From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #2049 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, January 17 2002 Volume 02 : Number 2049 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] MCAF Re: [CANSLIM] MCAF Re: [CANSLIM] NMTC down grade. Re: [CANSLIM] MCAF Re: [CANSLIM] Nasdaq Future.... INS - Not Canslim Re: [CANSLIM] NMTC down grade. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 11:01:48 -0600 From: Gyorgy Veszpremi Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] MCAF - --------------C44170B717810500FE403020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit If you check the daily chart of MCAF today's action was not a surprise after the last 3 down days on increased volume. Tom Worley wrote: > Hi Katherine, I took a quick look around, as I was curious about this anomaly. > Several items I noted: MCAF notes their tax rate in 2002 expected to jump to > 38% from 28%, keeping them from guiding earnings guidance even higher. They > are the antivirus of choice for MSN's Hotmail. Wish they would also be an > antispam for that source. And with Hotmail being free, wonder just how much > revenues they are taking in from MS for this. They indicate they are bundled > with Windows XP, but my new computer (with WIN XP) came with Norton from > Symantec. Both beat expectations by a wide margin, but actual results, > fundies, and forward looking statements look stronger for SYMC. Sell on news, > MCAF results older than SYMC. I see little "dumb" about still owning MCAF in > light of the past few months, especially if you bought it cheap. Maybe I might > have cut my position some in the past few days, but if I had been smart enough > to buy it in late Sept or early Oct, likely I would still now have a > position. Tom Worley > stkguru@netside.net > AIM: TexWorley > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Katherine Malm > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 11:31 AM > Subject: [CANSLIM] MCAF > Oh...here's the explanation for the SYMC vs. MCAF anomaly.... Will > post a technical post analysis later. I should just call this DYII, > FIC revisited... Katherine > Jan 17 2002 In Play McAfee.com (MCAF) 24.85 -7.44 (-23%): Robertson Stephens is raising several issues following MCAF's earnings report last night; believes 11:21 AM that the quality of revenue has eroded a bit following co's change in license revenue structure; notes that in Q4 subscribers grew by only 125K vs 200K sub adds in Q3. While firm remains confident that 2002 numbers are beatable, thinks stk remains expensive, and would not be constructive on the name until a move to $20 or below. > Jan 16 2002 In Play McAfee.com (MCAF) 32.29 -4.11: -- Update -- During its conference call, the co guides higher Q1 rev/EPS to $19.1 mln/$0.06 (consensus is $18.95 5:26 PM mln/$0.05); FY02 projections are revs of $80-$90 mln, 69-72% gross mgn, and EPS should be in the range of $0.25-$0.28 (in the mid-point of rev consensus of $85.82 mln, and better than EPS consensus of $0.22). > Jan 16 2002 In Play McAfee.com (MCAF) 32.29 -4.11: Reports Q4 (Dec) earnings of $0.09, four cents better than the Multex consensus of $0.05; revenues were $18.6 4:43 PM mln vs the consensus of $17.8 mln. > - --------------C44170B717810500FE403020 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit If you check the daily chart of MCAF today's action was not a surprise after the last 3 down days on increased volume.
 

Tom Worley wrote:

Hi Katherine, I took a quick look around, as I was curious about this anomaly. Several items I noted: MCAF notes their tax rate in 2002 expected to jump to 38% from 28%, keeping them from guiding earnings guidance even higher. They are the antivirus of choice for MSN's Hotmail. Wish they would also be an antispam for that source. And with Hotmail being free, wonder just how much revenues they are taking in from MS for this. They indicate they are bundled with Windows XP, but my new computer (with WIN XP) came with Norton from
Symantec. Both beat expectations by a wide margin, but actual results, fundies, and forward looking statements look stronger for SYMC. Sell on news, MCAF results older than SYMC. I see little "dumb" about still owning MCAF in light of the past few months, especially if you bought it cheap. Maybe I might have cut my position some in the past few days, but if I had been smart enough to buy it in late Sept or early Oct, likely I would still now have a position. Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM: TexWorley
----- Original Message -----
From: Katherine Malm
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 11:31 AM
Subject: [CANSLIM] MCAF
 Oh...here's the explanation for the SYMC vs. MCAF anomaly.... Will post a technical post analysis later. I should just call this DYII, FIC revisited... Katherine  
Jan 17 2002
11:21 AM		 In Play McAfee.com (MCAF) 24.85 -7.44 (-23%): Robertson Stephens is raising several issues following MCAF's earnings report last night; believes that the quality of revenue has eroded a bit following co's change in license revenue structure; notes that in Q4 subscribers grew by only 125K vs 200K sub adds in Q3. While firm remains confident that 2002 numbers are beatable, thinks stk remains expensive, and would not be constructive on the name until a move to $20 or below.

