From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #247 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 Thursday, May 21 1998 Volume 02 : Number 247 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] market indicator Re: [CANSLIM] Dump this thread! (was market indicator) Re: [CANSLIM] Dump this thread! (was market indicator) [CANSLIM] Re Jeff White's post about M and Market leaders [CANSLIM] Drop this thread Re: [CANSLIM] To those who subscribed to DailyGraphs Online Re: [CANSLIM] To those who subscribed to DailyGraphs Online [CANSLIM] tech stock review Re: [CANSLIM] To those who subscribed to DailyGraphs Online [CANSLIM] While we're on the subject of M [CANSLIM] market indicator Re: [CANSLIM] To those who subscribed to DailyGraphs Online Re: [CANSLIM] To those who subscribed to DailyGraphs Online Re: [CANSLIM] To those who subscribed to DailyGraphs Online Re: [CANSLIM] Tom Re: [CANSLIM] Tom Re: [CANSLIM] Connie, OBV/MF [CANSLIM] Company Research Re: [CANSLIM] market indicator [CANSLIM] CLST Breakout [CANSLIM] market indicator [CANSLIM] New America article on MDII Re: [CANSLIM] Where to look for cos. earnings and sales info? Re: [CANSLIM] Drop this thread [CANSLIM] Intraday Charts Re: [CANSLIM] Drop this thread Re: [CANSLIM] To those who subscribed to DailyGraphs Online RE: [CANSLIM] OBV/MF & Indices [CANSLIM] China financial news Re: [CANSLIM] New America article on MDII Re: [CANSLIM] CLST Breakout Re: [CANSLIM] Tom ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 14:54:38 GMT From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] market indicator On Tue, 19 May 1998 21:52:55 -0400, you wrote: :Fine, Jeffry, you win, I quit. Goodbye. : :Tom W : Bravo, Jeffry. Entirely great, and I'm NOT being facetious. I think your religious/scientific/disciplined interpretation (analysis!) of "M" is more than admirable -- it IS to be EMULATED. I need to take the time to develop the discipline to interpret the market action on a regular basis. I'd welcome any hints, even just page numbers from HTTMIS. Thanks.=20 And Tom...you can dish it out, but can you take it? Your contributions to this list have been fabulous, and your knowledge of the investment scene is vast and noone comes close to you as far as that goes on this list. However, you *can* get defensive. I've seen that before. Think you better watch that. Can't we all move beyond jealousy and jockying? A little "browbeating", as DC put it, quarelling, duelling, nay arguing IF kept on a high level may not be such a bad thing. In the words of William Blake, "opposition is true friendship". This IS a public list, and the "browbeating" is to a considerable extent for the benefit of "3rd parties" to the discussion, many of whom (like myself) from time to time can stand to be exposed to incisive critical thinking, if not being directly subject to it. As Jeffry suggests, if you cannot own up to your own predilections, shortcomings, foibles, that is reprehensible.=20 Personally, I lost a lot of money at the end of 1997. If I had been using WON's/Jeffry's techniques, that disaster would have been averted. I saw one member of the list ruined and disappear (Gess). I am extremely busy and haven't had the time to read much of the list. I have, however, been looking closely for "M" related discussion and seen precious little of it lately (I guess I'm just going to have to set up my own little M testing lab!). This seems very strange to me as the market has looked more than a little top-heavy and precarious in recent days/weeks. Instead I see most of the discussion centering on specific stocks and their relative merit, or Connie Mack's OBV/MF analysis of issues (I think I can give him credit at least precipitating discussions of these tactics on this list). I saw some talk of shorting strategy a couple of weeks ago, but that too seems to have dried up.=20 In the spirit of honor... Respectfully, y'all... Dan - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 08:11:58 -0500 From: Luke Lang Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Dump this thread! (was market indicator) Yes, I agree with DC that both Tom and Jeffry make good comments and give us something to think about. I think it is difficult to convey tone of voice through words. Therefore, the poster must be more careful with selection of words, and the reader must not be so sensitive. I really hope to see both Tom and Jeffry come back to discuss their different ways of reading the market. I'm sure we can all learn a lot from each other. And remember, none of us have the best way for investing. If one of us did, he would be so busy making money that he wouldn't have any time for us (and wouldn't need to hear what we have to say). Luke Lang DCSquires wrote: > > << Does the subjective provide with > some sense of security while you trade the "M"? Fine. >> > > << But, objectively speaking, did the subjective get you out of the "M" in > January and > October 1997? If not, why not? >> > > << Why is it so hard for you to acknowlege that you have strayed so far > from CANSLIM? Nothing to be defensive or ashamed about, right? >> > > << Fine, just fess up to it and be proud of it. You are proud of it, I > assume?