From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #225 Reply-To: canslim Sender: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes canslim-digest Tuesday, May 5 1998 Volume 02 : Number 225 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] Weekly Picks Re: [CANSLIM] Non-canslim HIV [CANSLIM] Re: "I" Re: [CANSLIM] Re: "I" Re: [CANSLIM] Non-canslim HIV Re: [CANSLIM] Re: "I" [CANSLIM] Some of my recent decisions Re: [CANSLIM] Non-canslim HIV Re: [CANSLIM] Some of my recent decisions Re: [CANSLIM] Re: "I" Re: [CANSLIM] Re: "I" Re: [CANSLIM] INSS [CANSLIM] Fw: VCI Re: [CANSLIM] Re: "I" [CANSLIM] Venezuela [CANSLIM] On "M", World Markets [CANSLIM] Adds to my watch list Re: [CANSLIM] Adds to my watch list [CANSLIM] Small caps on the rise? [CANSLIM] RCII at 52wk hi on light vol [CANSLIM] DGO and prices [CANSLIM] Want to be interviewed by Wall Street Journal? [CANSLIM] New Subscriber Introduction ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 19:19:12 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Weekly Picks Tim, DGO data is different from what you got, as listed below. Symbol Funds Mgmt Banks DVI 27% ? ? not in the books MLHR 18% 3% 7% VCI 78% 54% 22% (these figures have to be wrong, remember that DGO presents funds and banks as a percentage of the float, thus 78% plus 22% equals 100%, yet the ADV is 166K) HDWY 0 39% 0 EDAC 11% 61% 1% This Tom has always liked stocks with solid mngmt ownership, EDAC just being my latest example. DVI is admittedly high in the scale on what I like to see from funds, and the data on VCI is obviously in error (will write DG CustServ tonight on this). But I don't see any of these being knocked off the watch list due to "I" based on DGO data. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: Tim Fisher To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Monday, May 04, 1998 10:55 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Weekly Picks >DVI, MLHR, VCI all have over 50% of the float owned by institutions, and >from 0.1 to 7% of the issue owned by insiders. I can't get info from Zacks >on EDAC and MDWY - can someone get these numbers for those two? AVS has 80% >owned between the two; Tom would say too much - I added it to my watch list. >The moral: IMHO, at least the first three do no meet the "I" criteria. >Please do your homework before posting, or at least give us these numbers, >which should be available on the net. > >At 05:08 PM 5/3/98 -0400, you wrote: >>Not a bad list for a first try, Tony. I have listed the current data >>from DGO below, along with some comments. Hope it helps. I would >>disagree with you on the issue of RS. For me, it is the FIRST Canslim >>element I look at. If it's not over 90, I am usually not that >>interested, unless EPS is very high and the chart looks strong. I have >>found that RS, and its most recent trendline direction, shows the >>"popularity" of a stock. If it's out of current favor, I may leave it >>on my watch list for other reasons, but I will not buy it. >> >>Symbol RS EPS A/D U/D TIME GRS >>VCI 74 84 B 1.4 B 58 >>DVI 88 87 A - - - >>AVS 73 96 D 0.5 C 56 >>MLHR 69 96 B 1.6 B 86 >>TMBS 97 99 B 1.5 A 82 >> note: new CEO as of 5/98, often bullish - looks good >>EDAC 99 75 A 4.5 A 81 >> note: feel free to support, I'm only up 25% and may need some >>help while my accts are in transfer to Schwab >>WSTF 97 95 A 5.2 A 93 >> note: wish HDWY had looked this good, might have held on >>MDWY 62 74 B - - - >> >>Tom W >> >Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists >Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site >PFB Information >mailto:tim@orerockon.com >WWW http://OreRockOn.com > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 19:30:20 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Non-canslim HIV Sorry, Tony, but I'd rather have owned EMND (closed Friday at 12 and change, opened today at 83 before hitting 85 then dropping back all the way to 53 for only a one day gain of over 300%! Oh well, wish I'd seen this one before today. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: Tony Austin To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Monday, May 04, 1998 1:23 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Non-canslim HIV >If anyone is looking for an issue to stick in their back pocket for a long >term hold, consider HIV. > >By the name, you can tell that this pharm. company is working on immune >related disorders. Theirs is not a drug, but rather an immune boosting >therapy that has been showing great promise in early testing. > >If you remember in the news a few months back, several doctors who had >volunteered to infect themselves with the aids virus, as a part of a study. >That is this company. The are looking a numerous related immune related >illnesses for their approach as well. > >I started buying it at 4 1/2. Today it has run up a bit to 5 1/2. I was >in for the run from 4 to 9 late last year. This should not be viewed as a >short term trade. If it sees 4 3/4 again, I will be adding to my