Jan 16 2002
5:26 PM		 In Play McAfee.com (MCAF) 32.29 -4.11: -- Update -- During its conference call, the co guides higher Q1 rev/EPS to $19.1 mln/$0.06 (consensus is $18.95 mln/$0.05); FY02 projections are revs of $80-$90 mln, 69-72% gross mgn, and EPS should be in the range of $0.25-$0.28 (in the mid-point of rev consensus of $85.82 mln, and better than EPS consensus of $0.22).

Jan 16 2002
4:43 PM		 In Play McAfee.com (MCAF) 32.29 -4.11: Reports Q4 (Dec) earnings of $0.09, four cents better than the Multex consensus of $0.05; revenues were $18.6 mln vs the consensus of $17.8 mln.
- --------------C44170B717810500FE403020-- - - - -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, 17 Jan 2002 11:03:36 -0600 From: "Katherine Malm" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] MCAF This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0140_01C19F46.9C993D20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Understood...all the sell signals were there...just lost focus....more = in the post analysis ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Gyorgy Veszpremi=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 11:01 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] MCAF If you check the daily chart of MCAF today's action was not a surprise = after the last 3 down days on increased volume.=20 =20 Tom Worley wrote:=20 Hi Katherine, I took a quick look around, as I was curious about = this anomaly. Several items I noted: MCAF notes their tax rate in 2002 = expected to jump to 38% from 28%, keeping them from guiding earnings = guidance even higher. They are the antivirus of choice for MSN's = Hotmail. Wish they would also be an antispam for that source. And with = Hotmail being free, wonder just how much revenues they are taking in = from MS for this. They indicate they are bundled with Windows XP, but my = new computer (with WIN XP) came with Norton from=20 Symantec. Both beat expectations by a wide margin, but actual = results, fundies, and forward looking statements look stronger for SYMC. = Sell on news, MCAF results older than SYMC. I see little "dumb" about = still owning MCAF in light of the past few months, especially if you = bought it cheap. Maybe I might have cut my position some in the past few = days, but if I had been smart enough to buy it in late Sept or early = Oct, likely I would still now have a position. Tom Worley=20 stkguru@netside.net=20 AIM: TexWorley=20 ----- Original Message ----- From: Katherine Malm To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 11:31 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] MCAF Oh...here's the explanation for the SYMC vs. MCAF anomaly.... = Will post a technical post analysis later. I should just call this DYII, = FIC revisited... Katherine =20 Jan 17 2002=20 11:21 AM In Play McAfee.com (MCAF) 24.85 -7.44 (-23%): = Robertson Stephens is raising several issues following MCAF's earnings = report last night; believes that the quality of revenue has eroded a bit = following co's change in license revenue structure; notes that in Q4 = subscribers grew by only 125K vs 200K sub adds in Q3. While firm remains = confident that 2002 numbers are beatable, thinks stk remains expensive, = and would not be constructive on the name until a move to $20 or below.=20 =20 Jan 16 2002=20 5:26 PM In Play McAfee.com (MCAF) 32.29 -4.11: -- Update -- = During its conference call, the co guides higher Q1 rev/EPS to $19.1 = mln/$0.06 (consensus is $18.95 mln/$0.05); FY02 projections are revs of = $80-$90 mln, 69-72% gross mgn, and EPS should be in the range of = $0.25-$0.28 (in the mid-point of rev consensus of $85.82 mln, and better = than EPS consensus of $0.22).=20 =20 Jan 16 2002=20 4:43 PM In Play McAfee.com (MCAF) 32.29 -4.11: Reports Q4 = (Dec) earnings of $0.09, four cents better than the Multex consensus of = $0.05; revenues were $18.6 mln vs the consensus of $17.8 mln.=20 - ------=_NextPart_000_0140_01C19F46.9C993D20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Understood...all the sell signals were there...just lost = focus....more in=20 the post analysis
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Gyorgy=20 Veszpremi
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=
Sent: Thursday, January 17, = 2002 11:01=20 AM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] = MCAF

