From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #241 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 Monday, May 18 1998 Volume 02 : Number 241 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] My list for this week Re: [CANSLIM] Re: WSTF - Western Staff Services [CANSLIM] Sector strength Re: [CANSLIM] Connie, OBV/MF Re: [CANSLIM] Sector strength Re: [CANSLIM] Sector strength Re: [CANSLIM] Sector strength Re: [CANSLIM] Sector strength [CANSLIM] STRZ Opinions please. Re: [CANSLIM] Connie, OBV/MF Re: [CANSLIM] Compression [CANSLIM] Consolidation? Re: [CANSLIM] Connie, OBV/MF [CANSLIM] Connie Mack & Technical Indicators Re: [CANSLIM] HAL, RIG (was Oil related stocks) RE: [CANSLIM] My list for this week RE: [CANSLIM] My list for this week [CANSLIM] Re: Introduction [CANSLIM] Selections from"Your Weekend Review" Re: [CANSLIM] Selections from"Your Weekend Review" Re: [CANSLIM] ACF, EDAC [CANSLIM] Technical OBV/MF files. [CANSLIM] Camslim amendments [CANSLIM] Re: [ TIM"S CANSLIM] My list for this week Re: [CANSLIM] Re: [ TIM"S CANSLIM] My list for this week Re: [CANSLIM] Not a Pretty Day Re: [CANSLIM] Consolidation? Re: [CANSLIM] Re: [ TIM"S CANSLIM] My list for this week ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 07:36:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] My list for this week It disturbs me a bit that stocks like these get posted to the group without any CANSLIM numbers which we can use to judge their WON worthines, so to speak. I ran these through a quick scan and only one of them may make my "loosey-goosey" scan. ANF looks like a new issue, it may have great numbers before it went public, or Zacks may just not have the data; anyway it has huge debt. BOCB has a negative 5-yr EPS growth trend, ACF has practically no insider holdings and has already been grabbed by the institutionals. DCR looks good except for the insider holdings, which may be zero or just bad data. A real number would be appreciated. Zacks doesn't carry RGFC. The moral of what I am trying to say here is post something like this first so I don't have to! FIN-CONS LOANS Americredit Cp RETAIL-APP/SHOE Abercrombie RETAIL-RESTRNTS Buffets Inc BUS INFO SVCS Duff&phelps Cr TICKER ACF ANF BOCB DCR EXCHANGE NYSE NYSE NSDQ NYSE X SECTOR 13 3 3 16 X INDUSTRY 61 154 160 206 24WK PCHG% 23.22 48.33 50.00 54.75 TREND EPGR 90.25 N/A -1.70 18.26 QEPS 0/-4 45.45 70.00 133.33 90.91 QEPS -1/-5 46.67 122.22 38.46 41.30 QEPS -2/-6 51.85 N/A -13.64 25.71 QEPS -2/-7 50.00 N/A N/A 21.62 TREND SALE 82.36 N/A 27.14 18.46 P/E 12M 19.23 47.85 22.21 23.98 ROI 16.16 73.55 9.81 41.51 D/Equity 31.33 444.92 16.67 30.07 PEG F1 0.82 1.14 1.14 1.23 % INSIDERS 1.20 0.18 5.54 N/A % INSTITUT 86.03 15.33 67.23 55.74 At 09:01 PM 5/16/98 -0400, you wrote: > >1. Issues that may see a new high this week, market permitting. > >ACF - eps 99 relst 90 a/d A PE 19, looks like it might be forming a handle, >the cup portion was less than 4 weeks, so handle period may be short. > >BOCB - eps 83 relst 91 a/d A PE 19, penetrated upper resistance at 15 9/16 >on Friday closing at 15 3/4. Volume was strong and increasing from >Thursday. Maximum entry price would be 16 3/8. > >HIBB - eps 96 relst 91 a/d A, attempted and failed an upward move on 5/6 >and looks to be warming up for another attempt. Previous high, prior to >failed break-out is 36 1/4. Max entry would be 38. > >DCR - eps 93 relst 92 a/d B, has been consolidating since late April in a >converging triangle pattern, upward breaks out out this pattern ofter >happen at the 2/3 point of the triangle. Volume has been decreasing >steadily throughout the period. Watch for a volume surge, previous high at >59 7/16, max entry at 62 1/2. > >2. Issues that look to be near the bottom of correction/consolidation. > >ANF - eps 99 relst 96 a/d A, cap is high but still worth considering. >Tested support at 41 and looks to be working upward. > >RGFC - eps 85 relst 97 a/d A PE 27, has turned possitive, gave a stochastic >buy on 5/13 with a volume increase on Friday. > >Hope all are having a nice weekend. > >Tony > >- > > > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 07:36:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: WSTF - Western Staff Services Forgive me if I've missed something, but has anyone ever posed HDWY's numbers before? Zacks doesn't follow it. I'm keeping a watch list of stocks that Zacks misses because of bad data or no data, I'm planning on writing to them if I ever decide to pay for the service, to let them know how many great stocks I would never see because of their sloppy database. At 10:55 PM 5/16/98 -0400, you wrote: >I think one of the best performers in the "Commercial Services - Staffing" >group is Headway, HDWY. >It is really on fire and moving quite well. Great fundamental numbers also. > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 10:58:02 EDT From: ToothDr1 Subject: [CANSLIM] Sector strength I'm just a lurker learner on this board and