holdings. > >regards, > >Tony > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 16:35:18 -0700 From: Tim Fisher Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: "I" Tom, obviously Zacks and DGO disagree strongly on these numbers. Like= someone who once belonged to this list has said on numerous occasions, if this data= is usually in disagreement between services, can we actually rely on any of it= to make decisions? And if both Zacks and DGO and I get such low mgmt. ownership on MLHR then it explicitly does not meet "I" based on the criteria for insider ownership printed in HTMMIS. Or am I wrong and does WON say that 3% mgmt. ownership is acceptable? At 04:19 PM 5/4/98 , you wrote: >Tim, >DGO data is different from what you got, as listed below. > >Symbol=A0=A0=A0 Funds=A0=A0=A0 Mgmt=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Banks > >DVI=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 27%=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= ?=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 ?=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 not in the= books >MLHR=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 18%=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 3%=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0 7% >VCI=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 78%=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 54%=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 22%=A0 (these figures have to be >wrong, remember that DGO presents funds and banks as a percentage of >the float, thus 78% plus 22% equals 100%, yet the ADV is 166K) >HDWY=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 39%=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 0 >EDAC=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 11%=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 61%=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0 1% > >This Tom has always liked stocks with solid mngmt ownership, EDAC just >being my latest example. DVI is admittedly high in the scale on what I >like to see from funds, and the data on VCI is obviously in error >(will write DG CustServ tonight on this). But I don't see any of these >being knocked off the watch list due to "I" based on DGO data. > >Tom W > >-----Original Message----- >From: Tim Fisher >To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >Date: Monday, May 04, 1998 10:55 AM >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Weekly Picks > > >>DVI, MLHR, VCI all have over 50% of the float owned by institutions, >and >>from 0.1 to 7% of the issue owned by insiders. I can't get info from >Zacks >>on EDAC and MDWY - can someone get these numbers for those two? AVS >has 80% >>owned between the two; Tom would say too much - I added it to my >watch list. >>The moral: IMHO, at least the first three do no meet the "I" >criteria. >>Please do your homework before posting, or at least give us these >numbers, >>which should be available on the net. >> >>At 05:08 PM 5/3/98 -0400, you wrote: >>>Not a bad list for a first try, Tony. I have listed the current data >>>from DGO below, along with some comments. Hope it helps. I would >>>disagree with you on the issue of RS. For me, it is the FIRST >Canslim >>>element I look at. If it's not over 90, I am usually not that >>>interested, unless EPS is very high and the chart looks strong. I >have >>>found that RS, and its most recent trendline direction, shows the >>>"popularity" of a stock. If it's out of current favor, I may leave >it >>>on my watch list for other reasons, but I will not buy it. >>> >>>Symbol=A0=A0=A0=A0 RS=A0=A0=A0=A0 EPS=A0=A0=A0 A/D=A0=A0=A0 U/D=A0=A0=A0= TIME=A0=A0 GRS >>>VCI=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 74=A0=A0=A0=A0 84=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0 B=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 1.4=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 B=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= 58 >>>DVI=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 88=A0=A0=A0=A0 87=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0 A=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 -=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 -=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 - >>>AVS=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 73=A0=A0=A0=A0 96=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= D=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 0.5=A0=A0=A0=A0 C=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 56 >>>MLHR=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 69=A0=A0=A0=A0 96=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= B=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 1.6=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 B=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 86 >>>TMBS=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 97=A0=A0=A0=A0 99=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= B=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 