If you check the daily chart of MCAF today's action was = not a=20 surprise after the last 3 down days on increased volume.
 =20

Tom Worley wrote:=20

Hi Katherine, I = took a quick=20 look around, as I was curious about this anomaly. Several items I=20 noted: MCAF notes their tax rate in = 2002=20 expected to jump to 38% from 28%, keeping them from guiding earnings = guidance even higher. They are the = antivirus of=20 choice for MSN's Hotmail. Wish they would also be an antispam for = that=20 source. And with Hotmail being free, wonder just how much revenues = they are=20 taking in from MS for this. They = indicate they=20 are bundled with Windows XP, but my new computer (with WIN XP) came = with=20 Norton from
Symantec. Both beat expectations by a wide margin, but actual = results,=20 fundies, and forward looking statements look stronger for=20 SYMC. Sell on news, MCAF results = older than=20 SYMC. I see little "dumb" about still = owning=20 MCAF in light of the past few months, especially if you bought it = cheap.=20 Maybe I might have cut my position some in the past few days, but if = I had=20 been smart enough to buy it in late Sept or early Oct, likely I = would still=20 now have a position. Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM: = TexWorley=20
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Katherine=20 Malm
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=
Sent: Thursday, January 17, = 2002=20 11:31 AM
Subject: [CANSLIM]=20 MCAF
 Oh...here's the explanation for the SYMC vs. MCAF=20 anomaly.... Will post a technical post analysis later. I = should=20 just call this DYII, FIC revisited... Katherine  =20
Jan 17 2002 =
11:21=20 AM		 In=20 Play McAfee.com (MCAF) = 24.85 -7.44=20 (-23%): Robertson Stephens is raising several issues = following=20 MCAF's earnings report last night; believes that the quality = of=20 revenue has eroded a bit following co's change in license = revenue=20 structure; notes that in Q4 subscribers grew by only 125K vs = 200K=20 sub adds in Q3. While firm remains confident that 2002 = numbers are=20 beatable, thinks stk remains expensive, and would not be=20 constructive on the name until a move to $20 or=20 below.

Jan 16 2002 =
5:26=20 PM		 In=20 Play McAfee.com (MCAF) 32.29 -4.11: -- Update -- = During=20 its conference call, the co guides higher Q1 rev/EPS to = $19.1=20 mln/$0.06 (consensus is $18.95 mln/$0.05); FY02 projections = are revs=20 of $80-$90 mln, 69-72% gross mgn, and EPS should be in the = range of=20 $0.25-$0.28 (in the mid-point of rev consensus of $85.82 = mln, and=20 better than EPS consensus of=20 $0.22).