>> > > Jeffry, > > While I may agreed with many of the things you said about "M" I think you are > kind of browbeating Tom with this line of questioning. Tom has already stated > on a number of occations that his CS approach is not pure. It's more > fundemental and maybe more subjective and he likes low priced stocks...yada > yada. Big Deal! That doesn't make his imput any less useful. One of the best > features of CS is that its many good attributes can be molded into a personal > approach that works for each individual while still giving this individual an > edge. I happen to find Tom's comments and your comments very > useful............so maybe we should just drop it. > > DSquires > > - - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 10:23:14 -0500 From: "Joe Scott" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Dump this thread! (was market indicator) I agree, I do believe that the exchange of ideas can help us all, and I can use all the help I can get, but we can also recognize antagonistic behavior when we see it, and I don't believe it leads to a healthy exchange of ideas at all. don't know a thing joe joe@2fords.net http://www.2fords.net/joe/ - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 09:33:08 -0700 From: Harlan Subject: [CANSLIM] Re Jeff White's post about M and Market leaders Hate to say it but I am in 150% agreement with everthing Jeff has to say in reguards to the him and Tom thing. Especially this: My sole concern with your approach has been and will continue to be that your comments here are so well crafted, articulate and seemingly "M" savy, that many newbies, and perhaps not-so-newbies, could lose site of the fundamental rules of the discipline that you have cast aside as "not so clear". And this: You keep playing stocks that are by definition "cheap stocks" (not CANSLIM by definition), not leaders, not liquid, prone to blast-off and failure regardless of "M" conditions. Nuff said. Harlan Pyan - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 11:29:48 -0400 From: Jeffry White Subject: [CANSLIM] Drop this thread > Jeffry, > > While I may agreed with many of the things you said about "M" I think you are > kind of browbeating Tom with this line of questioning. Tom has already stated > on a number of occations that his CS approach is not pure. It's more > fundemental and maybe more subjective and he likes low priced stocks...yada > yada. Big Deal! That doesn't make his imput any less useful. One of the best > features of CS is that its many good attributes can be molded into a personal > approach that works for each individual while still giving this individual an > edge. I happen to find Tom's comments and your comments very > useful............so maybe we should just drop it. > > DSquires > > Fair enough, consider it dropped. You'll not hear from me again on the WON "M" or my concern over Tom's "M" commentary. I apologize to anyone, including Tom, for my persistence on the issue. It was borne out of genuine curiosity and concern. Best of luck. Jeffry - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 17:50:36 +0200 From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To those who subscribed to DailyGraphs Online Gui, Your right. I'm amazed at how uncarefull they are! The 3 reg*.dat files contain credit cardnr, expiration date, even your DG password in PLAIN ASCII! Thank you for the warning! Another warning most browsers have bugs in them that clever hackers can utilize to download files from YOUR computer. Indeed it is almost unbelieveable, but nevertheless true. The authoritive German computer magazine C't had a article on this a few months ago. At http://www.ix.de/ct/english/ you can find some of their article translated from German to English. Alas the article I'm referring to above is not one of them. At 02:18 PM 20-05-98 GMT, you wrote: >To those who subscribed to DGO with Credit Card. > > Today doing a routine check on the files on my computer I found in >the Dlygraph directory several files containing ALL my personal and >Credit Card details IN THE CLEAR. > I din't like that in the least. > > Be advised. > > Gui > >- > > Johan Van Houtven CLICK! N.V. / Wilrijk, Belgium - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 09:42:13 -0700 From: "Robert Venchiarutti" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To those who subscribed to DailyGraphs Online Any advice as to how I can remedy the situation? Also, is there some way I can determine if other online vendors have done the same thing? (For example, I've bought books at Amazon.com, and subscrptions to a amgazine or two over the internet.) Thanks. - -----Original Message----- From: Johan Van Houtven To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Wednesday, May 20, 1998 8:50 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To those who subscribed to DailyGraphs Online >Gui, > >Your right. I'm amazed at how uncarefull they are! The 3 reg*.dat files >contain credit