1.5=A0=A0=A0=A0 A=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 82 >>>=A0=A0=A0=A0 note: new CEO as of 5/98, often bullish - looks good >>>EDAC=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 99=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 75=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 A=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 4.5=A0=A0=A0=A0 A=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 81 >>>=A0=A0=A0=A0 note: feel free to support, I'm only up 25% and may need= some >>>help while my accts are in transfer to Schwab >>>WSTF=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 97=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 95=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= A=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 5.2=A0=A0=A0=A0 A=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0 93 >>>=A0=A0=A0=A0 note: wish HDWY had looked this good, might have held on >>>MDWY=A0=A0=A0=A0 62=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 74=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 B=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 -=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 -=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0 - >>> >>>Tom W >>> >>Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists >>Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site >>PFB Information >>mailto:tim@orerockon.com >>WWW http://OreRockOn.com >> >> >>- >> > > >- >=20 Tim Fisher / tim@OreRockOn.com Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites: http://OreRockOn.com See naked fish and rocks! - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 19:55:45 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: "I" Tim, in fact WON in Chapt 6 of HTMMIS doesn't even mention management ownership. What he says on the question of "what is Institutional Ownership" is "Sponsorship may take the form of mutual funds; corporate pension funds; insurance companies; large investment counselors; hedge funds; bank trust departments; or state, charitable, and educational institutions". Many relatively "young" cos still have large mngmt percentage holdings because the co was well run from the start, and hasn't yet diluted its mngmt holdings by having to raise more money thru secondary offerings, or do acquisitions with stock. On the other hand, other cos like MLHR have had some tremendous runs, as it did last year, often leading to mngmt selling their stock when it is in demand (nothing wrong with this, it's the right time) but still have a lot at stake thru both their salary and their stock options (which are typically only found by digging thru the SEC filings). What I glean from WON's writings is he looks for cos that have been "found" by funds in particular, but not yet so overbot by them that there is little if any buying power left, thus leaving the funds in the positions of being, at best, mere holders, and at worse net sellers. It is troubling that all sites don't have the same data, however recognizing that DGO does count it a little different in that funds and banks holdings are a percentage of the float, not of the issue, this may account for some of the difference in some of the cases. It's each investor's personal decision to determine which site has given accurate data more consistently. The "I" has never made a decision for me one way or the other, it's something I try to look at, but a strong RS and EPS and a good basing chart will count for more usually. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: Tim Fisher To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Monday, May 04, 1998 7:31 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: "I" Tom, obviously Zacks and DGO disagree strongly on these numbers. Like someone who once belonged to this list has said on numerous occasions, if this data is usually in disagreement between services, can we actually rely on any of it to make decisions? And if both Zacks and DGO and I get such low mgmt. ownership on MLHR then it explicitly does not meet "I" based on the criteria for insider ownership printed in HTMMIS. Or am I wrong and does WON say that 3% mgmt. ownership is acceptable? - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 21:08:57 -0400 From: "Tony Austin" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Non-canslim HIV If I were a betting man, I'd say HIV was up today because of EMND. But since I'm holding it, I'll take upward movement anyway I can get it. Tony - ---------- > From: Tom Worley > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Non-canslim HIV > Date: Monday, May 04, 1998 7:30 PM > > Sorry, Tony, but I'd rather have owned EMND (closed Friday at 12 and > change, opened today at 83 before hitting 85 then dropping back all > the way to 53 for only a one day gain of over 300%! Oh well, wish I'd > seen this one before today. > > Tom W > > -----Original Message----- > From: Tony Austin > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Date: Monday, May 04, 1998 1:23 PM > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Non-canslim HIV > > > >If anyone is looking for an issue to stick in their back pocket for a > long > >term hold, consider HIV. > > > >By the name, you can tell that this pharm. company is working on > immune > >related disorders. Theirs is not a drug, but rather an immune > boosting > >therapy that has been showing great promise in early testing. > > > >If you remember in the news a few months back, several doctors who > had > >volunteered to infect themselves with the aids virus, as a part of a > study. > >That is this company. The are looking a numerous related immune > related > >illnesses for their approach as well. > > > >I started buying it at 4 1/2. Today it has run up a bit to 5 1/2. I > was > >in for the run from 4 to 9 late last year. This should not be viewed > as a > >short term trade. If it sees 4 3/4 again, I will be adding to my > holdings. > > > >regards, > > > >Tony > > > > > >- > > > > > - > - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 19:13:14 -0700 From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: "I" Guess I need to fly to PA and get the book back from my mom. She isn't reading it anyway. I must be thinking of the Motley Fool's book, which counts Insiders as part of their "I". I believe them when they say that if the mgmt. doesn't own a good chunk of the stock then they have no real tie to the co's performance besides their salaries, which are not a very powerful incentive to excel, merely an incentive to do OK. At 07:55 PM 5/4/98 -0400, you wrote: >Tim, in fact WON in Chapt 6 of HTMMIS doesn't even mention management >ownership. What he says on the question of "what is Institutional >Ownership" is "Sponsorship may take the form of mutual funds; >corporate pension funds; insurance companies; large investment >counselors; hedge funds; bank trust departments; or state, charitable, >and educational institutions". > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@orerockon.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 22:18:11 -0500 From: Dave Cameron Subject: [CANSLIM] Some of my recent decisions The purpose of this is to mention 3 stocks. One that "got away" but illustrates discipline in action (in a way). One that is performing well. And one that would be a day trader's dream. If interested, read on.... I. TMBS 6 days ago, TMBS had a day where it dropped rapidly from 18-1/8 to 16-3/4 where it closed. I finally got tired of getting whipsawed on this one, and since the market indices were faltering, I sold. Since then, TMBS has gone straight up - to close just shy of 21. Do I feel foolish? No... but unlucky. I bought at 16 - held through a couple drops below 15. When it went down for a 3rd time - I stuck to my rule of selling before another drop below 15. Two reasons: 1) Always preserve a profit. 2) There is no such successful pattern as a triple bottom. So... sell before one occurs. Why do I mention this? Because by typing this, I reinforce (to myself) the need to stick to my discipline. More often than not, my rules will work. I've rarely had cases where immediately after I sell, the stock climbs 30% in 5 days. If I did, I'd start buying on dips like this. II. USNA I bought USNA when it hit 25 near the end of March. It quickly went into a new trading range from 26 to 29. Today it broke out of that trading range on high volume. I don't know if it will hold... but it fits the textbook breakout. For those of you who have read Darvas, this resembles a Darvas box so far... III. KTEL Not CANSLIM in the slightest, but another one which almost would make me break my rules except that my primary rule is "Don't risk your capital". I seriously pondered day-trading KTEL at the open. Had I done so, I'd have made decent money, just LOOK at that chart. But... O'Neil would never buy a stock on momentum, a story, and an EPS of 26. There is too much downside risk. I wonder if the OBV/MF types such as Connie were willing to plunge in on this. Connie normally trades in 3000+ share increments. 3000*18=54000 - an easy obtained fill today, from what I saw. 54000 would be enough for me to walk in a reserve a flight to some exotic locale for a great vacation or 3.... FWIW, Dave Cameron - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 03:33:25 GMT From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Non-canslim HIV On Mon, 4 May 1998 19:30:20 -0400, you wrote: :Sorry, Tony, but I'd rather have owned EMND (closed Friday at 12 and :change, opened today at 83 before hitting 85 then dropping back all :the way to 53 for only a one day gain of over 300%! Oh well, wish I'd :seen this one before today. : :Tom W Also in the if-only department: K-tel, which closed today at about 67 and change. Was between 6 and 7 a few weeks ago. Dan - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 04:04:04 GMT From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Some of my recent decisions On Mon, 04 May 1998 22:18:11 -0500, you wrote: :The purpose of this is to mention 3 stocks. One that "got away" but :illustrates discipline in action (in a way). One that is performing :well. And one that would be a day trader's dream. If interested, :read on.... =20 : :I. TMBS : : 6 days ago, TMBS had a day where it dropped rapidly from 18-1/8 : to 16-3/4 where it closed. I finally got tired of getting whipsawed : on this one, and since the market indices were faltering, I sold. : Since then, TMBS has gone straight up - to close just shy of 21. : : Do I feel foolish? No... but unlucky. I bought at 16 - held : through a couple drops below 15. When it went down for a 3rd : time - I stuck to my rule of selling before another drop below : 15. Two reasons: 1) Always preserve a profit. 