each weekend (flip through with Quotes Plus or TC2000 - the web is probably too slow). Ignore all the extended stocks and just keep a list of the stocks with the best bases (try to limit your list to say 30 candidates). Of those 30, look up the CANSLI fundamentals and choose the really best 10 or 15. Then watch those 10 or 15 for a breakout that week. Next weekend, do the same thing. Throw out some of the 10 or 15 that broke out or broke down or which just are not as fundamentally good as the new list you get the next week. After a week or two you will have 25 to 30 stocks that you have researched well and would like to own. Then you just have to watch them for breakouts. Most of the stocks will repeat in the Friday review each week, only 5%-20% will be replaced each week. That simplifies your list making. You just have to compare last weeks list to the new list in the newspaper and throw out the dropped issues and add in the new ones. Time consuming, yes, maybe 2-4 hours each weekend, just to review the list and another 2 hours to look up the best stocks out of your list. 2) (Excellent/Easy) Here is a simpler way to get candidates. It will not be exactly the same list, but it is just as good: subscribe to Ron Russell's weekly email of Canslim stocks (the number of stocks that pass his filters rise and fall each week based on market action - but you usually will have about 200 candidates to look through - and no typing - he updates it for you - no charge. ) And the spreadsheet he sends contains all kinds of cool fundamental data. I am a long time subscriber (did I mention it is free). THANK YOU RON! Then do the same with Ron's list. Go through looking for good bases with QP or TC2000 or any stock database/charting package (they all will accept lists of stock symbols as input and you can simply page through them, clickly click, same as in #1, just no typing of symbols required to build the list). 3) Use a scan/charting program such as TC2000 or QP2 or WOW. There is a public domain scan for QP2, for example, that will roughly reproduce the Friday list from IBD by scanning the QP2 database. You could do this every night if you wanted to and page through the 200 or so stocks output looking at bases (clicky clik). Or just do like above, look through each weekend, and build a 10-25 stock watchlist. Simple. 4) Use DG separately or in conjunction with all of the above. Tom Worley does this along with several others on the list and maybe they will speak to their methodology. I am a sometimes (monthly) subscriber to the paper copy of the NASDAQ and use it to look up fundamental data and to scan for bases (occassionally). Others use the DG Online as thier everything. Prices vary, but the cheapist system for time and money is probably either QP2 or TC2000 at about $17 monthly (which includes a charting package and scan capability), perhaps combined with Ron Russell's list. You can buy IBD weekly on the newsstand and just get Friday's paper or go to the library if you want to add that element cheaply. You can try DG Online for $60 for one month (it is cheaper by the year). You can try the print DG weekly for 5 weeks for about $40. Finding and buying one good breakout at the right time will pay for any of these subscriptions. But the important thing is to build a system that works for you. And don't go overboard with data sources. Any one of these will work just fine. You will never catch all of the best breakouts. But just catching a few each year properly is all you need. Get with the program. Hope this helps. Best Regards, Craig At 09:46 AM 1/8/99 -0500, you wrote: > > I am trying to get back into the market. My stock picking prowess leaves me >100% in cash while all of my great picks that I was stopped out of are out >of the blue and into the black. OK so if you dont use CANSLIM principles on >the way in your stops cant be CANSLIM either. Got that one figured out at >last. > I would love to buy ATT (T) today it took off two points at the open. I >also like MSFT. Only up one. I dont want to buy when the market first opens >according to some reading I have been doing it is best to let the day settle >in. We will see how that works today. > >Charlie > > >- > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jerry Hickman Subject: [CANSLIM] Current M Date: 08 Jan 1999 10:24:45 -0500 Hi all, The current state of M is, at least, confusing to me. Some of the negatives I see is: according to IBD, the bullish Advisor Sentiment is at a new high (contrarian, therefore bearish), and the Adv/Dec line has been essentially flat since early last November, even with an uptrending S&P, DJIA, and NASDAQ. What does that say for the "broader market"? Some others--the VIX is inching back up, the ABCDE numbers posted here on this list are slowly eroding. I don't want to sound like I am screaming "the sky is falling" but would be interested in what others are seeing in these indicators. Jerry Hickman Midland, MI - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Little Green Men Date: 08 Jan 1999 15:27:32 GMT On Thu, 7 Jan 1999 19:31:22 -0800, you wrote: :From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) :To: canslim@lists.xmission.com : :> :If you doubt this, I heard that there's an article in IBD stating = that :> :the best way to make money in this market is to buy HTFs. :> : :> :Enough said. :> : :> :--Db :>=20 :>=20 :> Umm, not quite "enough", Db. What's HTF's? : :High Tight Flags, I'm guessing. : Yeah, that finally came to me...=20 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Craig Griffin Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Current M Date: 08 Jan 1999 10:48:44 -0500 Jerry, I don't know. But all of the issues you point out are certainly concerns. This market not only is powerful, it is also frothy (Turkeys are flying, and people are jumping on anything that moves and says ".com"). Lots of stocks have advanced 35% in 3 or 4 days. It seems nuts and we are overdue a consolidation at least. But, the DJIA, S&P500, and NASDAQ have positive chart patterns and the new/high low ratio continues to improve, and many, if not most breakouts are working. So, my theory: the green light is on for now (could change any day). Ride breakouts as always when in "bull mode". Keep a wary eye out for distribution days and other signs of a top. Even as the DJIA was breaking out, I saw two toppy signs in the NASDAQ: 1) gap up two days ago - looked like the top of a climax run to me, 2) big distribution type of day yesterday, but not exactly. Today looks like it may be another and more definite distribution day followed by some backing and filling over the next week or two. (We gapped up about 40 pts- 2% - on the NASDAQ today and here we are at 10:30, only up 12 pts). But one never knows - it could still end up 2% for today. One day at the time. I will continue to buy nice looking breakouts as cash permits (so not right now), until we get a couple more days of distribution at least, or until the breakouts start failing on me. My point in the earlier post about the "powerful" M was not that every day will be up or that we are not (over)-due a consolidation. Only that, I would be very surprised if we had a major correction here. I would expect the cup w/handle bases that the indexes have formed to offer support at the top of the base or slightly below it. A pullback of 5-8% in rapid fashion would be no surprise at any time. A retracing of the years gains would probably work to scare out a lot of folks and hurt plenty of Johnie Come Lately's. And the market does work overtime to hurt you, unfortunately. Best Regards, Craig At 10:24 AM 1/8/99 -0500, you wrote: >Hi all, > >The current state of M is, at least, confusing to me. Some of the >negatives I see is: according to IBD, the bullish Advisor Sentiment is at >a new high (contrarian, therefore bearish), and the Adv/Dec line has been >essentially flat since early last November, even with an uptrending S&P, >DJIA, and NASDAQ. What does that say for the "broader market"? > >Some others--the VIX is inching back up, the ABCDE numbers posted here on >this list are slowly eroding. > >I don't want to sound like I am screaming "the sky is falling" but would be >interested in what others are seeing in these indicators. > >Jerry Hickman >Midland, MI > > >- > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Current M Date: 08 Jan 1999 16:31:52 GMT On Fri, 08 Jan 1999 10:24:45 -0500, you wrote: :Hi all, : :The current state of M is, at least, confusing to me. Some of the :negatives I see is: according to IBD, the bullish Advisor Sentiment is = at :a new high (contrarian, therefore bearish), and the Adv/Dec line has = been :essentially flat since early last November, even with an uptrending S&P, :DJIA, and NASDAQ. What does that say for the "broader market"? : :Some others--the VIX is inching back up, the ABCDE numbers posted here = on :this list are slowly eroding. : :I don't want to sound like I am screaming "the sky is falling" but would= be :interested in what others are seeing in these indicators. : :Jerry Hickman :Midland, MI Given the way things have been going my feeling is that the VIX is not going to go where you would like to see it for CANSLIM techniques to be most effective, in the parlance of Tom Worley. I think you will see it hanging around 25. That's my guess. However, they say that a good January means a good year 90% of the time. So far Jan. has been a boomer, and I don't expect that to deteriorate. The sky is not falling. Dan - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] M - Charlie Date: 08 Jan 1999 11:59:03 -0500 Craig, Thank you for the reply, its another print out for me. As always you are on the money. Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Craig Griffin > Sent: Friday, January 08, 1999 10:22 AM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] M - Charlie > > > Charlie, > > If you are buying these stocks, NON-Canslim, so to speak. You need very > clear goals / purpose in your head. Is this a long term, no matter what > hold? In which case - stuff them in a mattress and check on them in 5 > years? Is this daytrading, but you haven't told yourself yet? - very > dangerous if that is the case. Is this a vague, I'll participate, make > some money and then we'll see? If so, odds are you will not make money, > quite the reverse. Many stocks are extended now. Monday could as easily > advance another percent or two as pullback a percent or two. If it pulls > back a percent or two, what you buy today could pullback 5%. Don't be in > too much of a rush. Missed profits are better than losses. > > There are more breakouts happening daily (for example MSPG, AAPL, and many > others broke out in the last 2 or 3 days). Buy the breakouts and stick > with Canslim /OR/ put your money in a mutual fund and keep out 10% to > practice Canslim with. Your problem is not that there are no breakouts > left, there will be many many more over the coming days and weeks if the > market continues up. Your problem is finding the good bases and catching > them in a timely fashion (on the breakout day or on a pullback bounce). > > Learn to find the bases. Someone else asked me about this recently. I do > not have a formal system for doing it. I keep a watchlist of about 200 > good candidates selected from RS / EPS rankings, or things that I have > read about the company, and other sources and go from there. It is a long > laborious process that I need to improve on. > > Here are some methods that work: > > 1) (Hard work) Look at Friday's IBD and each week keep all of the symbols > from "Your Weekend Review" in a list. That is the 150 to 200 stocks you > should probably be interested in. Then review all of those charts each > weekend (flip through with Quotes Plus or TC2000 - the web is probably too > slow). Ignore all the extended stocks and just keep a list of the stocks > with the best bases (try to limit your list to say 30 candidates). Of > those 30, look up the CANSLI fundamentals and choose the really best 10 or > 15. Then watch those 10 or 15 for a breakout that week. Next weekend, do > the same thing. Throw out some of the 10 or 15 that broke out or broke > down or which just are not as fundamentally good as the new list you get > the next week. After a week or two you will have 25 to 30 stocks that you > have researched well and would like to own. Then you just have to watch > them for breakouts. Most of the stocks will repeat in the Friday review > each week, only 5%-20% will be replaced each week. That simplifies your > list making. You just have to compare last weeks list to the new list in > the newspaper and throw out the dropped issues and add in the new ones. > Time consuming, yes, maybe 2-4 hours each weekend, just to review the list > and another 2 hours to look up the best stocks out of your list. > > 2) (Excellent/Easy) Here is a simpler way to get candidates. It will not > be exactly the same list, but it is just as good: subscribe to Ron > Russell's weekly email of Canslim stocks (the number of stocks that pass > his filters rise and fall each week based on market action - but you > usually will have about 200 candidates to look through - and no > typing - he > updates it for you - no charge. ) And the spreadsheet he sends contains > all kinds of cool fundamental data. I am a long time subscriber (did I > mention it is free). THANK YOU RON! Then do the same with Ron's > list. Go > through looking for good bases with QP or TC2000 or any stock > database/charting package (they all will accept lists of stock symbols as > input and you can simply page through them, clickly click, same as in #1, > just no typing of symbols required to build the list). > > 3) Use a scan/charting program such as TC2000 or QP2 or WOW. There is a > public domain scan for QP2, for example, that will roughly reproduce the > Friday list from IBD by scanning the QP2 database. You could do > this every > night if you wanted to and page through the 200 or so stocks > output looking > at bases (clicky clik). Or just do like above, look through each weekend, > and build a 10-25 stock watchlist. Simple. > > 4) Use DG separately or in conjunction with all of the above. Tom Worley > does this along with several others on the list and maybe they will speak > to their methodology. I am a sometimes (monthly) subscriber to the paper > copy of the NASDAQ and use it to look up fundamental data and to scan for > bases (occassionally). Others use the DG Online as thier everything. > > Prices vary, but the cheapist system for time and money is probably either > QP2 or TC2000 at about $17 monthly (which includes a charting package and > scan capability), perhaps combined with Ron Russell's list. You can buy > IBD weekly on the newsstand and just get Friday's paper or go to the > library if you want to add that element cheaply. You can try DG > Online for > $60 for one month (it is cheaper by the year). You can try the print DG > weekly for 5 weeks for about $40. > > Finding and buying one good breakout at the right time will pay for any of > these subscriptions. But the important thing is to build a system that > works for you. And don't go overboard with data sources. Any > one of these > will work just fine. You will never catch all of the best breakouts. But > just catching a few each year properly is all you need. > > Get with the program. > > Hope this helps. > > Best Regards, > Craig > > At 09:46 AM 1/8/99 -0500, you wrote: > > > > I am trying to get back into the market. My stock picking > prowess leaves me > >100% in cash while all of my great picks that I was stopped out > of are out > >of the blue and into the black. OK so if you dont use CANSLIM > principles on > >the way in your stops cant be CANSLIM either. Got that one figured out at > >last. > > I would love to buy ATT (T) today it took off two points at > the open. I > >also like MSFT. Only up one. I dont want to buy when the market > first opens > >according to some reading I have been doing it is best to let > the day settle > >in. We will see how that works today. > > > >Charlie > > > > > >- > > > > > > - > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Joe J." Subject: [CANSLIM] little green men Date: 08 Jan 1999 11:34:46 -0700 [CANSLIM] Little Green Men Excellent post Db. I think this speaks right to the concerns Tom W. about sticking with "pure" canslim. Just look at WON's comments in his book about investing in smaller float stocks so you can get more bang for you're buck. About a year ago I heard him comment to someone questioning him about his investment in Pfizer. He indicated that with the size of institutional investors today they could move even a large cap company significantly - thus implying that perhaps float wasn't so important after all. Maybe this also implies that current institutional ownership is also not that important - they can always buy more right? Thus, over time I realized that even WON changes and evolves with changing conditions. Heck, I bet he even owns a few shares in AOL and AMZN right now! If we can learn anything from this, it should be that we need to also change and evolve over time. No, the internets don't meet pure CANSLIM but so what? Wasn't the whole purpose and goal of WON's quest to find "tomorrow's big winners"? If you recognize the risk, buy off a proper chart formation (i.e., a base) and set a stop to limit your risk why shouldn't you be part of this tulip/non-tulip mania? Did WON's system catch DELL at the beginning of its move? If not, why not? Can you learn something from this? Maybe trailing earnings growth is just not working in today's market conditions as well as it did in the days when WON developed his system? Should we be looking more at revenue growth instead? Or, should the RS become more heavily weighted in our analysis? The exact term escapes me right now, but for those of you who read books on Technical Analysis or even the magazine Technical Analysis of Stocks and Commodities, you may recall hearing that when developing a trading/investing system that it should be able to still work as market conditions change (meaning that the system is dynamic). Is pure CANSLIM, the way WON wrote about it so many years ago, still working in today's conditions? Wasn't the whole idea behind CANSLIM to find the DELL's and the AOL's and the AMZN's early on? There are those (mostly Tom W.) who are very concerned that newbies won't be able to figure out what is and what isn't CS if we keep discussing "other methods" that may or may not help improve our results. My personal opinion on that is that this is not just a list for newbies this is a list for experienced traders and investors who are already familiar with WON's concepts. If you are a newbie and you are just trading based on some comments made by myself or anyone else without fully understanding what you are doing, you deserve exactly what you end up with. I just don't think people are that naive myself! Thus, I propose that we use this list to attempt to "rebuild" CS to allow it to work in today's conditions. Let's find a version of CS that allows us to trade "today's big winners". Therefore, keep the posts coming on the trading of SEEK, interpreting the proper base, pivot points, etc. I think it is all valid and it belongs on this list! Good trading, Joe J. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: PWahl@sysinn.com Subject: [CANSLIM] RCGI Date: 08 Jan 1999 12:47:56 -0700 RCGI seems to be breaking out on heavy volume. Any comments on this one? - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: [CANSLIM] Volume Date: 08 Jan 1999 14:44:11 -0500 I have been looking at various stocks today. Two things struck me. First ATT (T). Massive volume and its up. This would indicate, I guess, a lot of people are interested in the stock. Though it is not clear if there is a lot of selling into it going on. Then there is AOL, half the normal volume and it is just floating around, if fact the bears are slightly ahead right not. Is this what is considered distribution into the stock. Charlie - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] RCGI Date: 08 Jan 1999 15:03:03 -0500 Hi, The volume, as you indicated is up there almost 3x's normal. It appears to have be in a trading range for a while, OTOH, 30 looks like resistance and it is about through that. Fundies look OK 95 75 BAB in IBD. If you get a chance look at QTRN. It has been doing the same thing forever. If I had more nerve and more money I would sell it short at 52 cover at 42 buy it long at 42 and sell it again at 52. Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of PWahl@sysinn.com > Sent: Friday, January 08, 1999 2:48 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: [CANSLIM] RCGI > > > RCGI seems to be breaking out on heavy volume. Any comments on this > one? > > - > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] little green men Date: 08 Jan 1999 21:10:06 +0100 Joe wrote: >Let's find a version of CS that >allows us to trade "today's big winners". I currently think that you have to adapt to what the market is telling you. Currently is (or was) - dot.com and anything else even slightly related with the internet - big cap gorilla's - momentum trading Some rules however almost always apply IMHO. To name a few: - 'M' market. What is it doing? Most important. - Buy only from proper bases (for your major buys anyway). - Practice strict money management. Limit your losses and hold your winners. (I have to learn this myself. Example: I was going to hold PFE for years, but sold a few days ago, when my very short term trader 'self' said sell now.) - Buy companies that have at least a few CANSLIM characteristics like 'being a leader' in a strong group, new product, new service or whatever else new. Anyway, I agree with Craig and others that this is sheer madness, but I love it. When I looked at LCOS this morning I reset my RT quote program 2 times to see if it wasn't decieving me. Up 28% in less than a trading day. Not like BCST but good enough for me. FWIW I'm 90% cash now. As Forest Gump would say "For no particular reason". Have to let the excitement wear off during the weekend. Johan - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DS Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] little green men Date: 08 Jan 1999 14:09:43 -0600 Hi Joe, Excellent post! I believe you nailed it.....CS must be adaptive in order to remain the method of finding big winners. Most of the time "S" matters but at times when a large cap stock like DELL or CPWR or WLA or PFE hits an incredible earnings stream massive fund flows allow them to act like they have a small float. They end up having a small float RELATIVE to the demand. MOST of the time earnings are essential for CS but sometimes "N" is more important. This, of course, is the case with the internet and was the case with AMGN and biotech in the early 90's. Most of the time a new high breakout is a must but when a stock forms a nice base 20-30 % off its all time high the breakout is not a new high. MOST the time annual earnings are a must but when you have a stock ramping up its current earnings so fast that they are accelerating 30-50 % quarter over quarter (ASND and USRX et al. in 1995) is it not a CS stock?? CS is vague and will remain so because there is a large subjective component in finding huge winners before everyone else does. All of the more experience CS'ers here have learned the subjectivity the hard way and no amount of pigeon holing CS will change that for the newbies. Ok, my rant is over! Great post Joe. DCSquires - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "dave" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] RCGI Date: 08 Jan 1999 12:08:09 -0800 > RCGI seems to be breaking out on heavy volume. Any comments on this > one? Fundamentals seem good, except very high institutional ownership. Technically, I don't know what to think. RCGI gapped down after last earnings report, which beat estimates, and has traded pretty much sideways since then. I bought on Monday (1/4/99) on what I thought was a breakout. I hope todays breakout is for real. Dave Farthing Gordian Design Services Wanna be blacklisted by our spam filter? mailto: aablme@gordian.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: PWahl@sysinn.com Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] RCGI Date: 08 Jan 1999 13:29:28 -0700 > -----Original Message----- > From: Charles Cangialosi [SMTP:chcng@worldnet.att.net] > Sent: Friday, January 08, 1999 1:03 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] RCGI > > Hi, > The volume, as you indicated is up there almost 3x's normal. It > appears to > have be in a trading range for a while, OTOH, 30 looks like resistance > and > it is about through that. Fundies look OK 95 75 BAB in IBD. > If you get a chance look at QTRN. It has been doing the same thing > forever. > [Wahl, Patrick] RS under 80 was the only negative I could see, plus a possibly overbought market. I day or two of upward movement in RCGI would get that RS up there though. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DS Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Volume Date: 08 Jan 1999 14:52:34 -0600 >>Then there is AOL, half the normal volume and it is just floating around, if fact the bears are slightly ahead right not. Is this what is considered distribution into the stock.<< Hi Charlie, I would not consider this distribution. This stock is trying to hold a High Tight Flag.....a very bullish patterm. My read on the volume situation is convictionless selling. What you have (IMO) is institutional buyers on the bid slowly taking stock from the weak holders that are scared of losing thier profits as the stock bounces around. This is farily heathly action for a stock that has moved so far. Another thing that hints at consolidation is the realatively small range the stock has traded in and that it has held yesterdays low. In order for this to be distribution I would want to see very heavy volume with a "high tail" day and the close lower or the same as the open. This would show that the stock ran higher after the open and then could not hold the high prices as the bears took over. Keep in mind that this stock is trending very stongly. That being said I wouldn't buy AOL until it proves itself buy trading above 153 on heavy volume. With the looks of the internets today (blow-off top likely) that might not happen. Good Luck, DSquires - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "dave" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] RCGI Date: 08 Jan 1999 12:08:09 -0800 > RCGI seems to be breaking out on heavy volume. Any comments on this > one? Fundamentals seem good, except very high institutional ownership. Technically, I don't know what to think. RCGI gapped down after last earnings report, which beat estimates, and has traded pretty much sideways since then. I bought on Monday (1/4/99) on what I thought was a breakout. I hope todays breakout is for real. Dave Farthing Gordian Design Services Wanna be blacklisted by our spam filter? mailto: aablme@gordian.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DS Subject: [CANSLIM] little green men Date: 08 Jan 1999 15:06:14 -0600 Hi Joe, Excellent post! I believe you nailed it.....CS must be adaptive in order to remain the method of finding big winners. Most of the time "S" matters but at times when a large cap stock like DELL or CPWR or WLA or PFE hits an incredible earnings stream massive fund flows allow them to act like they have a small float. They end up having a small float RELATIVE to the demand. MOST of the time earnings are essential for CS but sometimes "N" is more important. This, of course, is the case with the internet and was the case with AMGN and biotech in the early 90's. Most of the time a new high breakout is a must but when a stock forms a nice base 20-30 % off its all time high the breakout is not a new high. MOST the time annual earnings are a must but when you have a stock ramping up its current earnings so fast that they are accelerating 30-50 % quarter over quarter (ASND and USRX et al. in 1995) is it not a CS stock?? CS is vague and will remain so because there is a large subjective component in finding huge winners before everyone else does. All of the more experience CS'ers here have learned the subjectivity the hard way and no amount of pigeon holing CS will change that for the newbies. Ok, my rant is over! Great post Joe. DCSquires - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DS Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] little green men Date: 08 Jan 1999 14:09:43 -0600 Hi Joe, Excellent post! I believe you nailed it.....CS must be adaptive in order to remain the method of finding big winners. Most of the time "S" matters but at times when a large cap stock like DELL or CPWR or WLA or PFE hits an incredible earnings stream massive fund flows allow them to act like they have a small float. They end up having a small float RELATIVE to the demand. MOST of the time earnings are essential for CS but sometimes "N" is more important. This, of course, is the case with the internet and was the case with AMGN and biotech in the early 90's. Most of the time a new high breakout is a must but when a stock forms a nice base 20-30 % off its all time high the breakout is not a new high. MOST the time annual earnings are a must but when you have a stock ramping up its current earnings so fast that they are accelerating 30-50 % quarter over quarter (ASND and USRX et al. in 1995) is it not a CS stock?? CS is vague and will remain so because there is a large subjective component in finding huge winners before everyone else does. All of the more experience CS'ers here have learned the subjectivity the hard way and no amount of pigeon holing CS will change that for the newbies. Ok, my rant is over! Great post Joe. DCSquires - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Volume Date: 08 Jan 1999 16:24:48 -0500 I almost bought it and I almost bought ATT but I held off because I felt rushed and wanted to look things over on the weekend. Charlie PS Car was broke today so I was stuck at the computer. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of DS > Sent: Friday, January 08, 1999 3:53 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Volume > > > >>Then there is AOL, half the normal volume and it is just > floating around, if > fact the bears are slightly ahead right not. Is this what is considered > distribution into the stock.<< > > Hi Charlie, > > I would not consider this distribution. This stock is trying to hold a > High Tight Flag.....a very bullish patterm. My read on the volume > situation is convictionless selling. What you have (IMO) is > institutional buyers on the bid slowly taking stock from the weak > holders that are scared of losing thier profits as the stock bounces > around. This is farily heathly action for a stock that has moved so far. > Another thing that hints at consolidation is the realatively small range > the stock has traded in and that it has held yesterdays low. In order > for this to be distribution I would want to see very heavy volume with a > "high tail" day and the close lower or the same as the open. This would > show that the stock ran higher after the open and then could not hold > the high prices as the bears took over. Keep in mind that this stock is > trending very stongly. That being said I wouldn't buy AOL until it > proves itself buy trading above 153 on heavy volume. With the looks of > the internets today (blow-off top likely) that might not happen. > > Good Luck, > DSquires > > - > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "M Sims" Subject: [CANSLIM] importing list Date: 08 Jan 1999 14:35:14 -0800 I could use a little help if someone would please... I have WOW ver7 and I am trying to import Mr. Russell's list of stocks into my quote list. I have saved the list to excel then saved it as a csv file. Now I go to wow bring up a blank quote list and go to securities to import the file. When I select the file it tells me "unable to interpret" What might I be doing wrong? Thanks for any help... Mike - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Ricardo Bekin" Subject: [CANSLIM] off topic, non-CANSLIM, YHOO, ZD and Softbank Date: 08 Jan 1999 17:40:22 -0600 For anyone thinking about buying internut stocks, a very sobering piece! http://www.thestreet.com/comment/keyhole/597589.html JAFO Ricardo - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Ricardo Bekin" Subject: [CANSLIM] off-topic, YHOO, ZD and Softbank Date: 08 Jan 1999 17:51:43 -0600 If you are unable to read the story at TheStreet.com, it is also available at http://www.observer.com/ under "Business & Real Estate" Ricardo - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] M - Charlie Date: 09 Jan 1999 00:13:22 -0500 Charlie, Craig already made the point that I was going to make, both T and MSFT have great, and I mean GREAT, CANSLIM elements. But what they BOTH lack is a good base for setting up a breakout. That aspect (a base leading to a breakout) is a fundamental part of CANSLIM as developed by WON. Of course, neither meet the criteria for "S" or "I" in CANSLIM either, but WON has been wobbling on that for the past several years. CANSLIM is not only about finding the stocks with high RS and/or high EPS, it's also about timing your entry, and for that you must study charts. Craig is correct, I am lost without Daily Graphs. Have had the paper books for many years now, along with many other WON pubs and sources. Grew addicted to DGO (Daily Graphs Online) while it was in beta, and loved it because it gives me a basic CANSLIM chart of every stock, not just those in the books. Excellent resource if the cost works for you. After changing jobs (read it as being fired before I could quit, still best thing ever happened to me), I lost the paper version, but continued online even after I had to start paying. Without the ability to understand charts, I seriously doubt I could make money with CANSLIM. I do also use BigCharts for technical analysis, which I added to my "skills" portfolio in the past year or so. But my starting point always remains CANSLIM elements as I see them at DGO. I only use BigCharts for helping time my entry, exit and hold decisions. I manually screen stocks hitting new highs, as well as constantly reviewing those stocks I have already added to my "watch list" looking first at their CS elements, then using BigCharts at their technical aspects. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- 4) Use DG separately or in conjunction with all of the above. Tom Worley does this along with several others on the list and maybe they will speak to their methodology. I am a sometimes (monthly) subscriber to the paper copy of the NASDAQ and use it to look up fundamental data and to scan for bases (occassionally). Others use the DG Online as thier everything. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Current M Date: 09 Jan 1999 00:37:18 -0500 Hi Jerry, Mostly I second Craig's comments, but would also add that we are in more of a global economy, and global stock market, than ever before. I used to be a totally domestic (that is, USA based) investor and largely ignored whatever was happening elsewhere. Over the past several years, I have returned to some of my roots of economics and int'l relations/politics, and believe that the USA mkt is far more affected by global events and economies than ever before. Thus, while I rarely invest outside of the USA ( I chose not to add currency risk to investing risk), I still pay attention to what's happening around the globe. I expected at least a 1% spike on the open today, based on global mkts and the futures. It opened stronger than I anticipated, so was not surprised that it eventually gave back all its gains. I was also not surprised that the sheer strength of this mkt, along with other factors like a strong dollar rebound after the intro of the Euro, Brazil's dangerous flirtation with recession and collapse, Japan's failure to enact meaningful change and continued flirtation with new 12 year lows, etc would finally lead to a nice closing gain for the day. The underpinings of today's US mkt are the economics, despite the steadily contraction of mfr activity (7th straight month of downtrend and now in a meaningful contraction); growing inventories; rising unemployment (steady monthly record nrs of bankruptcy filings, good for one of my stocks); and so forth. But the bottom line remains: despite all this, the US economy still is managing to grow several percent (or more a year); Greenspan has his thumb on the process and intends to continue micromanaging the economy to whatever degree he must; the USA remains in the midst of the healthiest and longest economic expansion it likely has ever enjoyed; and finally despite Zippergate and impeachment the USA economy appears to still be #1 in the globe. Flight to safety continues, tho at a lesser and healthier pace. Meanwhile, money continues to flow into 401 plans at record levels. That money must be put somewhere, and the institutional money managers will continue to park it in liquid (e.g. big cap) stocks. Charts on virtually every index I study look healthy and positive (yes, including Russell 2000), and all I need to be able to declare total war on the bears is to see the Transportation index pick up some. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- Jerry, I don't know. But all of the issues you point out are certainly concerns. This market not only is powerful, it is also frothy (Turkeys are flying, and people are jumping on anything that moves and says ".com"). Lots of stocks have advanced 35% in 3 or 4 days. It seems nuts and we are overdue a consolidation at least. But, the DJIA, S&P500, and NASDAQ have positive chart patterns and the new/high low ratio continues to improve, and many, if not most breakouts are working. So, my theory: the green light is on for now (could change any day). Ride breakouts as always when in "bull mode". Keep a wary eye out for distribution days and other signs of a top. Even as the DJIA was breaking out, I saw two toppy signs in the NASDAQ: 1) gap up two days ago - looked like the top of a climax run to me, 2) big distribution type of day yesterday, but not exactly. Today looks like it may be another and more definite distribution day followed by some backing and filling over the next week or two. (We gapped up about 40 pts- 2% - on the NASDAQ today and here we are at 10:30, only up 12 pts). But one never knows - it could still end up 2% for today. One day at the time. I will continue to buy nice looking breakouts as cash permits (so not right now), until we get a couple more days of distribution at least, or until the breakouts start failing on me. My point in the earlier post about the "powerful" M was not that every day will be up or that we are not (over)-due a consolidation. Only that, I would be very surprised if we had a major correction here. I would expect the cup w/handle bases that the indexes have formed to offer support at the top of the base or slightly below it. A pullback of 5-8% in rapid fashion would be no surprise at any time. A retracing of the years gains would probably work to scare out a lot of folks and hurt plenty of Johnie Come Lately's. And the market does work overtime to hurt you, unfortunately. Best Regards, Craig At 10:24 AM 1/8/99 -0500, you wrote: >Hi all, > >The current state of M is, at least, confusing to me. Some of the >negatives I see is: according to IBD, the bullish Advisor Sentiment is at >a new high (contrarian, therefore bearish), and the Adv/Dec line has been >essentially flat since early last November, even with an uptrending S&P, >DJIA, and NASDAQ. What does that say for the "broader market"? > >Some others--the VIX is inching back up, the ABCDE numbers posted here on >this list are slowly eroding. > >I don't want to sound like I am screaming "the sky is falling" but would be >interested in what others are seeing in these indicators. > >Jerry Hickman >Midland, MI > > >- > > - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "George W. Gregory" Subject: [CANSLIM] Mkt & EPS Rank Factors Date: 08 Jan 1999 21:59:46 -0800 CS Members: I'm glad the EPS computation situation was finally resolved. Yes, the e mail you got from Dan at Dailygraphs Online was correct. I talked to Dan and he forwarded an e mail he had received from one of the programmers. Under $ .11, earnings for the quarter are treated differently than earnings over $ .11. However, there is a maximum cap percentagewise. Also, the one factor not mentioned was the stability factor. I understand the stability factor will be in the IBD "How to Read" soon. The "How to Read Page" for Datagraphs (the institutional service O'Neil provides to funds, investment advisors, etc.) reads as follows; EPS Rank is a proprietary formula weighting four different factors: percent increase/decrease in the most recent quarter versus the same quarter a year ago, percentage increase/decrease in the prior quarter versus the same quarter a year ago, the 5-year growth rate and stability (however, the longer term growth rate may have been altered some 'cause the are so many company's with no long tem history). The result is ranked on a scale of 1 to 99. A rank of 70 means the company had a better earnings record than 70% of all companies in our database. In looking at the Dow the last couple of days, it is a classic cup and handle. The S&P and NASDAQ could also be stretched to be called a cup and handle, or saucer and handle (S&P more than the NASDAQ). Also, today might be considered a "follow through" day, with the market up 1% or more on increased volume. Will have to check the market more closely on that. Sorry about the misunderstanding and sorry someone had to call Dailygraphs. tiger49er - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] little green men Date: 09 Jan 1999 01:14:01 -0500 At the risk of invoking another flaming war, and after my third day of working 13 or so hours, I will respond, Joe. This board was developed by Jeff Salisbury as a place for those trying to improve their CANSLIM skills. I thank Jeff for providing that opportunity. I am grateful, as it has helped me, both by challenging my understanding of CANSLIM, by adjusting to changing market conditions, and by many posts on internet resources that weren't necessarily "CANSLIM", but are free and most useful. The past few years of seminars and stuff by WON as well as Ryan has clearly shown a trend towards big cap stocks. I don't argue with this, that's where the cash flow is occurring. But I also do not believe WON is as reactive to changing mkt conditions as you are, or suggest this group should be. This group includes a wide variety of members ranging from true investors putting their money at risk for the long haul to those that are day trading to those earning a living from trading the mkt for a qtr pt gain or so. Nothing about CANSLIM says you must be constantly invested on either the long or short side. Only a true "trader" or someone making a living off the mkt will subscribe to that. For the CANSLIMer, there should be periods when it makes more sense to just sit on cash. Granted, in an extended bull mkt, it's hard to see that period, but that doesn't mean it's not there. I thought this was a pretty universal group, where everyone from newbies to experieced traders might have the opportunity to learn. That's been one of my premises in continuing to participate. If it's to be changed into one of only saavy, experienced, momentum based "traders", then it's changing in a way I can't support. One of the charms of this group has been its uniqueness in the internet. I hate to see it become just like so many other "net" "discussion" groups. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- [CANSLIM] Little Green Men Excellent post Db. I think this speaks right to the concerns Tom W. about sticking with "pure" canslim. Just look at WON's comments in his book about investing in smaller float stocks so you can get more bang for you're buck. There are those (mostly Tom W.) who are very concerned that newbies won't be able to figure out what is and what isn't CS if we keep discussing "other methods" that may or may not help improve our results. My personal opinion on that is that this is not just a list for newbies this is a list for experienced traders and investors who are already familiar with WON's concepts. If you are a newbie and you are just trading based on some comments made by myself or anyone else without fully understanding what you are doing, you deserve exactly what you end up with. I just don't think people are that naive myself! Thus, I propose that we use this list to attempt to "rebuild" CS to allow it to work in today's conditions. Let's find a version of CS that allows us to trade "today's big winners". Therefore, keep the posts coming on the trading of SEEK, interpreting the proper base, pivot points, etc. I think it is all valid and it belongs on this list! Good trading, Joe J. - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] RCGI Date: 09 Jan 1999 01:21:14 -0500 Patrick, you could add to that an ROE of 15%, and the funds owning better than three times the shares that management owns, so guess who ultimately controls the price of the stock, and the likelihood of funds going in and buying more shares. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- > -----Original Message----- > From: Charles Cangialosi [SMTP:chcng@worldnet.att.net] > Sent: Friday, January 08, 1999 1:03 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] RCGI > > Hi, > The volume, as you indicated is up there almost 3x's normal. It > appears to > have be in a trading range for a while, OTOH, 30 looks like resistance > and > it is about through that. Fundies look OK 95 75 BAB in IBD. > If you get a chance look at QTRN. It has been doing the same thing > forever. > [Wahl, Patrick] RS under 80 was the only negative I could see, plus a possibly overbought market. I day or two of upward movement in RCGI would get that RS up there though. - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] M - Charlie Date: 09 Jan 1999 04:09:38 -0500 Tom, What you are doing is what I would like to be doing. I'm still on the short end of the learning curve. However, I am going to take Craig's (yours and others) suggestions and look hard for stocks with the correct entry point. That has been the biggest challenge so it is the part I need to work on the most. I am using QP2. It's good and definitely useful and will probably be more so as I get better at it. DGO is probably a year or so away for me. The expense at the moment is more than want to manage. I want to gain a little more experience first. I really like this list and hope it continues. One day I may be able to contribute something to some newbie to repay the help I and other newbies have received. Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tom Worley > Sent: Saturday, January 09, 1999 12:13 AM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] M - Charlie > > > Charlie, > > Craig already made the point that I was going to make, both > T and MSFT have great, and I mean GREAT, CANSLIM elements. > But what they BOTH lack is a good base for setting up a > breakout. That aspect (a base leading to a breakout) is a > fundamental part of CANSLIM as developed by WON. Of course, > neither meet the criteria for "S" or "I" in CANSLIM either, > but WON has been wobbling on that for the past several > years. CANSLIM is not only about finding the stocks with > high RS and/or high EPS, it's also about timing your entry, > and for that you must study charts. > > Craig is correct, I am lost without Daily Graphs. Have had > the paper books for many years now, along with many other > WON pubs and sources. Grew addicted to DGO (Daily Graphs > Online) while it was in beta, and loved it because it gives > me a basic CANSLIM chart of every stock, not just those in > the books. Excellent resource if the cost works for you. > After changing jobs (read it as being fired before I could > quit, still best thing ever happened to me), I lost the > paper version, but continued online even after I had to > start paying. > > Without the ability to understand charts, I seriously doubt > I could make money with CANSLIM. I do also use BigCharts > for technical analysis, which I added to my "skills" > portfolio in the past year or so. But my starting point > always remains CANSLIM elements as I see them at DGO. I only > use BigCharts for helping time my entry, exit and hold > decisions. I manually screen stocks hitting new highs, as > well as constantly reviewing those stocks I have already > added to my "watch list" looking first at their CS elements, > then using BigCharts at their technical aspects. > > Tom W > stkguru@netside.net > ICQ # 5568838 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Craig Griffin > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Date: Friday, January 08, 1999 10:23 AM > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] M - Charlie > > > > 4) Use DG separately or in conjunction with all of the > above. Tom Worley > does this along with several others on the list and maybe > they will speak > to their methodology. I am a sometimes (monthly) subscriber > to the paper > copy of the NASDAQ and use it to look up fundamental data > and to scan for > bases (occassionally). Others use the DG Online as thier > everything. > > > > > - > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: [CANSLIM] Charts Date: 09 Jan 1999 09:59:32 -0500 I have gone back to HTMMIS to review the chart patters WON gives towards the back of the book. He has a lot of chart patterns back there that he calls CWH and double bottoms which look pretty much like just flat bases to me. Some of the CWH dont look like a CWH to me. I guess I have a long way to go in chart recognition. Charlie - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Reid Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Current M (and a question) Date: 09 Jan 1999 10:32:47 -0800 I want to ask if the fact that more people want to own stocks than ever before in history, is causing a shortage in some stocks thus driving up the whole stock market?? Also do you think that as long as the pension money keeps flowing in, what is gonna stop this Bull from running? I own three stocks at the present and two out of three have broken out this past week on heavy volume, so I guess you cant fight the tape. David Tom Worley wrote: > Hi Jerry, > > Mostly I second Craig's comments, but would also add that we > are in more of a global economy, and global stock market, > than ever before. I used to be a totally domestic (that is, > USA based) investor and largely ignored whatever was > happening elsewhere. Over the past several years, I have > returned to some of my roots of economics and int'l > relations/politics, and believe that the USA mkt is far more > affected by global events and economies than ever before. > Thus, while I rarely invest outside of the USA ( I chose not > to add currency risk to investing risk), I still pay > attention to what's happening around the globe. I expected > at least a 1% spike on the open today, based on global mkts > and the futures. It opened stronger than I anticipated, so > was not surprised that it eventually gave back all its > gains. I was also not surprised that the sheer strength of > this mkt, along with other factors like a strong dollar > rebound after the intro of the Euro, Brazil's dangerous > flirtation with recession and collapse, Japan's failure to > enact meaningful change and continued flirtation with new 12 > year lows, etc would finally lead to a nice closing gain for > the day. The underpinings of today's US mkt are the > economics, despite the steadily contraction of mfr activity > (7th straight month of downtrend and now in a meaningful > contraction); growing inventories; rising unemployment > (steady monthly record nrs of bankruptcy filings, good for > one of my stocks); and so forth. But the bottom line > remains: despite all this, the US economy still is managing > to grow several percent (or more a year); Greenspan has his > thumb on the process and intends to continue micromanaging > the economy to whatever degree he must; the USA remains in > the midst of the healthiest and longest economic expansion > it likely has ever enjoyed; and finally despite Zippergate > and impeachment the USA economy appears to still be #1 in > the globe. > > Flight to safety continues, tho at a lesser and healthier > pace. Meanwhile, money continues to flow into 401 plans at > record levels. That money must be put somewhere, and the > institutional money managers will continue to park it in > liquid (e.g. big cap) stocks. Charts on virtually every > index I study look healthy and positive (yes, including > Russell 2000), and all I need to be able to declare total > war on the bears is to see the Transportation index pick up > some. > > Tom W > stkguru@netside.net > ICQ # 5568838 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Craig Griffin > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Date: Friday, January 08, 1999 10:49 AM > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Current M > > Jerry, > > I don't know. But all of the issues you point out are > certainly concerns. > This market not only is powerful, it is also frothy (Turkeys > are flying, > and people are jumping on anything that moves and says > ".com"). Lots of > stocks have advanced 35% in 3 or 4 days. It seems nuts and > we are overdue > a consolidation at least. > > But, the DJIA, S&P500, and NASDAQ have positive chart > patterns and the > new/high low ratio continues to improve, and many, if not > most breakouts > are working. So, my theory: the green light is on for now > (could change > any day). Ride breakouts as always when in "bull mode". > Keep a wary eye > out for distribution days and other signs of a top. > > Even as the DJIA was breaking out, I saw two toppy signs in > the NASDAQ: 1) > gap up two days ago - looked like the top of a climax run to > me, 2) big > distribution type of day yesterday, but not exactly. Today > looks like it > may be another and more definite distribution day followed > by some backing > and filling over the next week or two. (We gapped up about > 40 pts- 2% - on > the NASDAQ today and here we are at 10:30, only up 12 pts). > But one never > knows - it could still end up 2% for today. One day at the > time. I will > continue to buy nice looking breakouts as cash permits (so > not right now), > until we get a couple more days of distribution at least, or > until the > breakouts start failing on me. > > My point in the earlier post about the "powerful" M was not > that every day > will be up or that we are not (over)-due a consolidation. > Only that, I > would be very surprised if we had a major correction here. > I would expect > the cup w/handle bases that the indexes have formed to offer > support at the > top of the base or slightly below it. A pullback of 5-8% in > rapid fashion > would be no surprise at any time. A retracing of the years > gains would > probably work to scare out a lot of folks and hurt plenty of > Johnie Come > Lately's. And the market does work overtime to hurt you, > unfortunately. > > Best Regards, > Craig > > At 10:24 AM 1/8/99 -0500, you wrote: > >Hi all, > > > >The current state of M is, at least, confusing to me. Some > of the > >negatives I see is: according to IBD, the bullish Advisor > Sentiment is at > >a new high (contrarian, therefore bearish), and the Adv/Dec > line has been > >essentially flat since early last November, even with an > uptrending S&P, > >DJIA, and NASDAQ. What does that say for the "broader > market"? > > > >Some others--the VIX is inching back up, the ABCDE numbers > posted here on > >this list are slowly eroding. > > > >I don't want to sound like I am screaming "the sky is > falling" but would be > >interested in what others are seeing in these indicators. > > > >Jerry Hickman > >Midland, MI > > > > > >- > > > > > > - > > - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dbphoenix Subject: [CANSLIM] importing list Date: 09 Jan 1999 07:37:34 -0800 (PST) <> Once you have your symbol list (saved as text), create a group in Security Maintenance, then click "Read ASCII Symbol file" on the lower right-hand corner of the Edit Groups page. Once you've found the file, open it and save it to the group you created. --Db == "Lessons are repeated until they are learned." http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/ _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ToothDr1@aol.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Sector lists Date: 09 Jan 1999 10:59:29 EST I really appreciate Naples-Jan P&F sector updates, Thanks Jan Can anyone tell me where I can find and print the list of the 197 IBD sectors and listings of some of the stocks contained in these sectors. As an example ,Oil field services: containing SLB and HAL Thanks in advance: Jim Kiser - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Craig Griffin Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Charts Date: 09 Jan 1999 11:09:12 -0500 At 09:59 AM 1/9/99 -0500, you wrote: > > I have gone back to HTMMIS to review the chart patters WON gives towards >the back of the book. He has a lot of chart patterns back there that he >calls CWH and double bottoms which look pretty much like just flat bases to >me. Some of the CWH dont look like a CWH to me. I guess I have a long way to >go in chart recognition. > >Charlie Here are some samples: http://home.att.net/~pwahl/ This is a web page by Canslim list member Patrick Wahl. Lots of good stuff here. http://www.accessone.com/~logical/farm98.htm When you get to this page, scroll down to the "Stock Farmer Collection" bullet and look at those links. Like Patrick's page, has nice base pattern examples. Also - Take a look at Investors Business Daily "Guide to the Markets" book pages 128-135. Maybe just browse it at the store or check it out from the library. For some reason O'Neil likes to use weekly patterns in his books, which makes it harder to follow, since you end up using daily charts for stock selection for the most part. Weekly patterns do have their place. I use them everyday - especially to look at up vs. down volume weekly in a stock, and once in a while the base is more obvious with a weekly chart. But, 90% of what I look at is a daily semi-log chart. Weekly charts are not very useful in identifying the pivot point either. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Craig Griffin Subject: [CANSLIM] Chart Scans for QP2 and WOW Date: 09 Jan 1999 11:12:27 -0500 The following website has both QP2 and WOW / Metastock chart scans in the public domain - http://members.aol.com/taornotta/index.htm When you get there select the "Formulas" link. This will take you to a page with two kinds of chart database scans: 1) Metastock and Windows on Wallstreet Scans 2) QP Scans There are probably 50 scans of various sorts in each group. When you initially get to the Formulas page the scans shown are for WOW. To see the QP scans, select the "Quotes Plus Scans" option at the top of the page. One of these scans may suit your needs, or, using these scans as an example you should be able to reproduce the IBD Weekend Review more or less (or even a better scan of some sort). IBD's weekend review says it is "all stocks above $7, within 15% of 12 mos high, and with EPS rank and Relative Strength of 85 or more". The only tough part is simulating EPS rank and RS of 85 or more (but check on the "EPS/QRS" scans for help). You also might want to skip all stocks with an average daily volume of less than say 30,000 shares or perhaps 15,000 shares. You also might want to skip all stocks with less than 1 million shares in the float or more than 200 million (or whatever). One thing about this type of scan: within 15% of old high is going to find lots of extended stocks that broke out days or weeks ago and have been hitting new highs for a while now. These are not what you are looking for, of course, but they are hard to weed out automatically. In addition, mixed in among all those extended stocks, will be stocks that are just approaching the top of their base and have not yet broken out into new high ground. These are the ones you are looking for (and it will be easy to see them as you page through the chart patterns). There are also scans to look for breakouts and bases and even one called "Canslim" by a (current/former?) member of this list, Mike Artobello. Also take a look at the Brookins and Brotnov scans (they practice Canslim variations). There are of course, lots of scans having to do with Stochastics, MACD and other technical indicators that some in our group use in conjunction with Canslim. You probably would want to keep it simple for a while (just get a scan that does a reasonably good job of helping you finding bases) and then expand from there if you find it necessary. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Sector lists Date: 09 Jan 1999 11:19:20 -0500 Jim, IBD sell this listing in book for for 35. I have it if you have specific questions let me know I will look them up for you. Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of ToothDr1@aol.com > Sent: Saturday, January 09, 1999 10:59 AM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: [CANSLIM] Sector lists > > > I really appreciate Naples-Jan P&F sector updates, Thanks Jan > Can anyone tell me where I can find and print the list of the 197 > IBD sectors > and listings of some of the stocks contained in these sectors. > As an example ,Oil field services: containing SLB and HAL > > Thanks in advance: > > Jim Kiser > > - > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] M - Charlie Date: 09 Jan 1999 11:45:21 -0500 What may come as a surprise to some investors is that it's far more difficult to find a "correct" entry point in the kind of mkt we are currently enjoying. And there's a danger in that, since the majority of stocks are moving up, you can throw darts and likely make money, so you don't get your decisions challenged. In this mkt, it's very difficult to find stocks with good CS elements that are also basing for more than a week or two, much less the desirable 6-8 weeks. I find I do better with my lists of stocks hitting new highs on moderately down days, as the "quiet ones" have a chance to prove themselves. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- Tom, What you are doing is what I would like to be doing. I'm still on the short end of the learning curve. However, I am going to take Craig's (yours and others) suggestions and look hard for stocks with the correct entry point. That has been the biggest challenge so it is the part I need to work on the most. I am using QP2. It's good and definitely useful and will probably be more so as I get better at it. DGO is probably a year or so away for me. The expense at the moment is more than want to manage. I want to gain a little more experience first. I really like this list and hope it continues. One day I may be able to contribute something to some newbie to repay the help I and other newbies have received. Charlie - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Charts Date: 09 Jan 1999 11:50:32 -0500 Charlie, HTMMIS is so far out of date with regard to chart studying, I wouldn't spend much time on it. I found it confused me more than helped me when I first read it almost a decade ago. I think you would gain more from studying the charts in IBD and using their weekend review, along with some "non CANSLIM" texts on chart reading. Yeah, I know, this sounds like heresy, but frankly the mkt conditions, as well as WON, have changed a lot in the past decade. And I find it's important to read charts in the context of the present (e.g. a year or so up to about 3) and the charts in HTMMIS are simply too outdated to be good examples. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- I have gone back to HTMMIS to review the chart patters WON gives towards the back of the book. He has a lot of chart patterns back there that he calls CWH and double bottoms which look pretty much like just flat bases to me. Some of the CWH dont look like a CWH to me. I guess I have a long way to go in chart recognition. Charlie - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Current M (and a question) Date: 09 Jan 1999 12:02:19 -0500 David, the continual inflow of money from IRAs, 401s, and the like, along with the steady infusion of money from investors using the stock mkt as their favored "savings account" (hey, who wants to get 2.5% or so in a real bank account??) means that the institutional money managers will likely always have cash to work with. A corrolary is the continued high level of stocks shorted. At some time, this short position means potential buying power as well. Does this mean this market can never sustain a true, long term, bear market?? No, emphatically not. But I do believe that so long as the economy remains healthy and growing, even at a 1 or 2% level, and employment remains at current levels, there will continue to be a net positive inflow of money to the stock market, it's the best game in town. Is there a shortage of shares of stocks to be owned? Not really, tho I do believe that the big caps have benefited in part from a trend towards this as all the institutionals plugged their money into the most liquid of stocks, thus drying up the excess supply despite the lack of earnings growth. But as this occurs, you see far more IPOs and stock splits, which increases the "supply" side of shares trading. And as prices rise, you see higher volume as investors take profits (or shorts cover) also increasing liquidity. Offsetting this in part is the increased merger and acquisition activity, which in some cases (cash buyout) reduces the nr of shares available. But most M&A deals lately are for stock swaps, so there's shares still available, just of a different company. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- I want to ask if the fact that more people want to own stocks than ever before in history, is causing a shortage in some stocks thus driving up the whole stock market?? Also do you think that as long as the pension money keeps flowing in, what is gonna stop this Bull from running? I own three stocks at the present and two out of three have broken out this past week on heavy volume, so I guess you cant fight the tape. David Tom Worley wrote: > Hi Jerry, > > Mostly I second Craig's comments, but would also add that we > are in more of a global economy, and global stock market, > than ever before. I used to be a totally domestic (that is, > USA based) investor and largely ignored whatever was > happening elsewhere. Over the past several years, I have > returned to some of my roots of economics and int'l > relations/politics, and believe that the USA mkt is far more > affected by global events and economies than ever before. > Thus, while I rarely invest outside of the USA ( I chose not > to add currency risk to investing risk), I still pay > attention to what's happening around the globe. I expected > at least a 1% spike on the open today, based on global mkts > and the futures. It opened stronger than I anticipated, so > was not surprised that it eventually gave back all its > gains. I was also not surprised that the sheer strength of > this mkt, along with other factors like a strong dollar > rebound after the intro of the Euro, Brazil's dangerous > flirtation with recession and collapse, Japan's failure to > enact meaningful change and continued flirtation with new 12 > year lows, etc would finally lead to a nice closing gain for > the day. The underpinings of today's US mkt are the > economics, despite the steadily contraction of mfr activity > (7th straight month of downtrend and now in a meaningful > contraction); growing inventories; rising unemployment > (steady monthly record nrs of bankruptcy filings, good for > one of my stocks); and so forth. But the bottom line > remains: despite all this, the US economy still is managing > to grow several percent (or more a year); Greenspan has his > thumb on the process and intends to continue micromanaging > the economy to whatever degree he must; the USA remains in > the midst of the healthiest and longest economic expansion > it likely has ever enjoyed; and finally despite Zippergate > and impeachment the USA economy appears to still be #1 in > the globe. > > Flight to safety continues, tho at a lesser and healthier > pace. Meanwhile, money continues to flow into 401 plans at > record levels. That money must be put somewhere, and the > institutional money managers will continue to park it in > liquid (e.g. big cap) stocks. Charts on virtually every > index I study look healthy and positive (yes, including > Russell 2000), and all I need to be able to declare total > war on the bears is to see the Transportation index pick up > some. > > Tom W > stkguru@netside.net > ICQ # 5568838 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Craig Griffin > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Date: Friday, January 08, 1999 10:49 AM > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Current M > > Jerry, > > I don't know. But all of the issues you point out are > certainly concerns. > This market not only is powerful, it is also frothy (Turkeys > are flying, > and people are jumping on anything that moves and says > ".com"). Lots of > stocks have advanced 35% in 3 or 4 days. It seems nuts and > we are overdue > a consolidation at least. > > But, the DJIA, S&P500, and NASDAQ have positive chart > patterns and the > new/high low ratio continues to improve, and many, if not > most breakouts > are working. So, my theory: the green light is on for now > (could change > any day). Ride breakouts as always when in "bull mode". > Keep a wary eye > out for distribution days and other signs of a top. > > Even as the DJIA was breaking out, I saw two toppy signs in > the NASDAQ: 1) > gap up two days ago - looked like the top of a climax run to > me, 2) big > distribution type of day yesterday, but not exactly. Today > looks like it > may be another and more definite distribution day followed > by some backing > and filling over the next week or two. (We gapped up about > 40 pts- 2% - on > the NASDAQ today and here we are at 10:30, only up 12 pts). > But one never > knows - it could still end up 2% for today. One day at the > time. I will > continue to buy nice looking breakouts as cash permits (so > not right now), > until we get a couple more days of distribution at least, or > until the > breakouts start failing on me. > > My point in the earlier post about the "powerful" M was not > that every day > will be up or that we are not (over)-due a consolidation. > Only that, I > would be very surprised if we had a major correction here. > I would expect > the cup w/handle bases that the indexes have formed to offer > support at the > top of the base or slightly below it. A pullback of 5-8% in > rapid fashion > would be no surprise at any time. A retracing of the years > gains would > probably work to scare out a lot of folks and hurt plenty of > Johnie Come > Lately's. And the market does work overtime to hurt you, > unfortunately. > > Best Regards, > Craig > > At 10:24 AM 1/8/99 -0500, you wrote: > >Hi all, > > > >The current state of M is, at least, confusing to me. Some > of the > >negatives I see is: according to IBD, the bullish Advisor > Sentiment is at > >a new high (contrarian, therefore bearish), and the Adv/Dec > line has been > >essentially flat since early last November, even with an > uptrending S&P, > >DJIA, and NASDAQ. What does that say for the "broader > market"? > > > >Some others--the VIX is inching back up, the ABCDE numbers > posted here on > >this list are slowly eroding. > > > >I don't want to sound like I am screaming "the sky is > falling" but would be > >interested in what others are seeing in these indicators. > > > >Jerry Hickman > >Midland, MI > > > > > >- > > > > > > - > > - - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Charts Date: 09 Jan 1999 12:07:55 -0500 Craig, Of all the resources I have ever had access to, the best was WON's "red books" (actually maroon) which were 11"X17" books produced for institutionals. The charts were five year weekly charts on a log scale. Spotting c&h patterns and flat bases etc were really easy on them compared to daily one year charts. Unfortunately, it cost then about $150,000/year to get the books, a little over my budget now. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- For some reason O'Neil likes to use weekly patterns in his books, which makes it harder to follow, since you end up using daily charts for stock selection for the most part. Weekly patterns do have their place. I use them everyday - especially to look at up vs. down volume weekly in a stock, and once in a while the base is more obvious with a weekly chart. But, 90% of what I look at is a daily semi-log chart. Weekly charts are not very useful in identifying the pivot point either. - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Ronald J. Russell, Jr." Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] M - Charlie Date: 09 Jan 1999 12:52:28 -0500 Craig, Wow! I'm honored to receive such favorable commentary from the Zen Master himself . The list is free and always will be (I'd probably have just a few legal problems charging for it anyway). The primary reason I put this together is for my own trading. I decided to offer it to the various lists, boards and email groups I have benefited from as my way of saying thanks and giving something back. I do this with one big caveat - I make no guarantees that I will produce it on any standard schedule or that I will do so each and every week. Sometimes (Many times) life just gets in the way. That having been said, I do my best to put the list out every weekend, usually on Sunday nights. With this understanding in mind, if anyone would like to be added to my distribution list, just drop me a private email (no need to clutter up the list) at ronrussell@home.com. Ron 2) (Excellent/Easy) Here is a simpler way to get candidates. It will not be exactly the same list, but it is just as good: subscribe to Ron Russell's weekly email of Canslim stocks (the number of stocks that pass his filters rise and fall each week based on market action - but you usually will have about 200 candidates to look through - and no typing - he updates it for you - no charge. ) And the spreadsheet he sends contains all kinds of cool fundamental data. I am a long time subscriber (did I mention it is free). THANK YOU RON! Then do the same with Ron's list. Go through looking for good bases with QP or TC2000 or any stock database/charting package (they all will accept lists of stock symbols as input and you can simply page through them, clickly click, same as in #1, just no typing of symbols required to build the list). - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Ronald J. Russell, Jr." Subject: [CANSLIM] Weekly Stock List - Help Needed Date: 09 Jan 1999 13:13:31 -0500 All, OK, I messed up and somehow managed to loose some of this week's data. If anyone else is downloading and saving the DGO data, I need the "Daily Graphs Printed Product Co. Index" from Monday (P/E and Timeliness) and Wednesday (Alpha and Beta). I still can and will produce the list without these files, the data will just be a little worn. Thanks, Ron - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Ronald J. Russell, Jr." Subject: [CANSLIM] Weekly Stock List - Help Needed Date: 09 Jan 1999 12:41:23 -0500 All, OK, I messed up and somehow managed to loose some of this week's data. If anyone else is downloading and saving the DGO data, I need the "Daily Graphs Printed Product Co. Index" from Monday (P/E and Timeliness) and Wednesday (Alpha and Beta). I still can and will produce the list without these files, the data will just be a little worn. Thanks, Ron - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Charts Date: 09 Jan 1999 13:47:18 -0500 I'm glad to hear that it is not totally me that cant see some of the patterns. I ordered, Investors Business Daily "Guide to the Markets", WON is a money making machine. Also I am single handedly going to solve amazons profitability problem. Hope I live long enough to read all the stuff I have ordered. I am spending the weekend with the weekend review and Ron's last list. Amazing how most of the same stocks end up on both. Picking the pivot point has been a difficult thing for me. I think I have learned a lot in this past week. Maybe one day I can even make a little money with it. Does it seem reasonable to use CANSLIM to pick stocks, breakouts, pivot points etc. and to use Elder's triple screen as confirmation? It seems a reasonable approach. Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tom Worley > Sent: Saturday, January 09, 1999 11:51 AM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Charts > > > Charlie, HTMMIS is so far out of date with regard to chart > studying, I wouldn't spend much time on it. I found it > confused me more than helped me when I first read it almost > a decade ago. I think you would gain more from studying the > charts in IBD and using their weekend review, along with > some "non CANSLIM" texts on chart reading. > > Yeah, I know, this sounds like heresy, but frankly the mkt > conditions, as well as WON, have changed a lot in the past > decade. And I find it's important to read charts in the > context of the present (e.g. a year or so up to about 3) and > the charts in HTMMIS are simply too outdated to be good > examples. > > Tom W > stkguru@netside.net > ICQ # 5568838 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Charles Cangialosi > To: canslim > Date: Saturday, January 09, 1999 9:58 AM > Subject: [CANSLIM] Charts > > > > I have gone back to HTMMIS to review the chart patters WON > gives towards > the back of the book. He has a lot of chart patterns back > there that he > calls CWH and double bottoms which look pretty much like > just flat bases to > me. Some of the CWH dont look like a CWH to me. I guess I > have a long way to > go in chart recognition. > > Charlie > > > - > > > > - > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "M Sims" Subject: [CANSLIM] Thanks Db Date: 09 Jan 1999 14:30:30 -0800 Thanks Db...it worked like a charm Mike > Once you have your symbol list (saved as text), create a group in > Security Maintenance, then click "Read ASCII Symbol file" on the lower > right-hand corner of the Edit Groups page. Once you've found the > file, open it and save it to the group you created. > > --Db > > > > > == > > "Lessons are repeated until they are learned." > http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/ _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeffry White Subject: [CANSLIM] AOL Date: 09 Jan 1999 18:09:19 -0500 AOL - HTF, watching Connie Mack's 3,7,10 EMA and slow stochs for entry. Volume draw down is compelling...watching the higher lows for a sign of failure. IMAXF - Nice break out from long C&H base, group sucks, looking for entry on CM's indicators as above. Volume draw down in progress. "M" - Humbling....seemingly as dangerous as I've seen it, but so compelling to the greedy... Happy New Year to the Group. Jeffry - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] little green men Date: 09 Jan 1999 19:51:15 -0800 > I thought this was a pretty universal group, where everyone > from newbies to experieced traders might have the > opportunity to learn. That's been one of my premises in > continuing to participate. If it's to be changed into one of > only saavy, experienced, momentum based "traders", then it's > changing in a way I can't support. One of the charms of this > group has been its uniqueness in the internet. I hate to see > it become just like so many other "net" "discussion" groups. I think you are close to jumping the gun a bit. I think if you are looking at the responses to Charles questions, you see a lot of helpful posts that follow the Canslim doctrine. I think we are still pretty far from being a bunch of strictly momentum people. Actually, I wish someone had been adamant about buying Amazon a few months ago, I'd be in fat city right now. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] little green men Date: 09 Jan 1999 19:51:15 -0800 Date sent: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 11:34:46 -0700 > Thus, I propose that we use this list to attempt to "rebuild" CS to > allow it to work in today's conditions. Let's find a version of CS that > allows us to trade "today's big winners". Therefore, keep the posts > coming on the trading of SEEK, interpreting the proper base, pivot > points, etc. I think it is all valid and it belongs on this list! Good post, I think I agree with most of what you are saying. Any system that would have you out of the internet stocks completely, one of the hottest groups of the last 20 years, probably needs a bit of tweaking. What that group was missing was C and A, but what it had in a very big way was the N and the L. Probably the only thing that needs to be rethought a bit is how much weight should N be given. Clearly, when something is as revolutionary as the internet is (supposed to be at least, I think it will be) you probably have to try to make an evaluation of how much potential something has and invest on that basis and not on how much something has earned in the past. This is probably riskier however because there is nothing tangible to base valuations on. If you do start making exceptions though, I think you need well though out reasons for doing so, not just that stock xyz is going up. James Cramer had a good point on CNBC this week when talking about the internet stocks and making a comparison to some spreadsheet companies of a few years ago. He said he wouldn't have minded buying Visicalc, Lotus, and Microsoft, and losing on 2 out of the 3 stocks. The third one more than makes up for the other two. He feels that way now about the internet stocks - you might not know which ones will work out, but some of them will. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: [CANSLIM] imaxf Date: 09 Jan 1999 19:51:15 -0800 While I was slapping some new charts together for my page, I noticed that Imaxf looks quite a bit like Micrel did right after it broke out. Might be a low risk trade here, where you can buy imax and bail out if the price pulls back into the handle. If anyone wants to see what I am talking about, I am going to put the chart of imaxf up on my page. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] SEEK Date: 09 Jan 1999 19:51:15 -0800 Date sent: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 07:44:41 -0600 (CST) > I don't always see cup with handles, > in fact, I find that pattern the hardest > to spot. This is very helpful. I suspect you aren't the only one, today I put several more examples of C&H at my page, plus a definition of sorts, so see if that helps you out. Of course, the C&H pattern is a bit subjective, so some people might not even agree that one of the charts I put up is a c&h, but anyway, hopefully you will find it helpful. At - http://home.att.net/~pwahl - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Bill Triffet" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] little green men Date: 09 Jan 1999 21:00:12 -0800 >>Heck, I bet he even owns a few shares in AOL and AMZN right now! << In this comming Mondays 26 week series (the last btw), he makes a reference to owning a few shares of Yahoo. Guess it's hard to pass up pure momentum plays. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "George W. Gregory" Subject: [CANSLIM] Graphic Displays Date: 09 Jan 1999 22:47:14 -0800 The graphs used by Bill O'Neil are weekly graphs and are on a log scale, whereas DailyGraphs are daily and on an arithmetic scale. The difference in the look of these graphs on the same company can by look drastically different. On the industry groups. there will be a number of changes very shorly. If you buy on of the industry group books, make sure it's the most up-to-date. For example, there will be 4 internet groups (e*commerce, ISP's, etc.) The Engineering R&D, etc. will disappear. The changes should take place very shortly. Best regards, George G. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Walter Stock Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Little Green Men Date: 10 Jan 1999 03:09:11 -0500 Hi Db, The alien abductions are spreading. Long time IBD staffers are now suspect : Fasciocco, and Jeffry's favorite (Fleckenstein), have been spotted with antennae. Traces of unknown green TA left everywhere. The article you mention Db, is from last Thursday's IBD and discusses buying Amazon, Ebay, Network Solutions, and Beyond.com using Flags, Triangles, and Pennants, and nothing else. This is a real eye-opener article for canslimmers. If I had access to a working scanner, I would post the article for the group. Friday's IBD had an all-technical analysis article on the Dow with interesting comments on Top formations. In Saturday's IBD WON column, he mentions that he has owned Yahoo for some time. All of this kinda makes HTMMIS seem a little musty. No flame-mail for this remark please, I still think the book is a must-read. It just seems like the book is graying rapidly and oughta spend its winters in Florida.... ;-) (Sorry Tom, nothing personal... I've shovelled the driveway five times in the last seven days and I'm envious). Walter Oakville ON, Canada dbphoenix wrote: > I'm becoming concerned. > > I hadn't visited the Success series for a while and just finished > catching up. In HTMMIS, O'N pooh-poohs PEs for a variety of reasons, > yet he now advocates using them as a source of sell signals. He has > also repeatedly pooh-poohed the use of moving averages and trendlines, > yet he now suggests that one pay close attention to them. > > Clearly, O'N is a victim of alien abduction, and the person who is now > providing all this advice is not O'N, but an alien impostor. > > If you doubt this, I heard that there's an article in IBD stating that > the best way to make money in this market is to buy HTFs. > > Enough said. > > --Db - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] SEEK?CHICO Date: 10 Jan 1999 05:39:33 -0800 (PST) Patrick, I looked at CHICO's C&H big picture. In early June did we see a climax run (up alot on big volume) and in late June distribution (heavy volume, not much price movement)? TM _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Little Green Men Date: 10 Jan 1999 08:59:53 -0500 That's ok, Walter, I think HTMMIS is a must read also, but is going gray even faster than I (and I had to blow the snow off a very long driveway 7 days a week for my four years in Sault Ste Marie, MI, that's one reason I am now where it's in the mid 60s in January, tho raining so can't do my yardwork today, drat!). As a general response to all the comments on CANSLIM vs missing out on the internet stocks, I still don't see why CANSLIM needs to be reinvented. There are many investment strategies that allowed participation in momentum based stocks lacking earnings, just find one of them that works for you and use it as well, or instead of, CANSLIM. The philosophy designed by Wm O'Neil was never intended to fit all investors, nor all investing situations. To do so would mean it would have to be even more generalized and vague than it already is. CANSLIM is actually designed for a relatively narrow group of stocks, with accelerating earnings (or at least rapidly decreasing losses) being one of the factors. Not all stocks will ever fit into CANSLIM, no matter how you "tweak" it. And what happens the next time some other sector or industry group or whatever doesn't fit into the "round hole"? You can still use CANSLIM rules and principles on stocks that don't meet all CS criteria, most investors using CANSLIM do it all the time. But at least you are making a conscious decision to ignore some part of CANSLIM. During my years as a retail broker, I frequently had clients ask me about a particular stock. I would first assess it against a CANSLIM criteria, then brief the client on its strengths and weaknesses and any news that pertained. Just because the stock might not measure up on CS basis didn't mean that there weren't reasons for the stock to succeed, I just had to be aware of other factors like increasing volume, moving averages, activity within its industry group, sales and earnings trends, etc. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- Hi Db, The alien abductions are spreading. Long time IBD staffers are now suspect : Fasciocco, and Jeffry's favorite (Fleckenstein), have been spotted with antennae. Traces of unknown green TA left everywhere. The article you mention Db, is from last Thursday's IBD and discusses buying Amazon, Ebay, Network Solutions, and Beyond.com using Flags, Triangles, and Pennants, and nothing else. This is a real eye-opener article for canslimmers. If I had access to a working scanner, I would post the article for the group. Friday's IBD had an all-technical analysis article on the Dow with interesting comments on Top formations. In Saturday's IBD WON column, he mentions that he has owned Yahoo for some time. All of this kinda makes HTMMIS seem a little musty. No flame-mail for this remark please, I still think the book is a must-read. It just seems like the book is graying rapidly and oughta spend its winters in Florida.... ;-) (Sorry Tom, nothing personal... I've shovelled the driveway five times in the last seven days and I'm envious). Walter Oakville ON, Canada dbphoenix wrote: > I'm becoming concerned. > > I hadn't visited the Success series for a while and just finished > catching up. In HTMMIS, O'N pooh-poohs PEs for a variety of reasons, > yet he now advocates using them as a source of sell signals. He has > also repeatedly pooh-poohed the use of moving averages and trendlines, > yet he now suggests that one pay close attention to them. > > Clearly, O'N is a victim of alien abduction, and the person who is now > providing all this advice is not O'N, but an alien impostor. > > If you doubt this, I heard that there's an article in IBD stating that > the best way to make money in this market is to buy HTFs. > > Enough said. > > --Db - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Little Green Men Date: 10 Jan 1999 06:04:00 -0800 (PST) "In Saturday's IBD WON column, he mentions that he has owned Yahoo for some time." WON mentioned this at a teleconference as well. He said he, "just knew" that Yahoo would be good (IBD was spending big bucks advertising). In my mind, this leans toward Lynch and using judgement and buying what you know. WON must have gotten results with Yahoo advertising or he wouldn't have continued. This makes sense to me, I "just knew" Walmart was doing fine and Sears wasn't, there was a line waiting to get into the parking lot over the holidays. The Sears store was basically empty. You know, I was so into Canslim that I took guests to the teleconference with me. Their attitude, yes there are some great things about Canslim, but WON is selling newspapers. I thought they were just being closed minded. TM _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] DGO New Highs Date: 10 Jan 1999 09:23:56 -0500 Despite having a fifth trading day, the total nr of stocks hitting new highs in the Daily Graph books only increased slightly to 437 (from 424), and the nr meeting the basic test of RS/EPS of 80/80 dropped from 213 to 182. Here's the survivors: OMC, TSAI, URS, XEIKY, VMC, NLCS, MNC, BELFB, CTX, NDN, BBC, MAST, DTEK, GVA, SWY, CCRD, RX, NCOG, CTL, JWB, LIN, BK, CRFT, SGP, PRY, FM, OCLI, XOMD, AEH, OK, PROX, BHW, BOBJY, JWA, FCBK, FIC, IMAXF, FORR, ICUI, EWB, CBXC, JEC, BEBE, LMTR, PSDI, CPRT, ALSI, SPLS, SERO, ELK, UFS, LSTR, GILTF, RGA, WCOM, GE, SUNW, PVN, KSS, SNPS, THQI, DNEX, ATI, SEIC, ARX, MINI, SONC, AIB, MCRL, FTEN, GAC, APCC, MCSC, HGR, ALTR, IBM, PLXS, NOKA, CNMD, ACS, ODP, XLSW, TJX, TGO, ORBKF, OVRL, HMK, PLT, VSVR, EDMC, VOD, ORLY, AHO, LLTC, MXIM, PBI, SEC, AEG, AXA, SAH, ORCL, MHP, WMT, NSIT, HLYW, GPS, LEVL, PPDI, WHIT, ESRX, SEH, SAPE, FPIC, IBI, EAGL, CDWC, MWHS, ECILF, TIF, PDX, TSS, YNR, SWFT, AVEI, GDT, CHKPF, GNSSF, MSFT, RAD, CREE, EBAY, VTSS, LU, PEGS, CMVT, AIG, USM, GENZ, ARMHY, T, VF, CGX, LM, RMBS, SEBL, CEN, INSS, YHOO, ASND, EMC, TMPW, SDS, GLC, VRTS, SKYW, SDLI, GUC, NITE, DELL, FDS, AMGN, PSEM, LOW, LXK, CSCO, MMS, CTAS, COMR, TCAT, XRX, NTAP, LUV, SANM, GNTX, FISV, AAII, SBC, AFS, UTX, NSOL, PJAM, PRGN. Happy hunting. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Dean Edwards" Subject: Fw: [CANSLIM] little green men Date: 11 Jan 1999 03:35:09 +1300 Nothing in life is more exciting and rewarding than the sudden flash of insight that leaves you a changed person - not only changed, but for the better. ~ Arthur Gordon ~ I have lots of questions. Like when would have WON bought YAHOO? Forgetting for the moment, about the questionable earnings of this company. That a Japanse company indirectly owns a big chuck of Yahoo and is propping up the advertising revenues. My interest is purely with the EPS rank for Yahoo, because it would not have met the strict CANSLIM criteria until 1-2 months ago. There was a interesting discussion in this CANSLIM forum not so long ago, regarding this internet stock (YAHOO) whether it did meet the EPS rank of over 80 or not. If I am led to believe that WON was in cash during the Bear market correction last year and bought Yahoo only at the start of the October bull market rallly, then my analysis tells me that YAHOO would have had an EPS rank < than 80 at that point in time. Unless someone can correct me, I am positive that YAHOO would have only met the EPS > 80 rank until much later. Does anyone have any ideal when WON would have bought YAHOO? It was my own observation that Yahoo was a market leader, as it was one of the first internet stocks to advance significantly in the October rally last year! Does WON break his own rules and buy stocks with an EPS rank < 80 and perhaps RS < 80 as well? YAHOO currently has a market cap of $34 billion and is one of the few Internet stocks that meet the strict CANSLIM criteria. In October it would have have had a market cap of $10 billion. Because it now meets the EPS rank > 80 criteria it is now alright to jump aboard YAHOO! On another note; like many others I question his comments in that 26 Weeks To Successful Investing series. I am cyncial enough to believe it has been ghost written by someone else. In an interview around late 1997 or in early 1998 WON did mention those internet stocks: William O'Neil: Our model book book studies of all the outstanding stocks show the most important criteria was that they had big increases in earnings already behind them. Why mess around with maybes? Recent Internet IPOs --- where he would consider investing in a company that hadn't yet published a profit. William ONeil: AOL has shown earnings in the last few years. They ran through a short period of problems, but they showed 4 cents in 90, 4c in 91, 5c in 92, 6c in 93 up to 24c in 1995. They had a problem in 1997, but they should come out of it this year.If a new company had never shown a profit, I would not buy it. So with a Yahoo at its IPO and Amazon at present... William O'Neil: That does not mean it will not eventually be successful, but we are playing probabilities. Why guess with something that has not been profitable yet. Our approach dictates waiting until profitability. -----Original Message----- >>>Heck, I bet he even owns a few shares in AOL and >AMZN right now! << > >In this comming Mondays 26 week series (the last btw), he makes a reference >to owning a few shares of Yahoo. Guess it's hard to pass up pure momentum >plays. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: [CANSLIM] Technical stuff [Connie Mack] Date: 10 Jan 1999 10:06:05 -0500 I ran my first OBV/MF scan in three days. I let them slide because I have been trading MU. It has been a profitable ride; but as so often with trading, those who bought and held have done better than I have. Had I shorted MU more [did so only a couple of times in three months] and had been successful, I could have done better than buy and hold. I am neither so deft nor adroit. But I am not "sleepless in Winter Haven." One of my students asked me if I wished that I were smarter. Obviously. But if Schroedinger were right and one can't "reverse the clock," then one need not savage himself for what cannot be. Because I am not smarter, I do not about disparaging my parents and the random ordering of DNA. My point is this. If smarter, I might have been both long and short MU in the months past and therefore have done better than those who bought and held. A trader/investor ought not disparage himself for not taking the last cent off the board. Determine your limits and take what they will give. Don't worry about intelligent errors of trading. Last year I was wrong more than 30% of the time but still made money. I took away just a bit more than 67% of MU's gain for the last three months. In consequence, I do not intend to disparage my parents nor shoot myself for the 33% that will never be mine. Limits. Limits. Limits. Know them and take what they give. For those who have quizzed me about MU these last few days, I say again that I have no plan beyond the next 5-minute screen. The technicals still look good. However, the wider the distance between the 3 and 7 EMA, the greater will be the correction. The MACD is solid. But I have not forgotten the negative divergence of MF; the divergence makes me ever cautious. My position in NOVL [19.5] has gone no where, but the technicals are still intact. I'll comment later on a couple of stocks from today's scan. Connie - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: [CANSLIM] (no subject) Date: 10 Jan 1999 10:54:04 -0500 MLI, NRES, CMSB, and NCBC survived my OBV/MF scan of Friday's stocks. MLI has a nice positive divergence. However, you have missed by seven or eight days the entry given by the 3/7/10 EMA. Same for the MACD. The gap up Friday implies there is some juice left. For those paying attention to candlestick reading, note that there were no tails on the marker--hence a sign of strength. The positive volume for the last few days looks good. Twenty-four is a resistance area. A break from there would indicate a further move up. NRES has some promise: MACD, 3/7/10 EMA, and Slo-Sto look good. Lot of resistance at 22.25-50. CMSB took out several months of resistance at 16. 3/7/10 EMA is buy. First day buy on MACD. Closed above 50 EMA. If you like ascending triangles, you've one. Watch the spread; volume is fairly modest. Parabolic is four days old. You might try your technical reading on NCBC. Connie - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ssingh@aol.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] little green men Date: 10 Jan 1999 11:09:35 EST In a message dated 1/9/99 9:49:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, pwahl@postoffice.worldnet.att.net writes: << I wish someone had been adamant about buying Amazon a few months ago, I'd be in fat city right now. >> Not too late Patrick for amzn.com.... It will go higher and higher as I heard mutual funds are buying this now..... More demand, less supply... - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Craig Griffin Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] little green men Date: 10 Jan 1999 12:05:17 -0500 At 11:09 AM 1/10/99 EST, you wrote: >Not too late Patrick for amzn.com.... It will go higher and higher as I heard >mutual funds are buying this now..... More demand, less supply... > I know Patrick will take this statement for what it is worth - your opinion only. But hope that no newbies will trade on this !%@# RUMOR you are sharing with us. As long as we are throwing around opinions, mine would be that odds are good that both AMZN and YHOO have seen their recent highs (Friday) and that it is downhill from here for the next couple of months. By the way ... never trade on someone's opinion (or a rumor), especially mine, and not even your own ;^) - use fundamentals and chart patterns (technicals) along with the other elements of CANSLIM. AMZN is EXTENDED and should not be purchased at this time (needs to form a base first). Looks like there is some support on the chart at 110-120 area and if it breaks below 100, could dip into the mid 70's. Then again it might double again shortly ... but my bet (if I was a gambling man) would be for it to see $100 long before it ever sees $200/share. By the way, as long as I am way, way off topic - - - If you want to throw candlestick charting into the mix ... the NASDAQ and SP500 both look like a Hanging Man on Friday. (possible "Bearish reversal pattern, look for confirmation"). Yahoo looks like a Doji Star, also a potential bearish reversal pattern. AMZN simply looks like the top of a climax run - major distribution day after a gap up. I would be fairly certain if the volume had topped 50 million. I mean we are talking a double in 16 trading days as of Friday's close, right? and a triple in about twice that, say oh 35 trading days? Maybe time to review O'Neil's selling rules in HTMMIS if you haven't already done so. And now I am seeing the doubters convinced, folks saying "Don't short it, its too dangerous" who were saying a month ago "short it, there is no way it can go much higher". Some of the big doubters are even talking about buying it now (how can you miss with a stock that has advanced 2000% in a year?) ... it smells to me like it is all done. As I said, my opinion only, and LIKELY WRONG, but I wouldn't bet the farm on it either way ... Be careful out there. OK, I'll get off my soapbox, sorry, now back to your regularly scheduled programming (CANSLIM) ... - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Craig Griffin Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] little green men Date: 10 Jan 1999 12:23:36 -0500 Ooops. I just re-read my response on this thread and it seems way too harsh and way too opinionated and way too far off-topic. Sometimes things don't come out in print the way you intend them. I feel I must apologize to the group and especially to Ssingh for any offense that was perceived. Certainly none was intended. My wording was beyond indelicate and I apologize. Best Regards, Craig - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Dan Sutton" Subject: [CANSLIM] COGIF Date: 10 Jan 1999 12:03:31 -0700 If this one has been discussed, sorry to waste your time. Most of the following information came from TELESCAN and may not coincide exactly with those from IBD, but they are close. COGIF EPS rank - 98 RS rank - 93 Group rank - 92 Next qtr projected EPS - .24 Current quarter EPS projection - .22 Last qtr EPS - .30 2 qtrs ago EPS - .18 2 qtrs ago EPS - .11 4 qtrs ago EPS - .07 5 qtrs ago EPS - .03 Zacks shows that it has 3 analysts following it, all recommending a strong buy In the Comp-Software group, Zacks has it rated number 2 out of 286 ROE is reported on some sites at 8.2 and some sites at 16.9 Profit margin 14.3% 1 year sales increase - 305% Currently at 96% of its 52 week high Currently in a handle of the C&H pattern (cup began in May, handle started about 8 days ago) Volume is dropping in handle Has had 4 positive earnings surprises in the last 4 quarters Friday it finished at 100% of its daily range It has traded higher for the last two days If you read Vic Sperandeo's "Principles of Professional Speculation" (page 254)- COGIF scored a 7 on Friday It doesn't trade very heavily, only about 56,000 shares per day Any comments? - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: [CANSLIM] canslim Date: 10 Jan 1999 14:07:00 -0500 I have picked out about 22 stocks to follow. I must have looked at a lot of charts. I have not completed Rons list, nor did I get past the first 4 or 5 groups in IBD's weekend review. They are mostly extended to far out but could return. I cant say if it would be worth it if they did. I also looked at some of Ian's box 7. The fundies are less good on some of those but there are a couple of possible entry points. I am seriously looking at MSFT, AOL and T for tomorrow. I am in 100% cash. I started my diary the beginning of the year and plan to continue it. I can do this. It has occurred to me that canslim probably works best in certain environment. Start of a bull market for example. However as we have seen there has to be a bit of flexibility as well. I missed the internet stocks. I would like to have caught them. Of course this is in hindsight. Each day I could have gotten in but was to scared that they would crash the next day. At least I did not loose money during the last few months, I probably deserved to when I consider the number of bone head moves I made. I dont think it would be to sacrilegious to use canslim principles and use some other method for confirmation. I like the triple screen thing a lot. It seems safe enough as long as you start with a good stock and dont try to fight the tape. Trying to short an internet stock because it turned down a little in a bull market was probably the bone headedist thing I did, I had a tight stop so it did not work out to bad. This list is great, I really like the differing views and the willingness of the "graybeards" to help. Charlie - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FBNAirPlt@aol.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Acc/Dis Numbers Date: 10 Jan 1999 14:20:21 EST Her are the latest Acc/Dis numbers: Date A B C D E AB/A:E %E 1/4/99 1163 2797 1267 1002 377 60% 6% 1/5/99 1281 2939 1226 891 309 63% 5% 1/6/99 1217 3019 1269 871 295 63% 4% 1/7/99 1270 3020 1253 858 292 64% 4% 1/8/99 1409 3050 1149 827 279 66% 4% 1/11/99 1399 3022 1171 835 290 66% 4% Spreedsheet version: Date,A,B,C,D,E,AB/A:E,%E 1/4/99,1163,2797,1267,1002,377,60%,6% 1/5/99,1281,2939,1226,891,309,63%,5% 1/6/99,1217,3019,1269,871,295,63%,4% 1/7/99,1270,3020,1253,858,292,64%,4% 1/8/99,1409,3050,1149,827,279,66%,4% 1/11/99,1399,3022,1171,835,290,66%,4% Robert - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Little Green Men Date: 10 Jan 1999 14:29:00 -0500 At 07:54 1/7/99 -0800, dbphoenix wrote: > >Clearly, O'N is a victim of alien abduction, and the person who is now >providing all this advice is not O'N, but an alien impostor. > >If you doubt this, I heard that there's an article in IBD stating that >the best way to make money in this market is to buy HTFs. > >Enough said. > >--Db > IBD, Thursday, January 7, 1999. "Flags, Pennants Get Aggressive Investor's Attention". Haven't read it yet, too busy. Regards, Frank Wolynski - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "The Jacksons" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] COGIF Date: 10 Jan 1999 14:49:44 -0500 The only thing that kept COGIF off my Breakout Watchlist is the lack of any real base. Mark - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: mckeener@ix.netcom.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Little Green Men Date: 10 Jan 1999 18:37:06 -0600 (CST) Hi Walter, "Now that I know what you say, tell me what you do", asked Jim Rodgers of an analyst touting some sector a few months back. At a June seminar, O'Neil said he would invest in Yahoo. It has been featured twice in the New America section. The article you referred to regarding flags and pennants just shows that an investment method needs to adapt. I was rather pleased to see that article because it's time O'Neil addresses what is happening in the market. No matter what method(s) you follow, ultimately, you refine it to suit your tolerance, risk, income and personality. Yahoo, mspg, aol are CANSLIM stocks as far as I read them. Mary - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] NonCanslim, Tom Date: 10 Jan 1999 16:47:36 -0800 (PST) Tom, I have heard on this board and elsewhere that the market discounts/incorporates news into the stock prices. The last few days, pollution related stocks have had a substantial run up. I had planned on following them closely if Al Gore were ever to become president since his presidency should be good for environmental regulation etc. Since you are politically as well as economically astute, is the market telling us that Al Gore will become President soon :)? TM _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] NonCanslim, Tom Date: 10 Jan 1999 20:37:24 -0500 I don't think one has anything to do with the other, esp since Gore has been mostly a total zero for the environment for the past six plus years. What little he has been associated with was mostly forced on him, and he is perceived, by me at least, as having simply not tried. Nor do I expect any better "environmentally concerned" attitude out of him should he become prez now or in two years. As for the likelihood of him succeeding Slick Willy in two years, that's probably a given at this time, with a healthy economy, high employment, windfall profits in the stock mkt, low inflation, low interest rates, etc. Voters cynically vote first on what's best for themselves, the country's interest at best comes in second or third (pretty much a reflection of our politicians). I see no viable candidate within the Republican or Libertarian parties that could pose a serious challenge to Gore at this time. Do I expect Gore to take over before the next election? No, unless Queen Hilary gets tired of all his affairs and kicks him out of the "House". Course then, she likely would have to move out as well, so not likely. Could be an interesting legal question tho, if they separated, who gets to keep the house while he's still in office?? Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- Tom, I have heard on this board and elsewhere that the market discounts/incorporates news into the stock prices. The last few days, pollution related stocks have had a substantial run up. I had planned on following them closely if Al Gore were ever to become president since his presidency should be good for environmental regulation etc. Since you are politically as well as economically astute, is the market telling us that Al Gore will become President soon :)? TM _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Peter D. Christiansen" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] COGIF Date: 11 Jan 1999 08:46:52 +0700 It is on my list. I look at it as having built a year long cup. and if the what appears to be a handle in the making tightens up, and it breaks out, it would be worth a shot. WON states that normally a stock shouldn't drop more than 50% from the top of the cup to the bottom, but he allows for exceptions to this rule. They have beat earnings estimates for the past four quarters. Peter The Jacksons wrote: > The only thing that kept COGIF off my Breakout Watchlist is the lack of any > real base. Mark > > - -- Peter Christiansen Chiang Mai - Thailand * ...when all government... in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the centre of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1821 * - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Little Green Men Date: 10 Jan 1999 21:14:18 -0500 At 08:59 1/10/99 -0500, Tom Worley wrote: >As a general response to all the comments on CANSLIM vs >missing out on the internet stocks, I still don't see why >CANSLIM needs to be reinvented. There are many investment >strategies that allowed participation in momentum based >stocks lacking earnings, just find one of them that works >for you and use it as well, or instead of, CANSLIM. The >philosophy designed by Wm O'Neil was never intended to fit >all investors, nor all investing situations. To do so would >mean it would have to be even more generalized and vague >than it already is. CANSLIM is actually designed for a >relatively narrow group of stocks, with accelerating >earnings (or at least rapidly decreasing losses) being one >of the factors. Not all stocks will ever fit into CANSLIM, >no matter how you "tweak" it. And what happens the next time >some other sector or industry group or whatever doesn't fit >into the "round hole"? > I always thought of CANSLIM as more of an observation than a designed system. That is to say WON has stated that the best performers in a 50 year period all had the same qualities in common. Those qualities were best described by application of the individual principles in CANSLIM. The Internet fire has potential to change some of the data that is manifested currently, but I think WON's original observations may be intact. In fact the potential to solidify those principles could be just a Internet stock crash ahead. Thus leaving only those with sustainable earnings power and market position in the drivers seat. At that point perhaps the CANSLIM elements could easily be disected and categorized. The rush of institutionals into the hottest industry group to come along in years is better compared to sharks in a feeding frenzy. Where anything is bitten, even the hull of a boat or the steel of a cage. I don't need CANSLIM to define or categorize the action of the Internets, I need CANSLIM to find candidates for the best performing stocks and it will do so. Even when the sharks have had their fill. Regards, Frank Wolynski - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Bentley" Subject: [CANSLIM] Interesting observation from Worden Brothers (TC2000) Date: 10 Jan 1999 20:45:44 -600 TIPS & HINTS (Friday, January 8, 1999, 4:00 P.M., ET) We saw a quote today by Scott Bleier, chief investment strategist at Prime Charter Ltd.: "There are two markets going on. The old-world market and the new-age market. The new-age market is anything related to the Internet. People are literally saying 'why should I buy Sara Lee [SLE] or Gillette [G]? Why should I follow what Warren Buffett says? His stocks don't go up 40 points every day.' People that have been in the business for 40 years have never seen anything like this. Ever. It's just beyond the scope of wildness." We can sympathize with him. Most old timers find this market surrealistic. Nevertheless, we can attest to the fact that anybody who has been in the market 40 years has seen many manias that flew in the face of all experience. Manias that persisted and persisted - long enough to drive Carry Nation to drink. But we have never seen a mania that didn't come to a bad end. Generally when least expected. The nuttiest mania we can remember - we can't even remember exactly when it was - involved a public stampede into treasury bonds. Life savings were put on the line. Widows and orphans were ushered to the head of the line (right behind the dentists, that is, who are always the most fearless plungers). It seems that somebody had learned that these "riskless" instruments could be financed at the local bank. Ten percent, even five percent, equity was common, depending on how much your banker liked you. Well, of course, bonds do fluctuate, and downward fluctuations of five or ten percent would be enough to turn your friendly banker into your worst enemy, as you find out your life savings have been wiped out - along with the last vestiges of your dear old mother's wealth. And that's how it turned out for thousands of investors involving hundreds of millions of dollars. The sorrow of a few who experienced truly heart-wrenching tragedies was perhaps mitigated by compassionate descriptions of their plights in feature articles on the front page of the Wall Street Journal. The Internet stocks embody all the necessary attributes of the most wanton mania. It isn't that we don't know much about them. We know quite a lot. We know that most of the companies don't make any money. We know that many of them never will. We know that many of them will disappear. We know there will be a handful of long-term winners, and we know that we don't know their names. We know this mania will end, and we know that we don't know when. The main thing we don't know is, when the dominoes start to fall, how much collateral damage will be wrought on the market as a whole and on innocent civilians standing around watching. 1 1 ========================================================== Charles Bentley Solution Group Voice (713) 827-8133 PO Box 31400 FAX (713) 827-8232 Houston, Texas 77231-1400 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "George W. Gregory" Subject: [CANSLIM] General Comments Date: 10 Jan 1999 19:56:52 -0800 Someone said that the CS method was outdated. Let me assure all of you that WON discovered this 35 years ago and has been using it ever since. Yes, he continues to refine his theorys and if he were to write HTMIS today, it would not be exactly the same as the original. Another person said we haven't seen a market like this (internet stocks) for 20 years. I'll carry that one step further and say no one has ever seen a craze like the one in internet. Yes, the future is all in front of the internet, but some stocks are not only discounting the future, but the hereafter. It is very easy to fault CS for missing the internets, but stick with CS and you will do well; WON has. He has built a newspaper from scratch on profits from CS and has 800+ employees to show for it. The salespeople at WON+Co. follow CS and they attempt to convince their institutional clients to use CS. Not all will, of course, but the whole company has been and is built on CS. By the way, the maroon books (2 volumes, 11" X 17") don't run anywhere near $150,000, even on a weekly basis. Most are sold monthly. Happy New Year, tiger49er - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] SEEK?CHICO Date: 10 Jan 1999 21:26:34 -0800 Date sent: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 05:39:33 -0800 (PST) > I looked at CHICO's C&H big picture. In early June did we see a > climax run (up alot on big volume) and in late June distribution > (heavy volume, not much price movement)? I don't think that was a climax run. I think you see some gaps on those climax tops. There may have been a bit of selling in there, but volume was lower than during the price rise. Its normal after a price runup to see a consolidation period, even some profit taking and a small price decline. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "sboone" Subject: [CANSLIM] how to cancel canslim Date: 10 Jan 1999 23:31:01 -0500 how does one get off the canslim list - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "james sullivan" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Little Green Men Date: 10 Jan 1999 23:32:07 -0500 >As a general response to all the comments on CANSLIM vs >missing out on the internet stocks, I still don't see why >CANSLIM needs to be reinvented. Neither do I; there are plenty of methods/indicators that would have triggered a buy in I-net stock. >You can still use CANSLIM rules and principles on stocks >that don't meet all CS criteria, most investors using >CANSLIM do it all the time. ALL the time...I don't think I have ever traded a stock that has met all the CANSLIM critieria, but yet, I more than doubled my account last year. I accomplished that using IBD, CANSLIM, and the Internet (trading,research,etc). I don't think that I have ever traded an Internet stock. They didn't pass basic EPS. Would I have liked to own one or two I-net's and make out like a bandit? Of course, but I know I won't own them until they meet a few more requirements. I admit that they present a problem. I assume that the people on this list understand the implications of the Internet equal to/more than most. Couple that assumption with the knowledge of CANSLIM trading, and that problem becomes self evident: How to trade this "revolution" profitably? My resolve is to look at the companies utilizing and/or benefiting networking/I-net. Regarding WON....I'm surprised that a story refering to YAHOO ownership has caused such a stir. If all the info WON had to offer was CANSLIM-related, IBD would be a much thinner paper. Why are there sections on IPO's? Why list the worst stocks? Why does WON tempt us with advertisments of other trading systems? He sells info, that's why. CANSLIM can be a good system and stocks with bad EPS ratings can be good buys....the two just don't mix. Have a good week and watch out for those LGM ;^) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Eatstock@aol.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Oneil Screen Date: 10 Jan 1999 23:58:40 EST Dont know if this has been mentioned, but Suretrade provides a WON screen as a free service for subscribers. You dont have to have a balance to open the account and use the features. It might be a good tool for some of us. Chris - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] ITX Date: 11 Jan 1999 00:00:04 -0500 For those with DGO (don't know how it will show on other sites) I must admit I am impressed with the level of insider buying on IT Group. CANSLIM data looks good as well (RS 91, EPS 77, A/D of A, Timeliness of C, GRS 43 in the Pollution Control - Svcs group). Debt is huge at 192% and ROE well below standards at 5%, but does have a nice base set up. Mostly I am intrigued by the insider buying. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Bill Triffet" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Interesting observation from Worden Brothers (TC2000) Date: 10 Jan 1999 21:42:09 -0800 >>But we have never seen a mania that didn't come to a bad end. Generally when least expected. << How 'bout this from todays LA Sunday Times business section: The 'Must-Own" Techs - of 1968 Fairchild Camera - 1968 high of $102.00 1970 low of $18.00 P/E at high 443 Teledyne - 72.00 13.00 42 Control Data - 163.00 28.00 54 Mohawk Data - 111.00 18.00 285 Electronic Data - 162.00 24.00 352 Optical Scanning - 146.00 16.00 200 Itek - 172.00 17.00 71 University Computing - 186.00 13.00 118 I think this is very relevent for today. Many folks made a lot of money on these using canslim type rules. ie, stop out at 8 percent loss, watch for volume changes, days of distribution etc. The buy and hold crowd, well... The more things change, the more they stay the same! Bill Triffet 1 1 ========================================================== Charles Bentley Solution Group Voice (713) 827-8133 PO Box 31400 FAX (713) 827-8232 Houston, Texas 77231-1400 - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "M Sims" Subject: [CANSLIM] DSP COMM Date: 10 Jan 1999 22:21:54 -0800 This is a test so please correct me were needed.....I am trying to put this all together... DSP has EPS 98 R/S 93 GRS A S/PM/ROE A A/D A VOL% +44 Spon/Rank D (dont like this) Oustanding shares 38,255,000 Shares held 63% (a tad high) According to chart last high was 5/26/98 of 20 1/16. On 1/8/99 it had a high of 17.5 just over 10% from the old high. Am I correct in seeing that a handle started on 12/8/98 with a high of 17 1/8. Since then the vol has been drying up. So this would make the pivot point at 17 1/4 with strong vol. Would the 1/8/99 have been that day to of entered this buy? Again any help would be appreciated.... Mike - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] DSP COMM Date: 11 Jan 1999 03:51:26 -0500 I am not sure if it is a CWH on the daily chart. It looks really good on the weekly chart. I have been looking at charts all weekend and this one looks about as close to a break out as I have found. Caution, I am not experienced at all. Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of M Sims > Sent: Monday, January 11, 1999 1:22 AM > To: Canslim > Subject: [CANSLIM] DSP COMM > > > This is a test so please correct me were needed.....I am trying > to put this > all together... > > DSP has > > EPS 98 > R/S 93 > GRS A > S/PM/ROE A > A/D A > VOL% +44 > Spon/Rank D (dont like this) > Oustanding shares 38,255,000 > Shares held 63% (a tad high) > > According to chart last high was 5/26/98 of 20 1/16. On 1/8/99 it > had a high > of 17.5 just over 10% from the old high. > > Am I correct in seeing that a handle started on 12/8/98 with a high of 17 > 1/8. Since then the vol has been drying up. So this would make the pivot > point at 17 1/4 with strong vol. Would the 1/8/99 have been that > day to of > entered this buy? > > Again any help would be appreciated.... > > Mike > > > - > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Oneil Screen Date: 11 Jan 1999 04:13:16 -0500 I did not find the WON screen. I did not look for long though. Do you use Suretrade? If so how do you like it? On the surface it looks better than E-Trade for half the price. The free real-time quotes at E-Trade are for those who make 30 trades a quarter. It is 19.95 for NASDAQ trades same for stop's. Research is OK but nothing special. Trade execution is great though. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Eatstock@aol.com > Sent: Sunday, January 10, 1999 11:59 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Oneil Screen > > > Dont know if this has been mentioned, but Suretrade provides a > WON screen as a > free service for subscribers. You dont have to have a balance to open the > account and use the features. > > It might be a good tool for some of us. > > Chris > > - > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: mckeener@ix.netcom.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Little Green Men Date: 11 Jan 1999 06:22:22 -0600 (CST) Hi Dean, 80 rank until much later. Does anyone have ideal when WON would have bought YAHOO?. A number of months ago, I posted regarding YAHOO being a CANSLIM stock, and there was some discussion about that. I don't know when O'Neil bought YAHOO, but I would say most probably before it became more CANSLIM with 80 80 ratings. Is O'Neil deceptive? Is he following his teachings? Is he primarily selling newspapers, books and charts? What are his motives? I never viewed him as totally altruistic just a successful, bright man who is in business for himself. He has many, many good ideas and a system that can work. That doesn't mean I need to follow it completely and totally. I can use what is right for me after I've given it a decent try, gained experience and a "feel" for the market that comes only with time. Aren't investors independent? Ultimately, the decision to buy and sell is a solitary one. O'Neil, Lynch, Elder and others help. They don't make and lose money for anyone. Individuals do that themselves. I don't know. I think we need to take what's helpful, what works for us and go on from there. Mary - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DSP COMM Date: 11 Jan 1999 07:51:06 -0500 Mike, The DGO chart looks, to me, like the cup started late August at 15 (left edge), bottomed about 5.5 in early October, started forming the handle again at 15 in late Nov, then tried to break out in early Dec before falling back to the base at 15. DGO shows 34 mil of the 40 mil issue in the float, with funds holding 18%, high but not terrible. It also shows ROE at 17%, a little lower than the desirable 20%+. A/D and Timeliness are both A. RS is 94, EPS 98, and GRS 99 (Elec-Semiconductor mfg). Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- This is a test so please correct me were needed.....I am trying to put this all together... DSP has EPS 98 R/S 93 GRS A S/PM/ROE A A/D A VOL% +44 Spon/Rank D (dont like this) Oustanding shares 38,255,000 Shares held 63% (a tad high) According to chart last high was 5/26/98 of 20 1/16. On 1/8/99 it had a high of 17.5 just over 10% from the old high. Am I correct in seeing that a handle started on 12/8/98 with a high of 17 1/8. Since then the vol has been drying up. So this would make the pivot point at 17 1/4 with strong vol. Would the 1/8/99 have been that day to of entered this buy? Again any help would be appreciated.... Mike - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dbphoenix Subject: [CANSLIM] Why Not? Date: 11 Jan 1999 05:32:45 -0800 (PST) Friday January 8, 5:43 pm Eastern Time Company Press Release Internet Stock Review Announces MonkeyDex BEVERLY HILLS, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 8, 1999--The Internet Stock Review announced MonkeyDex, the first index of publicly traded stocks selected by a Chimpanzee. MonkeyDex is an index of 10 Internet related companies selected by Raven ``Thorogood III.'' Raven, a 5-year-old chimpanzee, has starred in three feature films, several TV specials and numerous commercials. On Thursday, January 7, Raven threw 10 darts (not including numerous misses) at a dartboard of 133 Internet related companies. Both Roland Perry, editor of the Internet Stock Review and David Allsberry, animal trainer with Boone's Animal For Hollywood in Castaic, Calif., were on hand for the dart throwing. ``As Raven did not have prior knowledge of how any particular Internet related companies have been performing, we took his ten picks and dated the prices back to the beginning of the year to provide easier year-to-date comparisons with the more traditional market indexes such as Standard & Poor's 500,'' stated Roland Perry. ``It was a pleasure working with Raven,'' he added. ``He has talents far beyond what we ever dreamed possible and we feel certain that his picks will surprise many on Wall Street. We will launch a special Web site, www.monkeydex.com, in the near future to monitor the progress of his picks. Only time will tell how his picks pan out, but this much we can say -- he is storming right out of the gate with picks like CMGI, which is up 95% in six trading days (... way to go, Raven).'' The Internet Stock Review will issue a streaming audio and video news release through AV Newswire next week so everyone can see Raven in his full dart-throwing glory. To see the news release, visit http://www.avnewswire.com. The MonkeyDex index will be created and maintained by Nordby International. Nordby is a Colorado-based financial information provider specialzing in intraday stock tables for regional and industry specific indices. To visit the Nordby International site, go to: http://www.nordby.com Raven's Picks: AudioHighway (Nasdaq:AHWY - news) CMGI (Nasdaq:CMGI - news) iMall (Nasdaq:IMAL - news) Inktomi (Nasdaq:INKT - news) Kushner-Locke (Nasdaq:KLOC - news) ISSX Group (Nasdaq:ISSX - news) Lycos (Nasdaq:LCOS - news) NetSpeak (Nasdaq:NSPK - news) OnSale (Nasdaq:ONSL - news) OzEmail (Nasdaq:OZEMY - news) == "Lessons are repeated until they are learned." http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/ _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Technical Stuff [Connie Mack] Date: 11 Jan 1999 07:30:17 -0800 (PST) I've been intrigued by your recent comments on the absolute distance between the 3,7,10 MA lines. Would your system have you buying T on 12/7/98 and holding yet? I am looking at the node that formed on 12/4, also slight upward turn in MF and OBV. I have been looking for a perfect example. Quantitatively with QP, I can get values for indicators. I am wondering if you use slight increases and decreases in MF and OBV as long as they are progressing upward or do you want the slope up to be great enough so the naked eyeball doesn't miss it. Also is CHV in the first buying opportunity now according to your method and IP was on 1/8? Thank you for your comments. TM _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: Fw: [CANSLIM] little green men Date: 11 Jan 1999 15:58:22 GMT On Mon, 11 Jan 1999 03:35:09 +1300, you wrote: :Nothing in life is more exciting and rewarding than the sudden flash :of insight that leaves you a changed person - not only changed, :but for the better. ~ Arthur Gordon ~ I won't argue with this. Sounds great to me! : :I have lots of questions. Like when would have WON bought YAHOO? :Forgetting for the moment, about the questionable earnings of this = company. :That a Japanse company indirectly owns a big chuck of Yahoo and is = propping :up the advertising revenues. I don't believe that this is a valid question. A valid question (obviously) would be when DID WON buy his YHOO, inasmuch as it is documented that he did. It is giving the man too much credit to think that his *system* as documented in his book and presentations, and online appearances and much discussed in this forum would dictate a precise entry point in this (or actually any other) issue. Dan - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: Reply to TM on Technical stuff [Connie Mack] Date: 11 Jan 1999 11:30:34 -0500 Morning TM-- The absolute distances between/among the 3/7/10 EMA are pretty much subjective. That, however, does not diminish their usefulness. E.g., your question about the purchase of T on 12-7 is a clear cut "yes." First and Second Level buys occurred almost simultaneously. That entrance would have put you in at about 63 and kept you in. This buy was never in jeopardy, i.e., there was not a single instance when the 3/7/10 gave even a First Level sell. Whether for a trader [if you can consider T a trader's stock] or for an investor, the entrance was clean and the ride uneventful for $20 plus. The nodule at 12-10 never diminished into even a First Level sell signal. Rather, it merely indicated an innocuous price dip. Presently, there is a separation between the 3/7 EMA that implies, for this stock, a slight correction. Look back to see if by chance there is a previous resistance at this level. If so, you might expect a bit of lather before a further move up appears. You can also see similar separation on the MACD. There is, perhaps, more clarity--but not necessarily more validity--in the EMA. About the OBV/MF. These are customarily gross indicators, though I use them occasionally on intraday charts for trading. I also use the 3/7/10 on intraday charts, especially one day charts. Always couple a Time & Sales chart with the 3/7/10 one day chart, whether for trading or just for an entry for investing. About CHV. OBV/MF show nice positive divergence, perhaps even stronger than nice. The 3/7/10 EMA gave a First and Second Level buy about the 30th and 31st of December. There then appeared a few days of congestion with a slight upturn in the 3 EMA. The MACD pretty much mirrors the same period and is giving a buy signal. Were I to do what the OBV/MF implies, I would begin taking small positions. If you look back six months, you'll see a lot of congestion at 27. Make the stock do what you expect when approaching resistance. Thanks for the note. Connie TM wrote: > I've been intrigued by your recent comments on the absolute distance > between the 3,7,10 MA lines. Would your system have you buying T on > 12/7/98 and holding yet? I am looking at the node that formed on 12/4, > also slight upward turn in MF and OBV. I have been looking for a > perfect example. Quantitatively with QP, I can get values for > indicators. I am wondering if you use slight increases and decreases > in MF and OBV as long as they are progressing upward or do you want > the slope up to be great enough so the naked eyeball doesn't miss it. > > Also is CHV in the first buying opportunity now according to your > method and IP was on 1/8? > > Thank you for your comments. > > TM > > _________________________________________________________ > DO YOU YAHOO!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Ronald J. Russell, Jr." Subject: [CANSLIM] Weekly Stock List - 1/8/1999 - Condensed Version Date: 10 Jan 1999 23:26:24 -0500 Hi All, Thanks to a suggestion from Marguerite all of the data is current. She directed me to the owner of a site mentioned here earlier, http://members.aol.com/RANord, and he was able to provide the data. He is doing some neat stuff and his site is well worth a visit. Next, largely thanks to Craig's mention on the CANSLIM list, I must have received over thirty new requests to be added to my list today! I think I've got you all added. Finally, we dropped back to an even 200 this week. Considering the indexes are hitting new highs, I consider this to be a little surprising. My totally un-researched guess is that stocks may be dropping off the list because they are falling from "A" and "B" on A/D to "C" and maybe lower. If so, this could be an early warning sign. Trade well, Ron Symbol EPS RS GRS ERG A/D Close 30 ADV ACS 93 89 91 273 B $ 43.810 145,647 ADCT 94 92 88 274 A $ 39.880 1,627,363 AEOS 77 97 85 259 A $ 64.500 327,893 AGN 86 89 90 265 B $ 64.880 251,270 AGPH 76 94 93 263 A $ 56.690 590,770 AHAA 76 99 99 274 A $ 38.000 246,180 AIT 77 87 68 232 A $ 64.750 1,307,520 ALTR 82 95 99 276 A $ 62.810 2,002,847 AMGN 88 94 93 275 A $ 110.810 2,971,009 ANF 99 93 85 277 A $ 65.000 466,410 AOL 77 99 99 275 A $ 146.500 15,281,731 APCC 90 92 87 269 A $ 51.880 681,387 APCO 96 90 90 276 A $ 11.560 92,310 ARX 84 95 73 252 B $ 16.250 94,213 ASMLF 76 95 98 269 A $ 42.130 1,319,710 ASND 91 95 97 283 A $ 71.440 4,950,899 AT 78 88 68 234 A $ 63.000 652,147 ATI 95 92 81 268 B $ 79.000 2,822,514 AVEI 99 91 80 270 A $ 53.310 1,867,910 AXNT 72 92 93 257 A $ 30.880 357,793 BBBY 96 87 84 267 A $ 32.940 1,193,680 BBRC 83 87 99 269 B $ 26.590 212,690 BBY 76 97 89 262 B $ 69.810 1,441,803 BGEN 73 92 93 258 A $ 82.500 1,936,453 BPI 80 85 61 226 A $ 20.130 191,860 BVF 96 88 83 267 A $ 40.380 122,260 CAKE 85 87 67 239 B $ 28.130 174,607 CBSI 97 85 91 273 A $ 32.130 265,603 CBUK 98 89 76 263 A $ 34.000 82,520 CBXC 97 95 87 279 A $ 26.250 120,903 CCL 91 91 60 242 A $ 46.000 2,728,194 CCU 73 86 73 232 B $ 59.750 1,320,840 CDWC 97 97 96 290 A $ 107.940 152,210 CEFT 98 96 61 255 A $ 40.560 881,847 CELL 99 92 96 287 A $ 18.000 1,574,147 CEN 80 87 91 258 B $ 72.250 329,827 CHCS 79 98 85 262 A $ 27.310 112,927 CHKPF 99 95 93 287 A $ 46.880 1,042,350 CLFY 87 97 92 276 B $ 22.750 268,153 CMED 97 92 80 269 A $ 11.940 232,697 CMGI 78 99 90 267 A $ 200.250 1,572,523 CMVT 97 97 88 282 A $ 79.250 723,357 CNMD 93 87 70 250 A $ 32.940 100,467 COF 91 93 61 245 A $ 127.310 424,610 CPWR 98 92 92 282 A $ 72.380 3,318,973 CREE 99 99 99 297 A $ 52.630 283,660 CSCO 97 97 97 291 A $ 106.690 14,215,559 CTAS 90 90 81 261 A $ 72.000 300,187 CTL 86 92 88 266 A $ 68.500 250,557 CTS 93 90 96 279 A $ 42.690 96,977 CTXS 98 91 92 281 A $ 89.380 740,117 CUBE 89 92 98 279 B $ 28.690 917,730 DANB 97 85 67 249 B $ 23.750 87,630 DDDDF 99 96 92 287 A $ 45.880 129,033 DELL 99 96 94 289 A $ 77.810 15,636,374 DH 78 87 72 237 B $ 55.690 2,228,960 DLTR 98 89 70 257 A $ 45.380 533,993 DMMC 73 89 95 257 B $ 15.750 142,177 DRTE 77 92 82 251 B $ 26.250 345,810 DSP 98 94 99 291 A $ 17.380 309,563 DTPI 80 87 90 257 A $ 22.940 110,170 DY 96 95 66 257 A $ 36.940 243,750 EAII 99 90 92 281 A $ 58.750 244,663 EAT 74 90 67 231 B $ 26.880 327,907 ECILF 94 92 88 274 A $ 41.130 578,863 EMC 96 97 98 291 A $ 93.560 3,239,210 EQ 71 85 64 220 B $ 66.880 551,183 ESRX 95 96 86 277 A $ 71.380 113,980 ETEC 91 91 98 280 A $ 49.560 378,400 FDC 71 86 61 218 B $ 35.750 1,695,117 FLEX 98 97 99 294 A $ 82.880 464,667 FM 96 86 67 249 A $ 21.690 170,320 FMY 90 85 74 249 A $ 56.130 766,663 GDT 98 91 90 279 A $ 107.000 656,473 GENZ 90 93 93 276 B $ 50.130 1,033,300 GEOC 72 97 92 261 A $ 33.500 244,390 GILTF 96 93 88 277 A $ 57.250 117,707 GML 75 93 95 263 A $ 21.810 109,347 GPS 97 95 85 277 A $ 61.190 1,947,713 GUC 80 95 85 260 A $ 74.880 634,250 HLYW 83 98 84 265 B $ 33.310 665,290 HMK 99 87 79 265 A $ 37.750 141,530 HS 96 94 96 286 B $ 19.130 479,390 IBI 85 88 85 258 A $ 32.440 756,030 IBM 85 92 95 272 B $ 187.560 3,320,566 INSS 99 98 91 288 A $ 68.250 238,233 INTL 95 95 88 278 B $ 26.500 173,093 IONAY 96 93 92 281 A $ 38.000 108,937 IPG 89 88 79 256 A $ 76.750 346,780 JKHY 99 85 85 269 A $ 46.500 93,987 JVLN 77 94 85 256 B $ 15.750 109,633 KROG 80 95 76 251 A $ 35.810 111,280 LEVL 98 92 99 289 A $ 37.440 842,010 LGTO 99 95 92 286 A $ 58.630 648,473 LHSG 82 86 90 258 A $ 58.000 182,353 LLTC 90 93 99 282 A $ 92.500 935,413 LSON 93 89 90 272 A $ 57.060 201,883 LU 97 95 88 280 A $ 115.250 5,877,414 LXK 98 96 87 281 A $ 100.560 467,490 MARG 96 98 90 284 A $ 11.440 180,490 MCHP 71 94 98 263 A $ 40.750 724,993 MCRL 98 95 99 292 A $ 56.000 226,173 MCSC 98 95 75 268 B $ 28.000 86,953 MEDQ 95 92 90 277 B $ 37.500 255,430 MELI 94 96 88 278 A $ 20.690 97,830 MERQ 72 96 92 260 A $ 62.500 199,903 METZ 99 90 90 279 A $ 47.130 337,433 MHP 83 86 89 258 B $ 107.940 279,760 MLM 86 85 65 236 A $ 57.880 151,967 MMS 87 86 90 263 A $ 37.500 171,960 MNMD 98 96 90 284 B $ 94.000 126,670 MRX 94 90 83 267 A $ 63.630 114,820 MSFT 97 93 97 287 A $ 149.880 12,869,274 MTP 82 89 68 239 B $ 53.440 164,627 MXIM 95 92 99 286 A $ 48.130 1,343,320 MXWL 71 92 72 235 B $ 37.940 102,080 MYG 95 88 79 262 A $ 64.000 481,180 NCOG 98 91 90 279 A $ 40.000 165,057 NETA 99 92 93 284 A $ 58.000 3,048,154 NLCS 88 91 92 271 B $ 37.000 170,140 NSIT 98 98 96 292 B $ 56.440 267,713 NSOL 84 99 91 274 A $ 238.250 934,030 NT 95 87 88 270 B $ 55.750 1,810,603 NTAP 99 98 98 295 A $ 47.750 866,150 ODP 91 89 75 255 B $ 36.380 1,264,497 ORBKF 90 93 98 281 A $ 47.250 127,783 ORCL 97 96 92 285 A $ 46.250 8,299,240 OSI 72 89 79 240 B $ 28.880 396,563 OSTE 71 96 90 257 A $ 43.250 138,327 PCLE 77 85 71 233 A $ 35.250 99,863 PE 77 86 68 231 B $ 39.250 640,017 PGEX 99 88 88 275 A $ 45.690 242,200 PHCC 97 94 86 277 B $ 34.250 105,197 PLCE 95 99 85 279 A $ 26.750 232,207 PMS 90 90 85 265 B $ 52.500 164,677 POS 90 86 79 255 A $ 66.630 75,310 POWI 73 98 73 244 B $ 29.500 257,923 PPDI 87 89 69 245 B $ 29.940 302,107 PRGS 78 91 92 261 B $ 34.130 157,177 PRGX 90 90 90 270 A $ 35.130 164,103 PSEM 87 98 99 284 B $ 13.500 183,393 PVN 96 95 61 252 A $ 76.940 843,207 PVSW 77 97 92 266 B $ 20.380 82,420 RCL 89 85 60 234 A $ 38.310 499,243 RESM 97 97 90 284 A $ 41.940 233,667 RMBS 84 95 99 278 A $ 102.880 546,790 SALT 99 97 79 275 A $ 23.690 84,670 SANM 97 97 99 293 A $ 67.880 1,053,117 SAPE 99 94 92 285 A $ 64.380 316,070 SBC 83 88 68 239 A $ 57.690 2,375,933 SCAI 96 85 86 267 A $ 29.500 137,073 SCH 91 98 78 267 A $ 60.880 2,033,600 SDG 86 90 80 256 A $ 118.190 200,327 SDTI 71 96 87 254 B $ 27.130 2,080,080 SEBL 99 92 92 283 A $ 36.630 1,256,283 SERO 93 86 69 248 A $ 28.380 95,533 SIPX 72 85 99 256 A $ 31.940 223,033 SLI 98 91 96 285 A $ 26.750 77,560 SLR 94 96 96 286 A $ 89.630 1,268,053 SNPS 93 91 92 276 A $ 56.130 591,060 SONC 87 86 67 240 A $ 24.750 93,203 SORC 75 96 90 261 A $ 11.250 120,507 SPLS 98 94 75 267 B $ 43.000 2,602,097 SUNW 94 97 94 285 A $ 90.880 7,396,974 SWY 95 91 74 260 A $ 59.880 1,386,127 SYK 88 88 80 256 A $ 53.190 188,610 SYKE 99 92 90 281 B $ 28.750 313,327 T 85 87 88 260 B $ 85.060 6,393,339 TAGS 97 98 76 271 A $ 37.880 84,980 TCAT 80 89 94 263 A $ 37.630 164,010 TGO 90 95 88 273 B $ 36.310 326,723 THQI 99 95 78 272 A $ 28.750 249,157 TIER 98 86 91 275 A $ 18.060 87,553 TIF 87 94 67 248 B $ 62.630 264,993 TJX 92 86 85 263 B $ 28.500 962,963 TLAB 98 89 88 275 A $ 74.310 3,207,444 TMPW 84 90 79 253 B $ 41.000 409,120 TOM 99 85 76 260 A $ 59.380 387,667 TSAI 96 86 86 268 A $ 49.630 149,410 TSG 70 88 60 218 A $ 44.880 96,847 TSRI 99 85 91 275 A $ 12.880 79,380 TYC 97 89 60 246 A $ 76.060 1,965,393 UVSGA 93 93 73 259 A $ 26.000 141,363 VISX 78 98 92 268 A $ 95.560 316,107 VOD 96 94 81 271 A $ 173.130 246,890 VRTS 99 95 92 286 A $ 69.940 646,257 VTSS 97 96 99 292 A $ 45.940 1,399,753 WAG 85 86 77 248 B $ 54.000 999,433 WAT 97 91 64 252 A $ 81.500 112,293 WCOM 81 94 88 263 B $ 75.000 12,198,640 WHIT 97 86 91 274 A $ 27.250 356,367 WMT 87 91 72 250 B $ 83.500 2,873,713 WPI 93 85 75 253 A $ 54.690 310,880 WSM 92 90 95 277 A $ 36.250 217,750 WTSLA 89 86 85 260 A $ 32.380 145,577 XIRC 77 98 97 272 A $ 38.500 394,407 XLSW 98 92 88 278 A $ 33.250 135,460 XOMD 99 91 80 270 B $ 32.500 99,137 YHOO 84 99 99 282 B $ 343.630 6,461,541 ZQK 95 93 76 264 B $ 29.250 135,740 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dbphoenix Subject: Re:[CANSLIM] DSP COMM Date: 11 Jan 1999 09:46:18 -0800 (PST) <> The longer-term pattern you refer to is not so much a cup as it is a V-bottom or funnel. It has few of the volume characteristics of a cup. Arguably, it has none. What you're calling a handle is actually closer to a cup in terms of the requisite volume pattern. In any event, there are three places to buy. One is the breakout from the bottom of the cup, which in this case more closely resembles a flat base. Second is the point at which it surpasses the most recent high of 17. Third, if the stock forms a handle here, is to buy the breakout from the handle. If you're not sure what I mean by the volume pattern of a cup, check my website. --Db == "Lessons are repeated until they are learned." http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/ _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dbphoenix Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Acc/Dis Numbers Date: 11 Jan 1999 09:45:40 -0800 (PST) Again, much appreciated. These confirm what I've been seeing in volume for advancing and declining issues. --Db == "Lessons are repeated until they are learned." http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/ _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Walter Stock Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: Little Green Men Date: 11 Jan 1999 13:05:59 -0500 Here is a copy of the IBD article that Db had mentioned and that I commented on. It was kindly made available and sent to me privately (by email) by a reader of our list. Walter > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > If there's one thing an aggressive stock investor likes to do, it's to get on board a highflier. > > It's not a strategy for the faint of heart. But catching a chunk of a big move in top-performing stocks like Amazon.com, Ebay or Network Solutions is well worth the trouble. > > I N V E S T O R ' S C O R N E R > > > > Some people think getting a big winner is luck. Perhaps, it is to some degree. The stampede of buying into a fast- rising stock often carries its price well beyond its fundamental value. Still, it's an opportunity to make big money. > > Many times fast-moving stocks don't trade on fundamentals, but on perceptions. So a look into reported earnings and revenues isn't the key. Instead, you often need to rely on reading the technical pattern of both the stock and its industry. > > To play a fast-moving stock, you must identify the stock, find an entry point and know when to exit. > > A ''flag'' or ''pennant'' is one good technical pattern that signals a strong stock. > > The names given to chart patterns of stocks by technicians simply express the picture they see. A flag or pennant pattern is one in which a stock runs straight up 80% or more in a brief time (flag pole). The stock then goes sideways for no more than four or five weeks. The sideways pattern, or base, takes on the look of a rectangle (flag) or sometimes a triangle (pennant). > > The unique power of this technical formation is that if the stock breaks out of the flag or pennant pattern, it has the power to make about the same percentage gain as the prior surge. > > Amazon.com is a good example of a successful flag pattern. The stock ran up from 42 on Nov. 16 to 77 by Nov. 24. That's a gain of 83% in just a week and a half. > > You might have thought that was it for Amazon.com. But the stock blew out of the flag formation on Dec. 15. It surged from 74 to 138, an 86% advance in three weeks. > > Amazon isn't the only recent flag. > > Ebay surged 75% from Nov. 6 to Nov. 10, peaking at 140. It made a one-week pennant formation, broke out and soared to 234 in a week. That's a sensational gain of 109% from the trough in the pennant to the peak. It's since traded as high as 311. > > Network Solutions shot ahead from 58 3/4 to 120 3/4 in just a week and a half in December, paused for a few days, then spurted to 172. > > Beyond.com was pretty. It rose from 6 1/2 in late October to 20 1/4 in two weeks. The stock then set up a two-week flag and broke out climbing to 32 in just one week. > > To identify potential fliers, find a stock that has run up sharply. Second, watch its basing formation closely. If it breaks out in less than four weeks, that could be the entry point. The potential move should be roughly the same distance as the prior run-up in percentage terms. > > The flag or pennant is usually a ''continuation pattern'' of an uptrend, says Fred Meissner, technical analyst at Robinson-Humphrey Inc. of Atlanta. > > > > ''What I like to see after a sharp run-up is a triangle (pennant) where the bottom is flat and top is sloping down with volume contracting,'' Meissner said. ''In my research, I've found a pennant seems to be an early tip-off that the pattern will be a continuation of the uptrend. A flag pattern leaves some doubt because the highs are proving to be a near-term resistance area.'' > > > > One of the things that tells you that you are in a dangerous situation is if the stock pops out of a flag or pennant and then reverses the entire gain the next day, Meissner says. > > If a stock with a pennant or flag is part of a strong industry group, your chances of picking a winner are much greater, Meissner adds. ''You want to have good fundamentals, but that is not always possible,'' he said. ''The important thing for investors to do is keep good risk management.'' > > > > Failing flags and pennants are no time to cheat on your own sell rules. > > Andrew Addison, editor of the Addison report of Franklin, Mass., also looks for flags and pennants. He notes that when a stock breaks out of its base, the move should come with expanding volume. After it peaks and starts to form a pennant or flag, volume should contract. > > He calls that a ''turtle consolidation.'' That's because the stock seems to be pulling in its ''arms and legs.'' It doesn't give back much of its gain. There is not much profit taking. > > Addison believes flag and pennant technical formations are valid with major indexes like the S&P 500 and Nasdaq composite. Of course, they do not move up as much as a stock, in terms of percentage. However, his work suggests the S&P 500, for example, has the potential to climb to 1400 from its current level near 1270. > > > > //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > > Copyright (c) 1999 Investors Business Daily, All rights reserved. > > Investor's Business Daily - Investor's Corner (01/07/99) > > Flags, Pennants Get Aggressive Investors' Attention > > By Leo Fasciocco > > 1/7/99 11:47 PM - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re:[CANSLIM] DSP COMM Date: 11 Jan 1999 11:09:23 -0800 Was trading at 18-13/16 @ 20 minutes ago - up 8% on 1x ADV so far. Interesting that it just showed up on my filter of Russel's list on Sunday. Must have had some improved fundies in my Zack's database for Dec. On 09:46 AM 1/11/99 , dbphoenix Said: > ><a high of 17 1/8. Since then the vol has been drying up. So this would >make the pivot point at 17 1/4 with strong vol. Would the 1/8/99 have >been >that day to of entered this buy?