have garnered a wealth of information that has yet to produce a profit. I expecially enjoy the exercises given by Connie Mack and the generosity of information shared by Tom W, Dave, Jan, Joe , and all the others. I'm still developing my trading plan and I think I should include sector strength as part of my consideration. If someone can, tell me how you would develope a check list as it were to tell if a stock is in a sector that is bullish. As an example LBOR; where would one go to find out which sector LBOR is in and what is the strength of the sector? TIA Dr. Jim - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 11:35:21 -0400 From: John K Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Connie, OBV/MF Connie, Would appreciate it if you would send me your file also. John K. jkj2@erols.com Connie Mack Rea wrote: > Morning Joe-- > > If you're not familiar with BigCharts [http://BigCharts.com], you > might want > to learn that site. It is free and the best chart site around. There > is a > definition section that has all the items you will need. > > Too, there is a Money Flow [MF] indicator, along with OBV [On Balance > Volume] > indicator; both appear in the lower screen. > > Joe, I've finally put together most of my posts because others have > come to > technical analysis late and were then uninterested in my indicators. > I will > send you my entire file, if you like, and you can trash what is not to > the > point. There are quite a few. > > Thanks for the mail. > > Connie Mack > > Joe Scott wrote: > > > Connie, > > First before I ask these few questions, I must apologize for not > saving = > > your posts so I could go back and study them. > > Truthfully though I though I would never understand these > indicators, = > > but you have me hooked. I want to try a more technical approach to > my = > > trading, I think it will compliment my personality. I can follow > rules, = > > and I think if I set hard, fast limits (that I'm sure I won't > follow) at = > > least I'll be a more disciplined than I am now. > > I have Elders book "Trading for a living" open now, studying the > OBV, = > > EMA, and MACD.=20 > > I'm stuck on MF, what is it? > > If you have any of your old posts with explanations of how you use > these = > > indicators, and could forward to me I would appreciate it. > > > > don't know a thing > > joe > > > > joe@2fords.net > > http://www.2fords.net/joe/ > > > > - > > - - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 08:42:16 -0700 From: Bill Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Sector strength Try http://quote.yahoo.com/q?s=lbor&d=r for sector/industry group. Don't have a ready pointer for strength but have seen references to a free web site in the past for this info. Bill-->> - ---------------- At 7:58 AM -0700 5/17/98, ToothDr1 wrote: >I'm just a lurker learner on this board and have garnered a wealth of >information that has yet to produce a profit. I expecially enjoy the >exercises given by Connie Mack and the generosity of information shared by Tom >W, Dave, Jan, Joe , and all the others. I'm still developing my trading plan >and I think I should include sector strength as part of my consideration. > >If someone can, tell me how you would develope a check list as it were to tell >if a stock is in a sector that is bullish. > >As an example LBOR; where would one go to find out which sector LBOR is in >and what is the strength of the sector? > >TIA > >Dr. Jim > >- - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 08:42:16 -0700 From: Bill Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Sector strength Try http://quote.yahoo.com/q?s=lbor&d=r for sector/industry group. Don't have a ready pointer for strength but have seen references to a free web site in the past for this info. Bill-->> - ---------------- At 7:58 AM -0700 5/17/98, ToothDr1 wrote: >I'm just a lurker learner on this board and have garnered a wealth of >information that has yet to produce a profit. I expecially enjoy the >exercises given by Connie Mack and the generosity of information shared by Tom >W, Dave, Jan, Joe , and all the others. I'm still developing my trading plan >and I think I should include sector strength as part of my consideration. > >If someone can, tell me how you would develope a check list as it were to tell >if a stock is in a sector that is bullish. > >As an example LBOR; where would one go to find out which sector LBOR is in >and what is the strength of the sector? > >TIA > >Dr. Jim > >- - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 11:05:26 -0500 From: "Joe Scott" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Sector strength Dr Jim Investors business daily gives you group relative strength on Mondays for each stock don't know a thing joe joe@2fords.net http://www.2fords.net/joe/ - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 11:08:00 -0500 From: "Joe Scott" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Sector strength oh