2) There is : no such successful pattern as a triple bottom. So... sell : before one occurs. =20 : : Why do I mention this? Because by typing this, I reinforce : (to myself) the need to stick to my discipline. More often : than not, my rules will work. I've rarely had cases where : immediately after I sell, the stock climbs 30% in 5 days. : If I did, I'd start buying on dips like this. Dave, Don't feel bad (not saying you do, mind you). I did similarly with TMBS. I bought at 16 1/8 on 2/6, got out at 18 1/8 twelve days ago. It looked to me that the post-earnings surge was over and I expected nothing. The action of the last 2 days can be attributable to one thing, and one thing only: the article in Friday's IBD on page A3. Neither of us could have foreseen that. That in conjunction with a chart that was ripe for a catalyst and you have a breakout. : :II. USNA : : I bought USNA when it hit 25 near the end of March. It : quickly went into a new trading range from 26 to 29. Today : it broke out of that trading range on high volume. I don't : know if it will hold... but it fits the textbook breakout. : For those of you who have read Darvas, this resembles a : Darvas box so far... Chart looks really good. Do you think it still buyable? Anyone? Looks within about 6-7% of the pivot point to me. :III. KTEL : : Not CANSLIM in the slightest, but another one which almost : would make me break my rules except that my primary rule : is "Don't risk your capital". I seriously pondered day-trading : KTEL at the open. Had I done so, I'd have made decent money, : just LOOK at that chart. But... O'Neil would never buy a : stock on momentum, a story, and an EPS of 26. There is too : much downside risk. I wonder if the OBV/MF types such as=20 : Connie were willing to plunge in on this. Connie normally : trades in 3000+ share increments. 3000*18=3D54000 - an easy : obtained fill today, from what I saw. 54000 would be enough : for me to walk in a reserve a flight to some exotic locale : for a great vacation or 3.... : :FWIW, : :Dave Cameron I posted to this list a few minutes ago about K-tel. Up 41% today on 7.5 million shares. Really astounding. This stock is 10 times what it traded for on April 10. Downside risk, for sure. I think you have to be something of a gambler or have TA skills to trade this one. Not for me. Dan - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 04:07:59 GMT From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: "I" On Mon, 04 May 1998 16:35:18 -0700, you wrote: :Tom, obviously Zacks and DGO disagree strongly on these numbers. Like = someone :who once belonged to this list has said on numerous occasions, if this = data is :usually in disagreement between services, can we actually rely on any of= it to :make decisions? And if both Zacks and DGO and I get such low mgmt. :ownership on :MLHR then it explicitly does not meet "I" based on the criteria for = insider :ownership printed in HTMMIS. Or am I wrong and does WON say that 3% = mgmt. :ownership is acceptable? : :At 04:19 PM 5/4/98 , you wrote: :>Tim, :>DGO data is different from what you got, as listed below. :> :>Symbol=A0=A0=A0 Funds=A0=A0=A0 Mgmt=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Banks :> :>DVI=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 27%=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 = ?=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 ?=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 not in = the books :>MLHR=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 18%=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 = 3%=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 7% DGO shows MLHR at 18% owned by funds, 7% by banks. 18+7=3D3? Not last time I checked. Dan - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 04:13:42 GMT From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: "I" On Tue, 05 May 1998 04:07:59 GMT, you wrote: :On Mon, 04 May 1998 16:35:18 -0700, you wrote: : ::Tom, obviously Zacks and DGO disagree strongly on these numbers. Like = someone ::who once belonged to this list has said on numerous occasions, if this = data is ::usually in disagreement between services, can we actually rely on any = of it to ::make decisions? And if both Zacks and DGO and I get such low mgmt. ::ownership on ::MLHR then it explicitly does not meet "I" based on the criteria for = insider ::ownership printed in HTMMIS. Or am I wrong and does WON say that 3% = mgmt. ::ownership is acceptable? :: ::At 04:19 PM 5/4/98 , you wrote: ::>Tim, ::>DGO data is different from what you got, as listed below. ::> ::>Symbol=A0=A0=A0 Funds=A0=A0=A0 Mgmt=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Banks ::> ::>DVI=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 27%=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 = ?