From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #143 Reply-To: canslim Sender: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk canslim-digest Wednesday, March 11 1998 Volume 02 : Number 143 In this issue: [CANSLIM] RealTime Chat during Trading hours Re: [CANSLIM] CPQ Re: [CANSLIM] RealTime Chat during Trading hours [CANSLIM] new one - RCOT [CANSLIM] Short term "M" Re: [CANSLIM] RealTime Chat during Trading hours [CANSLIM] (CANSLIM)Tom Worley Re: [CANSLIM] RealTime Chat during Trading hours Re: [CANSLIM] My current watch list Re: [CANSLIM] My current watch list Re: [CANSLIM] RealTime Chat during Trading hours Re: [CANSLIM] ADVP, FFGI, ICN [CANSLIM] CLCX 94 94 B, but.... Re: [CANSLIM] CLCX 94 94 B, but.... Re: [CANSLIM] CLCX 94 94 B, but.... Re: [CANSLIM] Re: BigChart - EMA Re: [CANSLIM] CLCX 94 94 B, but.... [CANSLIM] SONC, ARSC [CANSLIM] Re: [Up-Up-and-A-Way]- News Stories And My Take On Them RE: [CANSLIM] Re: [Up-Up-and-A-Way]- News Stories And My Take On Them Re: [CANSLIM] FPAM (was (CANSLIM)Tom Worley) Re: [CANSLIM] My current watch list RE: [CANSLIM] Re: [Up-Up-and-A-Way]- News Stories And My Take On Them Re: [CANSLIM] CLCX 94 94 B, but.... Re: [CANSLIM] CLCX 94 94 B, but.... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 07:52:40 -0500 From: "Bud Barton" Subject: [CANSLIM] RealTime Chat during Trading hours This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01BD4CC2.AA6BCD80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I wanted to see if any of you are interested in using either ICQ or MIRC = to establish a chat room where we could chat with each other during the = day while the market is moving. If anyone already has either of these = programs and wants to trade contact information let me know. Both of = these are very low 1 time cost programs after an initial free trial = period and are great for very quickly contacting or chatting with others = who have the same program. Might could have reminded Tom about EQNX in = time for him to take action. - ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01BD4CC2.AA6BCD80 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I wanted to see if any of you are = interested in=20 using either ICQ or MIRC to establish a chat room where we could chat = with each=20 other during the day while the market is moving. If anyone already = has=20 either of these programs and wants to trade contact information let me=20 know. Both of these are very low 1 time cost programs after an = initial=20 free trial period and are great for very quickly contacting or chatting = with=20 others who have the same program. Might could have reminded Tom = about EQNX=20 in time for him to take action.

- ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01BD4CC2.AA6BCD80-- - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 08:05:09 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CPQ Johan, While many investors often think the "big guys" have the inside track on advance info, from my days as an active broker I think it's more having the time and staff to research a stock carefully and follow it over time. I know on stocks I followed for years that I built a certain rapport with the key executives I would frequently speak with. In many cases I talked with them AFTER earnings were reported, and that discussion, and how they reacted compared with how they acted or reacted on prior occasions gave me a good feel for anticipating the next qtrly report. Admittedly, because I had spoken with them many times before, I was no longer a stranger on the phone but rather someone that asked intelligent questions and wasn't wasting their time. But I was hardly one of the big players. I have never worked at the institutional level (altho would like to if anyone knows of a job in Miami!!!) so don't know if they get advance info all that often. But I do think they do a better job of planning and projecting and anticipating, which truthfully isn't very CANSLIM other than anticipating future price moves from how the stock reacts in the present. CPQ had been rolling over for well over a month before its bad news last Friday. Because of that I anticipated it would not drop much further, and so far have been proven correct. New thought: what do you think of the idea that all this price cutting by the PC mfrs may be just what the storage device group needs to get it moving again? There are some nice charts in the sector, but GRS remains very low. Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be interpreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Hopefully my comments will better inform and educate all investors. tom w - -----Original Message----- From: Johan Van Houtven To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Wednesday, March 11, 1998 5:48 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] CPQ >Not CANSLIM but .... nice example for the newer group members of how stock >price often precedes news: > >Got a call from the main CPQ distributor today with extremly good offers on >CPQ PCs. > >As you have probably read in the news by now, CPQ has a lot of 'old' >inventory. Why 'old'? I guess that as soon as the new low-end PII that >Intel just announced becomes available (a few weeks from today), the >Pentium MMX systems will soon become 'obsolete' or at least more difficult >to sell. > >CPQ is obviously trying to dump this inventory. > >Look at the chart. Look at the dates when the news came out. Just one more >example of how the big guys already new, and started selling of CPQ. > > > > > >--- Johan Van Houtven > > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 08:11:12 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] RealTime Chat during Trading hours Thanks for the thought, Bud. I do have ICQ and Peoplelink at home, but no internet access at work at all. I got both without any fee not that long ago, not aware there was a cost involved now. I'm not esp in favor of a "chat room" concept since non-participants would miss out on it. In the past, those active during the day have posted to the group. Bounceback to the non-digest list only takes about 5 minutes. And then everyone gets the benefit of the info, even if late. I will add you onto my ICQ list, feel free to add me to yours, altho not likely to be on during mkt hours unless on vacation or unemployed. Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be interpreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Hopefully my comments will better inform and educate all investors. tom w - -----Original Message----- From: Bud Barton To: canslim Date: Wednesday, March 11, 1998 7:50 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] RealTime Chat during Trading hours I wanted to see if any of you are interested in using either ICQ or MIRC to establish a chat room where we could chat with each other during the day while the market is moving. If anyone already has either of these programs and wants to trade contact information let me know. Both of these are very low 1 time cost programs after an initial free trial period and are great for very quickly contacting or chatting with others who have the same program. Might could have reminded Tom about EQNX in time for him to take action. - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 08:33:44 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] new one - RCOT Recoton Corp is way extended right now, and may just keep going. But I'm adding it to my watch list anyway to observe. Yesterday reported 66 cents vs 18, estimate was for 58. Had a long base over three months around 14 before moving up to close yesterday at over 23, so way too extended right now. Trailing PE will be dropping from only 20, and EPS of 71 will be going up. RS 94. Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be interpreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Hopefully my comments will better inform and educate all investors. tom w - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 08:50:04 -0500 From: Jeffry White <"postwhit@sover.net"@sover.net> Subject: [CANSLIM] Short term "M" Tim, you wrote: > Date: Tue, 10 Mar 1998 08:29:46 -0800 > From: Tim Fisher > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Toms Posts, MISI, INFS > > I am trying a new thing - PATIENCE. So far it's working - I've kept myself > from jumping in on several so-so breakouts off of short bases (i.e. MISI) > with my 20% cash, which is where I guess we should be right now (thanks for > that clarification Jeffrey). Tom has helped with his critical review of > stocks I think are sure winners. Although I'm still kicking myself for not > running against Tom's advice on BBRC and GLE (take a look - you could have > gotten in and out with 20%+ on each in a week!) > > P.S. PAYX is again moving up to a new high without breaking out. It seems > to me that the longer I wait on this one the more potential profit I give > up. Any opinions? > > P.P.S. What do you think of INFS. It's up 8% off a descending base to 20 > right now. I've been watching it for a few weeks. I know that the pivot > point was 17-18 but it didn't make my scan until after that earnings report > moved it up. > > At 11:14 PM 3/9/98 -0600, you wrote: > > Members I'm going to try to discipline myself more, that has been my > >problem in trading. (or at least one of them) Hoping the CANSLIM method > >will help that. Following you guys will help, and hopefully I can bring > >something to this group as well. "" Keep up the good work, I need all the > >help I can get. > > > Tim Fisher / tfish@spiritone.com > Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites: > http://www.spiritone.com/~tfish > See naked fish and rocks! > > - - Nasdaq followed through off the recent lows with a 1% on volume move. I interepret this to be a buy signal for another leg up. I'll be watching the leaders and the sentiment closely. Sentiment will likely test the 52 week numbers in the next few weeks. Any distribution on those numbers will have me off margin and looking to cash. Things are going to get pretty dangerous, I think. BTW, I say forget that trailing PE noise on PAYX. I love the stock. Have owned it since it first made it's move in late December. The chart tells the story. Adding some June 50 Calls on the open today. Earnings 3/17, probably a split in the cards. This is a quiet mover, but the news leaks and is pretty evident in the price action, I think. Good luck. - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 05:56:49 -0800 (PST) From: Rolatzi Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] RealTime Chat during Trading hours ISn't ICQ free? - ---Bud Barton wrote: > > I wanted to see if any of you are interested in using either ICQ or MIRC to establish a chat room where we could chat with each other during the day while the market is moving. If anyone already has either of these programs and wants to trade contact information let me know. Both of these are very low 1 time cost programs after an initial free trial period and are great for very quickly contacting or chatting with others who have the same program. Might could have reminded Tom about EQNX in time for him to take action. > >

I wanted to see if any of you are interested in using either ICQ or MIRC to establish a chat room where we could chat with each other during the day while the market is moving. If anyone already has either of these programs and wants to trade contact information let me know. Both of these are very low 1 time cost programs after an initial free trial period and are great for very quickly contacting or chatting with others who have the same program. Might could have reminded Tom about EQNX in time for him to take action.