and btw,, Group is Comml Serv Staffing RS 89 for LBOR don't know a thing joe joe@2fords.net http://www.2fords.net/joe/ - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 14:08:46 -0700 From: Subject: [CANSLIM] STRZ Opinions please. Check out the chart on this one. It is rated number one in group strength Opinions are appreciated. Still cant figure why I like restaurants so well.?? Dave the rookie. - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 12:36:29 -0600 From: "Kent Horne" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Connie, OBV/MF Connie, I'd appreciate a copy of your file on the indicators. I've been saving and doing cut and paste on what I think are all of them in the months I've been lurking here (trying to adjust my trading style to be more systematic), but don't know if I got them all. Thanks for the offer and your consistant advice and assistance to the group. Yes, please send the file. kent - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 15:38:40 -0400 From: Craig Griffin Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Compression Jeffry, You wrote: ..snip >Increased volume, barely any price range on >the day. Thank you for the clear and extensive answer re: compression. Regards, Craig - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 16:06:04 -0400 From: Jeffry White <"postwhit@sover.net"@sover.net> Subject: [CANSLIM] Consolidation? Tom, let me clean up this series of questions, post them again and see if I can understand your point here. You wrote: > But as long as I can continue finding stocks with top drawer CS > elements, I will continue to study charts and look for new buying > opportunities. I just don't find the "distribution" signals that > worked five years ago to be so clear today. Part of that is a result > of the duration of this bull mkt, which has led many "johnny come > lately"s to jump in (again a warning signal of a top). But mostly, I > think it is a result of the $20 billion or so being pumped into the > mkt every month on a net basis. And as long as the market says it > wants to go higher, whatever the reasons, who am I to argue with it?? > > Tom W > What exactly are you looking at which indicates "the market says it wants to go higher"? When you indicate a lack of clarity in distribution signals in the last 5 years, are you talking about distribution signals that pre-sage a bear market, or intermediate topping action leading to intermediate term corrections/conslidations? Were the "distribution" signals "clear" to you back in early October of 1997, prior to the crash? How about January 1997? If not, what exactly did you find to be unclear in each of those intermediate term tops? Whether you found those tops true to WON's distribution signals, what other points in the indices did you have in mind where "distribution" signals (compression type after an 3-6 month advance) were not clear during the past five years compared to those in the prior period which are referencing in your comments here? Thanks in advance for your response, Tom. Jeffry - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 13:17:28 -0700 (MST) From: John McDonald Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Connie, OBV/MF Connie, I, too, would be grateful if you could find time to mail me a copy of your posts. I realize you're being inundated with requests. I pretty much lurk here, mainly since I'm still in the process of learning TA, but I find your input to this group quite thought provoking. I tried going back to dig through the archives for some of you past posts but it's tough. Thanks. - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 16:25:16 -0400 From: "Deral Rackley" Subject: [CANSLIM] Connie Mack & Technical Indicators Connie Mack Thanks very much for your help! I looked at the Parabolic SAR and the exit and entry points are very clear on the charts. My next question has to do with Time and Frequency to use on Big Charts when I am in the process of entering or exiting a stock. If I use a Time of one month and a frequency of daily, I get a much different picture than if I use for Time 5, 2, or 1 and Frequency of 15 minutes. I understand that this is due to a longer span of time in calculating the moving averages and other formulae. But, What is most appropriate in making the entry and exit decisions in conjuction with the CANSLIM system. I do not really want to do day trading. Thanks! I promise that I will leave you alone for a few days. Deral Rackley - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 21:54:13 +0200 From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] HAL, RIG (was Oil related stocks) Tom, I know what the fundamentals are per DGO. Now please take a look at the chart, as I suggested, and let me know what it tells you. I'll do the same myself, because I haven't looked at it for more than 14 days. Didn't have to: 100% cash and only worry I had the last 14 days was wether I would take a swim in the pool or