=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 ?=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 not in = the books ::>MLHR=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 18%=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 = 3%=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 7% : :DGO shows MLHR at 18% owned by funds, 7% by banks. 18+7=3D3? Not last :time I checked. : :Dan Ah, I see now. It's not institutional ownership but insider holdings that the 3% refers to. That IS a negative, however my biggest winner from the last year+ is a small insider holding stock, so I wouldn't bet the farm on a stock with large insider holdings, personally. It matters, but it is a minor factor compared with a lot of other things. Dan - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 04:22:31 GMT From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] INSS On Sun, 3 May 1998 19:50:05 +0300, you wrote: :it's over 10% off the base but it looks so darn good, I can't believe no= one :has mentioned it. Somebody please tell me it's not too late to get in : :C - 300%, 125%, 83%, 100% EPS 99 :A - 155% :N - new service, new high :S - 15.7M float :L - RS 86 GRS 95 :I - 20% funds :M - ? : I figure it's about 15% past the pivot point at 31. I don't follow this stock. I wouldn't buy without knowing more than I see looking at the chart. Looks like a classic breakout. Too late for me on this one, though. All the info at DGO looks really good, but it's riskier buying this far off the pivot.=20 Dan - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 05:55:15 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] Fw: VCI Here's the response to the bad data on "I" for VCI. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: Customer Service To: 'Tom Worley' Date: Monday, May 04, 1998 11:33 PM Subject: RE: VCI >Thank you for bringing this to our attention it will be corrected. This is due to the capitalazation. > >DG Online > >-----Original Message----- >From: Tom Worley [SMTP:stkguru@netside.net] >Sent: Monday, May 04, 1998 4:21 PM >To: DGOnline Customer Service >Subject: VCI > >You are showing the institutional holdings on this one at Management >54%, Funds 78% and Banks 22%. As I understand it, your percentage of >the holdings by funds and banks is on the float, thus 78 plus 22 >equals 100% of the float, yet the stock has an ADV of 166K. I suspect >an error in the data, possibly in both the funds and management >categories. > >Tom W > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 06:08:54 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: "I" Dan, go back and look at the original post. The "3%" is the ownership by management, the 18% is the funds percentage of the float and the 7% is the bank's percentage of the float. All per DGO. If you wanted to calculate the institutional holdings on MLHR, it would be .18 plus .07 times the float. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: Dan Musicant To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Tuesday, May 05, 1998 12:06 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: "I" :>DVI 27% ? ? not in the books :>MLHR 18% 3% 7% DGO shows MLHR at 18% owned by funds, 7% by banks. 18+7=3? Not last time I checked. Dan - - - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 06:24:13 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] Venezuela Anyone been noticing how badly Venezuela's mkt has been doing? It's year high is 10,851, year low is 5975, and it lost another 1.74% yesterday (106 pts) to close 6104. I attribute a lot of this damage to the continued slump in oil prices, but along with some of the other Latin American economies, may be our next economic crises, esp if some of the debt issue starts going into default due to cash flows or earnings. This, in turn, could set off ripples in the int'l banking sector with South American exposure. This happened about 6 months ago, and was ultimately shrugged off, not so confident it will be so easy to ignore if it happens again. Tom W - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 06:44:37 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] On "M", World Markets I am growingly concerned by the relatively high levels of down volume on both NYSE and NASDAQ. I am also concerned, despite new highs being set by indexes, at the low number of new highs by individual stocks on both exchanges. At this point, we have survived the "jawboning" by the Feds, wonder what they will try next to "take the bubble" out of the