_________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 08:22:17 -0600 From: JOHN ENGLAND Subject: [CANSLIM] (CANSLIM)Tom Worley Hey Tom any info on "FPAM" .How about a Tom Worley evaluation.By the why it was a trains headlight,OOOOOUUUUUCCCCHHHHHH! - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 09:28:33 -0500 (EST) From: "Surindra J. Singh" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] RealTime Chat during Trading hours Tom: You too live in this third world country-no internet access from work!!! Regards Surindra - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Mar 1998 22:32:08 -0600 (CST) From: John Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] My current watch list what do you think of the dailygraphs online. can you follow the canslim path without it? John Adair At 08:28 AM 3/10/98 -0500, you wrote: >Did a somewhat rushed, but rigorous, review of my current shortened watch >list. The following are what's left: > >EQNX, EDAC, APSG, MTIC, EFTC, SPF, SSNC, INFM, SMMT, FFGI, MDLK. > >I have also got a few others that I watch, mostly cuz the office is in them. >They include KEA, DSTM, LHSPF, KM, THNK, TMBS, BEST, ATHM. > >We were selling TMBS in volume yesterday, and buying AVID, BEST and ATHM >over the past several days. > >Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. >My comments should not be interpreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am >a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do >their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on >the Internet. Hopefully my comments will better inform and educate all >investors. >tom w > > >- > > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Mar 1998 22:32:08 -0600 (CST) From: John Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] My current watch list what do you think of the dailygraphs online. can you follow the canslim path without it? John Adair At 08:28 AM 3/10/98 -0500, you wrote: >Did a somewhat rushed, but rigorous, review of my current shortened watch >list. The following are what's left: > >EQNX, EDAC, APSG, MTIC, EFTC, SPF, SSNC, INFM, SMMT, FFGI, MDLK. > >I have also got a few others that I watch, mostly cuz the office is in them. >They include KEA, DSTM, LHSPF, KM, THNK, TMBS, BEST, ATHM. > >We were selling TMBS in volume yesterday, and buying AVID, BEST and ATHM >over the past several days. > >Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. >My comments should not be interpreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am >a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do >their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on >the Internet. Hopefully my comments will better inform and educate all >investors. >tom w > > >- > > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 11:12:20 -0600 From: "Joe Scott" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] RealTime Chat during Trading hours This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01BD4CDE.8F3AFBA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Yeah Bud, I use ICQ all the time to stay in touch with a few friends, = 289837 is my number, don't know how much help I would be, but I'm in. joe - ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01BD4CDE.8F3AFBA0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Yeah Bud, I use ICQ all = the time to stay=20 in touch with a few friends, 289837 is my number, don't know how = much help=20 I would be, but I'm in.

joe

- ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01BD4CDE.8F3AFBA0-- - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 19:20:20 +0100 From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ADVP, FFGI, ICN All three broke out between now and Monday now. Another break-out: HARS. Low ADV though. At 12:22 AM 09-03-98 +0100, you wrote: >Three more for the watchlist: > >ADVP 75 88 A GRS 73 Time: A > >FFGI 74 98 B GRS 98 Time: C > >ICN 74 96 A GRS 84 Time: B > > > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 19:26:37 +0100 From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: [CANSLIM] CLCX 94 94 B, but.... Every new CANSLIM list member should take a look at the CLCX chart. Nice example to study how things can go wrong. - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 12:33:06 -0600 From: "Joe Scott" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CLCX 94 94 B, but.... This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0055_01BD4CE9.D774F820 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Could it be the fact, it has 67% institutional ownership? - ------=_NextPart_000_0055_01BD4CE9.D774F820 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Could it be the fact, it has 67% = institutional=20 ownership?