in the Gulf. B^) BTW, did DGO go 'subscribers-only' while I was awy or did I 'forget' my password? At 08:25 AM 01-05-98 -0400, you wrote: >HAL - PE 29, earnings growing but rev flat, basing >RIG - PE 32, earnings growing faster than revenues, basing > >Both have current RS in low 60s. Probably not a lot of downside here >unless there is further deterioration in oil products pricing. If >prices increase, revenues and earnings should both improve, along with >RS eventually. > >Tom W > >-----Original Message----- >From: Johan Van Houtven >To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >Date: Thursday, April 30, 1998 9:36 AM >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Oil related stocks > > >>Tom, >> >>Take a look at HAL, RIG, etc and tell me what the chart says... >> >> > > > >- > > Johan Van Houtven CLICK! N.V. / Wilrijk, Belgium - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 15:26:32 -0700 From: Mike Lucero Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] My list for this week From Daily Graphs: Funds Banks Mgt ACF 17 9 12 ANF 53 5 1 BOCB 22 12 13 DCR 37 10 4 ANF quarterly EPS growth 70, 120, 300, N/A LTG 73% On Sunday, May 17, 1998 7:36 AM, Tim Fisher [SMTP:tim@OreRockOn.com] wrote: > It disturbs me a bit that stocks like these get posted to the group without > any CANSLIM numbers which we can use to judge their WON worthines, so to > speak. I ran these through a quick scan and only one of them may make my > "loosey-goosey" scan. ANF looks like a new issue, it may have great numbers > before it went public, or Zacks may just not have the data; anyway it has > huge debt. BOCB has a negative 5-yr EPS growth trend, ACF has practically no > insider holdings and has already been grabbed by the institutionals. DCR > looks good except for the insider holdings, which may be zero or just bad > data. A real number would be appreciated. Zacks doesn't carry RGFC. > > The moral of what I am trying to say here is post something like this first > so I don't have to! > > FIN-CONS LOANS Americredit Cp > RETAIL-APP/SHOE Abercrombie > RETAIL-RESTRNTS Buffets Inc > BUS INFO SVCS Duff&phelps Cr > > TICKER ACF ANF BOCB DCR > EXCHANGE NYSE NYSE NSDQ NYSE > X SECTOR 13 3 3 16 > X INDUSTRY 61 154 160 206 > 24WK PCHG% 23.22 48.33 50.00 54.75 > TREND EPGR 90.25 N/A -1.70 18.26 > QEPS 0/-4 45.45 70.00 133.33 90.91 > QEPS -1/-5 46.67 122.22 38.46 41.30 > QEPS -2/-6 51.85 N/A -13.64 25.71 > QEPS -2/-7 50.00 N/A N/A 21.62 > TREND SALE 82.36 N/A 27.14 18.46 > P/E 12M 19.23 47.85 22.21 23.98 > ROI 16.16 73.55 9.81 41.51 > D/Equity 31.33 444.92 16.67 30.07 > PEG F1 0.82 1.14 1.14 1.23 > % INSIDERS 1.20 0.18 5.54 N/A > % INSTITUT 86.03 15.33 67.23 55.74 > > > At 09:01 PM 5/16/98 -0400, you wrote: > > > >1. Issues that may see a new high this week, market permitting. > > > >ACF - eps 99 relst 90 a/d A PE 19, looks like it might be forming a handle, > >the cup portion was less than 4 weeks, so handle period may be short. > > > >BOCB - eps 83 relst 91 a/d A PE 19, penetrated upper resistance at 15 9/16 > >on Friday closing at 15 3/4. Volume was strong and increasing from > >Thursday. Maximum entry price would be 16 3/8. > > > >HIBB - eps 96 relst 91 a/d A, attempted and failed an upward move on 5/6 > >and looks to be warming up for another attempt. Previous high, prior to > >failed break-out is 36 1/4. Max entry would be 38. > > > >DCR - eps 93 relst 92 a/d B, has been consolidating since late April in a > >converging triangle pattern, upward breaks out out this pattern ofter > >happen at the 2/3 point of the triangle. Volume has been decreasing > >steadily throughout the period. Watch for a volume surge, previous high at > >59 7/16, max entry at 62 1/2. > > > >2. Issues that look to be near the bottom of correction/consolidation. > > > >ANF - eps 99 relst 96 a/d A, cap is high but still worth considering. > >Tested support at 41 and looks to be working upward. > > > >RGFC - eps 85 relst 97 a/d A PE 27, has turned possitive, gave a stochastic > >buy on 5/13 with a volume increase on Friday. > > > >Hope all are having a nice weekend. > > > >Tony > > > >- > > > > > > > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists > Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site > PFB Information > mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com > WWW http://OreRockOn.com > > > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 17:26:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Tim Fisher Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] My list for this week Now that's more like it! DCR goes on my watch list. Thanks, Mike. At 03:26 PM 5/17/98 -0700, you wrote: >>From Daily Graphs: > > Funds Banks Mgt >ACF 17 9 12 >ANF 53 5 1 >BOCB 22 12 13 >DCR 37 10 4 > >ANF quarterly EPS growth 70, 120, 300, N/A LTG 73% > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 19:46:49 -0500 (CDT) From: mckeener@ix.netcom.