>> > >The longer-term pattern you refer to is not so much a cup as it is a >V-bottom or funnel. It has few of the volume characteristics of a >cup. Arguably, it has none. What you're calling a handle is actually >closer to a cup in terms of the requisite volume pattern. > >In any event, there are three places to buy. One is the breakout from >the bottom of the cup, which in this case more closely resembles a >flat base. Second is the point at which it surpasses the most recent >high of 17. Third, if the stock forms a handle here, is to buy the >breakout from the handle. > >If you're not sure what I mean by the volume pattern of a cup, check >my website. > >--Db > > > > >== > >"Lessons are repeated until they are learned." > >http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/ > > > >_________________________________________________________ >DO YOU YAHOO!? >Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > >- > Tim Fisher Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites Tim@OreRockOn.com WWW: http://OreRockOn.com See naked fish and rocks! - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "John Nogueira" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] COGIF Date: 11 Jan 1999 14:38:43 -0500 Dan Sutton wrote: >It doesn't trade very heavily, only about 56,000 shares per day If you're following COGIF, you may also be interested in its Canadian listing: COG on the Toronto Stock Exchange. As you may know, foreign-based companies traded on Nasdaq are denoted with an "F" in the fifth letter of their symbols as is the case here. J o h n N o g u e i r a L o n d o n O n t a r i o C a n a d a - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DS Subject: [CANSLIM] 26-week series Date: 11 Jan 1999 13:39:39 -0600 Hi all, Could someone post a link to O'neil's 26-week investment series. Thanks, DSquires - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Joe Scott" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 26-week series Date: 11 Jan 1999 15:19:57 -0500 http://ibd.infostreet.com/won/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: [CANSLIM] entry points Date: 11 Jan 1999 16:17:04 -0500 I am 100% cash. There is a lot of buying going on out there. I cant seem to get the one I feel good about. No point in worrying about should of's and could of's. I think T is going to be it for me. Charlie - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ari Lawson Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] little green men Date: 11 Jan 1999 19:32:44 -0500 YHOO is canslim. Ari Bill Triffet wrote: > >>Heck, I bet he even owns a few shares in AOL and > AMZN right now! << > > In this comming Mondays 26 week series (the last btw), he makes a reference > to owning a few shares of Yahoo. Guess it's hard to pass up pure momentum > plays. > > - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "George W. Gregory" Subject: [CANSLIM] Background Date: 11 Jan 1999 22:49:25 -0800 Fellow CS Members: Tom W. suggested I give a little background on myself as a somewhat new member of the group. First off, I have been in the brokerage business for a number of years. At one time, I had my own firm (members of the Pacific Stk Exch). and sold my interest to my partner. I made money - he went bankrupt. Up until 1984, I was the Treasurer and some retail sales for a L.A. based NYSE member firm. In August of 1984, I went with William O'Neil + Co. as a Vice President in the Institutional Services Dept. In 1987, I took a detour at Bill O'Neil's request and took over as Advertising Director at Investor's Business Daily for 2 1/2 years. Then back to O'Neil. and was with them until last month, when I retired. I made a post a couple of days ago and in case I missed it on the Digest, it is worth repeating. Someone said that the CS method was outdated. Let me assure all of you that WON discovered this 35 years ago and has been using it ever since. Yes, he continues to refine his theorys and if he were to write HTMIS today, it would not be exactly the same as the original. Another person said we haven't seen a market like this (internet stocks) for 20 years. I'll carry that one step further and say no one has ever seen a craze like the one in internet. Yes, the future is all in front of the internet, but some stocks are not only discounting the future, but the hereafter. It is very easy to fault CS for missing the internets, but stick with CS and you will do well; WON has. He has built a newspaper from scratch on profits from CS and has 800+ employees to show for it. The salespeople at WON+Co. follow CS and they attempt to convince their institutional clients to use CS. Not all will, of course, but the whole company has been and is built on CS. By the way, the maroon books (2 volumes, 11" X 17") don't run anywhere near $150,000, even on a weekly basis. Most are sold monthly. The whole organization is very upbeat and everyone without exception was a pleasure to work with. I feel that the past 14 years have been the best. Let me say that when I went with WON, it took me 2-3 years to unlearn everything I ever knew about stock selection. Even now I find myself falling back into old habits (low priced stocks, rumors, etc.). But I know CS works. Apply yourself and if you haven't got the time to study the theory, either make time or follow CS not quite as closely. I'll chime in from time to time but try not to make a pest of myself. tiger49er - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] DGO Subscribers Date: 12 Jan 1999 08:07:25 -0500 Discovered something last night I didn't know. Stocks can "make the books" during the week. One of mine was previously in the books and was dropped some weeks ago. As of this weekend it still was not in the books, thus no f4 screen. As of last night, it was back in the books. Don't know if this is another value added feature, or I just never noticed it before. Not yet up to CANSLIM standards, but a promising change. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] NonCanslim, Tom Date: 12 Jan 1999 21:15:30 GMT On Sun, 10 Jan 1999 20:37:24 -0500, you wrote: :I don't think one has anything to do with the other, esp :since Gore has been mostly a total zero for the environment :for the past six plus years. What little he has been :associated with was mostly forced on him, and he is :perceived, by me at least, as having simply not tried. Nor :do I expect any better "environmentally concerned" attitude :out of him should he become prez now or in two years. : :As for the likelihood of him succeeding Slick Willy in two :years, that's probably a given at this time, with a healthy :economy, high employment, windfall profits in the stock mkt, :low inflation, low interest rates, etc. Voters cynically :vote first on what's best for themselves, the country's :interest at best comes in second or third (pretty much a :reflection of our politicians). I see no viable candidate :within the Republican or Libertarian parties that could pose :a serious challenge to Gore at this time. : :Do I expect Gore to take over before the next election? No, :unless Queen Hilary gets tired of all his affairs and kicks :him out of the "House". Course then, she likely would have :to move out as well, so not likely. Could be an interesting :legal question tho, if they separated, who gets to keep the :house while he's still in office?? : :Tom W Are you kidding, Tom? If she decided that she and Bill gotta split up, she's going to be house hunting. Dan :stkguru@netside.net :ICQ # 5568838 : :-----Original Message----- :From: TM :To: canslim@lists.xmission.com :Date: Sunday, January 10, 1999 7:47 PM :Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] NonCanslim, Tom : : : :Tom, :I have heard on this board and elsewhere that the market :discounts/incorporates news into the stock prices. : :The last few days, pollution related stocks have had a :substantial run :up. I had planned on following them closely if Al Gore were :ever to :become president since his presidency should be good for :environmental :regulation etc. : :Since you are politically as well as economically astute, is :the :market telling us that Al Gore will become President soon ::)? : : :TM : : : : : : : : :_________________________________________________________ :DO YOU YAHOO!? :Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com : : :- : : : :- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Joe J." Subject: [CANSLIM] canslim - outdated? Date: 12 Jan 1999 14:58:39 -0700 > Someone said that the CS method was outdated. Let me assure all of you > that WON discovered this 35 years ago and has been using it ever since. Yes, > he continues to refine his theorys and if he were to write HTMIS today, it > would not be exactly the same as the original. > Isn't this precisely my point? The fact is WON has not rewritten HTMIS. That is what I was trying to suggest that we, as a group, do. Just look at the quote from IBD: > The stampede of buying into a fast- rising stock often carries its price well beyond its fundamental value. Still, it's an opportunity to make big money. > > > Many times fast-moving stocks don't trade on fundamentals, but on perceptions. So a look into reported earnings and revenues isn't the key. Instead, you often need to rely on reading the technical pattern of both the stock and its industry. > > > To play a fast-moving stock, you must identify the stock, find an entry point and know when to exit. > That was my point and at least the writer of this IBD article seems to agree. Thus, for those placing an equal emphasis on EPS growth, institutional ownership, and float maximums relative to the other elements of CS, you might want to at least give some thoughts as to whether these are really all that important? Joe J. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeffry White Subject: [CANSLIM] tiger49er Date: 12 Jan 1999 17:53:38 -0500 Welcome tiger49er. Look forward to your comments on CS. Jeffry - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] tiger49er Date: 12 Jan 1999 18:34:46 -0500 Welcome Tiger. I have to admit I am not really suprised that some things have changed since HTMMIS was written. I was looking at the dates when I first got it and wondered why there was not something a little more recent. However based on comments from long timers on this list and others it appears the basic tenants are in tact. It just happens, in my opinion anyway, that some stocks that did not appear to fit the mold turned out to be rockets. The lucky people caught them the rest of us got to think about what could have been. I got some T and ASND today. I decided since I could not find a good spot to get in that I would go the mattress stuffer route. I dont intend to get shaken out to easily. I am using weekly as opposed to daily charts so I am in for the longer time frame. With what is left of my brokerage account I am still hunting CANSLIM candidates. For the record I have some mutual funds that I contribute regularly to in my retirement account. That is one piece of advice that I believe WON is right about, I'm just going to leave them alone. They did OK, with the exception of a small cap fund. No supprise there but the fund manager did way worse, no way way worse than the RUT. He is fired tomorrow. I am getting out of his fund. Cant wait to find out what tomorrow will bring. Charlie - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] tiger49er Date: 12 Jan 1999 18:34:46 -0500 Welcome Tiger. I have to admit I am not really suprised that some things have changed since HTMMIS was written. I was looking at the dates when I first got it and wondered why there was not something a little more recent. However based on comments from long timers on this list and others it appears the basic tenants are in tact. It just happens, in my opinion anyway, that some stocks that did not appear to fit the mold turned out to be rockets. The lucky people caught them the rest of us got to think about what could have been. I got some T and ASND today. I decided since I could not find a good spot to get in that I would go the mattress stuffer route. I dont intend to get shaken out to easily. I am using weekly as opposed to daily charts so I am in for the longer time frame. With what is left of my brokerage account I am still hunting CANSLIM candidates. For the record I have some mutual funds that I contribute regularly to in my retirement account. That is one piece of advice that I believe WON is right about, I'm just going to leave them alone. They did OK, with the exception of a small cap fund. No supprise there but the fund manager did way worse, no way way worse than the RUT. He is fired tomorrow. I am getting out of his fund. Cant wait to find out what tomorrow will bring. Charlie - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tim Fisher Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] ASND Date: 12 Jan 1999 16:52:33 -0800 I make it a policy never to buy anything which is being bought out. ASND jumped on the news that LU was talking to them, and if the deal falls through, so does the stock. If it goes through, you'll wind up with LU shares. Which may not be a bad thing, but the possibility that the deal may fall through is too much risk for my taste. On 03:34 PM 1/12/99 , Charles Cangialosi Said: > > > Welcome Tiger. > I have to admit I am not really suprised that some things have changed >since HTMMIS was written. I was looking at the dates when I first got it and >wondered why there was not something a little more recent. However based on >comments from long timers on this list and others it appears the basic >tenants are in tact. > It just happens, in my opinion anyway, that some stocks that did not appear >to fit the mold turned out to be rockets. The lucky people caught them the >rest of us got to think about what could have been. > I got some T and ASND today. I decided since I could not find a good spot >to get in that I would go the mattress stuffer route. I dont intend to get >shaken out to easily. I am using weekly as opposed to daily charts so I am >in for the longer time frame. With what is left of my brokerage account I am >still hunting CANSLIM candidates. For the record I have some mutual funds >that I contribute regularly to in my retirement account. That is one piece >of advice that I believe WON is right about, I'm just going to leave them >alone. They did OK, with the exception of a small cap fund. No supprise >there but the fund manager did way worse, no way way worse than the RUT. He >is fired tomorrow. I am getting out of his fund. > Cant wait to find out what tomorrow will bring. > >Charlie > Tim Fisher Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites Tim@OreRockOn.com WWW: http://OreRockOn.com See naked fish and rocks! - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] Economics 101 Date: 12 Jan 1999 22:07:48 -0500 PPI report due tomorrow, forecasts call for some strong inflationary numbers, watch out for the media commentary. CPI reported on Thursday and Industrial Production on Friday, so all in all a lot for the commentators to talk about. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] tiger49er Date: 12 Jan 1999 22:35:52 -0500 Charlie, FWIW, I am exclusively STILL invested in small cap stocks. Any small cap fund manager who has not outperformed the R2000 deserves to be fired. For the past 18 months or so, my small cap portfolio has consistently outperformed the R2000, and mostly stayed even or better with the big cap indexes, so it can be done even on a part time basis. Thus far in January, I am up about 14%, as an example, and without a single internet stock! The Russell 2000 without a doubt contains a lot of dogs. The trick to small caps is finding the better performers, or at least the ones with the better potential of sharp earnings growth rates. CANSLIM and DGO continues to do that for my portfolios. Any institutional manager who can't show at least that much judgement is spending too much time on the links and not enough time doing his homework. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- canslim@mail.xmission.com Welcome Tiger. I have to admit I am not really suprised that some things have changed since HTMMIS was written. I was looking at the dates when I first got it and wondered why there was not something a little more recent. However based on comments from long timers on this list and others it appears the basic tenants are in tact. It just happens, in my opinion anyway, that some stocks that did not appear to fit the mold turned out to be rockets. The lucky people caught them the rest of us got to think about what could have been. I got some T and ASND today. I decided since I could not find a good spot to get in that I would go the mattress stuffer route. I dont intend to get shaken out to easily. I am using weekly as opposed to daily charts so I am in for the longer time frame. With what is left of my brokerage account I am still hunting CANSLIM candidates. For the record I have some mutual funds that I contribute regularly to in my retirement account. That is one piece of advice that I believe WON is right about, I'm just going to leave them alone. They did OK, with the exception of a small cap fund. No supprise there but the fund manager did way worse, no way way worse than the RUT. He is fired tomorrow. I am getting out of his fund. Cant wait to find out what tomorrow will bring. Charlie - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] Economics 102 Date: 12 Jan 1999 22:44:12 -0500 I love it, the Japanese government just can't stand to sit by and avoid intervening in the foreign currency markets. This time, they're intervening on behalf of the US DOLLAR!! Seems the yen is getting too strong, and that's hurting exports. Last time they lost their shirts thru intervention, they were buying yen. Didn't work then, and buying dollars now isn't expected to work now. Can't they at least find more creative ways to lose the tax dollars of their citizens?? Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Background Date: 12 Jan 1999 23:03:54 -0500 Thanks for the introduction George, pleased to have you in our group. Your background sounds as though you have had an interesting career to say the least. Anyway, don't worry about being a pest. Any and all contributions are welcome. Regards, Frank Wolynski (Often wrong, plan accordingly!) At 22:49 1/11/99 -0800, George W. Gregory wrote: >Fellow CS Members: > > Tom W. suggested I give a little background on myself as a somewhat new >member of the group. ...snipped..... >I'll chime in from time to time but try not to make a pest of myself. > > tiger49er > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Economics 102 Date: 12 Jan 1999 23:10:08 -0500 South America took it on the chin today, haven't caught the news lately, but I figured it was about time to start dipping into the old 'bad news' bucket and dragging out the budgetary problems in Brazil, Oil stagnation for the rest of S.A., or did I miss something else entirely? Regards, Frank Wolynski At 22:44 1/12/99 -0500, you wrote: >I love it, the Japanese government just can't stand to sit >by and avoid intervening in the foreign currency markets. >This time, they're intervening on behalf of the US DOLLAR!! >Seems the yen is getting too strong, and that's hurting >exports. Last time they lost their shirts thru intervention, >they were buying yen. Didn't work then, and buying dollars >now isn't expected to work now. Can't they at least find >more creative ways to lose the tax dollars of their >citizens?? > >Tom W >stkguru@netside.net >ICQ # 5568838 > > > >- > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Economics 102 Date: 12 Jan 1999 23:16:34 -0500 The most immediate factor is in Brazil, where several days ago one province "decided" that it would "withhold" its payment of tax dollars to the central govt. That in turn has once again lit off all the speculation over currency devaluation, chances of enacting meanful economic reforms, IMF withholding its bailout dollars, etc. I still do not believe that IMF and the USA will allow Brazil to buckle and fail, but the cost is clearly increasing. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- South America took it on the chin today, haven't caught the news lately, but I figured it was about time to start dipping into the old 'bad news' bucket and dragging out the budgetary problems in Brazil, Oil stagnation for the rest of S.A., or did I miss something else entirely? Regards, Frank Wolynski At 22:44 1/12/99 -0500, you wrote: >I love it, the Japanese government just can't stand to sit >by and avoid intervening in the foreign currency markets. >This time, they're intervening on behalf of the US DOLLAR!! >Seems the yen is getting too strong, and that's hurting >exports. Last time they lost their shirts thru intervention, >they were buying yen. Didn't work then, and buying dollars >now isn't expected to work now. Can't they at least find >more creative ways to lose the tax dollars of their >citizens?? > >Tom W >stkguru@netside.net >ICQ # 5568838 > > > >- > > - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Economics 101 Date: 12 Jan 1999 21:29:44 -0800 > PPI report due tomorrow, forecasts call for some strong > inflationary numbers, watch out for the media commentary. > CPI reported on Thursday and Industrial Production on > Friday, so all in all a lot for the commentators to talk > about. Don't know if you caught the news since you posted this, but the PPI was accidentally leaked on the internet this afternoon, not a good number, bonds may struggle tomorrow. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Economics 101 Date: 12 Jan 1999 23:39:02 -0500 Hadn't heard about the leak, what are the numbers?? From one site, the expectation is for up 0.3% on overall PPI vs last's month's decline of 0.2%; and up a whooping plus 0.6% for the core vs last months rise of only 0.1%. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- > PPI report due tomorrow, forecasts call for some strong > inflationary numbers, watch out for the media commentary. > CPI reported on Thursday and Industrial Production on > Friday, so all in all a lot for the commentators to talk > about. Don't know if you caught the news since you posted this, but the PPI was accidentally leaked on the internet this afternoon, not a good number, bonds may struggle tomorrow. - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Economics 101 Date: 13 Jan 1999 00:42:02 -0500 PPI climbs higher - Jan. 12, 1999 (CNNfn) Summary: 13, 1998 Department of Labor NEW YORK (CNNfn) - The producer price index climbed 0.4 percent last month, well ahead of estimates, but economists say the number does not necessarily paint an accurate picture of price performance. Excluding the volatile food and energy sectors, the index advanced fully 1 percent, well ahead of the 0.6 percent estimates. Here's a link: http://cnnfn.com:80/hotstories/economy/9901/12/ppi/ Frank At 23:39 1/12/99 -0500, you wrote: >Hadn't heard about the leak, what are the numbers?? > >From one site, the expectation is for up 0.3% on overall PPI >vs last's month's decline of 0.2%; and up a whooping plus >0.6% for the core vs last months rise of only 0.1%. > >Tom W >stkguru@netside.net >ICQ # 5568838 > >-----Original Message----- >From: Patrick Wahl >To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >Date: Tuesday, January 12, 1999 11:26 PM >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Economics 101 > > >From: "Tom Worley" >To: "CANSLIM" > >> PPI report due tomorrow, forecasts call for some strong >> inflationary numbers, watch out for the media commentary. >> CPI reported on Thursday and Industrial Production on >> Friday, so all in all a lot for the commentators to talk >> about. > >Don't know if you caught the news since you posted this, but >the >PPI was accidentally leaked on the internet this afternoon, >not a >good number, bonds may struggle tomorrow. > > > >- > > > >- > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Economics 101 Date: 13 Jan 1999 07:30:49 -0500 Nothing to panic over, tho the headlines are a real grabber. But when you follow the link to the whole story, you discover that the cause of such "inflationary" numbers is the 31% hike in cigarette prices put in place last month to pay for the litigation settlement. So only those of us still hooked on tobacco are paying for the billions to settle the lawsuits, and we were also the only ones to suffer inflation. The core number would have been down 0.1% without the contribution from tobacco. But I'm sure the media will still have fun with this. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- PPI climbs higher - Jan. 12, 1999 (CNNfn) Summary: 13, 1998 Department of Labor NEW YORK (CNNfn) - The producer price index climbed 0.4 percent last month, well ahead of estimates, but economists say the number does not necessarily paint an accurate picture of price performance. Excluding the volatile food and energy sectors, the index advanced fully 1 percent, well ahead of the 0.6 percent estimates. Here's a link: http://cnnfn.com:80/hotstories/economy/9901/12/ppi/ Frank At 23:39 1/12/99 -0500, you wrote: >Hadn't heard about the leak, what are the numbers?? > >From one site, the expectation is for up 0.3% on overall PPI >vs last's month's decline of 0.2%; and up a whooping plus >0.6% for the core vs last months rise of only 0.1%. > >Tom W >stkguru@netside.net >ICQ # 5568838 > >-----Original Message----- >From: Patrick Wahl >To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >Date: Tuesday, January 12, 1999 11:26 PM >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Economics 101 > > >From: "Tom Worley" >To: "CANSLIM" > >> PPI report due tomorrow, forecasts call for some strong >> inflationary numbers, watch out for the media commentary. >> CPI reported on Thursday and Industrial Production on >> Friday, so all in all a lot for the commentators to talk >> about. > >Don't know if you caught the news since you posted this, but >the >PPI was accidentally leaked on the internet this afternoon, >not a >good number, bonds may struggle tomorrow. > > > >- > > > >- > > - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "james sullivan" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Economics 101 Date: 13 Jan 1999 08:06:06 -0500 >Don't know if you caught the news since you posted this, but the >PPI was accidentally leaked on the internet this afternoon, not a >good number, bonds may struggle tomorrow. Just happened to catch CNBC with their news flashes....first, it was the mistaken release of the report; then it was that the figures were wrong; then it was that they were right....sensatonal broadcasting at it's best ;^) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Quan Tran Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] how to cancel canslim Date: 12 Jan 1999 21:47:41 -0800 Email to: majordomo@xmission.com In body of message: unsubscribe canslim At 11:31 PM 1/10/99 -0500, you wrote: >how does one get off the canslim list > > >- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FBNAirPlt@aol.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Acc/Dis Numbers Date: 13 Jan 1999 22:34:49 EST Here are the latest Acc/Dis numbers Date A B C D E AB/A:E %E 1/4/99 1163 2797 1267 1002 377 60% 6% 1/5/99 1281 2939 1226 891 309 63% 5% 1/6/99 1217 3019 1269 871 295 63% 4% 1/7/99 1270 3020 1253 858 292 64% 4% 1/8/99 1409 3050 1149 827 279 66% 4% 1/11/99 1399 3022 1171 835 290 66% 4% 1/12/99 1431 3047 1149 831 290 66% 4% 1/13/99 1447 2939 1203 860 309 65% 5% Spreadsheet Numbers: Date,A,B,C,D,E,AB/A:E,%E 1/4/99,1163,2797,1267,1002,377,60%,6% 1/5/99,1281,2939,1226,891,309,63%,5% 1/6/99,1217,3019,1269,871,295,63%,4% 1/7/99,1270,3020,1253,858,292,64%,4% 1/8/99,1409,3050,1149,827,279,66%,4% 1/11/99,1399,3022,1171,835,290,66%,4% 1/12/99,1431,3047,1149,831,290,66%,4% 1/13/99,1447,2939,1203,860,309,65%,5% - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeffry White Subject: [CANSLIM] tiger49er Date: 14 Jan 1999 06:34:00 -0500 > FWIW, I am exclusively STILL invested in small cap stocks. > Any small cap fund manager who has not outperformed the > R2000 deserves to be fired. For the past 18 months or so, my > small cap portfolio has consistently outperformed the R2000, > and mostly stayed even or better with the big cap indexes, > so it can be done even on a part time basis. Thus far in > January, I am up about 14%, as an example, and without a > single internet stock! Tom W. Unless you are running 100 million or more, do you really think this is a fair comment concerning small cap portfolior managers? Jeffry P.S. Excuse me if your portfolio equals or exceeds 100 million.... ;) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Russell, Ron" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Acc/Dis Numbers Date: 14 Jan 1999 08:32:25 -0500 Has anyone done any correlation between these numbers and the occurrence of corrections? Ron -----Original Message----- From: FBNAirPlt@aol.com [mailto:FBNAirPlt@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 1999 10:35 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Acc/Dis Numbers Here are the latest Acc/Dis numbers Date A B C D E AB/A:E %E 1/4/99 1163 2797 1267 1002 377 60% 6% 1/5/99 1281 2939 1226 891 309 63% 5% 1/6/99 1217 3019 1269 871 295 63% 4% 1/7/99 1270 3020 1253 858 292 64% 4% 1/8/99 1409 3050 1149 827 279 66% 4% 1/11/99 1399 3022 1171 835 290 66% 4% 1/12/99 1431 3047 1149 831 290 66% 4% 1/13/99 1447 2939 1203 860 309 65% 5% Spreadsheet Numbers: Date,A,B,C,D,E,AB/A:E,%E 1/4/99,1163,2797,1267,1002,377,60%,6% 1/5/99,1281,2939,1226,891,309,63%,5% 1/6/99,1217,3019,1269,871,295,63%,4% 1/7/99,1270,3020,1253,858,292,64%,4% 1/8/99,1409,3050,1149,827,279,66%,4% 1/11/99,1399,3022,1171,835,290,66%,4% 1/12/99,1431,3047,1149,831,290,66%,4% 1/13/99,1447,2939,1203,860,309,65%,5% - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dbphoenix Subject: Re:[CANSLIM] canslim - outdated? Date: 14 Jan 1999 06:32:49 -0800 (PST) Seems to me that all the debate about whether or not CS ought to be updated is moot. It HAS been updated. That was what the 26-week series was all about. And for anyone to claim that one must defer to HTMMIS because it's precedent and that WON himself has no right to alter his own work is idiotic. <> WON himself says that IS and float levels are no longer as important as they once were. And one can debate with him if one wants to. But it's his system. He can do what he wants with it. If we think he's incompetent to do so, what good can his system be? What many CSers overlook is that a high level of institutional sponsorship in a high float stock can create a practical low float, i.e., the number of shares available for trade. One of the reasons for the extraordinary intraday volatility in the Internet stocks is that the floats are getting smaller and smaller due to institutional buying. And the volatility will continue until the stocks have split enough or issued enough secondaries to satisfy demand. As far as earnings go, this, to me, is the only element of CS which is open to debate, but even here I see no reason why one must choose. Given the range of numbers which WON has always provided for most of the CS elements, one has had the freedom to lean toward a value approach or a momentum approach, though most people don't recognize the value aspects of CS (and I'm not referring to the "value" investing strategy). The only alteration that to me is open to debate is whether or not one should make earnings optional for the short-termer and mandatory for the intermediate to long-termer. But even here, one could argue that such a modification is not necessary. There aren't many Internet stocks that fit CS criteria (depending on how stringent one wants to be in the application of each and on how one defines "earnings"), but there are a few. And have been. If one had limited himself to them, he would have done just fine. And slept better too. When it comes to earnings, however, one must often do a little extra work, particularly when it comes to a young company. An EPS rank does not equal earnings any more than an RS rank equals relative strength. A young company can have excellent earnings and earnings prospects yet have a fair to middling EPS rank because of the way the EPS rank is calculated. Thus the investor has to put in some research time. The application of intelligence and common sense is also a great help, particularly when differentiating between a young company with a high concept and no earnings as compared to another young company which is raking in the revenues as fast as it can but is putting all those revenues to work rather than puff up a balance sheet. The vast majority of Internet stocks are not CS stocks not because they have no earnings but because they don't have the moxie that CS stocks are supposed to have. If one gets past all the nit-picking trivia of CS and focuses on its essence, there are a handful - and only a handful - of Internet stocks that are true CS stocks. And I can't think of a single reason why a CSer shouldn't buy them. At least, CS isn't preventing him from doing so. --Db == "Lessons are repeated until they are learned." http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/ _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Craig Griffin Subject: [CANSLIM] Off-Topic Streaming Video Stock Info Date: 14 Jan 1999 09:44:55 -0500 http://www.nightlybusiness.org/nbrvideo.htm Nice interviews with CSCO's CEO & AOL's CEO ... CSCO's CEO says he thinks in a couple of years, voice telco will be free and we will be paying for the high bandwith stuff like video. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jeff Salisbury" Subject: [CANSLIM] (Fwd) RS Vs. EPS Date: 14 Jan 1999 08:40:49 -0700 --- Forwarded mail from Coolcat895@aol.com Delivered-To: jeff@csd.sdl.usu.edu X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 61 The bottom line is that, for intermediate period investors (2-6 months, off less when the stocks run away from you), RS is much more important than EPS. To use Canslim limitations on EPS is to eliminate some of the best-performing stocks from consideration. You have to ask yourself: what is more important, how my stock LOOKS or how my STOCK acts? A stock with high EPS that doesn't go up isn't a good stock; a stock with low EPS that does go up is. Pure and simple. A good analogy for football fans is found in QBs Ryan Leaf and Doug Flutie. Leaf is 6-5 and has a big arm, the "ideal" quarterback who floundered in his rookie season. Flutie, meanwhile, is so short he has to jump up sometimes to see over his line, but he throws TDs and wins games. Kevin Kennedy Coolcat Explosive Small Cap Growth Stock Report www.coolcatreport.com ---End of forwarded mail from Coolcat895@aol.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jeff Salisbury" Subject: [CANSLIM] (Fwd) WebEntry Confirmation for Task #794 Date: 14 Jan 1999 08:41:03 -0700 --- Forwarded mail from "WebEntry Response System" Delivered-To: jeff@csd.sdl.usu.edu Reply-To: "WebEntry Response System" Your request titled: Convert Patch to fix "control-bit" problem has been been logged into the system as task #794. If you have any questions or problems regarding your request, please refer to this number and contact Ron Berrett. ---End of forwarded mail from "WebEntry Response System" - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jeff Salisbury" Subject: [CANSLIM] (Fwd) Darvas and CNBC Date: 14 Jan 1999 08:43:13 -0700 --- Forwarded mail from Coolcat895@aol.com Delivered-To: jeff@csd.sdl.usu.edu X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 61 <<<> Darvas wouldn't have wanted CNBC blaring in his brain. It would have cluttered his mind and given him thoughts on stocks outside his focus, which was the 6-7 best-performing stocks in the 4-5 best industries. Kevin Kennedy Coolcat Explosive Small Cap Growth Stock Report www.coolcatreport.com ---End of forwarded mail from Coolcat895@aol.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "George W. Gregory" Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: Cancellation of CS Messages Date: 13 Jan 1999 22:54:26 -0800 I don't know why anyone would want to cancel the transmission of CS info. There are a lot of people with some good ideas. This is a follow-up on Quan Tran asking how to get off the list. The name of the game is ideas, ideas, ideas. That is what the good money managers are constantly looking for-ideas. There are approx. 