Jan 16 2002 =
4:43=20 PM		 In=20 Play McAfee.com (MCAF) = 32.29 -4.11:=20 Reports Q4 (Dec) earnings of $0.09, four cents better than = the=20 Multex consensus of $0.05; revenues were $18.6 mln vs the = consensus=20 of $17.8=20 mln.
- ------=_NextPart_000_0140_01C19F46.9C993D20-- - - - -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, 17 Jan 2002 11:57:58 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] NMTC down grade. But NMTC has 41% funds ownership of half the issue. Good example of the dangers of high funds ownership, and how they all seem to follow the Shepard. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Triffet" To: "canslim" Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 11:59 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] NMTC down grade. > Amazing what a downgrade will do for a stock! I had been following this one > since its Dec. gap up looking for an entry. > On a side note (just a strange observation): If you lay the 1 year charts of > NMTC and DYII together (I used Clearstation) they run parallel. Hmmm. > > -Bill > > > - > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" > -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. > > - - - -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, 17 Jan 2002 11:09:11 -0600 From: Gyorgy Veszpremi Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] MCAF - --------------063D31B4165C0618E0D5B610 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Unfortunately, nowadays any every news that is not excellent can decimate a stock. Katherine Malm wrote: > Understood...all the sell signals were there...just lost focus....more in the > post analysis > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Gyorgy Veszpremi > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 11:01 AM > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] MCAF > If you check the daily chart of MCAF today's action was not a > surprise after the last 3 down days on increased volume. > > > Tom Worley wrote: > > > Hi Katherine, I took a quick look around, as I was curious about > > this anomaly. Several items I noted: MCAF notes their tax rate in > > 2002 expected to jump to 38% from 28%, keeping them from guiding > > earnings guidance even higher. They are the antivirus of choice > > for MSN's Hotmail. Wish they would also be an antispam for that > > source. And with Hotmail being free, wonder just how much revenues > > they are taking in from MS for this. They indicate they are > > bundled with Windows XP, but my new computer (with WIN XP) came > > with Norton from > > Symantec. Both beat expectations by a wide margin, but actual > > results, fundies, and forward looking statements look stronger for > > SYMC. Sell on news, MCAF results older than SYMC. I see little > > "dumb" about still owning MCAF in light of the past few months, > > especially if you bought it cheap. Maybe I might have cut my > > position some in the past few days, but if I had been smart enough > > to buy it in late Sept or early Oct, likely I would still now have > > a position. Tom Worley > > stkguru@netside.net > > AIM: TexWorley > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Katherine Malm > > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > > Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 11:31 AM > > Subject: [CANSLIM] MCAF > > Oh...here's the explanation for the SYMC vs. MCAF > > anomaly.... Will post a technical post analysis later. I > > should just call this DYII, FIC revisited... Katherine > > Jan 17 In Play McAfee.com (MCAF) 24.85 -7.44 (-23%): Robertson Stephens is raising 2002 several issues following MCAF's earnings report last night; believes 11:21 AM that the quality of revenue has eroded a bit following co's change in license revenue structure; notes that in Q4 subscribers grew by only 125K vs 200K sub adds in Q3. While firm remains confident that 2002 numbers are beatable, thinks stk remains expensive, and would not be constructive on the name until a move to $20 or below. > > Jan 16 In Play McAfee.com (MCAF) 32.29 -4.11: -- Update -- During its conference call, 2002 the co guides higher Q1 rev/EPS to $19.1 mln/$0.06 (consensus is $18.95 5:26 PM mln/$0.05); FY02 projections are revs of $80-$90 mln, 69-72% gross mgn, and EPS should be in the range of $0.25-$0.28 (in the mid-point of rev consensus of $85.82 mln, and better than EPS consensus of $0.22). > > Jan 16 In Play McAfee.com (MCAF) 32.29 -4.11: Reports Q4 (Dec) earnings of $0.09, four 2002 cents better than the Multex consensus of $0.05; revenues were $18.6 4:43 PM mln vs the consensus of $17.8 mln. > > - --------------063D31B4165C0618E0D5B610 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Unfortunately, nowadays any every news that is not excellent can decimate a stock.

Katherine Malm wrote:

 Understood...all the sell signals were there...just lost focus....more in the post analysis
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 11:01 AM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] MCAF
 If you check the daily chart of MCAF today's action was not a surprise after the last 3 down days on increased volume.
 