cardnr, expiration date, even your DG password in PLAIN ASCII! > >Thank you for the warning! > >Another warning most browsers have bugs in them that clever hackers can >utilize to download files from YOUR computer. Indeed it is almost >unbelieveable, but nevertheless true. The authoritive German computer >magazine C't had a article on this a few months ago. At >http://www.ix.de/ct/english/ you can find some of their article translated >from German to English. Alas the article I'm referring to above is not one >of them. > >At 02:18 PM 20-05-98 GMT, you wrote: >>To those who subscribed to DGO with Credit Card. >> >> Today doing a routine check on the files on my computer I found in >>the Dlygraph directory several files containing ALL my personal and >>Credit Card details IN THE CLEAR. >> I din't like that in the least. >> >> Be advised. >> >> Gui >> >>- >> >> > >Johan Van Houtven >CLICK! N.V. / Wilrijk, Belgium > > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 09:51:10 -0800 From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: [CANSLIM] tech stock review Forbe online has got reviews of something like 100 technology stocks, broken down by category, so anyone who wants to do lot of research can go there and get a nice long list of companies. Address is www.forbes.com and then click on technology on the left side. - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 18:56:13 +0200 From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To those who subscribed to DailyGraphs Online At 09:42 AM 20-05-98 -0700, you wrote: >Any advice as to how I can remedy the situation? One of the things they advised is to always use the latest version of your browser that is available. > Also, is there some way I >can determine if other online vendors have done the same thing? (For >example, I've bought books at Amazon.com, and subscrptions to a amgazine or >two over the internet.) Amazon does not put your credit card nr on harddisk as far as I have seen. I've ordered from them to. One of these days I may look up the article again. It was quite a number of pages and very technical. Did you know that a lot of stuff you type in can be found back in your 'swap' file (if you use Windows)? And if you go to someones browser cache you can trace back all the sites he went to etc (for as far as the cache takes you back). Someone knowledgable about Windows can find out A LOT of stuff about someone if they know where to look. Enough of this stuff now, this is the CANSLIM list. Just wanted to bring it to everyones attention. You can find a lot of this stuff by using a search engine and looking for Windows security and related topics. Johan Van Houtven CLICK! N.V. / Wilrijk, Belgium - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 11:45:19 -0700 From: Harlan Subject: [CANSLIM] While we're on the subject of M The following are all issues that after having been in uptrends/ leading the markets are either breaking they're uptrends, in the process of breaking uptrends, or are in the process of finishing head and shoulders tops with necklines that need to be broken. 1st off definitions Uptrends: when viewing a charts these issues have a habit of hitting higher highs. Above the 50 day moving average. Market leaders: when viewing a chart these issues are in serious uptrends consistantly hitting NEW HIGHS, are above the 50day moving ave., most tend to trade off of the 20day moving ave., after bouts of weakness in the mkts these issues are usually the 1st to take off to the upside again, usually before the general mkt does. (No single digit midgets in this group of stocks) Most have outrageous PE's, most have extremly strong sales and earnings and more importantly earnings acceleration. Most are consistantly downgraded by the so called big boys on price, most have consistant insider selling ( think about it for a moment, if you were sitting on stock options for 2 yrs waiting for your stock to start to move whats the 1st thing your going to do the moment it starts to move? you bet! Sell some stock! Baby needs a new pair of shoes) Insider selling? --- worthless gauge when you consistantly fish in the mkt leaders pond! Remember folk this is an art more than it is a science ok heres some names to look at. Your on your own at your own risk after that. LHSPF- for the 1st time since it began its run (30 a share in Jan) this issue has broken its 50day moving ave and is now in a correction. If considering going short use the 50day moving ave on a closing basis as a stop or X percent. Currently at 49.00 MSPG- Here too for the 1st time since it began its run this issue has broken it 50day ave and is now having a hard time rallying back above it. when shorting? same as with LHSPF. Currently this issue is at 60. ORBI- Same thing, this issue for the 1st time since its been in an uptrend has broken below its 50 day and as gramma would say "I've fallen and cant get up". Here too use the 50day moving ave as your guide. currently its at 41.5 AEOS- Can you say in the process of forming a Head and shoulders top with the Left shoulder,head intact and finishing the rt. shoulder? This issue is still above the 50day ave so be careful. For me? Any break below the 50day moving ave and I'm going short and buying puts but not until.Funny thing with this issue is that the 50day moving ave and what would be a completed H&S neckline are at about the same price. 