From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #260 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 Friday, May 29 1998 Volume 02 : Number 260 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] OBV/MF: Comment [CANSLIM] dbphoenix Re: [CANSLIM] Totally non-CANSLIM - If you have an appraisal coming up, watch... RE: [CANSLIM] IPO's & the IBD Re: [CANSLIM] dbphoenix--Joe Re: [CANSLIM] Re. BigCharts [CANSLIM] Db!!!! Re: [CANSLIM] Re. BigCharts [CANSLIM] Another mkt comment: 05/29/98 Re: [CANSLIM] "Internet" stocks--Johann Re: Glass half full (was Re: [CANSLIM] "M", and DG alternatives (Part One)--Larry) Re: Glass half full (was Re: [CANSLIM] "M", and DG alternatives (Part One)--Larry) Re: [CANSLIM] Db!!!!--Jeffry Re: [CANSLIM] IPO's & the IBD Re: [CANSLIM] "Internet" stocks--Tom LGWX & EDAC (was Re: Glass half full (was Re: [CANSLIM] -Larry)) RUSH (was Re: Glass half full (was Re: [CANSLIM] "M", and DG alternatives (Part One)--Larry)) Re: [CANSLIM] "Internet" stocks--Tom Re: RUSH (was Re: Glass half full (was Re: [CANSLIM] "M", and DG alternatives (Part One)--Larry)) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 13:30:56 -0700 (PDT) From: Anindo Majumdar Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] OBV/MF: Comment I see a Money flow / price divergence in AVEI . Has been a weak performer but showed explosive earnings the prior quarter. Anindo > > Members-- > > One of the "soft" readings of OBV/MF that goes squishy when passing > through the looking glass into the reality of the market is this: How > long should it take for a positive divergence to manifest itself in > price? > > The answer is: I don't know that. But I think I know this. That > irrespective of the chart look of the divergence [i.e., the contrasting > declination of price against OBV/MF inclination] the significance is > diminished by the time from that positive divergence to yesterday's > trading. A divergence six months old is, indeed, an old divergence; and > if there has been no EMA buy, in the next month or so, I weigh the > divergence modestly, if at all. However, if after this old divergence, > there appears another, then I consider both of them active and the > latter one a bit more weighty than if it were a lone divergence. > > What would keep either divergence alive would be an interim period in > which the EMA is bunched together. Bunching keeps alive any divergence, > positive or negative; bunching is a metaphor for ambiguity, > uncertainty. The significance of the divergence[s] influences my > speculation that the bunching will resolve itself to the upside. > > What is preferable is a positive divergence that is one to two weeks old > with more than a modest contrast of price declination and OBV/MF > inclination. The time to act on this divergence is dictated by the > EMA. If the divergence is strong, you may be more aggressive on your > entry. Whether you act on the FastSto or SlowSto is dictated by your > aggressiveness. The MACD ought to be turning to buy. > > When you anticipate an EMA buy, go to a 2-day 15-min chart. You're now > in a world where both price, EMA, and volume are flying. But there's no > reason to be here if you're not going to fly. In this fast wind tunnel, > the Volume+ indicator is useful to confirm your entry. > > Preparation, mental and mechanical, is all important. Don't go into the > tunnel and be buffeted because you're strategy is not settled. In this > instance, a market order may be your best order. Don't ever lose an > entry or an exit over an 1/8th or 1/4 point. > > I sold a stock two days ago that was bouncing all around my stop. First > the price was a little above, then a little below, and then above. The > intraday Volume+ looked like I might be getting out too soon. > > A half hour later, and 15 minutes before closing, the dipsy-do action > hadn't changed. I decided I had made a mistake [the stock was already > six days old and hadn't done what I had hoped for]. > > Screw it. A seventh day is procrastination. Not to get out would imply > that a blessed amnesia had settled upon me. > > A market order filled at a quarter below my stop kept me from making one > more bad decision. Today, the stock is jerking someone else about. > > Connie Mack > > > - > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 13:53:04 -0700 From: "Joe J." Subject: [CANSLIM] dbphoenix I for one would like to compliment dbphoenix on some very quality posts recently. Very informative and thought provoking! I'm a firm believer that "it's all in the charts". Joe J. - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 17:54:36 EDT From: Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Totally non-CANSLIM - If you have an appraisal coming up, watch... Tom watch out now for