Tom Worley wrote:

Hi Katherine, I took a quick look around, as I was curious about this anomaly. Several items I noted: MCAF notes their tax rate in 2002 expected to jump to 38% from 28%, keeping them from guiding earnings guidance even higher. They are the antivirus of choice for MSN's Hotmail. Wish they would also be an antispam for that source. And with Hotmail being free, wonder just how much revenues they are taking in from MS for this. They indicate they are bundled with Windows XP, but my new computer (with WIN XP) came with Norton from
Symantec. Both beat expectations by a wide margin, but actual results, fundies, and forward looking statements look stronger for SYMC. Sell on news, MCAF results older than SYMC. I see little "dumb" about still owning MCAF in light of the past few months, especially if you bought it cheap. Maybe I might have cut my position some in the past few days, but if I had been smart enough to buy it in late Sept or early Oct, likely I would still now have a position. Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM: TexWorley
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 11:31 AM
Subject: [CANSLIM] MCAF
 Oh...here's the explanation for the SYMC vs. MCAF anomaly.... Will post a technical post analysis later. I should just call this DYII, FIC revisited... Katherine


Jan 17 2002 
11:21 AM		 In Play McAfee.com (MCAF) 24.85 -7.44 (-23%): Robertson Stephens is raising several issues following MCAF's earnings report last night; believes that the quality of revenue has eroded a bit following co's change in license revenue structure; notes that in Q4 subscribers grew by only 125K vs 200K sub adds in Q3. While firm remains confident that 2002 numbers are beatable, thinks stk remains expensive, and would not be constructive on the name until a move to $20 or below.



Jan 16 2002 
5:26 PM		 In Play McAfee.com (MCAF) 32.29 -4.11: -- Update -- During its conference call, the co guides higher Q1 rev/EPS to $19.1 mln/$0.06 (consensus is $18.95 mln/$0.05); FY02 projections are revs of $80-$90 mln, 69-72% gross mgn, and EPS should be in the range of $0.25-$0.28 (in the mid-point of rev consensus of $85.82 mln, and better than EPS consensus of $0.22).