mkt?? I still don't expect a May rate hike, but clearly jawboning didn't do any sustainable damage, and now completely offset by economic reports since then. Of course, the employment report is due on Friday, who knows? Yesterday's huge gains were mostly given up by the close, and on moderate volume. Asian and European mkts both look weak this morning, and futures down between a qtr and a half percent, so I am expecting some correction today. But with the volume of cash still flowing into the mkts, I remain bullish overall. We may be beginning to see a period when it will be harder for the KTELs and the ENMDs to do what they have done. Hopefully, it will become a period in which it will be easier to identify the better earnings driven CANSLIM stocks, and with less distraction from the speculative groups like internet related stocks still chasing earnings. On the economic front, general expectation is for a slowing of economic growth this qtr. I have seen some limited data suggesting a moderation of manufacturer's activity, and a buildup of inventory. Too early yet to tell, but for the moment, I am expecting GDP for Q2 to be below the 4.2% rate of Q1. And, of course, the summer tends to be the "slow season" for the computer and chip related groups. Could be an interesting six months ahead, with a Fed rate hike overshadowing everything else. Tom W - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 07:33:47 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] Adds to my watch list NEWH, RENG, SNHY (note - RS is only 75, a violation of my usual stance, but liked a lot of what I saw on the chart), KTIE. Will try to review these in more depth tonight, but gotta get ready for work now. Tom W - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 06:53:52 -0700 From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Adds to my watch list Here's what I get from March data (Zacks still had March when I looked on Sunday. Who would pay for that kind of service?). NEWH looks to be controlled by mgmt., and ignoring all the N/A's (Zacks data is nothing if not sketchy!) I don't see much here, except maybe SNHY. Research Engrs Sun Hydraulics Kti Inc New Horizons TICKER RENG SNHY KTIE NEWH EXCHANGE NSDQ NSDQ NSDQ NSDQ 24WK PCHG% 54.39 14.89 14.29 1.85 TREND EPGR N/A N/A N/A -11.59 QEPS 0/-4 50.00 90.00 63.16 200.00 QEPS -1/-5 -66.67 N/A 22.73 175.00 QEPS -2/-6 -66.67 13.33 120.00 500.00 QEPS -2/-7 N/A N/A N/A N/A TREND SALE N/A 5.87 N/A 7.23 P/E 12M 39.29 18.49 19.32 47.41 ROI 9.60 12.33 8.84 4.44 D/Equity 26.24 40.64 135.96 1.49 PEG F1 N/A 0.95 0.53 0.76 % INSIDERS 37.10 N/A N/A 82.24 % INSTITUT 0.67 17.73 30.53 27.92 At 07:33 AM 5/5/98 -0400, you wrote: >NEWH, RENG, SNHY (note - RS is only 75, a violation of my usual >stance, but liked a lot of what I saw on the chart), KTIE. > >Will try to review these in more depth tonight, but gotta get ready >for work now. > >Tom W > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@orerockon.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 06:58:03 -0700 From: Tim Fisher Subject: [CANSLIM] Small caps on the rise? Found this on YHOO. All but ASGN and AMES have been or are on my watch list. Gary Kaltbaum, a technical analyst at J.W. Charles, said he has identified ``a couple hundred'' small-cap stocks gathering market momentum and ready to break out for big gains. Among them are staffing companies Western Staff Services Inc. (WSTF - news) and On Assignment Inc. (ASGN - news), as well as department store Ames Department Stores Inc. (AMES - news). Western Staffing shares closed at 29 Monday, while On Assignment closed at 34 and Ames at 25-1/16. Other stock-pickers said network storage software maker Legato Systems Inc (LGTO - news) and applications software outsource company Information Management Resources Inc. (IMRS - news) are potential standouts. Legato closed at 31-6/16, while Information Management closed at 29. Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@orerockon.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 07:03:46 -0700 From: Tim Fisher Subject: [CANSLIM] RCII at 52wk hi on light vol March data follows, it's at 25% of ADV at 10AM market time, might jump the gun and get it if it holds up till I get to work. RETAIL-MISC/DIV Renters Choice TICKER RCII EXCHANGE NSDQ X SECTOR 3 X INDUSTRY 165 24WK PCHG% 26.67 TREND EPGR 58.82 QEPS 0/-4 38.10 QEPS -1/-5 42.11 QEPS -2/-6 47.06 TREND SALE 63.98 P/E 12M 25.36 ROI 14.97 D/Equity 17.79 PEG F1 0.90 % INSIDERS 44.77 % INSTITUT 46.21 Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@orerockon.