From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #1449 Reply-To: canslim Sender: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-No-Archive: yes canslim-digest Thursday, June 7 2001 Volume 02 : Number 1449 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days RE: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days Re: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days Re: [CANSLIM] Good article on Market RE: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 10:23:55 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_005B_01C0EF3B.F4CDA280 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable David, How is that distributional? The index closed up 8.26 points, and on = 330,000 more shares. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley ----- Original Message -----=20 From: David Squires=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 10:09 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days NASDAQ had an important dist. day on 5-22. =20 Dsquires ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Doug Shannon=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 8:48 AM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days =20 =20 I am probably over simplifying the issue, but trying to understand = it better, and pay a little more attention. So looking for some = educating and advice from those that understand the topic better. If I essentially ignore completely down days where the volume was = less than ADV, then I find the following since April 1: NASDAQ - distribution 4/3, 4/26, 5/30 - yesterday clearly by any = definition is not distributional as volume failed to beat the prior day, = which was up. And 4/3, and possibly 4/26, seem too old to be meaningful NYSE Composite - 4/24, 4/30, 5/2, 5/22 appear distributional. = Again yesterday was not due lighter volume DOW 30 - 4/11, 6/6 distributional Russell 2000 - 4/3, 5/30 distributional S&P 500 - 4/3, 4/4, 4/30, 5/22, 5/30 distributional The questions I have: Is this approach too simplistic? Can I simply ignore down days = where volume is less than ADV? No, your analysis is quite good. I, too = would ignore down days on lighter volume. Those days are clearly not = distributional.=20 Is this summary essentially accurate? yes=20 How far back in time to you have to consider? What restarts the = counting from zero? I don't think in terms of ever re-starting the = count. I just look for at least 4+ days of distribution in any 2-3 week = period, The only time I would consider a distribution day where vol. = was less than ADV is if the price action is wide and loose. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley - ------=_NextPart_000_005B_01C0EF3B.F4CDA280 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

David,

How is that distributional? The index closed = up 8.26=20 points, and on 330,000 more shares.

Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 TexWorley

----- Original Message -----
From:=20 David=20 Squires
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com =

Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 = 10:09=20 AM

Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] = Distribution=20 Days

NASDAQ had an important dist. day on = 5-22.

Dsquires

----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Doug=20 Shannon
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com =

Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 = 8:48=20 AM

Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] = Distribution=20 Days

I am probably over simplifying the issue, but = trying to=20 understand it better, and pay a little more attention. So looking = for some=20 educating and advice from those that understand the topic=20 better.

If I essentially ignore completely down days = where the=20 volume was less than ADV, then I find the following since April=20 1:

NASDAQ - distribution 4/3, 4/26, 5/30 - = yesterday=20 clearly by any definition is not distributional as volume failed = to beat=20 the prior day, which was up. And 4/3, and possibly 4/26, seem too = old to=20 be meaningful

NYSE Composite - 4/24, 4/30, 5/2, 5/22 appear=20 distributional. Again yesterday was not due lighter = volume

DOW 30 - 4/11, 6/6 distributional

Russell 2000 - 4/3, 5/30 = distributional

S&P 500 - 4/3, 4/4, 4/30, 5/22, 5/30=20 distributional

The questions I have:

Is this approach too simplistic? Can I simply = ignore=20 down days where volume is less than ADV? No, your=20 analysis is quite good. I, too would ignore down days = on=20 lighter volume. Those days are clearly not=20 distributional.

Is this summary essentially accurate? =20 yes

How far back in time to you have to consider? = What=20 restarts the counting from zero? I don't think in terms of = ever=20 re-starting the count. I just look for at least 4+ days = of=20 distribution in any 2-3 week period, The only time I = would=20 consider a distribution day where vol. was less than ADV is if the = price=20 action is wide and loose.

Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 = TexWorley

<= /HTML> - ------=_NextPart_000_005B_01C0EF3B.F4CDA280-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 10:28:04 -0400 From: "Doug Shannon" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C0EF3C.88FBBF50 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit only to backtest market tops. The only top that took longer than 3 weeks to flash 4+ distribution days was the '87 top but you had 3 other important warnings - fed increased discount rate, market rallied on paltry volume, and the leaders where breaking down. Doug -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tom Worley Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 9:56 AM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days Thanks, Doug, So you never look any further back than a max of 3 weeks? Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley ----- Original Message ----- From: Doug Shannon To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 9:48 AM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days I am probably over simplifying the issue, but trying to understand it better, and pay a little more attention. So looking for some educating and advice from those that understand the topic better. If I essentially ignore completely down days where the volume was less than ADV, then I find the following since April 1: NASDAQ - distribution 4/3, 4/26, 5/30 - yesterday clearly by any definition is not distributional as volume failed to beat the prior day, which was up. And 4/3, and possibly 4/26, seem too old to be meaningful NYSE Composite - 4/24, 4/30, 5/2, 5/22 appear distributional. Again yesterday was not due lighter volume DOW 30 - 4/11, 6/6 distributional Russell 2000 - 4/3, 5/30 distributional S&P 500 - 4/3, 4/4, 4/30, 5/22, 5/30 distributional The questions I have: Is this approach too simplistic? Can I simply ignore down days where volume is less than ADV? No, your analysis is quite good. I, too would ignore down days on lighter volume. Those days are clearly not distributional. Is this summary essentially accurate? yes How far back in time to you have to consider? What restarts the counting from zero? I don't think in terms of ever re-starting the count. I just look for at least 4+ days of distribution in any 2-3 week period, The only time I would consider a distribution day where vol. was less than ADV is if the price action is wide and loose. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley - ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C0EF3C.88FBBF50 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

only=20 to backtest market tops. The only top that took longer than 3 = weeks to=20 flash 4+ distribution days was the '87 top but you had 3 other important = warnings - fed increased discount rate, market rallied on paltry volume, = and the=20 leaders where breaking down.

Doug

-----Original Message-----
From:=20 owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tom=20 Worley
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 9:56 AM
To:=20 canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] = Distribution=20 Days

Thanks, Doug,

So you never look any further back than a max of 3 = weeks?

Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 TexWorley

----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Doug=20 Shannon
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com= =20

Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 = 9:48=20 AM

Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] = Distribution=20 Days

I am probably over simplifying the issue, but = trying to=20 understand it better, and pay a little more attention. So looking = for some=20 educating and advice from those that understand the topic=20 better.

If I essentially ignore completely down days = where the=20 volume was less than ADV, then I find the following since April=20 1:

NASDAQ - distribution 4/3, 4/26, 5/30 - = yesterday=20 clearly by any definition is not distributional as volume failed = to beat=20 the prior day, which was up. And 4/3, and possibly 4/26, seem too = old to=20 be meaningful

NYSE Composite - 4/24, 4/30, 5/2, 5/22 appear=20 distributional. Again yesterday was not due lighter = volume

DOW 30 - 4/11, 6/6 distributional

Russell 2000 - 4/3, 5/30 = distributional

S&P 500 - 4/3, 4/4, 4/30, 5/22, 5/30=20 distributional

The questions I have:

Is this approach too simplistic? Can I simply = ignore=20 down days where volume is less than ADV? No, your=20 analysis is quite good. I, too would ignore down days = on=20 lighter volume. Those days are clearly not=20 distributional.

Is this summary essentially accurate? =20 yes

How far back in time to you have to consider? = What=20 restarts the counting from zero? I don't think in terms of = ever=20 re-starting the count. I just look for at least 4+ days = of=20 distribution in any 2-3 week period, The only time I = would=20 consider a distribution day where vol. was less than ADV is if the = price=20 action is wide and loose.

Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 = TexWorley

<= /HTML> - ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C0EF3C.88FBBF50-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 10:35:50 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0081_01C0EF3D.9F9D3EE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Doug, Both you and David see 5/22 as distributional, which is confusing me. = How can it be distributional, when the index not only closed up, but on = slightly greater volume? Or is the data at DGO wrong? Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Doug Shannon=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 10:25 AM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days I agree. 5/22 was basically flat for the day on very fast trade. = Vol. was higher than the day before and above average. =20 =20 I see 2 distribution days on above average trade on the Nasdaq in the = last 3 weeks: 5/22 and 5/30. =20 Doug -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com = [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of David Squires Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 10:10 AM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days NASDAQ had an important dist. day on 5-22. =20 Dsquires ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Doug Shannon=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 8:48 AM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days =20 =20 I am probably over simplifying the issue, but trying to = understand it better, and pay a little more attention. So looking for = some educating and advice from those that understand the topic better. If I essentially ignore completely down days where the volume = was less than ADV, then I find the following since April 1: NASDAQ - distribution 4/3, 4/26, 5/30 - yesterday clearly by any = definition is not distributional as volume failed to beat the prior day, = which was up. And 4/3, and possibly 4/26, seem too old to be meaningful NYSE Composite - 4/24, 4/30, 5/2, 5/22 appear distributional. = Again yesterday was not due lighter volume DOW 30 - 4/11, 6/6 distributional Russell 2000 - 4/3, 5/30 distributional S&P 500 - 4/3, 4/4, 4/30, 5/22, 5/30 distributional The questions I have: Is this approach too simplistic? Can I simply ignore down days = where volume is less than ADV? No, your analysis is quite good. I, too = would ignore down days on lighter volume. Those days are clearly not = distributional.=20 Is this summary essentially accurate? yes=20 How far back in time to you have to consider? What restarts the = counting from zero? I don't think in terms of ever re-starting the = count. I just look for at least 4+ days of distribution in any 2-3 week = period, The only time I would consider a distribution day where vol. = was less than ADV is if the price action is wide and loose. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley - ------=_NextPart_000_0081_01C0EF3D.9F9D3EE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Doug,