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: Introduction Phyllis Robinson, welcome to the group. You'll learn so much. As Deral commented, many heads are better than one. I use IBD, daily graphs and am still working on Connie's charting system. I also read books that William O'Neill recommends. All the best. Mary Keener - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 21:02:20 -0400 From: Larry Horn Subject: [CANSLIM] Selections from"Your Weekend Review" I just posted my selections from "Your Weekend Review" at www.duke.edu/~clhorn/canslim. I also updated the concatenation that Frank W. created from them on the same site. Once again, the spreadsheet lists all cos over $7, within 15% of 52 week high, with EPS and RS 85 or higher. All are group strength A, A/D = A or B, and the best fund with a large investment is A- or better. The spreadsheet also lists %Mgmt from IBD tables, %Instit from rapidresearch.com, Shr, Flt, ROE, and Debt:Eq from Yahoo! From information that I got from articles I have read in IBD, Investor's Corner- March 12, 1998, and a tape that came with my subscription, "Investing to Win" an interview with David Ryan, I have been looking to buy stocks with %Instit between 5-15% and "sell them usually by the time they reach 30%". Not that I have been able to do that yet. That is pretty restrictive and most of the cos posted above have %Instit greater than 30%. I have been doing another screen at rapidresearch.com on the advanced page for %Instit 5-15%, annual EPS > 18, 5 year EPS > 25, ROE > 14.5 (another criteria I got from IBD) and profit margin to industry > 100 %. Today I was left with 16 stocks and needless to say, I can look up the remaining data items much faster with so few stocks. I then take only those stocks with %Mgmt between 5 and 60, though I prefer 15-50, EPS and RS > 80. I mention this because I am planning to stop doing the selections from "Your Weekend Review" because it takes much longer and leaves me with lots of stocks I'm not interested in due to %Instit. Here is a list of all of the stocks that meet those criteria: Ticker EPS RS Sum Mgmt A/D Shr Flt D:E Inst Grp PE PEG ROE TMBS 99 96 195 27 A 7.01 4.9 0 13.7 A 25 0.22 39.8 AXR 97 92 189 54 C 7.37 3.5 0.56 15 B 8 0 16.3 XETA 97 83 180 40 C 2.05 1.2 0 9.1 B 20 0.34 26.9 BCP 91 94 185 ? A 3.2 2.5 0.07 5.3 ? ? 24.4 NOBH 90 97 187 55 B 4.46 2.1 0 10.2 B 26 0.58 20.5 WBPR 90 93 183 37 B ? ? ? 5.2 C 30 23.2 NTSC 86 89 175 42 B 6.97 4.7 0.62 12.7 A 19 0.28 14.7 ATRO 84 90 174 14 A 4.3 3.2 0.18 5.8 B 17 0.39 19.8 CEBC 92 84 176 20 B 14.5 9.7 0 6.1 B 27 18 I've seen TMBS, XETA and NOBH mentioned here often but I don't recall any of the others. As usual, I haven't found any with particularly good charts. NTSC looks to be forming the right side of a cup. Many of you won't like that the price for many of these is < 12 and many are thinly traded. I'd love to hear your comments on these especially if anyone thinks one of the charts looks good to them. Larry Horn - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 21:20:15 EDT From: CA011667 Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Selections from"Your Weekend Review" For what its worth. I have owned WBPR before, and it has been a great performer. It has run from about 4-20 over the last 2 years, this includes two 2-1 stock splits. they seem to like to split shares when stock reaches the high 20's. - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 21:32:26 -0400 From: "Tony Austin" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ACF, EDAC www.canslim.net added ACF and EDAC to their posted favorites on Friday. - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 18:27:12 -0400 From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: [CANSLIM] Technical OBV/MF files. Members-- Have had many requests for my posts on OBV/MF/EMA. Have not forgotten any of you, but am having trouble Copying and Pasting since I've downloaded Com.4.05. Am working on the bugger. Thanks for your posts. Connie Mack - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 22:46:24 -0400 From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: [CANSLIM] Camslim amendments Members-- From my correspondence with Tom, I find him not to be an implacable Canslim follower. I believe he does a bit of trading when the opportunity comes, has held a few stocks for investments that didn't meet every one of O'Neill's criteria, and knows immeasurably more about Canslim than I do, and probably most others. I, therefore, have never once tried to re-read or over-read his comments. Tom will perhaps not reprimand me severely if I make a suggestion to Canslim criteria. What is most obvious about Canslim criteria is that there is much "soft" information, i.e., information that is amenable to several readings. And the "hard" information--IBD numbers, especially--get the investor late to the party. The later you are to the party, the closer you are to the next correction. Would it be unthinkable that a 10% relaxation, either across the