11,000 stocks in the WON database and if someone can screen through and give others names to look at, so much the better. In my years in the business (especially the last 10 or 12), a good indicator has been the direction of long term interest rates. Let's face it, the money has to go someplace and with interest rates at the lowest levels in many years, the only place left is the stock market. Another interesting fact is that many money managers don't try too hard to beat the averages; they just want to stay even with the indexes. I really don't think that a number of portfolio managers are very sharp. When they do become a little smarter, they subscribe to WON services. As far as I'm concerned, mutual funds are fine, but I do want one that will out perform the S&P. CS would have allowed some internet stocks in, such as AOL. Most of them would have been screened out with no earnings. I see where AOL have a 76 RS today, which is O.K. Continue to buy the strongest stocks in the strongest groups, as long as they have CS characteristics. I seem to rambling here so will sign off. tiger49er - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Coolcat895@aol.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: canslim-digest V2 #500 Date: 14 Jan 1999 08:04:05 EST The bottom line is that, for intermediate period investors (2-6 months, off less when the stocks run away from you), RS is much more important than EPS. To use Canslim limitations on EPS is to eliminate some of the best-performing stocks from consideration. You have to ask yourself: what is more important, how my stock LOOKS or how my STOCK acts? A stock with high EPS that doesn't go up isn't a good stock; a stock with low EPS that does go up is. Pure and simple. A good analogy for football fans is found in QBs Ryan Leaf and Doug Flutie. Leaf is 6-5 and has a big arm, the "ideal" quarterback who floundered in his rookie season. Flutie, meanwhile, is so short he has to jump up sometimes to see over his line, but he throws TDs and wins games. Kevin Kennedy Coolcat Explosive Small Cap Growth Stock Report www.coolcatreport.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: [CANSLIM] DGO news Date: 14 Jan 1999 20:35:24 +0100 We would like to alert our subscribers that next Friday, January 22, 1999, William O'Neil & Company is updating its 197 Industry Groups. The number of groups (197) will remain the same. The changes are as follows: -Computer-Mini/Micro and Computer-Mainframes will be merged into Computer-Manufacturers. -Containers-Paper/Plastic and Containers-Metal/Glass will be merged into Containers. -Metal-Steel Pipe & Tube will be merged into Metal Processing & Fabrication. -Commercial Svc-Engineering/R&D will be merged into Commercial Services-Misc. -The Finance-Public Traded Investment Funds group will be split into two groups: bond and equity. The following groups are being added: -Internet-Software -Internet-E*Commerce -Internet-Network Security/Solutions -Internet-ISP/Content We hope you are all enjoying our service. Happy New Year! Daily Graphs Online --------------------- end of quoted forwarded message ------------------- Since all the groups that are being added are internet related, I wonder why... ;^) Johan - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: [CANSLIM] COGIF breakout Date: 14 Jan 1999 20:50:06 +0100 COGIF Breakout on 3.5 x av daily volume (ADV) in face of a negative market. Solid CS credentials: 98 92 A GRS:92 6.5M float Earnings acceleration 3 last Qs: 400%, 567%, 600% Earnings due: 4/2 Breakout point is 23 and ADV(30)=59603 current volume = 274000 Johan - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: mikelu Subject: [CANSLIM] Darvas box/ trailing stops Date: 14 Jan 1999 12:53:39 -0800 I've been using hard stops on all my stocks this time, to be less emotional. I've been trying to put them below the bottom of the Darvas box as the stocks move up, but this latest dip in the market has pointed out a hole in my strategy. When the stock breaks out of the old box to make a new high (new box top), then reacts to make the new higher low (which will be the new bottom of the box), there's a period of time when I'm still using the old box's bottom for a stop. It seems like I'm risking more profit than I need to. I believe Darvas mentioned selling some "weak" stocks before they fell out the bottom of the box, but that seems to put the emotion back in. Does anyone have a good "solution" to this? Thanks, Mike - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "John Adair" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Darvas box/ trailing stops Date: 14 Jan 1999 15:34:40 -0800 solution Dont use hard stops. I recently read about a ploy used by market makers - They sell one share of a stock at a price say 15%less than the market. This then sets the low and triggers off all the stops and the rush will bring the market down. John -----Original Message----- >I've been using hard stops on all my stocks this time, to be less >emotional. I've been trying to put them below the bottom of the Darvas box >as the stocks move up, but this latest dip in the market has pointed out a >hole in my strategy. > >When the stock breaks out of the old box to make a new high (new box top), >then reacts to make the new higher low (which will be the new bottom of the >box), there's a period of time when I'm still using the old box's bottom >for a stop. It seems like I'm risking more profit than I need to. > >I believe Darvas mentioned selling some "weak" stocks before they fell out >the bottom of the box, but that seems to put the emotion back in. > >Does anyone have a good "solution" to this? > >Thanks, > >Mike > > >- > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Darvas box/ trailing stops Date: 14 Jan 1999 17:16:53 -0500 Mike, I really liked his book. I dont know the answer to your question. On one hand if the stop is to tight you get bounced out, that has happened to me a lot. On the other hand if you loosen up the stop you stand to loose more. I got tired of getting stopped out, I might add that the reason I did was because I got in wrong, the system is fine but operator error is a factor. I got some stocks that I am holding for a longer time frame. I used the weekly chart as opposed to the daily so to set stops I put them where I thought they should be on a weekly chart and if the stock drops some I feel like it will come back in the longer run. I have one other stock that is almost canslim but (according to Ian) has "stubbed it's toe" I purchased puts, so the max I can loose on the transaction is 6.5, which is too high, of my brokerage account I dont think it will come to that, but its the worst case scenario. Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of mikelu > Sent: Thursday, January 14, 1999 3:54 PM > To: 'canslim@lists.xmission.com' > Subject: [CANSLIM] Darvas box/ trailing stops > > > I've been using hard stops on all my stocks this time, to be less > emotional. I've been trying to put them below the bottom of the > Darvas box > as the stocks move up, but this latest dip in the market has > pointed out a > hole in my strategy. > > When the stock breaks out of the old box to make a new high (new > box top), > then reacts to make the new higher low (which will be the new > bottom of the > box), there's a period of time when I'm still using the old box's bottom > for a stop. It seems like I'm risking more profit than I need to. > > I believe Darvas mentioned selling some "weak" stocks before they > fell out > the bottom of the box, but that seems to put the emotion back in. > > Does anyone have a good "solution" to this? > > Thanks, > > Mike > > > - > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Acc/Dis Numbers Date: 14 Jan 1999 18:30:47 -0500 At 08:32 AM 1/14/99 -0500, you wrote: >Has anyone done any correlation between these numbers and the occurrence of >corrections? >Ron > Ian Woodward has done work in this area. He has targets and ranges for peaks and troughs. It isn't absolute and is subjective in terms of what the values mean. I do believe Ian has some definitive and very learned opinions on the readings of the numbers, but I'm not aware specifically what those are. He has a Web site though. http://www.wallstreetcity.com/talk/roundtables.htm Then select the High Growth Stock Corner Forum. Another individual on AOL used to set a target level for a ratio of the A+B/Total and the D+E/Total and call the target level the trigger for getting in and out. He had a limited amount of data available, however. It seemed a bit inadequate to me. I haven't checked in there for a long time and can't remember the exact figures he was using, but he admitted it was a work in progress. I do however go to the bother of tracking it. It appears as timely as the number of stocks above or below their 200 day moving average. Not really for timing, but for confirming trends and defining range. My take on it anyway. I graph the raw data and apply the ratio to a graph on my web site if you'd like to see it. http://home1.gte.net/wolynski/index.htm ( About half way down the left margin menu to the "IBD A/D Raw / Ratios" selection.) Regards, Frank Wolynski P.S. If you go there please disregard my opening page journal. Also are you the Ron Russell ( ronrussell@home.com ) that sends out the Weekly Stock List? If so, thank you for your efforts and fine work. I really appreciate your hard work! - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "anthony boone" Subject: [CANSLIM] CPQ -breakout 12/4/98 Yes/No ? Date: 14 Jan 1999 19:16:56 -0500 I need help from a CANSLIMer. I have been trying to understand how to identify a breakout, a real confirmed breakout and buy point.. When I analyze the price action on CPQ, I see that it closed at a new 52 week high on above average volume, and the volume and price remained strong for 3 days. Previous High: 8/18/98 37 1/2 35 1/2 38 11/16 35 3/8 28,501,000 New High: 12/04/98 38 11/16 37 5/8 38 3/4 37 24,441,700 next day:12/07/98 41 11/16 39 5/32 41 15/16 38 5/8 30,051,300 next day:12/08/98 41 7/16 41 3/4 43 3/16 40 1/4 27,195,000 today:1/14/99 44 9/16 46 5/16 46 3/8 44 1/2 9,051,700 MY QUESTION: Is this the classic pattern, if not what am i missing? Thanks, Anthony Boone - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: rolatzi Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Darvas box/ trailing stops Date: 14 Jan 1999 17:19:04 -0800 (PST) Why not use the top of the previous box as the stop when the stock jumps into its next higher box? Ciao, rolatzi ---mikelu wrote: > > I've been using hard stops on all my stocks this time, to be less > emotional. I've been trying to put them below the bottom of the Darvas box > as the stocks move up, but this latest dip in the market has pointed out a > hole in my strategy. > > When the stock breaks out of the old box to make a new high (new box top), > then reacts to make the new higher low (which will be the new bottom of the > box), there's a period of time when I'm still using the old box's bottom > for a stop. It seems like I'm risking more profit than I need to. > > I believe Darvas mentioned selling some "weak" stocks before they fell out > the bottom of the box, but that seems to put the emotion back in. > > Does anyone have a good "solution" to this? > > Thanks, > > Mike > > > - > > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DS Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CPQ -breakout 12/4/98 Yes/No ? Date: 14 Jan 1999 20:58:21 -0600 Hi Anthony, Good Job! Your definitely on your way to identifying sound base structures. Unfortunately, CPQ is a poor example of a Cup & Handle pattern. It's actual more like Db's now famous Funnel with a handle pattern. Here's what I see. First, a new high is important but not as important as buying a stock right when it comes out of the basing area. You have the breakout time correct for the new high but CPQ came out of its base on 12/2/98. Look at the tight trading area from 11/11/98 to 12/1/98. This is the handle or consolidation just before the stock broke out. You want to see this kind of resting action before a stock moves into new high ground. Also, notice that towards the end of the consolidation area the volume got very light. This is ideal as it shows general investor apathy and convictionless selling. 12/2/98 was the correct and safe day to buy this stock. The stock cleared its handle at 35 1/8 and this would have been a good entry point assuming that the volume was really there. Since this was not a new high you could have made your volume requirements more stringent to be sure the stock had enough power to get through the old high(However, large cap stocks can have valid breakouts without the 100 % average daily volume requirement. It's the price breakout that matters with large cap issues more than the volume breakout). It would have been more ideal for this breakout to come with a new high. However, if you bought the new high your stop loss risk would have been nearly 20% assuming you put your stop under the low of 11/30/98. I hope this helps. If you don't see it email me and I will send you a chart so you can see it clearly. Good Trading, Dave Squires >>>I need help from a CANSLIMer. I have been trying to understand how to identify a breakout, a real confirmed breakout and buy point.. When I analyze the price action on CPQ, I see that it closed at a new 52 week high on above average volume, and the volume and price remained strong for 3 days. Previous High: 8/18/98 37 1/2 35 1/2 38 11/16 35 3/8 28,501,000 New High: 12/04/98 38 11/16 37 5/8 38 3/4 37 24,441,700 next day:12/07/98 41 11/16 39 5/32 41 15/16 38 5/8 30,051,300 next day:12/08/98 41 7/16 41 3/4 43 3/16 40 1/4 27,195,000 today:1/14/99 44 9/16 46 5/16 46 3/8 44 1/2 9,051,700 MY QUESTION: Is this the classic pattern, if not what am i missing<< - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CPQ -breakout 12/4/98 Yes/No ? Date: 14 Jan 1999 20:48:13 -0800 > I need help from a CANSLIMer. I have been trying to understand how to > identify a breakout, a real confirmed breakout and buy point.. > > Previous High: 8/18/98 37 1/2 35 1/2 38 11/16 35 3/8 > 28,501,000 > New High: 12/04/98 38 11/16 37 5/8 38 3/4 37 > 24,441,700 > next day:12/07/98 41 11/16 39 5/32 41 15/16 38 5/8 > 30,051,300 > next day:12/08/98 41 7/16 41 3/4 43 3/16 40 1/4 > 27,195,000 > today:1/14/99 44 9/16 46 5/16 46 3/8 44 1/2 9,051,700 > > > MY QUESTION: Is this the classic pattern, if not what am i missing? This is probably what Db has dubbed the funnel with handle, that is, an abbreviated cup and handle, thus the funnel part. I think if you did want to buy out of this, the buy point would be when it spiked out of the flat base that formed throughout the middle of November, and not wait for the new high. New highs are good if you form the handle around the old highs. CPQ had already risen about 5 points by the time it made a new high, a bit extended from its most recent base of around 34-35. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Eatstock@aol.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Acc/Dis Numbers Date: 14 Jan 1999 23:18:50 EST Thanks for the numbers...I am trying to figure out what exactly to do with them. Do you keep a running track and plot it? any ideas would be helpful....what does the AB/A:E mean? thanks chris - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Ronald J. Russell, Jr." Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Acc/Dis Numbers Date: 14 Jan 1999 23:46:54 -0500 Frank, Thanks for the response. I did vaguely recall that Ian had covered this, but I too can't remember the specifics. Maybe somone else can chime in. It has been a long while since I've visited Ian's site. That is mostly due to his unfortunate (IMHO) association with Telescan with whom I have had very negative experiences. I'll cruise by your site and take a look around. Finally, yes, I am the same Ron Russell who sends out the Weekly Stock List. I sent my first note from my office. Ron -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Frank V. Wolynski Sent: Thursday, January 14, 1999 6:31 PM At 08:32 AM 1/14/99 -0500, you wrote: >Has anyone done any correlation between these numbers and the occurrence of >corrections? >Ron > Ian Woodward has done work in this area. He has targets and ranges for peaks and troughs. It isn't absolute and is subjective in terms of what the values mean. I do believe Ian has some definitive and very learned opinions on the readings of the numbers, but I'm not aware specifically what those are. He has a Web site though. http://www.wallstreetcity.com/talk/roundtables.htm Then select the High Growth Stock Corner Forum. Another individual on AOL used to set a target level for a ratio of the A+B/Total and the D+E/Total and call the target level the trigger for getting in and out. He had a limited amount of data available, however. It seemed a bit inadequate to me. I haven't checked in there for a long time and can't remember the exact figures he was using, but he admitted it was a work in progress. I do however go to the bother of tracking it. It appears as timely as the number of stocks above or below their 200 day moving average. Not really for timing, but for confirming trends and defining range. My take on it anyway. I graph the raw data and apply the ratio to a graph on my web site if you'd like to see it. http://home1.gte.net/wolynski/index.htm ( About half way down the left margin menu to the "IBD A/D Raw / Ratios" selection.) Regards, Frank Wolynski P.S. If you go there please disregard my opening page journal. Also are you the Ron Russell ( ronrussell@home.com ) that sends out the Weekly Stock List? If so, thank you for your efforts and fine work. I really appreciate your hard work! - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: mikelu Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Darvas box/ trailing stops Date: 14 Jan 1999 22:30:23 -0800 The boxes can overlap, so you could be getting stopped out too often. What you're supposed to do is wait for the top to be made (high not exceeded for 3 days), then wait for the new bottom (low not exceeded for 3 days). Mike -----Original Message----- Sent: Thursday, January 14, 1999 5:19 PM Why not use the top of the previous box as the stop when the stock jumps into its next higher box? Ciao, rolatzi ---mikelu wrote: > > I've been using hard stops on all my stocks this time, to be less > emotional. I've been trying to put them below the bottom of the Darvas box > as the stocks move up, but this latest dip in the market has pointed out a > hole in my strategy. > > When the stock breaks out of the old box to make a new high (new box top), > then reacts to make the new higher low (which will be the new bottom of the > box), there's a period of time when I'm still using the old box's bottom > for a stop. It seems like I'm risking more profit than I need to. > > I believe Darvas mentioned selling some "weak" stocks before they fell out > the bottom of the box, but that seems to put the emotion back in. > > Does anyone have a good "solution" to this? > > Thanks, > > Mike > > > - > > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com (Jeff Salisbury) Subject: [CANSLIM] Changing your canslim subscription Date: 15 Jan 1999 08:00:01 -0700 This is a monthly posting to the CANLSLIM group. Frequently, people sign up for the canslim list and then are overwhelmed by the volume of the email. There are two remedies for this problem: 1) You can leave our group, or 2) you can switch to the digest version which "conglomerates" many canslim messages into one large message. To change your configuration, email a message to: majordomo@xmission.com The remove yourself from the canslim list, write in the body of the email: unsubscribe canslim To add yourself to the digest version of the canslim list, write in the body of the email: subscribe canslim-digest For general help with majordomo commands, write in the body of the email: help If you need further clarification, write me directly at: canslim-owner@lists.xmission.com Best Regards, Jeff Salisbury - CANSLIM list admin / owner - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Not Canslim - Bigcharts Tricks Frank Date: 15 Jan 1999 07:05:52 -0800 (PST) Frank, I've been saving up questions to ask you about your work and am prompted to write after your site reference yesterday. The information on your page is impressive (and the links are fast on my computer). I have been collecting some data from the General Market sectors and earnings pages in IBD and have it in very raw form right now. I better see some things to do with it after looking at your page. I have several questions based on my work with groups. The IBD universe is 6000 stocks, your universe is less because you are more selective in screening, I am assuming. Do you know what the definition of the IBD universe is? I screened QP2 for stocks with prices over $2 today(I found that figure somewhere in the IBD- microcaps area) and got 8693 stocks in the 3 exchanges so that's not it. Is your universe all of the stocks from the 197 groups in the Industry Group Book that you follow screened for price and volume? I looked at bigcharts highs and lows on the exchanges; there are more in bigcharts than in the IBD for today;... two different universes? You were working on more current A,B,C,D,E. Did you work it out? Lastly (for today), I saved this attached message from some time ago. I think the links have changed, new http://www.bigcharts.com/reports/bigpics/money-movers.asp?exch=nasdaq&start=1 In the old link, we could change dates to see previous days as you described. Is it obvious to you how to do it with this new link? Thanks, TM ---"Frank V. Wolynski" wrote: > > Discovered something this morning that may be of use to some of you. > I was looking for a means to research the apparent follow through day, > 6/23/98. > > If you click on the available links at Bigcharts for the Charts Report of > the biggest volume changes with recent new highs, you will receive the > little mini charts of all stocks meeting their qualifications. > > While on that page, if you edit the URL (in the browser address window) and > replace todays date with a date you wish to see the data for, you'll be > rewarded with that days page! Not all the charts are there, but the Tickers > and the Names are. I suspect their cache directory is updated daily. > Interesting though, the charts will be their for the stocks continuing to > meet their qualifications! > > Here a sample from the follow through day: > http://www.bigcharts.com/reports/bigpics/volume-change/nasdaq/19980623/all_d > ata.asp > > Same thing applies for the New High List from the opening homepage. > > Sample: > http://www.bigcharts.com/reports/bigmovers/52wk-high/nasdaq/19980623/all_dat > a.asp > > I don't know how far back they go, but I was collecting screens using > Adobe's Acrobat Writer, as far back as 6/17. I would also assume that any > of the other reports are also available. > > Frank Wolynski > > > - > > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "The Jacksons" Subject: [CANSLIM] BBOX Date: 15 Jan 1999 10:55:41 -0500 Hello All, Is BBOX on anyone's breakout watch list?? The chart looks great to me, although the cup is a little deep (50%), eps and rs in the upper 80's. Group strength (computer networks) in the upper 90's. Earnings met estimates. Any comments?? Mark - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Craig Griffin Subject: [CANSLIM] Cree News Link Date: 15 Jan 1999 10:59:56 -0500 For any holders of CREE -- CREE announced several news items today. I assume the dilution as a result of issuing additional shares is hurting the stock price today. You can read all of the news releases on Yahoo, of course. For a local newspaper article on CREE's news today, go here http://news-observer.com/biz/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dbphoenix Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Acc/Dis Numbers Date: 15 Jan 1999 08:03:44 -0800 (PST) Good thing I kept this. --Db ..................................... This is a copy of a post made by a friend of mine last January. He also researched the levels of ABCDE one should look for. --Db <> .................................... This is Ian Woodward's response to a question on the subject. It's based on the aforementioned research. <10%. On each occasion, the resulting drop of A+B to the Total below 62%, fell to around 45%, with the market broken. It hovered at these levels for a few weeks before retracing back up quickly to above 62%, the entire drop to retrace to this level taking approximately 4 weeks. With the number currently at 53%, the market is still weak and in a state of flux. It needs to get above 62% before you can feel comfortable that there is sufficient strength and breadth in the market. This implies that the number for A+B should be around 4500 total. It has another 700 to go, so it still has a fair amount of repair ahead. You should also understand that as the market gets trashed the number of stocks (>$5) goes down, and vice versa. So the current number of 7198 will rise and fall with the strength or weakness of the market. For example, at its peak at the end of October, this total number was about 7570. Likewise, the % of "E" will also give you a clue. Currently, this is 515/7198 = 7.15% - that's bad! For a stable and meaningful market, this number should stay below 4%. As you would expect, the "E" chart pattern is the reverse of the A+B/Total. It hit a peak of between 8 to 10% on the same three occasions mentioned above, and retraced down to the 4% or below level after 4 weeks. You want to watch the # of "E's" come down below 300 for you to be comfortable that the market has repaired. The steady state is between 1.5 to 4% or 100 to 300 stocks in category "E". Likewise, when it gets as low as 1.5 to 2%, you should be on the look out that the market is overextended (over-rich), and is due for a correction. If you put this stuff in a spreadsheet, you can watch the changes and graph the results. With trendlines, you can anticipate when a market is about to break or about to repair!>> == "Lessons are repeated until they are learned." http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/ _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] BBOX Date: 15 Jan 1999 11:52:43 -0500 At 10:55 AM 1/15/99 -0500, you wrote: > >Hello All, >Is BBOX on anyone's breakout watch list?? The chart looks great to me, >although the cup is a little deep (50%), eps and rs in the upper 80's. >Group strength (computer networks) in the upper 90's. Earnings met >estimates. >Any comments?? Mark > It isn't on my watch list. A breakout (New high -above $41.00) would be necessitated and more volume than it looks like it is capable of generating. It hasn't exactly been storming the gates in relative strength either. Is there a compelling "N" or "C" that is irresistable with the company? The weekly chart is not particularly inspiring. JMTC, you asked for comments. Regards, Frank Wolynski - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] BBOX Date: 15 Jan 1999 09:55:39 -0800 It's on mine. I got it from Ron Russel's list. Chartwise it could be a very sloppy C&H but notice how it has bounced off the low side of 38 like a ping pong ball the last few weeks? I'd call that a pivot point. It couldn't get through it on earnings or an S&P tout either, and I'm frankly surprised, with today's strong market, that it still can't get up there. I suggest you read their earnings release closely - either no one is paying attention to BBOX or there is something buried in there that is making people flinch. P.S. They are in a merger so maybe that's why the price isn't reacting to earnings. It is scheduled to be completed this month. At 10:55 AM 1/15/99 -0500, you wrote: > >Hello All, >Is BBOX on anyone's breakout watch list?? The chart looks great to me, >although the cup is a little deep (50%), eps and rs in the upper 80's. >Group strength (computer networks) in the upper 90's. Earnings met >estimates. >Any comments?? Mark > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Joe J." Subject: [CANSLIM] hard stops...to use or not to use??? Date: 15 Jan 1999 11:53:21 -0700 > solution Dont use hard stops. I recently read about a ploy used by market > makers - They sell one share of a stock at a price say 15%less than the > market. This then sets the low and triggers off all the stops and the > rush will bring the market down. > John > A solution to this problem is to say away from thinly traded stocks. While I agree that MM'ers can and do use this practice, it is obviously much more difficult to accomplish this in a very liquid market. When I run scans for stocks, I will look for average volume of at least 500,000 shares per day. I will occasionally trade trade stocks which have a lower average volume if I really like the stock. I think we have put to rest that float doesn't matter elsewhere so we don't have to worry about high volume stock having too large of a float. This issue of hard stops is a tough one. Certainly if you are sitting in front of your real time steaming quotes screen with instant trading features, hard stops are not necessary. However, what if you're not? I have been burned a few times on stocks that gap down on negative news or a poor market (i.e., this past Wednesday morning). Sometimes the hard stops serve to be towards the low range of the day and sometimes they are not. My feeling is that the cardinal rule in trading is to preserve capital as to be able to stay in the game. Thus, I would rather be stopped out prematurely then risk getting severely burned on a position that continues to decline past where I placed that "mental stop" but wasn't there to watch it. Therefore, I never have a position open for which I don't have a hard stop in. Good trading, Joe J. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] BBOX Date: 15 Jan 1999 11:06:24 -0800 (PST) I saw a cup and handle, but thought that the handle failed on 1/12/99. Anywhay the way I interpret 3,7,10 MAverages (still learning); 3 crossed the 7 giving a first level buy that day and it has gone down every day since. It has closed in the lower third of its range 3 days in a row which is below its 20 day MA. I wouldn't buy right now. TM > > Hello All, > Is BBOX on anyone's breakout watch list?? The chart looks great to me, > although the cup is a little deep (50%), eps and rs in the upper 80's. > Group strength (computer networks) in the upper 90's. Earnings met > estimates. > Any comments?? Mark > > > - > > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Not Canslim - Bigcharts Tricks Frank Date: 15 Jan 1999 16:12:55 -0500 At 07:05 AM 1/15/99 -0800, you wrote: >Frank, > >I have several questions based on my work with groups. The IBD >universe is 6000 stocks, your universe is less because you are more >selective in screening, I am assuming. > >Do you know what the definition of the IBD universe is? I screened >QP2 for stocks with prices over $2 today(I found that figure somewhere >in the IBD- microcaps area) and got 8693 stocks in the 3 exchanges so >that's not it. Is your universe all of the stocks from the 197 groups >in the Industry Group Book that you follow screened for price and >volume? I really don't know how IBD defines it's universe. I purchased the "Industry Groups Guide", but have found in some groups that some really cheap and illiquid stocks are listed. My universe is less. I started with the "Companies in the News" tables. There you'll find up to 24 stocks in a group listed by EPS/RS. I believe the stocks are ranked by EPS+RS top down. I don't have the paper with me. This gave me quite a few of the groups and some good stocks, however IBD is not the greatest in timely highlighting of an appropriate "In The News" group. I then bought the "Industry Group Guide" and added the rest of the groups using the top stocks in each group. To keep my universe current, I check the Weekend in Review, Ron Russell's "Weekly Stock List", Rogers HGS Mumbo Jumbo site, IBD new highs list, Tom's list of NH's and this listserv, Individual Investors quarterly Top 500 update, Big Charts for breakouts, then go around the circle again. All in all a neverending task. I envy DB's more focused approach, but the A--- Retentive natured engineer in me demands my universe be complete and the only way for "relative" to have meaning to me is to know the complete universe, bad and good. So, therefore my universe contains all the groups. (Minus, mining gems and two others. I mean there is hope for me afterall.) Even this is not enough. I've often wanted to move the IBD groups into sectors and look at broader swatches of the markets. Since this has not been done by IBD or WON, I've been hesitant to do it. Besides I have another means to fill that particular void. Many years ago in a Galaxy far far away I used Metastock and tracked the Dow Jones Sectors/Groups by manually entering the data weekly. They are a more liquid group and represent the large and mid caps, Institutional favorites. If I'm going to run around in the jungle trying not to get eaten, I might as well know where the elephants are stomping, or at least know their "paths of least resistance". It works for me. > >I looked at bigcharts highs and lows on the exchanges; there are more >in bigcharts than in the IBD for today;... two different universes? I'm sure of it, but can't help in eithers definition. I do trust the IBD's universe more. Some basic RS/EPS and Group focus is a must for my interest to be ignited. > >You were working on more current A,B,C,D,E. Did you work it out? > Not that I could say mirrored IBD's approach. I found something in Wilders RSI that works for me. I count the numbers of stocks in certain ranges, in regards to the WRSI and graph the result. My interest in IBD's ABCDE is restricted to just tallying the numbers. I have control of my own Mumbo-Jumbo and am comfortable with it. We usually are with the things we understand. As long as WON's ABCDE A/D numbers are proprietary and confidential, I would never have confidence in them. Again the engineer that demands to know how it works controls that area of my life. > >Lastly (for today), I saved this attached message from some time ago. >I think the links have changed, new >http://www.bigcharts.com/reports/bigpics/money-movers.asp?exch=nasdaq&start=1 > >In the old link, we could change dates to see previous days as you >described. Is it obvious to you how to do it with this new link? > They've changed server software. The old system was updated by publishing a new html document to the directory (folder) that contained all the particular charts. The old documents were date named and you could simply change the address and see yesterdays document. The new server is apparently generating the pages dynamically. Takes less human effort on their part with the new method. In short, I couldn't find a way to see yesterdays because yesterday was never on the server as a file, it was generated as "now" and always will be. So any reference to time or date is irrelevant. Can't do it. It is created as you log in each time and day. I hope this has helped. Regards, Frank Wolynski - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Your message to canslim was too big... Date: 15 Jan 1999 16:44:34 -0700 This is an automatic message sent to: canslim@lists.xmission.com Your message sent to the canslim group with the subject of: canslim-digest V2 #501 and sent on the date/time of: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 08:02:21 -0700 was received. However, it has not yet been forwarded to the group. The reason for the delay was that your message exceeds the list's automatic threshold and will require approval before it is posted to the group. The reason this threshold exists is to: 1. Prevent people from quoting vast portions of someone else's message. canslim members are encouraged to trim down quotations as much as possible. 2. Prevent people from unknowingly quoting the entire digest. New digest subscribers are vulnerable to this mistake. 3. Prevent people from sending large data or graphics files through the list. However, you may have just sent a message that was long. This is OK and your message will not be rejected because of its length. In the future, you do not need to seek permission for long postings. I do not want to discourage long, on-topic, original messages. If this is the case with your message, please accept my apologies for this dely. Your message will be forwarded to the group without editing within 24 hours (usually within a few minutes). Consequently, please do not fix and resend your message without contacting me first as this may cause your message to be posted twice (once by me and once by you). Best Regards, Jeff Salisbury - canslim owner/admin - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] hard stops...to use or not to use??? Date: 15 Jan 1999 19:28:10 -0500 If anyone can cite chapter and verse (e.g. the date, at least approx; the stock; the price traded and the then current bid and ask; and if possible the firm) that traded that phantom one share of stock 15% below (or above) the market so as to manipulate the mkt into triggering and executing a basket of stop orders, I will be happy to follow up with the SEC (they're only six blocks from my office and I know people there). Personally, while I have seen such blatant attempts at price manipulation, I have only seen it very rarely, and it took a LOT more than one share to achieve the goal. On the other hand, I have seen many occasions where there was a bad "print", usually later corrected. Of course, they don't report single shares, only lots of 100 so this may not explain it. This may have given some investors the false impression of such a scenario. But since I can't prove this transaction of a single share 15% off market, I welcome anyone educating me, and in return will attempt to get an SEC investigation initiated. You can respond via the group address, or directly to me at stkguru@netside.net and I will keep you informed on any results. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- > solution Dont use hard stops. I recently read about a ploy used by market > makers - They sell one share of a stock at a price say 15%less than the > market. This then sets the low and triggers off all the stops and the > rush will bring the market down. > John > A solution to this problem is to say away from thinly traded stocks. While I agree that MM'ers can and do use this practice, it is obviously much more difficult to accomplish this in a very liquid market - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] hard stops...to use or not to use??? Date: 16 Jan 1999 04:23:34 -0500 Tom, I dont know anything about one share of stock but according to Searandeo, traders legally manipulate prices all the time. He makes the point and I agree that it is not illegal to work within the limits of the rules to try to get the best price. It was really interesting reading, as I have no concept of what happens when an order is placed or how the system actually works. Dr. Elders mentions the "them vrs us" mentality of floor traders and I didn't really understand what he was referring to till just yesterday when I read that section of "Trader Vic". The part that really blew me away was how program trading is done. I had not known that part of the game was avoiding being trampled by elephants. What should be interesting in the years to come now that everyone is on line with a e-trade or ameritrade or something, is how will that change things. Will chart patterns change now that a gazillion people are out here all with our own separate strategies. It's interesting reading. Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tom Worley > Sent: Friday, January 15, 1999 7:28 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] hard stops...to use or not to use??? > > > If anyone can cite chapter and verse (e.g. the date, at > least approx; the stock; the price traded and the then > current bid and ask; and if possible the firm) that traded > that phantom one share of stock 15% below (or above) the > market so as to manipulate the mkt into triggering and > executing a basket of stop orders, I will be happy to follow > up with the SEC (they're only six blocks from my office and > I know people there). Personally, while I have seen such > blatant attempts at price manipulation, I have only seen it > very rarely, and it took a LOT more than one share to > achieve the goal. > > On the other hand, I have seen many occasions where there > was a bad "print", usually later corrected. Of course, they > don't report single shares, only lots of 100 so this may not > explain it. This may have given some investors the false > impression of such a scenario. But since I can't prove this > transaction of a single share 15% off market, I welcome > anyone educating me, and in return will attempt to get an > SEC investigation initiated. > > You can respond via the group address, or directly to me at > stkguru@netside.net and I will keep you informed on any > results. > > Tom W > stkguru@netside.net > ICQ # 5568838 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Joe J. > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Date: Friday, January 15, 1999 1:43 PM > Subject: [CANSLIM] hard stops...to use or not to use??? > > > > solution Dont use hard stops. I recently read about a > ploy used by market > > makers - They sell one share of a stock at a price say > 15%less than the > > market. This then sets the low and triggers off all the > stops and the > > rush will bring the market down. > > John > > > A solution to this problem is to say away from thinly traded > stocks. > While I agree that MM'ers can and do use this practice, it > is obviously > much more difficult to accomplish this in a very liquid > market > > > - > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] Week's performance Date: 16 Jan 1999 08:14:15 -0500 Hello members, It's been a while since I posted my complete watch list of small cap stocks. Some members don't want it, and while I was not being faithful to my system I felt uncomfortable in sharing unless it was requested privately. I don't intend to make this a regular post, but did want to respond to one member's response to my comment on small cap fund manager's performance. Small cap stocks are certainly not suitable for many (maybe most in today's volatile mkts) investors, but they do work for me. I've been slowly trying to make the time to resume my discipline, and it's paying off. Now only up 12.8% for January, but the ones I'm trying to buy but miss are taking off, thus building my confidence factor. Led to me getting too aggressive on one (DTEK) out of frustration of missing several others. Oh well, you gotta crack some eggs to make an omelet. I chose not to respond to the comment that I was being unfair to small cap fund mgrs unless I too was working with $100 million to invest. With the expansion of the definition of "small cap", as well as the current liquidity (most on my list have ADV of 100,000 or better), I find no justification for a small cap mgr not soundly beating the R2000 and at least staying even, if not better, than the Naz Comp index. My weekly reports generally look just like this list. If I had the capital to just buy everything on my list, I would usually beat most indexes. And now that I am back to some discipline and effort, by being selective and using MACD for timing, I would easily blow away most indexes (except possibly the internet one). Anyway, here's what I've been doing: Switched two losers to my IRA to hold longer term and for tax writeoff to shelter profits (Scan Optics and Misonix). Will hold Misonix long term due fundies, sell Scan on signal from MACD. Neither are currently CANSLIM. Added to my Timberline and Elec. Processing (12.875 and 10 respectively). Profitable on original shares and nicely profitable on new shares. Tried to buy Healthdyne and Overland as they came out of short bases, both got away. Frustrated, bot Display Tech at 6.875 on a pullback after it got away as well, now paying the price for ignoring MACD on this one. Still negative and may pull the plug next week. Tried to buy Take Two, another miss, gotta get more aggressive, or quicker, with these small floats. Tried to buy Rimage but so far no pullback, and after the experience with Display, will likely cancel the order this weekend. Biggest lesson learned for 1998 - gotta stay focused and disciplined. If I can't do this for personal or emotional reasons, or day job workload simply doesn't permit the time to be focused, better cashing out for awhile and take a vacation. Here's the latest week's results with major index comparisons: Security Close 52 Wk High 52 Wk Low PE Ratio Week Chge Best Software Inc 23 5/8 28 1/2 9 3/4 +8.0% Delphi Information Sys 8 1/8 9 1/8 2 7/8 +4.8% Display Technologies 5 3/4 7 13/16 2 5/8 17 -9.8% Electronic Processing 12 5/8 20 8 1/16 45 +7.4% Exactech Inc 10 1/2 13 5/8 5 26 -3.4% Healthdyne Info Ent 9 5/8 9 1/2 1 7/16 +13.2% Invivo Corporation 15 1/2 17 8 1/4 23 +0.8% MDC Corp 20 1/4 24 13 10 -2.7% Miami Computer Supply 27.68 29 3/4 8 7/8 48 -1.1% Misonix Inc 5 9/16 8 3/4 4 1/4 9 +5.9% Overland Data Inc 9 15/16 11 5/8 3 3/8 25 +13.5% Polycom Inc 25 3/4 26 1/2 5 50 +2.2% Rimage Corporation 17 17 1/4 3 3/8 19 +21.4% Scan-Optics Inc. 4 31/32 10 1/8 3 11 +5.9% Secure Computer 25 15/16 26 1/8 6 3/8 +16.9% Take-Two Interactive Software11 1/8 12 3/8 4 3/4 29 +7.8% Timberline Software 16 3/4 20 5/8 8 1/8 25 +4.6% Unify Corporation 9 5/8 10 1/2 1 3/4 48 +21.2% Composite NASDAQ 2,348.20 +0.1% Dow Jones 30 Industrials -3.1% Russell 2000 Index -0.9% Standard & Poor's 100 Index -3.0% Standard & Poor's 500 Index -2.4% Vix Market Volitility Index 29.75 +24.5% Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Market Manipulation (was Re: [CANSLIM] hard stops...to use or not to use???) Date: 16 Jan 1999 08:39:14 -0500 Hi Charlie, It's important to understand first that a floor trader is just that, not an investor, but rather a trader. He (or she, I think there are now a few) make their money on sixteenths and eighths, not on home runs or even base hits that guys like us trading hundreds or thousands of shares need. They are also doing it for a living, it's their job and how they pay themselves. This is also true of the independent "traders" like Connie, who make a living day trading. For most, it's a very intense occupation, and they want to close the day flat (neither long nor short) so they can start the next day from scratch. If they hold a position overnight, they are usually thinking in terms of only holding for a few days, not weeks or months of "mattress stuffing". Second, it's also important to realize that much that has been written about market manipulation by market makers was regarding Nasdaq stocks, and preceded the massive lawsuit now settled for over $100 million by a number of large firms. This led directly to the implementation of the new Order Display rules designed to prevent past abuses and allow individual investors full access to the markets. The NYSE and AMEX have long been auction systems, with these new rules NASDAQ comes much closer to an auction system as well. And with the merger of AMEX and NASDAQ, I expect this process to continue. Third, since "odd lots" are not printed (and a single share certainly would be an odd lot) I don't believe it would achieve the desired effect of printing a trade away from the market for purposes of triggering stops. The same is true of a very large transaction executed off market (e.g. a mutual fund that wants to buy or sell a qtr or half million shares). Sometimes these large "off market" blocks are reported and affect the high or low of the day, but often the high or low is subsequently corrected to exclude these off mkt transactions. I don't question that there will always be some mkt manipulation, heck I've done it myself as an individual investor, as well as while operating the trading desk for a broker dealer. It's part of the business, and the traders I was dealing with were well aware of it, just as they would try to manipulate me. But we were dealing with fractional parts of a dollar, not something 15% off current mkt quotes (example would be I've got a mkt buy order for 5000 shares in front of me, I talk to a market maker who wants to execute it at the offer, I convince him that we need the order done an eighth better, within the spread). However, a 15% difference would be pretty blatant, which is why I offered to take any documented cases to the SEC, as I know they would be interested in any cases that actually occurred that their audits and mkt surveillance systems may have somehow missed. (and their systems are quite good, tho often slow to act without a lengthy investigation) Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- Tom, I dont know anything about one share of stock but according to Searandeo, traders legally manipulate prices all the time. He makes the point and I agree that it is not illegal to work within the limits of the rules to try to get the best price. It was really interesting reading, as I have no concept of what happens when an order is placed or how the system actually works. Dr. Elders mentions the "them vrs us" mentality of floor traders and I didn't really understand what he was referring to till just yesterday when I read that section of "Trader Vic". The part that really blew me away was how program trading is done. I had not known that part of the game was avoiding being trampled by elephants. What should be interesting in the years to come now that everyone is on line with a e-trade or ameritrade or something, is how will that change things. Will chart patterns change now that a gazillion people are out here all with our own separate strategies. It's interesting reading. Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tom Worley > Sent: Friday, January 15, 1999 7:28 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] hard stops...to use or not to use??? > > > If anyone can cite chapter and verse (e.g. the date, at > least approx; the stock; the price traded and the then > current bid and ask; and if possible the firm) that traded > that phantom one share of stock 15% below (or above) the > market so as to manipulate the mkt into triggering and > executing a basket of stop orders, I will be happy to follow > up with the SEC (they're only six blocks from my office and > I know people there). Personally, while I have seen such > blatant attempts at price manipulation, I have only seen it > very rarely, and it took a LOT more than one share to > achieve the goal. > > On the other hand, I have seen many occasions where there > was a bad "print", usually later corrected. Of course, they > don't report single shares, only lots of 100 so this may not > explain it. This may have given some investors the false > impression of such a scenario. But since I can't prove this > transaction of a single share 15% off market, I welcome > anyone educating me, and in return will attempt to get an > SEC investigation initiated. > > You can respond via the group address, or directly to me at > stkguru@netside.net and I will keep you informed on any > results. > > Tom W > stkguru@netside.net > ICQ # 5568838 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Joe J. > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Date: Friday, January 15, 1999 1:43 PM > Subject: [CANSLIM] hard stops...to use or not to use??? > > > > solution Dont use hard stops. I recently read about a > ploy used by market > > makers - They sell one share of a stock at a price say > 15%less than the > > market. This then sets the low and triggers off all the > stops and the > > rush will bring the market down. > > John > > > A solution to this problem is to say away from thinly traded > stocks. > While I agree that MM'ers can and do use this practice, it > is obviously > much more difficult to accomplish this in a very liquid > market > > > - > > - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeffry White Subject: [CANSLIM] Week's performance Date: 16 Jan 1999 09:18:23 -0500 > I chose not to respond to the comment that I was being > unfair to small cap fund mgrs unless I too was working with > $100 million to invest. With the expansion of the definition > of "small cap", as well as the current liquidity (most on my > list have ADV of 100,000 or better), I find no justification > for a small cap mgr not soundly beating the R2000 and at > least staying even, if not better, than the Naz Comp index. Tom W. Obviously, I failed to consider your extraordinarily thin skin when I questioned the fairness of your criticism of small cap fund managers. Again, I've offended you. Just a simple question to a fairly emboldened comment, I thought. If my point was not obvious, let me be more direct. Last week, I took one account with a measly $700 in it (yes, just two zeroes) up five fold in one small cap stock (using options only, and more than one trade in both directions). Now, wouldn't it be unfair for criticize all small cap fund managers who didn't do as well as I last week? If I can do it, why can't they? You don't really believe that you could quietly slip 100 million into and out of a handful of stocks as easily as you're slipping a few thousand bucks into those same few issues, do you? Perhaps I missed your point, but isn't it the 100 million folks buying activity that is making you the profit on your few hundred shares? Really not trying to insult you, argue with you, or silence your participation in the group. Just found the comment kind of humorous, unexplained, and hard to understand. Respectfully, Jeff - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Week's performance Date: 16 Jan 1999 09:38:52 -0500 Hello, Jeffry, I hope my response has now answered your "simple question" and its no longer "unexplained, and hard to understand". While many small cap funds are not working with as much as $100 million at any time (much less trying to "slip 100 million into and out of a handful of stocks"), I do believe there are sufficient opportunities and liquidity for any small cap fund manager to be selective, if he is willing to invest the time and effort to do his job, and thus pick more of the top performing small cap stocks and easily beat the R2000 index performance. Frankly, ANY fund manager that can't be selective enough to beat any unmanaged index should be fired, assuming that "his" portfolio is supposed to be compared to a specific index. If he can't beat an unmanaged index, who needs him? Sorry if this offends you, but I have felt this way for a long time. Frankly, I am not impressed with most funds managers, and don't think they earn their salaries, bonuses, or other compensations. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- > I chose not to respond to the comment that I was being > unfair to small cap fund mgrs unless I too was working with > $100 million to invest. With the expansion of the definition > of "small cap", as well as the current liquidity (most on my > list have ADV of 100,000 or better), I find no justification > for a small cap mgr not soundly beating the R2000 and at > least staying even, if not better, than the Naz Comp index. Tom W. Obviously, I failed to consider your extraordinarily thin skin when I questioned the fairness of your criticism of small cap fund managers. Again, I've offended you. Just a simple question to a fairly emboldened comment, I thought. If my point was not obvious, let me be more direct. Last week, I took one account with a measly $700 in it (yes, just two zeroes) up five fold in one small cap stock (using options only, and more than one trade in both directions). Now, wouldn't it be unfair for criticize all small cap fund managers who didn't do as well as I last week? If I can do it, why can't they? You don't really believe that you could quietly slip 100 million into and out of a handful of stocks as easily as you're slipping a few thousand bucks into those same few issues, do you? Perhaps I missed your point, but isn't it the 100 million folks buying activity that is making you the profit on your few hundred shares? Really not trying to insult you, argue with you, or silence your participation in the group. Just found the comment kind of humorous, unexplained, and hard to understand. Respectfully, Jeff - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] DGO New Highs Date: 16 Jan 1999 09:53:54 -0500 No surprise, the numbers are down sharply this week. Most of the new highs came early in the week, or on Friday (which tells me a lot of top performers never backed off that much, and were positioned to break new highs on Friday's rally, 23 in all, despite the drop of the two prior days). Overall, 277 of the stocks in the Daily Graphs books hit a new high last week, and of this number 97 meet the basic CANSLIM test of RS/ESP of 80/80 or better. Here's the survivors: PLXS, EAGL, PROX, ORCL, CGX, CLKB, CREE, ADMS, CACS, CMVT, MYG, GNSSF, INSS, GDT, TIF, ECILF, DELL, ADCT, IMTR, ARMHY, LXK, CTL, LOW, YHOO, T, SALT, VRTS, USM, SYKE, NITE, ZOMX, BEBE, AVTC, MRX, KROG, OVRL, INTC, PGR, CVD, AHO, ITII, FPIC, PLCE, NTAP, COF, CHKPF, YNR, MMS, SCOR, EWB, SUNW, HLYW, GENZ, AXTI, CDWC, FDS, SDLI, ATSI, ABE, MDCC, SAPE, FM, MXIM, VCI, MELI, PTI, AAII, ARX, UVSGA, LLTC, ISTN, SWFT, ACAI, LEVL, TCAT, MWHS, TECH, PSDI, ITP, ASND, WHIT, PRGN, SANM, FORR, MHP, SEBL, TLTN, APEX, OCLI, ALTR, COGIF, ATI, ORLY, AAS, AGN, EMC, CPN. As always, I haven't done any reviews of these so don't know if any of them may be valid buys. Nor do I guarantee against any typos. You're on your own from here. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: rolatzi Date: 16 Jan 1999 07:46:37 -0800 (PST) !DJ30,12/16/1998,8922.94,8675.52,8790.60, 70.31, 94.30 !DJ30,12/17/1998,8959.76,8725.21,8875.82, 71.75, 90.92 !DJ30,12/18/1998,9012.28,8789.31,8903.63, 95.15, 88.07 !DJ30,12/21/1998,9150.54,8874.28,8988.85, 77.84, 86.67 !DJ30,12/22/1998,9122.99,8909.29,9044.46, 58.51, 86.09 !DJ30,12/23/1998,9255.84,9022.58,9202.03, 58.32, 87.96 !DJ30,12/24/1998,9289.57,9146.42,9217.99, 20.21, 89.69 !DJ30,12/28/1998,9330.50,9133.54,9226.75, 45.91, 91.17 !DJ30,12/29/1998,9375.30,9152.34,9320.98, 51.15, 93.84 !DJ30,12/30/1998,9390.75,9211.30,9274.64, 48.25, 95.24 !DJ30,12/31/1998,9343.64,9106.77,9181.43, 53.40, 94.67,Compress !DJ30,01/04/1999,9393.84,9089.00,9184.27, 89.41, 93.94 !DJ30,01/05/1999,9389.46,9137.66,9311.19, 79.86, 95.13 !DJ30,01/06/1999,9608.05,9315.42,9544.97, 10.34, 99.86 !DJ30,01/07/1999,9616.29,9369.12,9537.76, 88.29,103.76,Reversal !DJ30,01/08/1999,9759.44,9447.91,9643.32,103.25,108.78 !DJ30,01/11/1999,9751.46,9446.36,9619.89, 98.72,112.65 !DJ30,01/12/1999,9680.40,9394.87,9474.68, 95.68,113.41 !DJ30,01/13/1999,9485.24,9134.06,9349.56,109.06,111.67,Compress !DJ30,01/14/1999,9359.08,9087.72,9120.93, 92.77,105.92 !DJ30,01/15/1999,9381.74,9124.02,9340.55, 80.77,104.05 !NYA ,12/16/1998,564.31,559.95,562.89, 7.36, 6.49 !NYA ,12/17/1998,570.16,562.84,570.15, 7.44, 6.44 !NYA ,12/18/1998,572.54,568.77,572.07, 8.42, 6.40 !NYA ,12/21/1998,581.01,571.79,577.70, 7.45, 6.45 !NYA ,12/22/1998,580.82,574.13,578.75, 7.45, 6.49 !NYA ,12/23/1998,589.58,578.66,588.95, 6.88, 6.68 !NYA ,12/24/1998,589.94,587.82,589.07, 2.47, 6.84 !NYA ,12/28/1998,591.05,587.18,589.01, 5.33, 6.97,Reversal !NYA ,12/29/1998,597.05,587.32,597.05, 5.89, 7.20 !NYA ,12/30/1998,597.86,593.68,594.27, 6.00, 7.35,Reversal !NYA ,12/31/1998,597.82,592.70,595.81, 7.55, 7.49 !NYA ,01/04/1999,602.83,590.47,594.12, 8.85, 7.57,Reversal !NYA ,01/05/1999,600.24,594.00,599.91, 7.81, 7.72 !NYA ,01/06/1999,611.05,599.88,611.01, 7.84, 8.02 !NYA ,01/07/1999,611.01,604.47,609.19, 8.59, 8.24,Compress !NYA ,01/08/1999,612.20,605.86,611.06, 9.42, 8.45 !NYA ,01/11/1999,611.06,600.06,604.04, 8.17, 8.50 !NYA ,01/12/1999,604.04,593.61,594.59, 7.96, 8.36 !NYA ,01/13/1999,595.50,579.76,590.72, 9.34, 8.15,Compress !NYA ,01/14/1999,591.56,579.71,581.07, 7.97, 7.77 !NYA ,01/15/1999,593.40,581.07,593.39, 7.98, 7.61 !COMP,12/16/1998,2027.10,1996.80,2009.30, 0.85, 42.05,Reversal !COMP,12/17/1998,2043.80,2014.70,2043.80, 0.80, 42.46 !COMP,12/18/1998,2086.10,2055.80,2086.10, 0.91, 43.43 !COMP,12/21/1998,2143.80,2104.10,2138.00, 0.96, 45.07 !COMP,12/22/1998,2144.60,2105.50,2120.90, 0.91, 46.15 !COMP,12/23/1998,2172.50,2134.20,2172.50, 0.97, 47.88 Symbol,Date, Hi, Lo, Close, Vol MACD, Action !COMP,12/24/1998,2171.30,2162.60,2163.00, 0.45, 49.15 !COMP,12/28/1998,2190.10,2163.00,2180.30, 0.87, 50.47 !COMP,12/29/1998,2186.10,2161.80,2181.70, 0.92, 51.55 !COMP,12/30/1998,2196.60,2160.90,2166.90, 0.93, 52.15,Reversal !COMP,12/31/1998,2200.60,2165.70,2192.60, 0.89, 52.97 !COMP,01/04/1999,2233.50,2192.60,2208.00, 0.94, 53.83 !COMP,01/05/1999,2251.70,2206.40,2251.20, 0.95, 55.18 !COMP,01/06/1999,2320.90,2286.10,2320.80, 1.26, 57.42 !COMP,01/07/1999,2333.70,2284.20,2326.00, 1.21, 59.38 !COMP,01/08/1999,2369.50,2314.90,2344.40, 1.29, 61.31 !COMP,01/11/1999,2384.70,2348.20,2384.50, 1.15, 63.55 !COMP,01/12/1999,2396.30,2320.20,2320.70, 1.11, 64.34 !COMP,01/13/1999,2353.30,2205.60,2316.80, 1.20, 64.81,Compress !COMP,01/14/1999,2338.20,2276.30,2276.80, 1.02, 64.37 !COMP,01/15/1999,2348.72,2276.82,2348.20, 1.01, 64.98 _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "mdor" Subject: [CANSLIM] Fast Stochastic and Slow Stochastic Formula Request Date: 16 Jan 1999 12:45:06 -0600 Hello Group: I have periodically requested information on formulas for a number of indicators. I am currently preparing myself to program the Slow Stochastic and Fast Stochastic in my visual basic program. However, I can only find one formula between the slow and fast stochastic indicator. Could someone shed some light on the difference between the slow stochastic and the fast stochastic? Also, could you provide the formulas for both stochastics so that I can compare them and analyze them for my program? If you have technical analysis programs that provide the formulas in your help section of the program, I would appreciate this information. Thanks so much for your time and effort. Michael Doroshenko - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jeff Salisbury" Subject: [CANSLIM] (Fwd) New Industry Groups Date: 16 Jan 1999 13:53:33 -0700 --- Forwarded mail from "George W. Gregory" Delivered-To: jeff@csd.sdl.usu.edu X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express for Macintosh - 4.01 (295) X-Priority: 3 In answer to Johan wondering why the new additions are Internet related, I believe you all know the answer. Since developing the industry group list was one of my last projects before I left WON, I felt that this is where the growth will be. Don't be terribly surprised to find more changes of this kind in the future. The manufacturing industries are not real growth situations. In fact, if anyone has ideas for new industries, let me know. I may be able to pass it on. Our objective was to change the list every 6 months, but due to demands on programmers time (Y2K, etc.) this has not been accomplished. The last real change (other than additions of stocks to existing groups) was last March. IBD intends to publish the list every 6 months, however, whether there have been changes or not. WON + Co. will changer when necessary, or when the new groups are ready. tiger49er ---End of forwarded mail from "George W. Gregory" - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "bamend" Subject: [CANSLIM] [Canslim] YHOO Date: 16 Jan 1999 07:53:44 -0500 What's going on with this stock? - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] [Canslim] YHOO Date: 16 Jan 1999 13:26:57 -0800 At 07:53 AM 1/16/99 -0500, you wrote: >What's going on with this stock? > Even though I don't "dabble" in the 'nets too often except for AOL and recently SDTI (I love this little guy!) my mom does and I am helping her to prepare for the inevitable correction of the ridiculous high-flyers, which seems to be under way. (BTW she had an IRR of 87% for 1998 and I only half-jokingly suggested she open up www.fishertrader.com and charge for her picks ;) Looking at the charts of her 'net stocks, YHOO, AMZN, EBAY, CMGI, there's a fairly consistent base of support for these puppies that formed between Dec 5 and Dec 19. The charts are remarkably similar for this period, although the day each one "took off" varies. These bases form strong support (IMHO) and depending on when you pulled the trigger, you could be in at the "right" time to preserve profits or the wrong time. For YHOO I'd put the support at 180-190. If it trades down through this base I'd say it was in trouble. Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] BBOX Date: 16 Jan 1999 17:17:11 -0500 I thought something else was odd concerning the BBOX question. It is not in the IBD Computer Networks group. It may be in Market Guides or Telescans, but it is in IBD's "Retail-Mail Order Direct" group. Still a strong group, #6. My two cents after having purchased a sizeable amount of computer, networking hardware during the past 3 years sez that BBOX is a very expensive reseller of networking/computer hardware. I get their catalogs every month and have yet to order a single item from them. Comparitively speaking they are very pricey in hardware costs. They have some specialty devices like digital/analog encoders/decoders and hardware protocol converters you don't see from the more popular outlets but it is hard to imagine there is sufficient energy in those specialty applications to warrant optimism in increased sales. Could be wrong, often am, plan accordingly. Regards, Frank Wolynski At 11:06 AM 1/15/99 -0800, you wrote: > >I saw a cup and handle, but thought that the handle failed on 1/12/99. > Anywhay the way I interpret 3,7,10 MAverages (still learning); 3 >crossed the 7 giving a first level buy that day and it has gone down >every day since. It has closed in the lower third of its range 3 days >in a row which is below its 20 day MA. I wouldn't buy right now. > >TM >> >> Hello All, >> Is BBOX on anyone's breakout watch list?? The chart looks great to >me, >> although the cup is a little deep (50%), eps and rs in the upper >80's. >> Group strength (computer networks) in the upper 90's. Earnings met >> estimates. >> Any comments?? Mark >> - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] [Canslim] YHOO Date: 16 Jan 1999 17:55:49 -0500 While I think it's unlikely, it's possible that some investors at the institutional level are starting to worry about a stock with a market cap even now of over $30 billion that did less than $200 million in revenue in the past 12 months. Even assuming a continuation of growth at the same rate (which is certainly possible, given its history and market positioning), it is still unlikely to break one billion in sales in 1999, and a mkt cap ratio of 30 is extremely high. I suspect as YHOO and some of the other net stocks grow and prosper, more traditional valuation models will be applied. And most will fail those models, partially because those models are not suitable for measuring the true value to the investor's expectations for growth. As long as they had no earnings, and relatively low sales figures, most ignored models. But as they gain respectability and acceptance into such arenas as the S&P500 index, models will likely be applied more often. I think it may still be too early for this to be much of a problem for YHOO, more likely the recent slide is nothing more than some wise profit taking for the short term. I doubt the run is completely over, but profits at this point should still be protected and charts studied. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- What's going on with this stock? - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "George W. Gregory" Subject: [CANSLIM] Today's Digest (Jan 16) Date: 16 Jan 1999 16:59:55 -0800 WON does have the 197 industry groups funneling down to 92 sector groups and in turn funneling down to 11 sectors. However, the sector groups and the sectors themselves are only used by WON+Co., not Dailygraphs or IBD. They are used in institutional services. Secondly, when I left WON (Dec. 7th), our database consisted of over 11,000 stocks. The Industry Group Guide from last year doesn't contain many of the stocks that were issued last year, and we had been running at a rate of 500/700 new issues a year. A few of the 10,000 are BB stocks, which don't really count at all. Many more (and this list keeps growing very rapidly) are ADR's and ADS's. Common stocks that we would be interested in total almost 10,000. tiger49er - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Eatstock@aol.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] New Era of Trading Date: 16 Jan 1999 20:42:04 EST Charlie made a mention about new chart formations now that there is the new breed of traders (myself) which use the internet. This is something that I have been thinking about too, and has lead me to one support as to why the float is less immportant as in the past The one stock that sticks in my head is Amazon, and we all ask ourselves, why is it so high. Well, think about how many people use it, and figure that many of them say, 'This is a company I would like to own'. So lets say the market gets a million shareholders which own between 25-1000 shares. That is a lot of shares just sitting around. Now, a lot of people call this their golden egg. THE BIG ONE. They dont have their life savings in it, but they have a small stake, but dont mind loosing it for the upside potential. I believe this drives the supply and demand curve of the market and just lets the stock stagnate or increase in value. I really think it will take something catastropic to get the sucker to fall. People are using the market to get rich quick and only have small positions which they can recoupe if they loose it all. As for new chart patterns...cant really venture onto that one - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] More on BBOX Date: 16 Jan 1999 17:47:56 -0800 (PST) BBOX starred in ValueLines Expanded Edition as expected to outperform; Valueline has them under Telecom Equip. BBOX featured in Monday's IBD. 7th in MailOrder by EPS and RS. Mail order group. It closed at its high yesterday. TM _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Dean Edwards" Subject: [CANSLIM] Sector Analysis Date: 17 Jan 1999 15:50:32 +1300 Here is a useful site: It can show you in a glance, what sector is leading the market. http://www.wallstreetalert.com/sector.cgi Each stock in an industry index is drawn from the S&P 500, and here are the 24 industry sectors: 1. Aerospace & Defense 2. Automotive 3. Banks 4. Chemicals 5. Conglomerates 6. Consumer Products 7. Containers & Packaging 8. Discount & Fashion Retailing 9. Electrical & Electronics 10. Food 11. Fuel 12. Health Care 13. Housing & Real Estate 14. Leisure time Industries 15. Manufacturing 16. Metals & Mining 17. Nonbank Financial 18. Office Equipment & Computers 19. Paper & Forest Products 20. Publishing & Broadcasting 21. Service industries 22. Telecommunications 23. Transportation 24. Utilities - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Dean Edwards" Subject: [CANSLIM] M Date: 17 Jan 1999 17:39:02 +1300 I thought you might be interested in reading this article. This is an outsider's perspective on the US economy. This is a repected global investment manager from NZ. He believes the US economy is now overheating. * the star is my comments. Restraint bet Policy for Now - By Frank Pearson When Alan Greenspan, quelled financial panic last year by lowering short term interest rates, he merely bought some time for the underlying concer= ns to be addressed. This was highlighted by the past week=92s South American upset. Despite re-electing a reformist president and obtaining IMF support, Braz= il=92 s inability to pass tough budgetary legislation has essentially wasted th= e past 6 months respite. Similarly, neither Russia nor more importanly Japa= n, have picked up their act. At the same time, US consumers have started counting their chickens by spending up some of their sharemarket gains, the US savings rate going negative for the first time since the late 1920s. Speculative excess is evidenced by Internet mania. The =93tech heavy=94 N= ASDAQ composite index has used the months since October=92s interest rate cuts = to rise a 1,000 points (1400-2400). Last year, according to Goldman Sachs, t= he average internet Internet stock climbed 225%. New issue Internet stock gained an average of 38% on their first day of trading. According to the Wall Street Journal, America Online=92s capitalisation reprsents a histor= ic PE of 418. Were earnings to grow at 50% pa compounded over the next 5 yea= rs, the stock would still then be on a PE of 55. Auction house eBay with a recent market value of US$11 billion had third quarter revenue (not profits!) of only US12.9 million. Going public at US= $18 in September, by year end the stock traded at more than $240 and less tha= n a year after joining the company CEO Margaret Whitman=92s own holdings were worth $US500 million. Economic policy errors agravated the 1930s setback. Relief at the compete= nce of Greenspan and Chinese economic czar Zhu Rongji was manifest during the recent market recovery. However, the longer investors are made to wait fo= r positive reinforcement from inevitably politically tough fiscal/trade/regulatory decisions around the world, the weaker becomes th= e soothing balme of lower interest rates. *(This has not worked in Japan, I think interest rates for the bank of Ja= pan are/were at .5 percent, to try and simulate the economy) The months subsequent to the three interest rate cuts have not been encouraging. Too little too late has been the story from Brazil, Russia a= nd Japan, while too much too quickly has characterised US securities markets. Prudent investing now must assume the American equity market is an accide= nt waiting to happen. Japan is unlikely to pick up any time soon and China i= s far from sound shape. *(It has evident now, that the official Chinese statistics may not be totally accurate. Official have been cooking the books to paint a brighte= r outlook) It is time for restaint for percentages in equities especially US, and fo= r comtemplating defensive attractions. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Today's Digest (Jan 16) Date: 17 Jan 1999 02:08:21 -0500 Holy Rotational Sector theory Batman, 92 Sectors? I can't even begin to imagine. Needless to say, most on this listserv would acknowledge there are a few of us that would short Amazon for a peak at those tables! I could envision having 11 sectors, although having only been exposed to the S&P & the DJ Sectors, my vision is limited. Now...., how does one become an institution? :-) Thanks for clarifying, it certainly seemed an unthinkable hole existed in WON's approach, but in a simple 2 paragraph email, you have restored my faith and uncovered the gauntlet I must now transverse. Regards, Frank Wolynski wolynski@mindspring.com http://wolynski.home.mindspring.com/ At 16:59 1/16/99 -0800, you wrote: > WON does have the 197 industry groups funneling down to 92 sector groups >and in turn funneling down to 11 sectors. However, the sector groups and the >sectors themselves are only used by WON+Co., not Dailygraphs or IBD. They >are used in institutional services. > Secondly, when I left WON (Dec. 7th), our database consisted of over >11,000 stocks. The Industry Group Guide from last year doesn't contain many >of the stocks that were issued last year, and we had been running at a rate >of 500/700 new issues a year. A few of the 10,000 are BB stocks, which don't >really count at all. Many more (and this list keeps growing very rapidly) >are ADR's and ADS's. Common stocks that we would be interested in total >almost 10,000. > >tiger49er > >- > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] More on BBOX Date: 17 Jan 1999 02:11:44 -0500 The group chart looks exceptional also. My personal experience and earlier email should be viewed with skepticism, even by myself. (The toughest task of the two.) Frank Wolynski Often wrong, plan accordingly. At 17:47 1/16/99 -0800, you wrote: > >BBOX starred in ValueLines Expanded Edition as expected to outperform; > Valueline has them under Telecom Equip. > >BBOX featured in Monday's IBD. 7th in MailOrder by EPS and RS. Mail >order group. > >It closed at its high yesterday. > >TM - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] M Date: 17 Jan 1999 07:52:16 -0500 Hi Dean, Interestingly, the author of this article fails to note that fully two thirds of the US GDP comes from domestic spending, which continues unabated, possibly aided in part by market profits, but certainly supported to date by strong employment. Abby Cohen was on CNN a few days ago, and pointed out that exports account for only 14% of GDP. Obviously, exports to LATAM comprise a smaller percentage, and to Brazil it's only something like 1.4%. Thus a slowdown in Brazil, even a total stoppage, of our exports only has a minor hiccup in the GDP picture. Likewise, if Brazil takes down the entire region and moves all the LATAM countries (except possibly Mexico) into recession, the damage to the GDP is still only slight even if exports went to zero, which is highly unlikely. Certainly the volatility and extreme valuations placed on net stocks in the past year are a little scary to anyone trying to value them by any rational valuation models. On the other hand, they have generated enormous wealth for many, and haven't really crushed that many (so far). I suspect one of the reasons for their huge success is the high percentage of the US population involved with the internet in one way or the other (at work, at home, or both). Even the children are exposed to it at school, and can come home and tell their non-net literate parents all about the experience. Thus most everyone is exposed to a still emerging technology and retailing medium. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 -----Original Message----- I thought you might be interested in reading this article. This is an outsider's perspective on the US economy. This is a repected global investment manager from NZ. He believes the US economy is now overheating. * the star is my comments. Restraint bet Policy for Now - By Frank Pearson When Alan Greenspan, quelled financial panic last year by lowering short term interest rates, he merely bought some time for the underlying concerns to be addressed. This was highlighted by the past week=92s South American upset. Despite re-electing a reformist president and obtaining IMF support, Brazil=92 s inability to pass tough budgetary legislation has essentially wasted the past 6 months respite. Similarly, neither Russia nor more importanly Japan, have picked up their act. At the same time, US consumers have started counting their chickens by spending up some of their sharemarket gains, the US savings rate going negative for the first time since the late 1920s. Speculative excess is evidenced by Internet mania. The =93tech heavy=94 NASDAQ composite index has used the months since October=92s interest rate cuts to rise a 1,000 points (1400-2400). Last year, according to Goldman Sachs, the average internet Internet stock climbed 225%. New issue Internet stock gained an average of 38% on their first day of trading. According to the Wall Street Journal, America Online=92s capitalisation reprsents a historic PE of 418. Were earnings to grow at 50% pa compounded over the next 5 years, the stock would still then be on a PE of 55. Auction house eBay with a recent market value of US$11 billion had third quarter revenue (not profits!) of only US12.9 million. Going public at US$18 in September, by year end the stock traded at more than $240 and less than a year after joining the company CEO Margaret Whitman=92s own holdings were worth $US500 million. Economic policy errors agravated the 1930s setback. Relief at the competence of Greenspan and Chinese economic czar Zhu Rongji was manifest during the recent market recovery. However, the longer investors are made to wait for positive reinforcement from inevitably politically tough fiscal/trade/regulatory decisions around the world, the weaker becomes the soothing balme of lower interest rates. *(This has not worked in Japan, I think interest rates for the bank of Japan are/were at .5 percent, to try and simulate the economy) The months subsequent to the three interest rate cuts have not been encouraging. Too little too late has been the story from Brazil, Russia and Japan, while too much too quickly has characterised US securities markets. Prudent investing now must assume the American equity market is an accident waiting to happen. Japan is unlikely to pick up any time soon and China is far from sound shape. *(It has evident now, that the official Chinese statistics may not be totally accurate. Official have been cooking the books to paint a brighter outlook) It is time for restaint for percentages in equities especially US, and for comtemplating defensive attractions. - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: [CANSLIM] Shock and Dismay Date: 17 Jan 1999 10:35:17 -0500 Today I found out why it is important to keep accurate records as you go. I started on 98 tax. If a good capital loss is good news then the news was great. OK, I got hammered on a few before CANSLIM, most notably FLC, PAP, BOST and IASCA. FLC I bought 3 times I averaged down (easy folks, this was actually recommend to me by my broker). I did not know about sectors and that they could go out of favor. That one was the worst. PAP, sounded good then there was a revolution in Indonesia-end of my foreign sector career. Next was BOST, I just knew it was coming back and it was cheep. Chapter 11 or whatever they call it. Of course IASCA my little antenna company that was going to revolutionize the communications world. Then came the CANSLIM era, actually the last few months. I had two winners and 7 losers, they about offset. Hammering home the "get in at the right place or you will be stopped out instantly" scenario. I was thinking I was only loosing a little, which is essentially true, but a lot of littles equals a lot in the end. I am not upset or dissuaded. The good thing about recognizing that you act like a dumb ass is that you get to learn from mistakes and grow. No guts no glory. A hard lesson still. Charlie in Port Orange Florida, looser capital of the world. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Shock and Dismay Date: 17 Jan 1999 11:28:18 -0500 At 10:35 1/17/99 -0500, you wrote: > . I did not know about sectors and >that they could go out of favor. That one was the worst. > I am not upset or dissuaded. The good thing about recognizing that you act >like a dumb ass is that you get to learn from mistakes and grow. No guts no >glory. A hard lesson still. > >Charlie in Port Orange Florida, looser capital of the world. > > In late 1990, I bought a Texas S&L. The group had been hammered, from a group index value of $2500 to approx $500. Sure thing, couldn't go lower. They stopped the trading on the issue while the company announced bankruptcy. I only had 200 shares, and got them at a steal! Or was it the S&L that did the stealing? I had a great tax year in 1990. Expensive tuition! I couldn't believe it when I read WON was buying new highs. Every broker I had ever run into was pushing value investing and bottom fishing. They pined that with the market being "over-valued" it was a more prudent approach! After reading HTMMIS and the IBD, I stumbled upon Cisco Systems. I asked one broker about it. He said, "Who"? I asked another and he said it was "rediculously over extended, couldn't possibly keep up the growth!" I told him it was going up 3000% in the next 9 years and also the Dow would tag on a 1000 points a year for the next 9 years! He blew coffee out his nostrils and kicked me out! (I may be remembering this part a little differently than it really happened!) :-) Where is Port Orange? What's it near? I'm in Brandon, outside Tampa. Regards, Frank Wolynski wolynski@mindspring.com http://wolynski.home.mindspring.com/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Shock and Dismay Date: 17 Jan 1999 11:37:15 -0500 Frank, I dont think I am quite up to picking the next CSCO but maybe someday. Port Orange is outside of Daytona Beach. I have been to Brandon many times. My other hobby is long distance running. When they were having the Brandon marathon I used to go there. Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Frank V. Wolynski > Sent: Sunday, January 17, 1999 11:28 AM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Shock and Dismay > > > At 10:35 1/17/99 -0500, you wrote: > > > . I did not know about sectors and > >that they could go out of favor. That one was the worst. > > I am not upset or dissuaded. The good thing about > recognizing that you act > >like a dumb ass is that you get to learn from mistakes and grow. > No guts no > >glory. A hard lesson still. > > > >Charlie in Port Orange Florida, looser capital of the world. > > > > > > In late 1990, I bought a Texas S&L. The group had been hammered, from a > group index value of $2500 to approx $500. > Sure thing, couldn't go lower. > They stopped the trading on the issue while the company announced > bankruptcy. I only had 200 shares, and got them at a steal! Or was it the > S&L that did the stealing? > I had a great tax year in 1990. Expensive tuition! > > I couldn't believe it when I read WON was buying new highs. Every broker I > had ever run into was pushing value investing and bottom fishing. They > pined that with the market being "over-valued" it was a more prudent > approach! > > After reading HTMMIS and the IBD, I stumbled upon Cisco Systems. I asked > one broker about it. He said, "Who"? I asked another and he said it was > "rediculously over extended, couldn't possibly keep up the growth!" > > I told him it was going up 3000% in the next 9 years and also the > Dow would > tag on a 1000 points a year for the next 9 years! He blew coffee out his > nostrils and kicked me out! > (I may be remembering this part a little differently than it really > happened!) :-) > > Where is Port Orange? What's it near? > I'm in Brandon, outside Tampa. > > Regards, > Frank Wolynski > wolynski@mindspring.com > http://wolynski.home.mindspring.com/ > > > > - > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: [CANSLIM] Trading and Canslim [Connie Mack] Date: 17 Jan 1999 12:22:49 -0500 From some of the anecdotal comments of several members, it seems that too many are trading and investing without having had enough experience. Charlie was the last to calculate the beauty of tax losses. Not an infallible axiom, but nevertheless of considerable truth, is this one: If you can't make money in an up market, you'll not make money in a down market. There are several underlying reasons for the axiom. First, one can make mistakes in an up-trending market and be saved by the trend; the obverse corollary is also axiomatic, minus the resurrection. Second, no more than 5-10 percent of those in the market short the market. And of those, even fewer use shorts as a consistent and uniform trading or investing practice. These latter shorters are a different animal. And none of these animals started trading and investing until they had paid their dues with an understanding of the technical side. For those of us who are not members of the shorters (and I include myself, for I have never thought that I was capable of shorting over a long period), they, too, learned the technical side before moving to other market strategies. One can look at technical indicators through a metaphor of speech. Technically, there are no organs of speech. There are only organs that are incidentally useful for producing speech sounds. The lungs, the larynx, the palate, the nose, the tongue, the teeth, and the lips are so utilized, but they are no more to be thought of as organs of speech than are the fingers to be considered as essentially organs of piano playing or the knees as organs of prayer. The random walk theory is a market specie of the metaphor. Every trader wishes that his intention and achievement were counterparts as alike as the seal and its impression, or, said another way, that his intention and his indicators were so connected that every position produced a profit. The criteria of CANSLIM are predisposed such that any technical indicators [primarily their volatility] of the trader are suppressed or filtered. Otherwise, would "M" or breakouts hold such a sacred place. All market strategies carry a bit of preposterous enthusiasm for preciseness. For me to think that my technical indicators [or my reading of them] carries more than above average preciseness would be as silly as my congratulating my alarm clock for going off as prescribed. And so for CANSLIM. Learn the technical side of the market before you undertake any other. No barber shaves so close nor any investor invest so wisely but that another finds work. Connie Mack - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ssingh@aol.com Subject: [CANSLIM] test Date: 18 Jan 1999 22:24:26 EST - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: [CANSLIM] Institutional Inquiries Date: 19 Jan 1999 00:25:42 -0500 I seem to have lost some links and wonder if somebody either has links for institutional % held or the numbers for LVCI, NTAP and OVRL. Thanks, Regards, Frank Wolynski wolynski@mindspring.com http://wolynski.home.mindspring.com/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: [CANSLIM] Interesting statistics re: large/small caps Date: 18 Jan 1999 14:06:48 +0100 Quote from http://www.bull-market.com/bmr-archives.htm. Copyright 1999, The Bull Market Report It was a great year by any standard, but if you weren=92t in the market leaders you had a tough time. Salomon Smith Barney did some research and found that stocks with market caps of $20 billion+ were up 26% while the mid-caps, with market caps of $2-5 billion were down 6%. The smallest stocks, the micro-caps (less than $250 million) fell 24%. Another stat they uncovered was that 72% of all stocks were trailing the S&P 500 by more than 15%. Furthermore, two thirds of all US stocks fell last year. This is brutal news. The reason is that the S&P 500 is capitalization weighted, so that the big boys have the most weight. Microsoft, for example, accounted for 8% of the 27% increase in the S&P. The other statistic we find so hard to fathom is that 95% of ALL mutual funds couldn=92t beat the S&P 500.=20 -- Johan Van Houtven - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TM Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: [NonCANSLIM] : IBD 1/19/99 Date: 19 Jan 1999 04:53:12 -0800 (PST) Today's IBD has a comprehensive report/interpretation of "Nirvana the 90's". Year by year, month by month. Very detailed and comprehensive lots of graphs - technology, bonds, interest, stocks, commodities etc. Looks like a keeper. TM _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Russell, Ron" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Institutional Inquiries Date: 19 Jan 1999 08:04:22 -0500 Frank, According to DGO: LVCI - Funds = 9%, Banks = 2%, Management = 27% NTAP - Funds = 27%, Banks = 4%, Management = 10% OVRL - Funds = 3%, Banks = 1%, Management = 30% Ron -----Original Message----- From: Frank V. Wolynski [mailto:Wolynski@MindSpring.Com] Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 1999 12:26 AM To: canslim@mail.xmission.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Institutional Inquiries I seem to have lost some links and wonder if somebody either has links for institutional % held or the numbers for LVCI, NTAP and OVRL. Thanks, Regards, Frank Wolynski wolynski@mindspring.com http://wolynski.home.mindspring.com/ - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Ronald J. Russell, Jr." Subject: [CANSLIM] Weekly Stock List - January 15, 1999 - Condensed Version Date: 18 Jan 1999 20:49:20 -0500 All, We dropped twenty this past week to end up at an even 180. No real surprise there I guess. Trade well, Ron Symbol EPS RS GRS ERG A/D Close 30 ADV AAS 91 86 81 258 B $ 79.500 85,613 ACS 93 85 91 269 B $ 41.500 150,347 ADCT 94 91 89 274 A $ 39.440 1,674,407 AEOS 76 96 85 257 A $ 62.810 329,760 AGN 86 89 90 265 B $ 67.940 268,723 AGPH 76 94 94 264 A $ 58.000 615,130 AHAA 71 97 98 266 A $ 37.000 288,063 AIT 77 87 63 227 A $ 64.250 1,419,580 ALTR 82 94 98 274 A $ 64.440 2,117,380 AMGN 88 94 94 276 A $ 108.880 3,000,190 ANF 99 93 85 277 A $ 66.810 482,960 AOL 76 99 99 274 A $ 146.500 16,028,529 APCC 90 92 88 270 A $ 50.880 692,373 APCO 96 90 91 277 A $ 11.690 92,940 ARX 84 93 74 251 B $ 16.880 117,247 ASMLF 76 93 98 267 A $ 43.250 1,486,947 ASND 91 96 97 284 A $ 86.190 6,962,967 AT 78 89 63 230 A $ 62.560 641,717 ATI 95 93 80 268 B $ 83.380 3,212,900 AVEI 99 93 78 270 A $ 53.250 1,263,490 AXNT 72 95 92 259 A $ 38.000 419,987 BBBY 96 86 76 258 A $ 32.560 1,065,727 BBY 75 97 92 264 B $ 78.000 1,403,837 CBSI 97 86 91 274 A $ 32.500 256,373 CBXC 97 96 88 281 A $ 31.130 122,840 CCL 91 89 65 245 A $ 45.060 2,832,297 CCU 73 85 74 232 B $ 60.440 1,381,387 CD 90 87 97 274 A $ 20.750 6,307,166 CDWC 97 97 96 290 A $ 116.130 152,857 CEFT 98 95 75 268 A $ 38.940 894,860 CHCS 79 98 85 262 A $ 27.500 104,720 CHKPF 99 96 92 287 A $ 51.250 1,002,997 CLFY 87 96 93 276 B $ 22.630 289,480 CMED 97 93 78 268 A $ 11.880 239,630 CMGI 76 99 91 266 A $ 96.380 4,012,024 CMVT 97 94 89 280 A $ 75.940 688,083 CNMD 93 85 69 247 A $ 31.910 117,460 COF 91 90 75 256 A $ 130.440 462,580 COGIF 98 95 93 286 A $ 24.250 79,630 CPWR 98 91 93 282 A $ 73.560 3,490,450 CREE 99 97 98 294 A $ 42.500 297,343 CSCO 97 96 97 290 A $ 101.690 15,972,796 CTAS 90 89 84 263 A $ 70.690 332,693 CTL 87 89 85 261 A $ 64.250 261,217 CTS 93 89 96 278 A $ 43.380 111,153 CTXS 98 92 93 283 A $ 95.310 760,853 CUBE 89 92 99 280 B $ 28.500 768,987 DDDDF 99 96 93 288 A $ 46.000 121,047 DELL 99 96 89 284 A $ 79.000 14,733,538 DH 78 85 68 231 B $ 56.940 2,101,247 DRTE 76 89 87 252 B $ 26.380 403,217 DSP 96 89 98 283 A $ 16.130 337,170 DTPI 80 86 91 257 A $ 24.500 118,820 DV 87 88 63 238 A $ 27.000 133,463 DY 97 93 66 256 A $ 34.380 243,127 EAII 99 86 93 278 A $ 60.380 225,333 EAT 74 88 70 232 B $ 27.060 340,857 ECILF 94 87 89 270 A $ 38.630 616,683 EDMC 99 89 63 251 A $ 24.130 137,717 EL 88 85 62 235 B $ 80.630 181,950 EMC 96 97 99 292 A $ 100.060 3,639,887 ESRX 95 95 81 271 A $ 72.000 126,093 ETEC 91 89 98 278 A $ 50.880 417,363 FDC 71 85 75 231 B $ 35.000 1,889,403 FLEX 98 97 98 293 A $ 44.630 939,323 FM 96 91 70 257 A $ 23.060 157,717 FMY 90 86 72 248 A $ 57.690 821,017 GDT 98 92 90 280 A $ 109.500 737,607 GENZ 90 94 94 278 B $ 53.500 1,309,163 GEOC 72 97 93 262 A $ 34.940 253,053 GILTF 96 94 89 279 A $ 58.500 121,900 GML 74 90 97 261 A $ 20.190 107,477 GPS 97 93 85 275 A $ 57.500 1,887,460 GUC 80 95 85 260 A $ 72.630 834,303 HLYW 83 98 76 257 B $ 34.500 535,740 IBM 85 91 94 270 B $ 184.940 3,556,596 INSS 99 97 91 287 A $ 69.130 233,727 INTC 84 94 98 276 A $ 135.380 15,659,714 INTL 95 90 89 274 B $ 25.250 166,667 IPG 89 87 77 253 A $ 75.000 368,707 JVLN 76 93 86 255 B $ 15.000 121,943 KROG 80 95 73 248 A $ 37.190 142,253 LEVL 98 90 98 286 A $ 38.630 822,683 LGTO 99 94 93 286 A $ 63.130 678,217 LLTC 82 92 98 272 A $ 98.130 1,102,240 LSON 93 85 91 269 A $ 55.380 191,837 LU 97 93 89 279 A $ 110.250 7,046,370 LXK 98 94 88 280 A $ 98.060 479,487 MARG 96 99 91 286 A $ 15.880 235,593 MCHP 79 85 99 263 B $ 35.130 842,147 MCRL 98 93 98 289 A $ 54.250 236,583 MCSC 98 94 70 262 B $ 27.690 87,373 MEDQ 95 88 91 274 B $ 34.630 264,693 MELI 94 95 89 278 A $ 20.880 87,067 MERQ 72 95 93 260 A $ 58.250 233,907 METZ 99 89 91 279 A $ 47.000 326,537 MHP 83 86 87 256 B $ 108.000 306,673 MMCN 76 93 98 267 B $ 21.060 408,473 MMS 87 85 91 263 A $ 37.500 174,680 MNMD 98 95 90 283 B $ 96.810 132,080 MRX 94 90 83 267 A $ 65.130 125,387 MSFT 97 92 95 284 A $ 149.750 12,933,589 MTP 82 87 67 236 B $ 50.630 164,943 MTZ 83 88 66 237 A $ 30.060 95,080 MXIM 95 92 98 285 A $ 51.940 1,447,750 MXWL 70 90 68 228 B $ 37.940 113,287 MYG 95 89 81 265 A $ 64.250 489,523 NCOG 98 91 91 280 A $ 39.280 138,860 NETA 99 89 92 280 A $ 55.250 2,960,734 NLCS 88 88 93 269 B $ 33.880 165,157 NSIT 98 96 96 290 B $ 54.500 247,223 NSOL 84 99 91 274 A $ 190.000 990,680 NTAP 99 98 99 296 A $ 52.750 914,930 ORBKF 90 91 98 279 A $ 43.750 132,743 ORCL 97 95 93 285 A $ 47.130 8,839,038 OSI 72 86 77 235 B $ 28.500 422,720 OSTE 70 96 90 256 A $ 44.750 136,380 PDX 96 89 60 245 A $ 60.000 86,157 PE 78 87 67 232 B $ 38.560 712,217 PHCC 95 92 81 268 B $ 32.500 119,867 PLCE 95 99 85 279 A $ 26.250 198,337 PMS 90 88 86 264 B $ 53.380 167,390 POWI 72 97 74 243 B $ 28.000 250,663 PPDI 87 88 71 246 B $ 30.130 301,337 PRGS 78 93 93 264 B $ 34.250 157,520 PRGX 90 86 91 267 A $ 32.880 196,757 PSDI 96 97 93 286 A $ 39.500 79,357 PSEM 82 96 98 276 A $ 12.130 177,483 PVN 96 94 75 265 A $ 78.130 849,043 PVSW 76 98 93 267 B $ 21.000 83,707 RESM 97 97 90 284 A $ 44.750 231,007 RGIS 86 86 76 248 B $ 38.500 95,097 SALT 99 97 81 277 A $ 23.500 98,257 SANM 97 97 98 292 A $ 75.560 998,653 SAPE 99 94 93 286 A $ 77.250 366,090 SBC 82 88 63 233 A $ 55.940 2,573,484 SCH 91 97 90 278 A $ 59.750 2,139,318 SDG 86 90 78 254 A $ 117.000 198,247 SDTI 71 93 88 252 B $ 27.500 1,798,040 SEBL 99 91 93 283 A $ 38.310 1,207,720 SLR 94 95 96 285 A $ 87.500 1,360,927 SNPS 93 92 93 278 A $ 59.000 574,323 SORC 75 96 91 262 A $ 12.190 127,140 SPLS 98 93 70 261 B $ 41.560 2,965,257 SPNSF 76 93 93 262 A $ 10.130 267,390 SUNW 94 97 89 280 A $ 100.440 6,927,414 SWY 95 88 72 255 A $ 55.750 1,502,167 SYKE 99 89 91 279 A $ 28.130 376,500 T 85 87 85 257 B $ 84.250 7,300,870 TAGS 97 98 79 274 A $ 39.130 91,080 TCAT 80 91 93 264 A $ 38.500 261,487 TECH 87 87 94 268 A $ 21.630 132,017 TGO 90 93 85 268 B $ 35.940 338,000 THQI 99 94 84 277 A $ 28.940 214,750 TIER 98 89 91 278 A $ 19.130 96,720 TIF 87 91 61 239 A $ 57.750 298,660 TJX 92 85 85 262 A $ 28.750 969,363 TLAB 98 91 89 278 A $ 85.940 3,400,086 TMBS 98 85 82 265 A $ 16.750 89,303 TMPW 84 92 77 253 B $ 42.380 430,183 TOM 99 86 79 264 A $ 62.880 397,437 TSAI 97 88 82 267 A $ 49.380 156,470 TSG 70 86 65 221 A $ 46.250 108,603 UVSGA 93 97 74 264 A $ 30.500 165,897 VISX 77 98 95 270 A $ 58.500 690,280 VOD 96 93 80 269 A $ 176.000 318,743 VRTS 99 95 93 287 A $ 73.000 659,040 VSIO 98 88 93 279 A $ 40.880 344,180 VTSS 97 94 98 289 A $ 47.310 1,453,520 WAG 84 88 73 245 B $ 57.000 1,161,227 WCOM 81 94 85 260 B $ 75.060 12,670,775 WHIT 99 90 91 280 A $ 29.410 352,453 WMT 87 88 68 243 B $ 80.130 3,081,544 WPI 93 85 78 256 A $ 56.500 345,677 WTSLA 89 91 85 265 A $ 36.000 159,410 XIRC 76 98 97 271 A $ 39.880 322,820 XLSW 98 94 89 281 A $ 35.250 138,933 XOMD 99 91 78 268 B $ 31.130 118,337 YHOO 84 99 99 282 B $ 317.000 7,005,471 ZQK 95 93 79 267 B $ 29.380 139,313 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Chris Thornlow Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Institutional Inquiries Date: 19 Jan 1999 09:57:31 -0800 (PST) Is there a site on the net that will give average investors (read "non-institutional" investors) numbers for institutional ownership as well as mgmt ownership? I really on the numbers provided in IBD but only when the stock appears in the minigraphs section . thanx in advance (new to the board/mail list) CT _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Chris Thornlow Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Weekly Stock List - January 15, 1999 - Condensed Version Date: 19 Jan 1999 10:00:42 -0800 (PST) I am new to the mail list. What is this Weekly Stock List? thanx in advance ct _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "James H. Coburn" Subject: [CANSLIM] Quotes Plus 2 telephone numbers Date: 19 Jan 1999 12:25:29 -0700 Hi, Are there any QP2 (QPII?) users out there that could pass on their main telephone number? I didn't see ads in the IBDs that I went through recently. Thanks. James Coburn PS If you are a user, do you like it, it is so-so, or does it have "fatal" flaws? - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jose O. Perez" Subject: [CANSLIM] www.TradeHard.com Date: 19 Jan 1999 12:47:50 -0700 This site just came on line. They seem to have a few good things for CANSLIM'ers. Like Cup&Handle searches, RS,New Highs, momentum stocks and some good trading training. http://www.tradehard.com Enjoy, Jose' - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Quotes Plus 2 telephone numbers Date: 19 Jan 1999 15:05:28 -0500 http://qp2.com/ Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of James H. Coburn > Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 1999 2:25 PM > To: CAN SLIM > Subject: [CANSLIM] Quotes Plus 2 telephone numbers > > > Hi, > > Are there any QP2 (QPII?) users out there that could pass on their main > telephone number? I didn't see ads in the IBDs that I went through > recently. > > Thanks. > > James Coburn > > PS If you are a user, do you like it, it is so-so, or does it > have "fatal" > flaws? > > > > - > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Quan Tran Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Quotes Plus 2 telephone numbers Date: 19 Jan 1999 15:20:43 -0800 At 12:25 PM 1/19/99 -0700, you wrote: >Hi, > >Are there any QP2 (QPII?) users out there that could pass on their main >telephone number? I didn't see ads in the IBDs that I went through >recently. > >Thanks. > >James Coburn > >PS If you are a user, do you like it, it is so-so, or does it have "fatal" >flaws? > There website is at http://www.qp2.com I am a new user (only using it for about two weeks), so far so good. I called order on the phone, the two CDs (program and data) showed up at the door a few days later. There's no problem so far with the software running on Win98 or Win95. The user's manual is very thin, you'll find more info in their online help file. One of the component mentioned in the manual, the 'virtual setup', is not on the CD. I had to download it from their website. If you use MetaStock, which I do, the Virtual is very nice. So far, I like three features: (1) All updates, such as symbols change, splits, ... are automatic. (2) The virtual directory feature. (3) the database scaning. The only flaw I can think of is that the download data are incremental starting from the date they cut the data CD. And they only keep the incremental data for short period of time on the server. So you really have to backup your downloaded directory. Otherwise, it is difficult to restore/download historical data later down the road if you have a hard disk crash. The manual mentions that you can order new/more current data CD if you ever run into this mishap. I am a new and happy camper, however not in anyway affiliated with QP2. Hope this help. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Quotes Plus 2 telephone numbers Date: 19 Jan 1999 17:29:13 -0800 > PS If you are a user, do you like it, it is so-so, or does it have "fatal" > flaws? I've been using it for two months now, like it quite a bit. Has some good scanning capablities - you can pretty closely approximate a canslim scan by using an earnings growth function in lieu of the EPS rank, and QP has their own RS ranking. I think its a great deal. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Institutional Inquiries Date: 19 Jan 1999 19:58:50 -0500 Welcome to the list CT, and I am not aware of any. I had some good links at one time, but recently lost them. I've never seen what you are asking for. Regards, Frank Wolynski wolynski@mindspring.com http://wolynski.home.mindspring.com/ At 09:57 AM 1/19/99 -0800, you wrote: > >Is there a site on the net that will give average investors (read >"non-institutional" investors) numbers for institutional ownership as >well as mgmt ownership? I really on the numbers provided in IBD but >only when the stock appears in the minigraphs section . > >thanx in advance (new to the board/mail list) > >CT >_________________________________________________________ >DO YOU YAHOO!? >Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Quotes Plus 2 telephone numbers Date: 19 Jan 1999 19:55:25 -0500 I like qp2 also. I am waiting for the IRL package to arrive. It should be good for doing groups. If we are going to do top down. Doing groups is going to be one of the things I will want to do. Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Quan Tran > Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 1999 6:21 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Quotes Plus 2 telephone numbers > > > At 12:25 PM 1/19/99 -0700, you wrote: > >Hi, > > > >Are there any QP2 (QPII?) users out there that could pass on their main > >telephone number? I didn't see ads in the IBDs that I went through > >recently. > > > >Thanks. > > > >James Coburn > > > >PS If you are a user, do you like it, it is so-so, or does it > have "fatal" > >flaws? > > > > There website is at http://www.qp2.com > > I am a new user (only using it for about two weeks), so far so > good. I called order on the phone, the two CDs (program and data) > showed up at the door a few days later. There's no problem so far > with the software running on Win98 or Win95. > > The user's manual is very thin, you'll find more info in their > online help file. One of the component mentioned in the manual, > the 'virtual setup', is not on the CD. I had to download it > from their website. If you use MetaStock, which I do, the Virtual > is very nice. > > So far, I like three features: (1) All updates, such as symbols > change, splits, ... are automatic. (2) The virtual directory > feature. (3) the database scaning. > > The only flaw I can think of is that the download data are > incremental starting from the date they cut the data CD. And they > only keep the incremental data for short period of time on the > server. So you really have to backup your downloaded directory. > Otherwise, it is difficult to restore/download historical data later > down the road if you have a hard disk crash. The manual mentions > that you can order new/more current data CD if you ever run into > this mishap. > > I am a new and happy camper, however not in anyway affiliated with > QP2. Hope this help. > > > - > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Eatstock@aol.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Institutional Inquiries Date: 19 Jan 1999 21:16:53 EST www.stockselector.com I believe has some management and inst. holding percentages. I THINK - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Ronald J. Russell, Jr." Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Weekly Stock List - January 15, 1999 - Condensed Version Date: 19 Jan 1999 22:42:54 -0500 Chris, It is a list of stocks meeting the following criteria that I put together each week. EPS > 69 RS > 84 GRS > 59 A/D = "A" or "B" CLOSE > 10.00 30 Day ADV > 75,000 I posted a message on 1/9/1999 under the subject "RE: [CANSLIM] M - Charlie" that explains things a little more. You should be able to find it in the archives. Ron -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Chris Thornlow Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 1999 1:01 PM Version I am new to the mail list. What is this Weekly Stock List? thanx in advance ct _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Institutional Inquiries Date: 19 Jan 1999 23:35:24 -0500 It does offer the Institutional Holdings and Insiders percentages owned, but I don't think the data is very accurate. I only looked up one I was researching earlier and it listed both categories as N/A. Incorrect according to other sources. http://www.stockselector.com/fundamentals.asp?symbol=OVRL Frank Wolynski wolynski@mindspring.com http://wolynski.home.mindspring.com/ At 21:16 1/19/99 EST, you wrote: >www.stockselector.com I believe has some management and inst. holding >percentages. > >I THINK > >- > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: [CANSLIM] wed. market Date: 19 Jan 1999 22:34:02 -0800 For what this is worth, after the market closed, MSFT reported earnings that really clobbered the estimates, 14 cents ahead of estimates. Kinda surprising that a company as widely followed as msft can beat the estimates by such a wide margin, shows you how much stock (no pun intended) you can put in those earnings estimates. Anyway, presumably as a consequence of that report, the nasdaq futures are up 31 points, S&P up 8+ at around 12:30 am eastern time. Also after the close, CPWR reported earnings that beat estimates by 3 cents, if anyone is watching that one, .48 actual vs. .45 forecast. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Joe J." Subject: [CANSLIM] Ron's weekly scan - scanned Date: 19 Jan 1999 23:47:47 -0700 I have posted before to this list on the Bill Williams' methods that I have been using. Tonight, I took Ron's weekly scan posted to this list and ran my own Williams' scan on those stocks. Two looked interesting - CMED and PRGS. I would wait for a trade above 35 (the fractal) for PRGS and above 12 5/8 for CMED (also the fractal). Both are in a "base" as defined by Williams' 3 moving averages coming together. The only negative I see from my standpoint is that they both have average trading volumes of around 150k per day which is a bit light for my taste. Nonetheless, I will trade them as the charts look very good on both. Good Trading, Joe J. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] wed. market Date: 20 Jan 1999 04:28:22 -0500 I have been watching CPWR but have been gotten into it. Probably the best time recently (in retrospect) to enter would have been on the 15th, when it bounced off of 67 1/4. Someone once mentioned that they never buy stock within 2 weeks one way or the other of earnings announcement. I dont know if that is good advice or not. Certainly the earnings announcements impact the price. As a technical question. Would this be considered a flag formation? What may be a little disturbing is the volume. It seems to close down on a little higher volume, the only day lately it closed up was on a little less the recent average volume. So it looks like some distribution to me. So Pat, this is why I have not bought it. It is giving me conflicting signals. Probably be selling for 150 tomorrow. Does anyone know of any book that really goes into volume patterns. Something tells me that volume is a thing watching. Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Patrick Wahl > Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 1999 1:34 AM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: [CANSLIM] wed. market > > > For what this is worth, after the market closed, MSFT reported > earnings that really clobbered the estimates, 14 cents ahead of > estimates. Kinda surprising that a company as widely followed as > msft can beat the estimates by such a wide margin, shows you > how much stock (no pun intended) you can put in those earnings > estimates. Anyway, presumably as a consequence of that report, > the nasdaq futures are up 31 points, S&P up 8+ at around 12:30 > am eastern time. > > Also after the close, CPWR reported earnings that beat estimates > by 3 cents, if anyone is watching that one, .48 actual vs. .45 > forecast. > > > > - > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] IBD Ratios Date: 20 Jan 1999 05:59:26 -0800 (PST) I am looking at the IBD A/D Ratio on your site http://wolynski.home.mindspring.com/, roughly the accumulation is 0.6. In the IBD B- is shown. I'm trying to correlate letters and numbers. Is the yellow line approximately the C level of accumulation as defined by IBD? Thanks, TM _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: CHUCKCBM@aol.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Hardware for QP2, etc. Date: 20 Jan 1999 10:20:10 EST I am a new list member beginning to learn the system. I now have a Power Mac. What are the specs for a PC needed to run the programs most people use? Thank you, Chuck Mercer - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: PWahl@sysinn.com Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] wed. market Date: 20 Jan 1999 09:39:55 -0700 > -----Original Message----- > From: Charles Cangialosi [SMTP:chcng@worldnet.att.net] > Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 1999 2:28 AM > > I have been watching CPWR but have been gotten into it. Probably