Both you and David see 5/22 as distributional, which = is=20 confusing me. How can it be distributional, when the index not only = closed up,=20 but on slightly greater volume?

Or is the data at DGO wrong?

Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 TexWorley

----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Doug=20 Shannon
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com =

Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 = 10:25=20 AM

Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] = Distribution=20 Days

I=20 agree. 5/22 was basically flat for the day on very fast = trade. =20 Vol. was higher than the day before and above average. =20

I=20 see 2 distribution days on above average trade on the Nasdaq in the = last 3=20 weeks: 5/22 and 5/30.

Doug

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-canslim@lists.xmis= sion.com=20 [mailto:owner-canslim@lis= ts.xmission.com]On=20 Behalf Of David Squires
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 = 10:10=20 AM
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: = [CANSLIM]=20 Distribution Days

NASDAQ had an important dist. day on = 5-22.

Dsquires

----- Original Message ----- =
From:=20 Doug=20 Shannon
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com =

Sent: Thursday, June 07, = 2001 8:48=20 AM

Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] = Distribution=20 Days

I am probably over simplifying the issue, = but trying=20 to understand it better, and pay a little more attention. So = looking for=20 some educating and advice from those that understand the topic=20 better.

If I essentially ignore completely down days = where the=20 volume was less than ADV, then I find the following since April=20 1:

NASDAQ - distribution 4/3, 4/26, 5/30 - = yesterday=20 clearly by any definition is not distributional as volume failed = to beat=20 the prior day, which was up. And 4/3, and possibly 4/26, seem = too old to=20 be meaningful

NYSE Composite - 4/24, 4/30, 5/2, 5/22 = appear=20 distributional. Again yesterday was not due lighter = volume

DOW 30 - 4/11, 6/6 = distributional

Russell 2000 - 4/3, 5/30 = distributional

S&P 500 - 4/3, 4/4, 4/30, 5/22, 5/30=20 distributional

The questions I have:

Is this approach too simplistic? Can I = simply ignore=20 down days where volume is less than ADV? No, your=20 analysis is quite good. I, too would ignore down days = on=20 lighter volume. Those days are clearly not=20 distributional.

Is this summary essentially accurate? =20 yes

How far back in time to you have to = consider? What=20 restarts the counting from zero? I don't think in terms = of ever=20 re-starting the count. I just look for at least 4+ = days of=20 distribution in any 2-3 week period, The only time I = would=20 consider a distribution day where vol. was less than ADV is if = the price=20 action is wide and loose.

Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 = TexWorley
- ------=_NextPart_000_0081_01C0EF3D.9F9D3EE0-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 07:37:21 -0700 (PDT) From: Kent Norman Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Good article on Market Regarding his statement: "After this point is reached, wait until unemployment has risen one full percentage point from its low point before you call a market bottom." I think there is something different about employment this time around. Companies are applying "just in time" techniques to personnel. They were very quick to shed workers at the first hint of trouble. January was a record month for unemployment. Let's see how rapidly they restock their talent shelves when things start recovering. I suspect they will discover people will be reluctant to return to a company that dumped them. People are different from parts. Regards Kent Norman - --- Steven Limbert wrote: > To all, > > For an interesting comment on the market please read > the attached article by > Ken Fisher (a portfolio manager) of Forbes Magazine. > And remember new bulls > seldom start with an S&P500 PE of 23-24. > > > SL > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at > http://explorer.msn.com > > ATTACHMENT part 2 application/msword name=Ken Fisher Article.doc __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 10:38:11 -0400 From: "Doug Shannon" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C0EF3D.F2C2F380 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Tom, Looking at the chart, the Nasdaq made a new high intraday and then closed in the lower part of that day's range and slightly above (.35%) the previous close. Very little progress in price on higher volume especially if it is above average is a clear sign of churning which is also distribution. Also, the previous day's volume was way above average so you have to give the vol on 5/22 some extra respect because it surpassed 5/21 even though it was only by a little. Doug -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tom Worley Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 10:24 AM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days David, How is that distributional? The index closed up 8.26 points, and on 330,000 more shares. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley ----- Original Message ----- From: David Squires To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 10:09 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days NASDAQ had an important dist. day on 5-22. Dsquires ----- Original Message ----- From: Doug Shannon To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 8:48 AM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days I am probably over simplifying the issue, but trying to understand it better, and pay a little more attention. So looking for some educating and advice from those that understand the topic better. If I essentially ignore completely down days where the volume was less than ADV, then I find the following since April 1: NASDAQ - distribution 4/3, 4/26, 5/30 - yesterday clearly by any definition is not distributional as volume failed to beat the prior day, which was up. And 4/3, and possibly 4/26, seem too old to be meaningful NYSE Composite - 4/24, 4/30, 5/2, 5/22 appear distributional. Again yesterday was not due lighter volume DOW 30 - 4/11, 6/6 distributional Russell 2000 - 4/3, 5/30 distributional S&P 500 - 4/3, 4/4, 4/30, 5/22, 5/30 distributional The questions I have: Is this approach too simplistic? Can I simply ignore down days where volume is less than ADV? No, your analysis is quite good. I, too would ignore down days on lighter volume. Those days are clearly not distributional. Is this summary essentially accurate? yes How far back in time to you have to consider? What restarts the counting from zero? I don't think in terms of ever re-starting the count. I just look for at least 4+ days of distribution in any 2-3 week period, The only time I would consider a distribution day where vol. was less than ADV is if the price action is wide and loose. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley - ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C0EF3D.F2C2F380 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Tom,

Looking at the chart, the Nasdaq made a new high intraday and = then closed=20 in the lower part of that day's range and slightly above (.35%) the = previous=20 close. Very little progress in price on higher volume especially if it = is above=20 average is a clear sign of churning which is also distribution. = Also, the=20 previous day's volume was way above average so you have to give the vol = on 5/22=20 some extra respect because it surpassed 5/21 even though it was only by = a=20 little.

Doug

-----Original = Message-----
From:=20 owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com = [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On=20 Behalf Of Tom Worley
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 10:24=20 AM
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: = [CANSLIM]=20 Distribution Days

David,

How is that distributional? The index closed = up 8.26=20 points, and on 330,000 more shares.

Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 TexWorley

----- Original Message -----
From:=20 David=20 Squires
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com= =20

Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 = 10:09=20 AM

Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] = Distribution=20 Days

NASDAQ had an important dist. day on = 5-22.

Dsquires

----- Original Message ----- =
From:=20 Doug=20 Shannon
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com= =20

Sent: Thursday, June 07, = 2001 8:48=20 AM

Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] = Distribution=20 Days

I am probably over simplifying the issue, = but trying=20 to understand it better, and pay a little more attention. So = looking for=20 some educating and advice from those that understand the topic=20 better.

If I essentially ignore completely down days = where the=20 volume was less than ADV, then I find the following since April=20 1:

NASDAQ - distribution 4/3, 4/26, 5/30 - = yesterday=20 clearly by any definition is not distributional as volume failed = to beat=20 the prior day, which was up. And 4/3, and possibly 4/26, seem = too old to=20 be meaningful

NYSE Composite - 4/24, 4/30, 5/2, 5/22 = appear=20 distributional. Again yesterday was not due lighter = volume

DOW 30 - 4/11, 6/6 = distributional

Russell 2000 - 4/3, 5/30 = distributional

S&P 500 - 4/3, 4/4, 4/30, 5/22, 5/30=20 distributional

The questions I have:

Is this approach too simplistic? Can I = simply ignore=20 down days where volume is less than ADV? No, your=20 analysis is quite good. I, too would ignore down days = on=20 lighter volume. Those days are clearly not=20 distributional.

Is this summary essentially accurate? =20 yes

How far back in time to you have to = consider? What=20 restarts the counting from zero? I don't think in terms = of ever=20 re-starting the count. I just look for at least 4+ = days of=20 distribution in any 2-3 week period, The only time I = would=20 consider a distribution day where vol. was less than ADV is if = the price=20 action is wide and loose.

Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 = TexWorley
- ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C0EF3D.F2C2F380-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #1449 ****************************** 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.