board or for specific criteria, be permitted. It seems to me that such a strategy might bring more profits. My experience with market mavens is that the strategy of today, once it has already been published or otherwise made public, is already the strategy of yesterday. Often I think that the mavens are not substantially different from marketers of the latest diet. Each , by the time I see his latest product, is on his next marketing adventure. Tom speaks of O'Neill's corporate customers. Ought I believe that there is available for me the same information that corporations receive. If it should be the same, it is tardy to me and I am late to the party. I judge that O'Neill is not oblivious to technical work and likely has a few technicians in his employ. He may be conservative, but he is not crazy. The great and former overseer of Fidelity's Magellan Fund admitted that he, too, could not ignore the power of the technician and did, in fact, use technical indicators. Never have I disparaged Canslim, nor will I. And as a trader, all I have ever suggested about my technical indicators is that they might in some circumstances be useful for Canslim, especially for evaluating breakouts and for finding entries and exits. Therefore, my suggestion of a 10% relaxation rule is not to disparage Canslim; and it is certainly not one of my technical rules that I'm trying to impose on any member's strategy. It is important to those who are putting together a strategy that they do not become discouraged and, heaven forbid, lose their capital as a function of learning. You must learn and conserve your money; these are two disparate and dangerous concerns. And you must learn not to fear the market or that your strategy is not the right strategy. As with Canslim, or any system, anchored fear is only nominally better than unanchored. Whatever takes away the fear is what is to be chosen--even if a technical indicator receive anchor. In society, wealth is a sacred thing; and in a democracy, it is the only thing. Connie Mack - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 22:58:43 -0400 From: "Tony Austin" Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: [ TIM"S CANSLIM] My list for this week Tim, I think you need to check your "loosey-goosey" scan's to make sure they are working OK. If you will look, 5 of the 6 stocks I listed show up in this weeks "your weekend review", and I must take issue with your statement that these are, as you worded it "lousy prospects." > > It disturbs me a bit that stocks like these get posted to the group without > > any CANSLIM numbers which we can use to judge their WON worthines, so to > > speak. stocks like these, like what? Like those that get listed by IBD? I'll try to do better, provide more complete info, if for no other reason than just to make you happy. > ACF has practically no insider holdings and has already been grabbed by the institutionals. Thats funny, I show 12% insider holdings > DCR looks good except for the insider holdings, 4% isn't great, but it's not "lousy" After further review, the only one I would consider retracting is ANF, it has very low %man ownership. BOCB is a new issue, we can remove that one for that reason if you wish, but the chart is compelling. > > The moral of what I am trying to say here is post something like this first > > so I don't have to! No, I'll give the data that I view appropriate and adequate. If you aren't satisfied with that which I list, do your own homework, or rather ignore my post altogether. The issues I post largely come form "Your weekend review", so they aren't "lousy prospects" as you so careingly worded it. The balance of the issues I stand by. We can debate large %instit ownership if you wish, but going back to the section on supply and demand, a small float with high %inst'l ownership is more beneficial than a "reasonable" %inst'l ownership and a larger percentage float. Let all try to keep our posts productive, shall we. Kindest regards, Tony Austin P.S. Oh, and add CBUK to my list for this week. Look Tim, no data. - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 11:39:27 +0700 From: "Peter Christiansen" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: [ TIM"S CANSLIM] My list for this week Don't let them get you down Tony. All of those picks were worth taking a closer look at. DCR was already on my list. If people are too lazy to look up the numbers on their own, to hell with them. They should be grateful that there are people willing to share the fruits of their hard work with the rest of the world. Here are several that I am adding to my watchlist. All have histories of beating earnings estimates. Some need additional time to complete their bases. They all meet MY filtering criteria. If they don't meet yours, so be it. Symbol Pivot Point Avg Daily Vol. ASDV 69.375 257323 CBH 61.625 40353 DVD 33.75 20100 EVR 56.125 33616 LSN 30.375 29753 MCY 68.125 122976 Peter Christiansen Chiang Mai - Thailand - -----Original Message----- From: Tony Austin To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Monday, May 18, 1998 10:01 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: [ TIM"S CANSLIM] My list for this week > >Tim, > >I think you need to check your "loosey-goosey" scan's to make sure they are >working OK. If you will look, 5 of the 6 stocks I listed show up in this >weeks "your weekend review", and I must take issue with your statement that >these are, as you worded it "lousy prospects." > >> > It disturbs me a bit that stocks like these get posted to the group >without >> > any CANSLIM numbers which we can use to judge their WON worthines, so >to >> > speak. > >stocks like these, like what? Like those that get listed by IBD? I'll >try to do better, provide more complete info, if for no other reason than >just to make you happy. > >> ACF has practically no insider holdings and has already been grabbed by >the institutionals. > >Thats funny, I show 12% insider holdings > > > DCR looks good except for the insider holdings, > >4% isn't great, but it's not "lousy" > >After further review, the only one I would consider retracting is ANF, it >has very low %man ownership. BOCB is a new issue, we can remove that one >for that reason if you wish, but the chart is compelling. > >> > The moral of what I am trying to say here is post something like this >first >> > so I don't have to! > >No, I'll give the data that I view appropriate and adequate. If you aren't >satisfied with that which I list, do your own homework, or rather ignore my >post altogether. The issues I post largely come form "Your weekend >review", so they aren't "lousy prospects" as you so careingly worded it. > >The balance of the issues I stand by. We can debate large %instit >ownership if you wish, but going back to the section on supply and demand, >a small float with high %inst'l ownership is more beneficial than a >"reasonable" %inst'l ownership and a larger percentage float. > >Let all try to keep our posts productive, shall we. > >Kindest regards, > > >Tony Austin > >P.S. Oh, and add CBUK to my list for this week. Look Tim, no data. - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 21:39:21 -0500 From: Luke Lang Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Not a Pretty Day Frank, Sorry to respond so late to your observations. Frank V. Wolynski wrote: > > Russell 2000 looks to be in trouble, needs to pull out of it soon! RUT looks like a head-and-shoulder formation. The formation will be complete if RUT falls below 468.5. > > My calculations place the OTC Advance/Decline line at a new 1 year low and > still in a steep decline. I was watching this one yesterday and thinking, > one not so great day of advancers and we get a new low. Well, we got it. The OTC a/d line is not yet at 1 year low but very close to the low set on 1/12/98. Luke Lang - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 02:20:34 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Consolidation? Jeffry, since you apparently can't figure out that I am trying to politely ignore your taunts, I guess I must state it for the record. Over the two years I have been in this group, I have been quite clear that I am not a rigid or formula based dogmatic follower of CANSLIM, rather I apply 40 years of investing and 10 years of working in the financial industry to finding stocks THAT WORK FOR ME. I do not make recommendations, I do voice my opinion, and often offer up my knowledge of the securities industry. If some of my picks happen to find favor with other members of this group, that is there decision. I would suggest that you simply hit the delete button on any posts from me rather than reading them and having them bother you so much. I have voiced my opinion, and I have respected your opinion. Why do you have such a problem respecting my right to have an opinion that differs from yours? Is it because of your allegiance to "The Farmer" site where you learned everything you know about CANSLIM two years before reading HTMMIS (ref: your intro to this group August 31, 1997)? Yes, I have a copy of what you posted, and I am sure anyone wishing to reread it can find it in the archives. I am not interested in continuing this thread, nor in opening a discussion or dialogue. I have stated my opinion, and explained what I felt supported that opinion. Time will tell if I am right, however I just got my Daily Graph books today and spent some time reviewing the various index charts, and still stand by my opinion on the market currently consolidating. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: Jeffry White <"postwhit@sover.net"@sover.net> To: canslim@mail.xmission.com Date: Sunday, May 17, 1998 4:05 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] Consolidation? >Tom, let me clean up this series of questions, post them again and see >if I can understand your point here. You wrote: > > >> But as long as I can continue finding stocks with top drawer CS >> elements, I will continue to study charts and look for new buying >> opportunities. I just don't find the "distribution" signals that >> worked five years ago to be so clear today. Part of that is a result >> of the duration of this bull mkt, which has led many "johnny come >> lately"s to jump in (again a warning signal of a top). But mostly, I >> think it is a result of the $20 billion or so being pumped into the >> mkt every month on a net basis. And as long as the market says it >> wants to go higher, whatever the reasons, who am I to argue with it?? >> >> Tom W >> > >What exactly are you looking at which indicates "the market says it >wants to go higher"? > >When you indicate a lack of clarity in distribution signals in the last >5 years, are you talking about distribution signals that pre-sage a bear >market, or intermediate topping action leading to intermediate term >corrections/conslidations? > >Were the "distribution" signals "clear" to you back in early October of >1997, prior to the crash? How about January 1997? > >If not, what exactly did you find to be unclear in each of those >intermediate term tops? > >Whether you found those tops true to WON's distribution signals, what >other points in the indices did you have in mind where "distribution" >signals (compression type after an 3-6 month advance) were not clear >during the past five years compared to those in the prior period which >are referencing in your comments here? > >Thanks in advance for your response, Tom. > >Jeffry > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 02:31:08 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: [ TIM"S CANSLIM] My list for this week Well said, Peter. I quite heartily endorse and share your sentiments, even if I can't afford your picks. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: Peter Christiansen To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Monday, May 18, 1998 12:38 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: [ TIM"S CANSLIM] My list for this week >Don't let them get you down Tony. All of those picks were worth taking a >closer look at. DCR was already on my list. > >If people are too lazy to look up the numbers on their own, to hell with >them. They should be grateful that there are people willing to share the >fruits of their hard work with the rest of the world. > >Here are several that I am adding to my watchlist. All have histories of >beating earnings estimates. Some need additional time to complete their >bases. They all meet MY filtering criteria. If they don't meet yours, so >be it. > >-----Original Message----- >From: Tony Austin >To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >Date: Monday, May 18, 1998 10:01 AM >Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: [ TIM"S CANSLIM] My list for this week > >>Tim, >> >>I think you need to check your "loosey-goosey" scan's to make sure they are >>working OK. If you will look, 5 of the 6 stocks I listed show up in this >>weeks "your weekend review", and I must take issue with your statement that >>these are, as you worded it "lousy prospects." >> >>> > It disturbs me a bit that stocks like these get posted to the group >>without >>> > any CANSLIM numbers which we can use to judge their WON worthines, so >>to >>> > speak. >> >>stocks like these, like what? Like those that get listed by IBD? I'll >>try to do better, provide more complete info, if for no other reason than >>just to make you happy. >> >>> ACF has practically no insider holdings and has already been grabbed by >>the institutionals. >> >>Thats funny, I show 12% insider holdings >> >> > DCR looks good except for the insider holdings, >> >>4% isn't great, but it's not "lousy" >> >>After further review, the only one I would consider retracting is ANF, it >>has very low %man ownership. BOCB is a new issue, we can remove that one >>for that reason if you wish, but the chart is compelling. >> >>> > The moral of what I am trying to say here is post something like this >>first >>> > so I don't have to! >> >>No, I'll give the data that I view appropriate and adequate. If you aren't >>satisfied with that which I list, do your own homework, or rather ignore my >>post altogether. The issues I post largely come form "Your weekend >>review", so they aren't "lousy prospects" as you so careingly worded it. >> >>The balance of the issues I stand by. We can debate large %instit >>ownership if you wish, but going back to the section on supply and demand, >>a small float with high %inst'l ownership is more beneficial than a >>"reasonable" %inst'l ownership and a larger percentage float. >> >>Let all try to keep our posts productive, shall we. >> >>Kindest regards, >> >> >>Tony Austin >> >>P.S. Oh, and add CBUK to my list for this week. Look Tim, no data. > > > >- > - - ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #241 ***************************** 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.