35ish currently the stock is at 37.125 BBY- My example of what I'm striving for when I buy a stock and am in it for the long run. For the 1st time this issue since it began its run 500 and some percent ago is seriously struggleing and in my opinion ready to go into a correction. This issue too has the making of a H&s top and is only a matter of time. Neckline on this one is at 64ish. If considering going short here (67.75) give yourself enough room for the stock to do its normal gyrations without allowing you to get whipsawed in and out of it. For me thats a 10% trailing stop. For you? Whats youre risk tolerance, if your not willing to lose dont play the game and please unsubscribe. Others SAVLY- already on its way! notice what happened once it broke its 50day moving ave and stayed below it? currently at 43.75 SAPE- broke the 50day rallied back up to it and now look at what its doing. Its doing the little train that could thing only running out of steam. currently at 43.00 PSFT MEDI VWRX MERQ just to name a few. Folks Had you looked at these 2 months ago and I said these are mkt leaders would you have disagreed? I think not. So if the bulk of the screamers are having troubles these days dont you think that says something? Stay tuned. Just calling it as I see it, and really dont care if you dont agree with it. Do your own homework I did. The Action on these stocks speaks for themselves. Oh by the way for those of you looking for stocastics, OBV,MACD's, moving aves on charts go to www.bigcharts.com and click on the interactive chart box then play around. Harlan - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 11:19:29 -0700 From: "Joe J." Subject: [CANSLIM] market indicator Tom wrote: > Jeffry, I will reluctantly respond. > Sorry you feel the need to be so cautious in responding, all we are talking about is a difference of opinion on the "M" and a few other essential CANSLIM criteria, right?... Jeffery, I know you'll probably get some flack for this post because Tom is viewed as "untouchable" by quite a few on the CANSLIM mailing list but, I just want to say while you're somewhat harsh towards Tom, you're correct in your statements. I remember when I first got on the mailing list about 8 months ago. I just couldn't figure out where Tom was getting half the stuff he was saying. I thought I had missed something about CANSLIM the way WON wrote about it in his book. Just to name a few, why was he always focusing on these low priced, non-leader stocks? Why was he focusing on "noise"?, etc. I guess you get the sense right away that he is one of "the"experts" on the list which makes it more confusing. I remember that a friend and I were so confused by one of his comments that we emailed him on it. He sent something back that made even less sense to us at the time. My friend actually unsubcribed to the list because he felt it didn't conform to CANSLIM. I stuck with it and learned the personalities of the main posters. Now, while I myself have been focusing elsewhere (other than CANSLIM) for trading ideas, I still scan the list in an effort to "read" M. I view WON's M methods as an interesting and valid way to read the market. In terms of "M", I greatly value Jeffery's posts and think of him as one of the foremost authorities on this list in terms of conforming/following WON's M. I also read and value Tom's "M" comments but, I do now realize that they are not WON's M and, in fact, that Tom does not adhere to much of WON's CANSLIM. I think Jeffery's main point was that new members to the list may be a bit confused by the comments on this mailing list. However, that's probably just the way it goes. We certainly don't want to censor this list for only "correct" CANSLIM comments. If we did, we'd probably lose most of Tom's comments and all of Connie's comments (which a lot of people on the list are really into). Even WON does stuff against his book. For example, in his January Yahoo chat he was touting PFE & MRK which are not exactly small companies! When asked about this, he indicated that since money managers have so much buying power these days they have the power to move even these very large cap companies. Perhaps, WON will write another book someday? Personally, I will only trade a stock now if its average daily volume is at least 250,000 and it is at least $30 per share. I just can handle a quote that shows 10 7/8 by 11 1/4, volume 7,800! Arrrrhhh! Back to lurking mode! Jeffery, keep up the good work with your "M" analysis! Joe J. (not to be confused with Joe - I don't know a thing!) - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 15:15:55 -0400 From: Ari Lawson Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To those who subscribed to DailyGraphs Online How do you look at 3 reg*.dat files? - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 21:20:55 +0200 From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To those who subscribed to DailyGraphs Online At 03:15 PM 20-05-98 -0400, you wrote: >How do you look at 3 reg*.dat files? Load them into a text editor or such. Johan Van Houtven CLICK! N.V. / Wilrijk, Belgium - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 18:01:12 -0400 From: "K Strauss" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To those who subscribed to DailyGraphs Online Notepad seems to work fine. - -----Original Message----- From: Ari Lawson To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Wednesday, May 20, 1998 3:22 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To those who subscribed to DailyGraphs Online >How do you look at 3 reg*.dat files? > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 19:37:18 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Tom Too late, John, the group has voted, and I'm passe, wrong, not CANSLIM, outdated, yada yada yada. I frankly don't even feel like bothering to try and defend myself or the quality of the picks I have made, or the profits they have made some members. Forget the fact that most of my picks are over $12, forget the fact that I have seen WON violate many of the rules they seem to hold sacred. I just don't care anymore. Good luck to you. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: John Iding To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Tuesday, May 19, 1998 11:34 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] Tom >Tom ... don't let the detractors get you down ... some of us appreciate your >input ... and don't take things so personally ... John >- > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 19:17:37 -0500 From: "Joe Scott" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Tom Tom, don't be like that now, you know the vast majority of us do appreciate your input, as we do everyone else's including Jeffry's. It takes the different opinions to make the group as interesting as it is. Were all grown ups here, playing in a grown ups game. We all should have enough sense to know that posts are the point of view of the person posting. The idea is for everyone to help each other, its a shame that this exchange of ideas did get carried away, enough it seems to cause some hard feelings. I for one sure hope we don't lose either one of you, because I still can't decide who's point of view I agree with. :-) Actually, I do agree with parts of both, which is generally the case with me. I like the idea of letting the individual stocks telling you, and I also agree that I for one would have been better off out 3 weeks ago. Anyway my 2 cents worth. Oh, and I don't think anyone was voting. don't know a thing joe joe@2fords.net http://www.2fords.net/joe/ - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 21:01:27 -0400 From: "bamend" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Connie, OBV/MF Connie, Could you also send me a copy too? Bob Amend - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 21:09:31 -0400 From: Craig Griffin Subject: [CANSLIM] Company Research This is a bit off subject, but I just discovered a useful company research site. It does not exactly have Canslim data (sorry). What it does have is related though. It has abstracts from publications in which a company has appeared and significant news events for the company - sometimes going back years. For companies like IBM, the references are overwhelming. For a company like EDAC or EAII - you get some interesting hits. This might be a supplement for those wishing to do some more fundamental research. Says it has over 300,000 companies in its database! I noticed that the "Search" function only seems to work properly from the home page. So you may want to return to main page before entering a new symbol. The URL is http://www.Transium.com/ Regards, Craig - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 18:38:38 -0700 From: Dan Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] market indicator Jeffry White wrote: > Tom wrote: > > > Jeffry, I will reluctantly respond. > > > Sorry you feel the need to be so cautious in responding, all we are > talking about is a difference of opinion on the "M" and a few other > essential CANSLIM criteria, right? > I believe everyone is missing Tom's point! A month or so ago, Tom replied > to a comment Jeffry made that as I recall Tom thought was sarcastic (and > it seemed so to me at the time), by stating he was not going to respond to > Jeffry's sarcasm again; that he was going to hit the delete button in > response to Jeffry's posts. After reading Tom's posts for many months, I perceive that he is not reluctant to engage in a discussion of Jeffry's points, but that he wasn't going to respond to Jeffry, and probably wishes he hadn't this time. For what that is worth, Dan Cash - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 18:38:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Tim Fisher Subject: [CANSLIM] CLST Breakout Cellstar broke out 7% off its descending