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 17:20:08 -0700 From: Kom Tukovinit Subject: [CANSLIM] DGO and prices > Hi, > Here's what I have in the spreadsheet of how much it would cost to subscribe to DGO with different options for getting a printed edition. It looks like the cheapest option would be to get either the NYSE monthly or the Nadaq/American Monthly with the DGO option. Note, though, that they have quite a few conditions of how things might or might not work out. The web site does say the discounted price is available for a limited time only. kom > EDITION Price S/H DGO Total > > NY Weekly 363 156 299 818 > NY Bi-Weekly 297 78 299 674 > NY Monthly 195 36 299 530 > N/A Weekly 363 156 299 818 > N/A Bi-Weekly 297 78 299 674 > N/A Monthly 195 36 299 530 > Both Weekly 723 156 99 978 > Both Bi-Weekly 591 78 299 968 > Both Monthly 390 36 299 725 > The discounted prices are honored with the following conditions: 1.You must obtain your printed product account number and use it in the registration form in order to receive the discounted offer for Daily Graphs Online. 2.In the event the printed product is cancelled or expires, the discounted Daily Graphs Online price will no longer be valid. The regular Daily Graphs Online prices will be applied. 3.The printed product account must contain a minimum of 2 months' worth of issues in order to be eligible for the discounted offer for Daily Graphs Online. 4.The printed product may not be suspended for more than a month. In the event an account is suspended for more than the specified period, the regular Daily Graphs Online price will apply. 5.Prices are good for a limited time and may be subject to change any time. - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 12:39:40 -0600 From: jeff@scrooge.csd.sdl.usu.edu (Jeff Salisbury) Subject: [CANSLIM] Want to be interviewed by Wall Street Journal? Everyone, I was just contacted by a writer for the Wall Street Journal -- Danialle Weaver. She is interested in interviewing some members of our discussion group. If you would be interested in being interviewed, I would encourage you to read her message below and then contact her. Best Regards, Jeff - list admin / owner - --- Forwarded mail from Danialle Weaver Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 11:43:41 -0400 (EDT) To: jeff (Jeff Salisbury) From: Danialle Weaver Subject: need feedback/trading styles Jeff-- My name is Danialle Weaver and I am a freelance writer who contributes to the CyberInvesting column of the Wall Street Journal Interactive Edition. Occasionally, Ira would post queries from me to your list, and I was wondering if you'd be kind enough to do so for me also. I'm testing out a theory that there are three kinds of investors: advice-hungry (beginners and high-net worth individuals) who gravitate toward full-service brokers, information-hungry (market-savvy individuals and some novices) who seek value-added info, who use chat rooms and bbs services who gravitate toward discount brokerages, and transaction-hungry (individuals with significant trading experience and high risk tolerance) who gravitate toward deep-discount brokers.) I am looking for folks to interview for my story who believe they fall into one of these categories to tell me which brokerages they favor and why. I would need to talk to them by May 12. Typically, this would require revealing the interviewee's real name, age, occupation and hometown, although other arrangements can be made with sources as warranted. My editor also requires me to talk on the phone (at least once, however briefly) with investors, so that we can be more certain you're not a 10-year-old masquerading as a stock trader. If your folks would like to check me out first, please have them point their browsers to http://www.bigfoot.com/~danialle (no trailing slash and watch the spelling). This page has a bio, resume, photo and numerous stories I've written before. Thanks for your consideration. Danialle Weaver The Wall St. Journal Interactive Edition/CyberInvesting dweaver@reporters.net online credentials: http://www.bigfoot.com/~danialle - ---End of forwarded mail from Danialle Weaver - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 16:51:57 -0400 From: "Deral Rackley" Subject: [CANSLIM] New Subscriber Introduction Hello! I'm Deral Rackley, a new subscriber to the CANSLIM list; but not new to O'Neal's stock trading strategy. i have read his book "How to Make Money in Stocks" several times over the last four years, and I "pick up" something new every time I read it. I have used the CANSLIM approach with reasonable success over this period of time. I am sure that I will learn new techniques and gain useful ideas from this group. I hope that I will have something usefull to share with you as well over time. As for a brief bio, I am 54 and have recently redirected my career from that of a corporate slave to an budding entrepreneur. After spending about thirty years working in such areas as manufacturing engineering, managing new plant start-ups, and in international business development; I have started a chain of quick lubes and car washes with the first business opening in June of this year. My son is may partner is this endeavor. I look forward to sharing information this group and learning about "making money in the stock market" while having fun doing it. - - ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #225 ***************************** 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.