- ------=_NextPart_000_0055_01BD4CE9.D774F820-- - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 13:42:58 -0500 From: Craig Griffin Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CLCX 94 94 B, but.... Johan, Agreed. Nice example. Along those same lines take a look at THQI today. Notice that with each of these stocks: if you had bought the breakout from the previous base properly - - you would have been able to get out whole or with maybe an 8-12% loss. If OTOH, you had chased them and bought extended by 15% or 20%, you would be underwater by as much as 30-40%. Even falling knives will sometimes pause a bit at old support (ie. top of the base). Best regards, Craig At 07:26 PM 3/11/98 +0100, you wrote: >Every new CANSLIM list member should take a look at the CLCX chart. > >Nice example to study how things can go wrong. > - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 13:47:45 -0500 From: "Bud Barton" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: BigChart - EMA This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0025_01BD4CF4.45387120 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Please briefly explain how you interpret the results of your 3EMA chart. - ------=_NextPart_000_0025_01BD4CF4.45387120 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Please briefly explain how you = interpret the=20 results of your 3EMA chart.

- ------=_NextPart_000_0025_01BD4CF4.45387120-- - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 20:33:00 +0100 From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CLCX 94 94 B, but.... Craig wrote: >Along those same lines take a look at THQI today. Indeed another very nice example. Should be kept as study material. Al these same lines, members should take a look at what can happen to a strong momentum stock like LHSPF. High today: 93 3/4, low 75 5/8. Better have stops in place loke the pro's... - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 15:11:23 -0500 From: "Bud Barton" Subject: [CANSLIM] SONC, ARSC This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD4CFF.F49AD080 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable (NASDAQ) =20 SONC - 84,84,A=20 ARSC - 99,75,A Both of these are at the high end of my price range but I wanted your = opinion of the quailty of my scan. Both came from the highest increase = in volume section of IBD on tues. - ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD4CFF.F49AD080 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

(NASDAQ)

SONC - 84,84,A

ARSC - 99,75,A

Both of these are at the high end of = my price=20 range but I wanted your opinion of the quailty of my scan. Both = came from=20 the highest increase in volume section of IBD on=20 tues.

- ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD4CFF.F49AD080-- - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 14:55:13 -0800 From: Tim Fisher Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: [Up-Up-and-A-Way]- News Stories And My Take On Them I agree - I think Morgan Stanley analysts should be taken out in the parking lot and SHOT. That was a totally bald-faced attempt to manipulate the price of a great little company. Can't the shareholders sue the brokerage houses instead of the company? I'd join in on a suit against those ***holes in a New York Minute. This will probably the second time in 3 weeks M-S takes me out on a "downgrade" based on B.S. At 02:39 PM 3/11/98 -0800, you wrote: >Here goes on that I also have not heard mentioned on CNBC yet. You know how >I feel about these downgrades on price. You KNOW that if I were in the >enforcement business I would initiate and very seriously see about leveling >FRAUD charges on many of these downgrades. My question is this: Would this >company, without their downgrade, SHORT this stock with their own PERSONAL >money. Look at a long term graph of the one I am about to mention and I >would seriously doubt it. Short too many stocks with long term graphs that >look like this stocks graph and you and your money will soon be parted. OK! >Here we go! Another one of those downgrades on price. This is about the >only way they could have gotten their clients out of the stock. This is >about the only way a drop could be FORCED. Now, if it follows the trend of >MOST (not all, but MOST) of the downgrades on price, you buy it now, within >24 hours or if you wait 48 hours many times you will have waited to long. >This downgrade will get out ALL of those sitting on the fence. Once they are >gone guess what happens to the price of the stock. Yep! Goes right back up >and this time minus any of the squeamish and those so WEAK that they let >some comment like a downgrade on price take them out. It is really >approaching the ridiculous stage and I'm sorry but I could not do this to >you and sleep at night. It is my personal opinion that there are people in >JAIL for doing less than this. Here's the article and do what you want. I >HOPE it makes our top FIVE this week. > >03/11 09:01 MORGAN STANLEY SAYS CUTS MGIC INVESTMENT TO NEUTRAL > > >FROM OUTPERFORM >NEW YORK, March 11 (Reuters) - Morgan Stanley Dean Witter said it lowered >its rating on MGIC Investment