base today at 2x ADV after announcing a split. Makes my "Big Cap" CASLI scan. I like how the volume shriveled up during the basing period except for the obvious attempt by the MMs to manipulate it last week. High debt is a concern for me. MACD followed through, stochastic indicating overbought. A gamble overall. TELECOMM EQUIP Cellstar Corp TICKER CLST EXCHANGE NSDQ X SECTOR 10 X INDUSTRY 179 24WK PCHG% -3.76 TREND EPGR 28.79 QEPS 0/-4 135.00 QEPS -1/-5 81.18 QEPS -2/-6 509.20 QEPS -3/-7 548.60 TREND SALE 36.45 P/E 12M 16.00 ROI 26.86 D/Equity 93.25 PEG F1 0.43 % INSIDERS 48.21 % INSTITUT 41.91 Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 18:42:29 -0700 From: Dan Subject: [CANSLIM] market indicator Jeffry White wrote: > Tom wrote: > > > Jeffry, I will reluctantly respond. > > > Sorry you feel the need to be so cautious in responding, all we are > talking about is a difference of opinion on the "M" and a few other > essential CANSLIM criteria, right? I believe everyone is missing Tom's point! A month or so ago, Tom replied to a comment Jeffry made that as I recall Tom thought was sarcastic (and it seemed so to me at the time), by stating he was not going to respond to Jeffry's sarcasm again; that he was going to hit the delete button in response to Jeffry's posts. After reading Tom's posts for many months, I perceive that he is not reluctant to engage in a discussion of Jeffry's points, but that he wasn't going to respond to Jeffry, and probably wishes he hadn't this time. For what that is worth, Dan Cash - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 22:07:50 -0400 From: "Deral Rackley" Subject: [CANSLIM] New America article on MDII FYI: Good article on Mechanical Dynamics (MDII) in the NEW AMERICA section of the Wednesday, May 20, 1998 issue of INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY. DERAL - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 23:36:11 EDT From: Ssingh Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Where to look for cos. earnings and sales info? Try this site for a lot of information: http://207.226.179.207/cgi-bin/getbigreport?Ticker=icui&Report=Get Have a wonderful Thursday. Surindra - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 00:54:32 EDT From: DCSquires Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Drop this thread In a message dated 98-05-20 11:33:10 EDT, you write: << Fair enough, consider it dropped. You'll not hear from me again on the WON "M" or my concern over Tom's "M" commentary. >> Hey Jeff, To be totally honest………….. you and I think exactly alike when it comes to "M"! I love WON's "M" and look for it during every rally and consolidation. I am ALWAYS interested in hearing about distribution or follow throughs, so please don't let my comments affect your posting of such things. My ONLY point was that you seemed to be really going after a very active and useful contributor to our group. Who takes the time to answer all the newbie mail........not me....not you??? I think that all people enter the market at their own risk......heck....I know I did! So, the basic initiation into this CS group is a reading AND basic understanding of WON's ideas. Assuming this, most members should know that Tom's methods are unorthodox but still partly CS. ALL MEMBERS who don't understand this trade at their own peril.........and we can't do much to help them until they either totally blow out, or realize they are trading wrong before their stake is depleted. If the average member can't tell the difference between your approach and Tom's approach then they MUST lose for a while to understand how to trade and, ultimately, make those differentiations. DSquires - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 01:05:33 EDT From: SACADS Subject: [CANSLIM] Intraday Charts Big Charts is down due to a technical difficulties. Any other places to go for intraday charts. Thank you, Greg - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 05:22:50 GMT From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Drop this thread On Wed, 20 May 1998 11:29:48 -0400, you wrote: :> Jeffry, :>=20 :> While I may agreed with many of the things you said about "M" I think = you are :> kind of browbeating Tom with this line of questioning. Tom has already= stated :> on a number of occations that his CS approach is not pure. It's more :> fundemental and maybe more subjective and he likes low priced = stocks...yada :> yada. Big Deal! That doesn't make his imput any less useful. One of = the best :> features of CS is that its many good attributes can be molded into a = personal :> approach that works for each individual while still giving this = individual an :> edge. I happen to find Tom's comments and your comments very :> useful............so maybe we should just drop it. :>=20 :> DSquires :>=20 :>=20 :Fair enough, consider it dropped. You'll not hear from me again on the :WON "M" or my concern over Tom's "M" commentary. : :I apologize to anyone, including Tom, for my persistence on the issue.