Jan 16 2002 
4:43 PM		 In Play McAfee.com (MCAF) 32.29 -4.11: Reports Q4 (Dec) earnings of $0.09, four cents better than the Multex consensus of $0.05; revenues were $18.6 mln vs the consensus of $17.8 mln.
- --------------063D31B4165C0618E0D5B610-- - - - -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, 17 Jan 2002 09:10:11 -0800 (PST) From: Fanus Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Nasdaq Future.... INS - Not Canslim I am currently a green card holder, so I guess I am one of the baffoons. It took me 3 years to get a green card and I had to have proof of employment before obtaining a workers visa. After one obtain a green card, you need to wait 5 years before you can become citizen, (if you marry a citizen, you have to wait 3 years), only then can you vote. So on average one can only vote after about 8 years. Don't know where you get the idea that people can vote right away. Furthermore, I am not elegible for welfare and social security. Only citizens are. But I still pay social security tax, which I do not have a problem with. This is a small price to pay to work in a stable country. Keep in mind, the general idea of immigrants working in the US is to fill jobs for which there are a shortage of skilled workers. And yes, there had to be a shortage. Before being able to get my green card, my job had to be advertised in a newspaper and only after there weren't qualifying applications from US citizens were it determined that there is a shortage for that particular skill. I am not sure how you consider filling shortages as hurting the country. You also cannot blame the INS for illegal immigrants working here. The INS had nothing to do with them. That is why they are illegal. I am sorry for going off the topic of the discussion list, but couldn't let this one slip by. Regards - - Fanus - --- Dan Forant wrote: > Please, let's not compare the immigrants of today > with the past. No > comparison. If you don't believe the INS has hurt > the Nation in general, > that's your right. This was a broad stroke > statement, not just about Miami, > but including Miami. > > DanF > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tom Worley" > To: > Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 1:23 AM > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Nasdaq Future is under water > .... > > > > Dan, having lived in Miami, FL for the past 18 > years, I take exception to > > your statements. > > > > The bulk of the immigrants that have settled here > are Cuban, and they are > > among the most hard working people I have met. > They are family oriented, > and > > welcome with open arms even very distant > relatives, or even friends or > > neighbors of distant relatives. They help find > them a place to live, they > > find them a job, they support them and ease the > transition into a new > > country and culture. > > > > I also believe one of the requirements to gain > resident alien status is > > proof of a job, or other means of support to > ensure welfare will not be an > > issue. > > > > I certainly would not be still living in the city > of Miami after 18 years > if > > I believe it was "ruined". > > > > Where did you get the notion that a recent > immigrant, legal or illegal, > was > > even allowed to vote? Are you forgetting that most > present day citizens of > > the USA were once an immigrant, or are descended > from an immigrant? Not a > > bad thing, I believe this cultural blend is what > has made this country so > > great, and made it value freedom so much. > > > > I would also note that typically only a very small > percentage of the > > citizens of the United States even bother to vote. > Guess the ones that > don't > > bother are baffoons as well? > > > > Tom Worley > > stkguru@netside.net > > AIM: TexWorley > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Dan Forant" > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 7:17 PM > > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Nasdaq Future is under > water .... > > > > > > > Fanus, > > > > > > It is a well known fact the last Administration > let in a bunch of > baffoons > > > mainly so they would enroll Democrat and vote. > Un-controlled borders > etc. > > > Carter did the same thing and ruined Miami Fla. > Most of these enrolled > > > immediately for welfare of sorts. Couldn't or > can't speak the language > let > > > alone have a trade of any sort. That doesn't > include the illegal ones > > > including those from the troubled Middle East. > > > > > > DanF > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Fanus" > > > To: > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 4:28 PM > > > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Nasdaq Future is under > water .... > > > > > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > Please clarify your statement "The INS has > screwed up > > > > the makeup of our Country..." > > > > > > > > - Fanus > > > > > > > > --- Dan Forant wrote: > > > > > Glug,glug,glug, under water is right. Enron > may have > > > > > put the final nail in > > > > > the coffin for awhile. This combined with > future > > > > > bleak earnings spell > > > > > trouble ahead. Kmart bumbling along with > other bad > > > > > news such as the SEC's > > > > > inability to keep track of GIANTS have given > > > > > investors a bad taste. Congress > > > > > will bloat and gloat for months over Enron > and I > > > > > believe very little will be > > > > > done about it legally. Congress is part of > the > > > > > problem. Campaign $$$. The > > > > > INS has screwed up the makeup of our > Country, the > > > > > Government (SEC) may now > > > > > have set back our financial markets for > quite > > > > > awhile.. That's why a large > > > > > brokerage house recently said to be only 50% > > > > > invested. But then again > > > > > ........of course they would. > > > > > > > > > > DanF > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > From: "Andreas Himmelreich" > > > > > > To: > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 7:42 AM > > > > > Subject: [CANSLIM] Nasdaq Future is under > water .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nasdaq Future is under water .... > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email > > > > > "majordomo@xmission.com" > > > > > > -In the email body, write "subscribe > canslim" or > > > > > > -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes > in your > > > > > email. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email > > > > > "majordomo@xmission.com" > > > > > -In the email body, write "subscribe > canslim" or > > > > > -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes > in your > > > > email. > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > > Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! > > > > http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ > > > > > > > > - > > > > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email > "majordomo@xmission.com" > > > > -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" > or > > > > -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in > your email. > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email > "majordomo@xmission.com" > > > -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > > > -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in > your email. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email > "majordomo@xmission.com" > > -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > === message truncated === __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ - - - -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, 17 Jan 2002 11:11:57 -0600 From: Gyorgy Veszpremi Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] NMTC down grade. NMTC also showed major distribution over the last 5 days (that should have been enough time to get out. At least I think so. It is very important to read the chart. Tom Worley wrote: > But NMTC has 41% funds ownership of half the issue. Good example of the > dangers of high funds ownership, and how they all seem to follow the > Shepard. > > Tom Worley > stkguru@netside.net > AIM: TexWorley > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bill Triffet" > To: "canslim" > Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 11:59 AM > Subject: [CANSLIM] NMTC down grade. > > > Amazing what a downgrade will do for a stock! I had been following this > one > > since its Dec. gap up looking for an entry. > > On a side note (just a strange observation): If you lay the 1 year charts > of > > NMTC and DYII together (I used Clearstation) they run parallel. Hmmm. > > > > -Bill > > > > > > - > > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" > > -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > > -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. > > > > > > - > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" > -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - - - -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 #2049 ****************************** 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.