Corp to neutral from outperform due to slowing >industry growth. > >-- The private mortgage industry is losing market share at an accelerating >rate. > >-- The industry's strategic position is weak. There is near-term risk from a >refinance wave. > >-- MGIC shares appear to be fully valued, particularly given Morgan's >reduced industry outlook. > >-- The 1999 earnings estimate was trimmed to $3.70 per share from $3.76. > >WOW! Six cents huh? One half a penny per share a month! Hmmm! That's really >bad! And that takes it from an outperform to a neutral. > >Well, as usual do what you have to do and use the info if you can. Have a >GREAT day and this is just SOME of what we as investors are FORCED to have >to put up with! > >James >www.taylortrader.com >JamesTaylor@TaylorTrader.com > Tim Fisher / tfish@spiritone.com Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites: http://www.spiritone.com/~tfish See naked fish and rocks! - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 19:13:49 -0500 From: "Surindra Singh" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Re: [Up-Up-and-A-Way]- News Stories And My Take On Them Tim: Not a good idea to forward mail to both canslim and downdown&-- group at the same time. You are confusing people on both lists. Please do not mix canslim with junkies. Surindra |-----Original Message----- |From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com |[mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tim Fisher |Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 1998 5:55 PM |To: upupandaway@shango.com |Cc: canslim@xmission.com |Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: [Up-Up-and-A-Way]- News Stories And My Take On |Them | | |I agree - I think Morgan Stanley analysts should be taken out in the |parking lot and SHOT. That was a totally bald-faced attempt to manipulate |the price of a great little company. Can't the shareholders sue the |brokerage houses instead of the company? I'd join in on a suit against |those ***holes in a New York Minute. This will probably the second time in |3 weeks M-S takes me out on a "downgrade" based on B.S. | |At 02:39 PM 3/11/98 -0800, you wrote: |>Here goes on that I also have not heard mentioned on CNBC yet. You know how |>I feel about these downgrades on price. You KNOW that if I were in the |>enforcement business I would initiate and very seriously see about leveling |>FRAUD charges on many of these downgrades. My question is this: Would this |>company, without their downgrade, SHORT this stock with their own PERSONAL |>money. Look at a long term graph of the one I am about to mention and I |>would seriously doubt it. Short too many stocks with long term graphs that |>look like this stocks graph and you and your money will soon be parted. OK! |>Here we go! Another one of those downgrades on price. This is about the |>only way they could have gotten their clients out of the stock. This is |>about the only way a drop could be FORCED. Now, if it follows the trend of |>MOST (not all, but MOST) of the downgrades on price, you buy it now, within |>24 hours or if you wait 48 hours many times you will have waited to long. |>This downgrade will get out ALL of those sitting on the fence. Once they are |>gone guess what happens to the price of the stock. Yep! Goes right back up |>and this time minus any of the squeamish and those so WEAK that they let |>some comment like a downgrade on price take them out. It is really |>approaching the ridiculous stage and I'm sorry but I could not do this to |>you and sleep at night. It is my personal opinion that there are people in |>JAIL for doing less than this. Here's the article and do what you want. I |>HOPE it makes our top FIVE this week. |> |>03/11 09:01 MORGAN STANLEY SAYS CUTS MGIC INVESTMENT TO NEUTRAL |> |> |>FROM OUTPERFORM |>NEW YORK, March 11 (Reuters) - Morgan Stanley Dean Witter said it lowered |>its rating on MGIC Investment Corp to neutral from outperform due to slowing |>industry growth. |> |>-- The private mortgage industry is losing market share at an accelerating |>rate. |> |>-- The industry's strategic position is weak. There is near-term risk from a |>refinance wave. |> |>-- MGIC shares appear to be fully valued, particularly given Morgan's |>reduced industry outlook. |> |>-- The 1999 earnings estimate was trimmed to $3.70 per share from $3.76. |> |>WOW! Six cents huh? One half a penny per share a month! Hmmm! That's really |>bad! And that takes it from an outperform to a neutral. |> |>Well, as usual do what you have to do and use the info if you can. Have a |>GREAT day and this is just SOME of what we as investors are FORCED to have |>to put up with! |> |>James |>www.taylortrader.com |>JamesTaylor@TaylorTrader.com |> | |Tim Fisher / tfish@spiritone.com |Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites: |http://www.spiritone.com/~tfish |See naked fish and rocks! | |- | - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 19:20:45 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] FPAM (was (CANSLIM)Tom Worley) As a short?? Oh, you mean as a CANSLIM long? Nah, the RS 19 would stop that in its tracks. The 140% debt may also be a factor, along with the funds betting with 40% while management only bets with 14%. The good news is that there has not been insider selling since it broke below 25 some months ago, the bad news is that there has not been insider buying after it bottomed at 15 and worked its way back up to 25 again. Don't know what clobbered it a week ago for a 20% loss, but that would also weigh against it. And the earnings forecast for the current year means it must average better each qtr than it has done for any of the past 8 qtrs. It may work out, but definitely not CANSLIM, altho may not be a train either at this price. Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be interpreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Hopefully my comments will better inform and educate all investors. tom w - -----Original Message----- From: JOHN ENGLAND To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Wednesday, March 11, 1998 9:15 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] (CANSLIM)Tom Worley >Hey Tom any info on "FPAM" .How about a Tom Worley evaluation.By the why >it was a trains headlight,OOOOOUUUUUCCCCHHHHHH! > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 19:23:19 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] My current watch list I for one will suffer severe withdrawal once it goes commercial, and probably post less as I will have to wait to check the books at work the next day if I have time. When I look at a Daily Graphs chart, vs Big Charts or any other site, I get so much more CS data which is important to me. Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be interpreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Hopefully my comments will better inform and educate all investors. tom w - -----Original Message----- From: John To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Wednesday, March 11, 1998 9:55 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] My current watch list >what do you think of the dailygraphs online. can you follow the canslim path >without it? >John Adair > > > > > >At 08:28 AM 3/10/98 -0500, you wrote: >>Did a somewhat rushed, but rigorous, review of my current shortened watch >>list. The following are what's left: >> >>EQNX, EDAC, APSG, MTIC, EFTC, SPF, SSNC, INFM, SMMT, FFGI, MDLK. >> >>I have also got a few others that I watch, mostly cuz the office is in them. >>They include KEA, DSTM, LHSPF, KM, THNK, TMBS, BEST, ATHM. >> >>We were selling TMBS in volume yesterday, and buying AVID, BEST and ATHM >>over the past several days. >> >>Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. >>My comments should not be interpreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am >>a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do >>their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on >>the Internet. Hopefully my comments will better inform and educate all >>investors. >>tom w >> >> >>- >> >> >> > > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 16:43:47 -0800 From: Tim Fisher Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Re: [Up-Up-and-A-Way]- News Stories And My Take On Them At 07:13 PM 3/11/98 -0500, you wrote: >Tim: > >Not a good idea to forward mail to both canslim and downdown&-- group at the >same time. You are confusing people on both lists. Please do not mix canslim >with junkies. > >Surindra > Sorry I offended you. James may not be a strict CANSLIMer but he has a good grasp of the market and a solidly cynical view of brokerage houses and analysts. Furthermore, the topic of discussion was relevant to both lists, and so was the forward. MTG is a solid CANSLIM stock and no doubt will continue to be one after Morgan Stanley makes their money off it. Also, I'd be willing to bet that James is beating your performance with his "system" since he stopped relying on IBD and DGO for rankings; I know he is beating me and my applicaiton of CANSLIM. So don't be so quick to judge. >|-----Original Message----- >|From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com >|[mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tim Fisher >|Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 1998 5:55 PM >|To: upupandaway@shango.com >|Cc: canslim@xmission.com >|Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: [Up-Up-and-A-Way]- News Stories And My Take On >|Them >| >| >|I agree - I think Morgan Stanley analysts should be taken out in the >|parking lot and SHOT. That was a totally bald-faced attempt to manipulate >|the price of a great little company. Can't the shareholders sue the >|brokerage houses instead of the company? I'd join in on a suit against >|those ***holes in a New York Minute. This will probably the second time in >|3 weeks M-S takes me out on a "downgrade" based on B.S. >| >|At 02:39 PM 3/11/98 -0800, you wrote: >|>Here goes on that I also have not heard mentioned on CNBC yet. You know >how >|>I feel about these downgrades on price. You KNOW that if I were in the >|>enforcement business I would initiate and very seriously see about >leveling >|>FRAUD charges on many of these downgrades. My question is this: Would this >|>company, without their downgrade, SHORT