=20 :It was borne out of genuine curiosity and concern. : :Best of luck. : :Jeffry : Jeffry, I, for one, feel it would be unfortunate if you desist from posting to the CANSLIM list on "M", be it WON's or Tom's. That's the last thing I would hope for.=20 I believe that your analysis and understanding of a disciplined evaluation of "M" to be the best part of your contributions. Please don't be intimidated or dissuaded from speaking your mind. Dan=20 - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 05:42:05 GMT From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To those who subscribed to DailyGraphs Online On Wed, 20 May 1998 18:01:12 -0400, you wrote: :Notepad seems to work fine. : :-----Original Message----- :From: Ari Lawson :To: canslim@lists.xmission.com :Date: Wednesday, May 20, 1998 3:22 PM :Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To those who subscribed to DailyGraphs Online : : :>How do you look at 3 reg*.dat files? :> I "beta tested" DGO for a number of months, and my impression from the beginning was that the application was not "state of the art" in a lot of ways. It displays all the useful info that WON values. The charts are evocative. However, it is not particularly "interactive", in that you cannot do programable scans against their databases. It does not surprise me that they neglected security in a substantial way. They will no doubt have to rewrite those aspects of DGO, and soon. If there are other ways of subscribing that do not record sensitive info on your computer, you should use those. I would certainly complain to the administrators of the program. Dan - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 00:32:20 -0700 From: Mike Lucero Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] OBV/MF & Indices Doesn't it look like we may break out on the DOW, S&P, and NYA.X? The Nasdaq's not doing as well, but at least went lower on lower volume. Mike On Wednesday, May 20, 1998 6:14 AM, Connie Mack Rea [SMTP:rea1@dp.net] wrote: > Members-- > > Irrespective of the unsophistication of the OBV/MF/EMA, you might plug > in INDU and NASDAQ into BigCharts. You will be surprised at their > unsophisticated clarity and how closely they approximate sophisticated > indicators. > > Draw a trendline across the tops of the INDU for the last three months; > draw a line across the bottoms for the same period. You have a triangle > with a flat top and an ascending, higher lows bottom. Ordinarily, the > sooner price breaks out of such a triangle, the stronger the break. The > closer price gets to the apex, the less strong any breakout. > > If price doesn't hold and therefore makes a higher low [than the > preceding two lows], then the bottoms of those two preceding lows will > serve as resistance. In the short term a correction to the low of April > 28, would not be serious. The next resistance would be April 1, but not > disastrous if there were no breach. > > Pull up MF and draw a trendline across the tops for a similar period; > notice that there is a negative divergence between price and MF. > > Do the same with OBV. Here the reading is different. OBV is ragged but > tracking price. > > The red line of MACD hit the blue but didn't pass through; it is > correcting from a high [strong] level and is therefore not yet a > problem. > > The SlowSto has an interesting pattern. Notice the three completed > recovery bottoms and an approaching fourth bottom. From each of the > three, the INDU has recovered. The FastSto has had five recovery > bottoms and is approaching a sixth from which the recovery is not yet > determined. There is a hint that the blue line is flattening. In the > next two to three days, we ought to know more about this indicator. > > The VolumeAccumulation indicator is a bit less promising as you will see > with a couple of trendlines across the tops and bottoms of the last six > weeks. > > The Volume indicator for the last few days falls along with price. > > The Volume+ indicator can be similarly read. > > The EMA is approaching a third level sell. A bump down today will > confirm the sell. > > The SAR gave a first day sell yesterday. > > To see what the NASDAQ, or any other index, is doing, approach it with > trendlines and indicators. > > These are short term views, and ambiguous. They say that it is best to > hold off on purchases for a few days; and there is no reason to sell > yet. But be aware if your stock chart is tracking either index [or is > weaker than the index], then you would be quicker to exit [especially > if you have a nice profit] if the index continues to fall. > > A stock with positive divergence over the period of the index correction > ought to resist that correction; if the stock corrects more than the > index, you have lost the positive divergence influence and ought to be > suspicious of the next price rise in the stock. > > Connie Mack > > > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 06:16:48 -0600 From: "Kent Horne" Subject: [CANSLIM] China financial news This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD8480.09B55140 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit FYI a link to an interesting article from Singapore regarding a keystone change in China's emerging financial relationships with outside companies http://www.asia1.com.sg/biztimes/4/viewscw.html In my view they continue moving very carefully, and the intent seems to continue in the free market direction. This seems very positive for HKG and PacRim countries Net effects are very long term The NUKE testing competition in SW Asia continues to have the PacRim economies much more concerned than we are hearing or reading in the US. BBC and CBC have more global views of those concerns than our media have had (as ususal) kent - ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD8480.09B55140 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name=" Views & Opinions.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=" Views & Opinions.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.asia1.com.sg/biztimes/4/viewscw.html Modified=00EC6B7CB084BD01C5 - ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD8480.09B55140-- - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 14:30:32 +0200 From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] New America article on MDII At 10:07 PM 20-05-98 -0400, you wrote: >FYI: >Good article on Mechanical Dynamics (MDII) in the NEW AMERICA section of >the Wednesday, May 20, 1998 issue of INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY. Hot group: GRS 97. Others in that group: CLYS, THNK, BNYN, etc Johan Van Houtven CLICK! N.V. / Wilrijk, Belgium - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 14:26:46 +0200 From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CLST Breakout Tim, CLST 75 58 B (RS:58 ouch...) GRS: 26 (far from hot) Debt: 93% (Indeed a concern!) Funds 44% Chart: Eventhough it was up on 2x ADV it still bounced of the 50DMA from below. And it came from under the 200DMA. I see no reason why a CANSLIMer would want to buy this stock now. What am I missing here? I used to like your picks very much. As far as I can remember the last few that you came up with (e.g. RXSD) are far from hot in MY book, that is. Have you changed your scan or investment technique? This is NOT critique, I just want to understand where you are comming from. You wrote: "I like how the volume shriveled up during the basing period except for the obvious attempt by the MMs to manipulate it last week.?" Your kiddin' me, right? Do you know how many MMs there are for CLST? About 76, with at least 20 important ones. You want to look at something telecom related that MIGHT be worth watching? Try CCSC. 94 95 A GRS:80 Timel: A Funds: 10% . Mgmt: 9% Debt: 0 ROE: 35% . I do have a problem with last earnings and sales however. I said watching, NOT buying. At 06:38 PM 20-05-98 -0700, you wrote: >Cellstar broke out 7% off its descending base today at 2x ADV after >announcing a split. Makes my "Big Cap" CASLI scan. I like how the volume >shriveled up during the basing period except for the obvious attempt by the >MMs to manipulate it last week. High debt is a concern for me. MACD followed >through, stochastic indicating overbought. A gamble overall. > >TELECOMM EQUIP Cellstar Corp >TICKER CLST >EXCHANGE NSDQ >X SECTOR 10 >X INDUSTRY 179 >24WK PCHG% -3.76 >TREND EPGR 28.79 >QEPS 0/-4 135.00 >QEPS -1/-5 81.18 >QEPS -2/-6 509.20 >QEPS -3/-7 548.60 >TREND SALE 36.45 >P/E 12M 16.00 >ROI 26.86 >D/Equity 93.25 >PEG F1 0.43 >% INSIDERS 48.21 >% INSTITUT 41.91 > >Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists >Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site >PFB Information >mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com >WWW http://OreRockOn.com > > >- > > Johan Van Houtven CLICK! N.V. / Wilrijk, Belgium - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 05:44:21 -0700 From: Robert J Knott Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Tom Joe Scott wrote: > > Tom, > don't be like that now, you know the vast majority of us do appreciate your > input, as we do everyone else's including Jeffry's. It takes the different > opinions to make the group as interesting as it is. Were all grown ups here, > playing in a grown ups game. We all should have enough sense to know that > posts are the point of view of the person posting. The idea is for everyone > to help each other, its a shame that this exchange of ideas did get carried > away, enough it seems to cause some hard feelings. > I for one sure hope we don't lose either one of you, because I still can't > decide who's point of view I agree with. :-) > Actually, I do agree with parts of both, which is generally the case with > me. > I like the idea of letting the individual stocks telling you, and I also > agree that I for one would have been better off out 3 weeks ago. Anyway my 2 > cents worth. > Oh, and I don't think anyone was voting. > > don't know a thing > joe > > joe@2fords.net > http://www.2fords.net/joe/ > > I agree, Its worth reading this list. Thankyou Bob ( a lurker) - - ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #247 ***************************** 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.