this stock with their own PERSONAL >|>money. Look at a long term graph of the one I am about to mention and I >|>would seriously doubt it. Short too many stocks with long term graphs that >|>look like this stocks graph and you and your money will soon be parted. >OK! >|>Here we go! Another one of those downgrades on price. This is about the >|>only way they could have gotten their clients out of the stock. This is >|>about the only way a drop could be FORCED. Now, if it follows the trend of >|>MOST (not all, but MOST) of the downgrades on price, you buy it now, >within >|>24 hours or if you wait 48 hours many times you will have waited to long. >|>This downgrade will get out ALL of those sitting on the fence. Once they >are >|>gone guess what happens to the price of the stock. Yep! Goes right back up >|>and this time minus any of the squeamish and those so WEAK that they let >|>some comment like a downgrade on price take them out. It is really >|>approaching the ridiculous stage and I'm sorry but I could not do this to >|>you and sleep at night. It is my personal opinion that there are people in >|>JAIL for doing less than this. Here's the article and do what you want. I >|>HOPE it makes our top FIVE this week. >|> >|>03/11 09:01 MORGAN STANLEY SAYS CUTS MGIC INVESTMENT TO NEUTRAL >|> >|> >|>FROM OUTPERFORM >|>NEW YORK, March 11 (Reuters) - Morgan Stanley Dean Witter said it lowered >|>its rating on MGIC Investment Corp to neutral from outperform due to >slowing >|>industry growth. >|> >|>-- The private mortgage industry is losing market share at an accelerating >|>rate. >|> >|>-- The industry's strategic position is weak. There is near-term risk from >a >|>refinance wave. >|> >|>-- MGIC shares appear to be fully valued, particularly given Morgan's >|>reduced industry outlook. >|> >|>-- The 1999 earnings estimate was trimmed to $3.70 per share from $3.76. >|> >|>WOW! Six cents huh? One half a penny per share a month! Hmmm! That's >really >|>bad! And that takes it from an outperform to a neutral. >|> >|>Well, as usual do what you have to do and use the info if you can. Have a >|>GREAT day and this is just SOME of what we as investors are FORCED to have >|>to put up with! >|> >|>James >|>www.taylortrader.com >|>JamesTaylor@TaylorTrader.com >|> >| >|Tim Fisher / tfish@spiritone.com >|Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites: >|http://www.spiritone.com/~tfish >|See naked fish and rocks! >| >|- >| > > > Tim Fisher / tfish@spiritone.com Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites: http://www.spiritone.com/~tfish See naked fish and rocks! - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 19:42:19 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CLCX 94 94 B, but.... Excluding yesterday and today, however, I don't see any obvious warning signs. Didn't have time today to review the news that crashed this stock yesterday and today, and don't know when the news broke initially (but if it wasn't during trading yesterday there were a lot selling on inside info!). Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be interpreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Hopefully my comments will better inform and educate all investors. tom w - -----Original Message----- From: Johan Van Houtven To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Wednesday, March 11, 1998 1:22 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] CLCX 94 94 B, but.... >Every new CANSLIM list member should take a look at the CLCX chart. > >Nice example to study how things can go wrong. > > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 19:43:47 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CLCX 94 94 B, but.... Also another example of why stop losses are important. In the case of CLCX, if yesterday didn't drive you out, your losses were only greater today. Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be interpreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Hopefully my comments will better inform and educate all investors. tom w - -----Original Message----- From: Craig Griffin To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Wednesday, March 11, 1998 1:39 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CLCX 94 94 B, but.... >Johan, > >Agreed. Nice example. > >Along those same lines take a look at THQI today. Notice that with each of >these stocks: if you had bought the breakout from the previous base properly >- you would have been able to get out whole or with maybe an 8-12% loss. If >OTOH, you had chased them and bought extended by 15% or 20%, you would be >underwater by as much as 30-40%. Even falling knives will sometimes pause a >bit at old support (ie. top of the base). > >Best regards, >Craig > >At 07:26 PM 3/11/98 +0100, you wrote: >>Every new CANSLIM list member should take a look at the CLCX chart. >> >>Nice example to study how things can go wrong. >> > > >- > - - ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #143 ***************************** To unsubscribe to canslim-digest, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe canslim-digest" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message.