all the jokes. I know lists that posts jokes only and no canslim stuff. I can send you the addresses if you like and you can post all you can... ;) In a message dated 5/29/98 7:53:58 AM Eastern Daylight Time, stkguru@netside.net writes: << Subj: [CANSLIM] Totally non-CANSLIM - If you have an appraisal coming up, watch out Date: 5/29/98 7:53:58 AM Eastern Daylight Time From: stkguru@netside.net (Tom Worley) Sender: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com Reply-to: canslim@lists.xmission.com To: canslim@xmission.com (CANSLIM) OK, forgive me, but I got some good chuckles out of these. Where were they, tho, when I was scratching my brains trying to write polite personnel evaluations about someone so hard to say something nice?? Tom W >Actual quotes >from Federal employee performance evaluations: > > "Since my last report, he has reached rock bottom and has > > started to dig." > > "His men would follow him anywhere, but only out of morbid > > curiosity." > > "I would not allow this employee to breed." > > "Works well when under constant supervision and cornered > > like a rat in a trap." > > "He would be out of his depth in a parking lot puddle." > > "This young lady has delusions of adequacy." > > "She sets low personal standards and then consistently fails > > to achieve them." > > "This employee should go far - and the sooner he starts, the > > better." > > "This employee is depriving a village somewhere of an > > idiot." > > >These are actual lines out of OER (Officer Efficiency > >Reports) - performance appraisal for the military. > > > * Not the sharpest knife in the drawer. > > * Got into the gene pool while the lifeguard wasn't > > watching. > > * A room temperature IQ. > > * Got a full 6-pack, but lacks the plastic thingy to > > hold it all together. > > * A gross ignoramus -144 times worse than an ordinary > > ignoramus. > > * A photographic memory but with the lens cover glued on. > > * A prime candidate for natural deselection. > > * Bright as Alaska in December. > > * One celled organisms out score him in IQ tests. > > * Donated his body to science before he was done using it. > > * Fell out of the family tree. > > * Gates are down, the lights are flashing, but the train > > isn't coming. > > * Has two brains: one is lost and the other is out looking > > for it. > > * He's so dense, light bends around him. > > * If brains were taxed, he'd get a rebate. > > * If he were any more stupid, he'd have to be watered twice > > a week. > > * If you give him a penny for his thoughts, you'd get > > change. > > * If you stand close enough to him you can hear the ocean. > > * It's hard to believe that he beat out 1,000,000 other > > sperm. > > * One neuron short of a synapse. > > * Some drink from the fountain of knowledge; he only > > gargled. > > * Takes him 1 1/2 hours to watch 60 minutes. > > * Was left on the Tilt-A-Whirl a bit too long as a baby. > - ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from relay15.mx.aol.com (relay15.mail.aol.com [172.31.106.74]) by air11.mail.aol.com (v43.17) with SMTP; Fri, 29 May 1998 07:53:58 -0400 Received: from lists.xmission.com (lists.xmission.com [198.60.22.7]) by relay15.mx.aol.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0) with SMTP id HAA13605; Fri, 29 May 1998 07:53:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from domo by lists.xmission.com with local (Exim 1.82 #1) id 0yfNiF-0000XG-00; Fri, 29 May 1998 05:52:43 -0600 Received: from (mail.xmission.com) [198.60.22.22] by lists.xmission.com with smtp (Exim 1.82 #1) id 0yfNiC-0000XB-00; Fri, 29 May 1998 05:52:40 -0600 Received: from (netside.net) [205.159.140.2] (root) by mail.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 1.82 #2) id 0yfNiB-0005NA-00; Fri, 29 May 1998 05:52:40 -0600 Received: from txw (stkguru@sunny.netside.net [205.159.140.2]) by netside.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA08298; Fri, 29 May 1998 07:49:08 -0400 (EDT) From: "Tom Worley" To: "CANSLIM" Subject: [CANSLIM] Totally non-CANSLIM - If you have an appraisal coming up, watch out for these. . . Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 07:50:13 -0400 Message-ID: <01bd8af7$f10a9640$0f02000a@txw> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 Sender: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: canslim@lists.xmission.com X-No-Archive: yes >> - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 18:10:41 -0400 From: "Nelson E. Timken, Esq." Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] IPO's & the IBD This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01BD8B2D.16F84340 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This site gives you prospectuses on IPOs: http://www.investquest.com/.html/prospectuses.html _______________________ Nelson E. Timken, Esq. J.N. Capital, Inc. Douglaston, New York - -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of DCSquires@aol.com Sent: Friday, May 29, 1998 9:34 AM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] IPO's & the IBD Frank, This is an excellent IPO site. They have strict ranking system and often pick good performers. http://gaskinsco.com/reviews.htm DSquires - - - ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01BD8B2D.16F84340 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; name="Nelson E. Timken, Esq..vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Nelson E. Timken, Esq..vcf" BEGIN:VCARD VERSION:2.1 N:Timken, Esq.;Nelson;E. FN:Nelson E. Timken, Esq. ORG:J.N. Capital, Inc. TITLE:Principal TEL;WORK;VOICE:718-423-6800 TEL;HOME;VOICE:718-468-6293 TEL;WORK;FAX:718-224-4782 TEL;HOME;FAX:718-224-4782 ADR;WORK:;;40-26 235th Street;Douglaston;New York;11363;USA LABEL;WORK;ENCODING=3DQUOTED-PRINTABLE:40-26 235th = Street=3D0D=3D0ADouglaston, New York 11363=3D0D=3D0AUSA ADR;HOME;ENCODING=3DQUOTED-PRINTABLE:;;80-41 230th = Street=3D0D=3D0A;Bellerose Manor;New York;11427-2105;USA LABEL;HOME;ENCODING=3DQUOTED-PRINTABLE:80-41 230th = Street=3D0D=3D0A=3D0D=3D0ABellerose Manor, New York = 11427-2105=3D0D=3D0AUSA URL:http://www.geocities.com/wallstreet/5791 EMAIL;PREF;INTERNET:netimken@erols.com REV:19980528T113437Z END:VCARD - ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01BD8B2D.16F84340-- - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 15:10:23 -0700 (PDT) From: dbphoenix Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] dbphoenix--Joe <> I appreciate the sentiment, though I can't agree that it's *all* in the charts. A lot of it, maybe even most of it, but not all of it. A lot of it is in the fundamentals too. Which is what I like about CANSLIM. Keeps me on the straight and narrow. And on the lookout for gorillas (remember the old elephant joke about the pygmies?). - --Db _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 18:15:38 -0400 From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re. BigCharts Jans-- Once in a while I get the default or at least some other setting than the one I've saved. I use Comm.4.05. If you click the arrow at the end of the URL line, you see several previous URLs that you've been to--and maybe some previous BCs. As new URLs are entered, old ones drop away. Your browser may be looking at one of these rather than your setting when it opens. Too, if you close BC [not go off-line], it may not attend to your setting when you return. BC did make some changes. You may be right about a bug. Connie Mack JANSI1AUG1@aol.com wrote: > Connie: > > Has this happened to you to: I set BigCharts with the "setting" button, > and sometimes the next day I get the default chart (1yr. stock and volume). > Sometimes it comes up with my settings though. So, either I'm doing something > wrong or BigCharts has a big bug. Has this ever happened to you or anyone > else you know of? Would you surmise on a solution? I'm out of ideas. > (Yesterday I wrote to BigCharts regarding this problem, but they haven't > answered me yet.) > > jans > > - - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 18:44:39 -0400 From: Jeffry White <"postwhit@sover.net"@sover.net> Subject: [CANSLIM] Db!!!! > <<"Dead cat bounce"--That's why we wait for the "follow through day" > before taking action, right?>> > > Supposedly. I guess you better help me along with at least a few more words, Db. :0) > < hopeful on a day like yesterday without clouding the head, I think. > However, I've been known to let even that type of thinking corrupt me > to a fault.>> > > Hate to sound like a Zen master, but, no, you can't. Hopeful, > fearful, anxious, doubtful, etc., etc., serve no purpose other than > to--as you say--cloud judgement. Until one has brought "feelings" > under control, every decision must be made very carefully. This is > not a video game; it's a business. So each decision must be a > business decision. Bummer. > Nice, ice cold mug of water in the face, Db. Thanks for "unclouding my judgment". BTW, where have you been lately, or have I just been indiscriminately skipping your posts? Good reading!! Thanks. > That's one of the reasons why, over the past year, I've tried to get into the spirit of CS rather than the piddly details. Guess your gonna have to elaborate on this one as well, I didn't follow it, completely. Thanks. Jeffry - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 18:54:18 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re. BigCharts Jans, I have had the same problem. Annoying, but hardly enough to overcome the high cost I am paying. I just mutter a few words I won't print here, and continue on. It has had the advantage of forcing me to use more variables, as a result I think I'm finally on track to finding that "magical" combo of TA with CS that will improve my timing dramatically. I spent two hours backtesting this morning an idea I had last night, and I really liked the results. Will do more testing and run it past Connie to see if I am missing anything. If it passes those tests, will give it away to the group without waiting to become a millionaire. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: JANSI1AUG1@aol.com To: CANSLIM@xmission.com Date: Friday, May 29, 1998 10:03 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] Re. BigCharts >Connie: > > Has this happened to you to: I set BigCharts with the "setting" button, >and sometimes the next day I get the default chart (1yr. stock and volume). >Sometimes it comes up with my settings though. So, either I'm doing something >wrong or BigCharts has a big bug. Has this ever happened to you or anyone >else you know of? Would you surmise on a solution? I'm out of ideas. >(Yesterday I wrote to BigCharts regarding this problem, but they haven't >answered me yet.) > > jans > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 19:18:35 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] Another mkt comment: 05/29/98 "There is a shift in leadership," said Michael Metz, managing director at CIBC Oppenheimer & Corp. "The big-cap stocks are over owned and most vulnerable. We are starting to see some shift to unexploited mid- and small-cap stocks." > - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 19:38:02 -0400 From: Tom Worley Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] "Internet" stocks--Johann DB, I guess I must 'fess up that I am getting lost in all this. It sounds like you are saying you can't rely on the EPS and RS nrs shown in IBD, but can rely on the cloned nrs produced by a commercial software package. We already know I'm a tad different from most in my approach to the mkt and stocks, but I have no trouble seeing where the RS is trending by simply looking at the RS line on a Daily Graph. Even when I didn't have access to the "graphs" product, which has been rare, I had no trouble simply noting what the daily nrs were in IBD and seeing if they were going up or down, along with other indicators like A/D. On EPS, on this I am also having trouble understanding your point. It sounds, to me, like you are saying that you don't trust WON's methodology of measuring EPS growth rate rank percentile (which is what the nr is, a measure of the rate of growth, not of actual EPS) by using a combo of the past 5 years of annual earnings and growth, overweighed with the two most recent qtrs results. You seem to be suggesting that an investor should "dig deeper" (into the SEC filings maybe, or some other site or source than DG?) to examine the earnings? But then how do you manage to compare those answers you find with all other stocks in the same group, much less to all other stocks publicly traded, to gain any relative measure of how fast the earnings are changing relative to the universe of stocks?? I don't know anyone with the time to closely examine the earnings reports on every single stock, much less load them into a computer and analyze them. The main problem I had with the internet stocks was the lack of earnings, they were trading on the expectation of increased mkt share, future revenues, future profitability, etc. In other words, they traded on expectations. Certainly that's a portion of CANSLIM, at least within the context of "M", but the lack of earnings prevented most stocks from being good CS candidates, much like the telecom and many pharmeceutical stocks have been. Doesn't mean they can't go up sharply because of expectation, however, since there's a lot of reasons for buying a stock than CANSLIM. And I would disagree strongly that the massive rally in internet related stocks occurred, or could occur, without the active involvement (and yes, investing) by mutual funds. They in turn were driven by all the individuals, both investing thru the funds as well as individually in the stock mkt. After all, it was the individuals, along with all the corps adding their employees, that was creating such a huge new demand for internet access and services. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: dbphoenix To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Friday, May 29, 1998 3:44 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] "Internet" stocks--Johann ><not the >same as Canslim? Please help me to underdstand this!! I was under the >impression that RS and EPS that WON talks about in his book is the same >criterisa that is printed in IBD. > >Thanks,Phyllis>> > >Don't jump to conclusions, Phyllis. I'm probably alone in this. > >I learned long ago to separate O'N the researcher and investor from >O'N the newspaper publisher. When I began investing 10 years ago, I >scoured IBD, hanging on its every word, but much of what I gathered >didn't make sense to me. > >There's really nothing unique or even unusual about CANSLIM. Most of >its principles date back to the last century. What O'N did is put it >all together into a comprehensive and relatively comprehensible >package, aided by his daily newspaper. What he learned in his >research is that a record of strong, stable earnings was "critical" >(his word) to selecting winning stocks. To aid the investor in >locating these companies, he came up with the EPS formula. But to say >that EPS rank is the same as the actual earnings record is to say that >a photograph of a banana is the same as a banana. They are not the >same. And those who go strictly by IBD's EPS numbers without ever >looking at the company's balance sheet or its 10K are taking a great >deal on faith and swimming in very muddy water. > >The other half of the equation after what to buy is when to buy it, >which is where charts and relative strength come in. O'N advises >buying stocks with strong relative strength. That does not--much to >many investors' surprise--mean stocks that are going up. A stock can >have a high relative strength and be basing, or even forming a cup and >handle. What he's talking about are stocks that are going places, >strong stocks, industry leaders (even if they may not be price leaders >at that exact moment), gorillas. Again, to help investors >(specifically, subscribers), he came up with the RS formula. But also >again, the RS rank is not the same as relative strength. If you want >to see relative strength, you need to find or plot a relative strength >line. Otherwise, unless you plot every stock in IBD in Excel, you >have no way of knowing whether the relative strength is increasing or >decreasing. You also have no way of knowing whether the relative >strength line is diverging from the price plot unless you look at it. >Ditto with group and sector composites and indices. An RS line can >also tell you how fast a stock or group is moving relative to the >market. An RS number can't, unless you keep track of it and plot it >on a spreadsheet. But, as to the latter, unless your time is worth 25 >cents an hour, it's a lot easier just to buy an inexpensive charting >program and have the computer do it in a few seconds. > >So, to make a short story long, the RS and EPS ranks mentioned in the >book are the same as those in IBD. However, the bulk of HTMMIS is >devoted to extolling the virtues of earnings and relative strength, >and EPS and RS ranks are only surrogates for earnings and relative >strength, not the earnings and relative strength themselves. To get >at those, you have to dig a little deeper. > >--Db > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________ >DO YOU YAHOO!? >Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 19:58:01 -0400 From: "PHYLLIS ROBINSON" Subject: Re: Glass half full (was Re: [CANSLIM] "M", and DG alternatives (Part One)--Larry) Well I am learnign well from CANSLIM, I sold EDAC at 17 today! I hope that I didnot make a mistake! At least I made a profit! I am begginning to understand Canslim more and more now. I looked at LGWX and I think that it fits Canslim criteria. Phyllis - -----Original Message----- From: Tom Worley To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Friday, May 29, 1998 1:42 AM Subject: Glass half full (was Re: [CANSLIM] "M", and DG alternatives (Part One)--Larry) >Or, you could see a stock that shows no institutional ownership, but >has all the qualities of attracting a small cap fund, or patient >pension fund, yada yada yada, and not be turned away by the lack of >institutional ownership despite its sterling CS elements and top >drawer chart. That's why I am not scared away by the lack of funds >ownership, only by the excess of it. And that's why of the some 19 >stocks on my watch list, I felt good about having one of the ten on >NASDAQ that managed to hit a new high today (RUSH) and having 13 of >the 19 manage to close up for the day. > >I don't think I have yet added or deleted a stock from my watch list, >or just avoided it, solely on "I" reasons, nor do I think it has ever >directly affected my buy or sell actions. I consider "I" to be a >lagging indicator, and on those stocks where I had the patience to >wait and watch, have often been able to "see" where the funds finally >got on the bandwagon. > >Tom W > >-----Original Message----- >From: dbphoenix >To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >Date: Thursday, May 28, 1998 10:12 PM >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CANSLIM, "M", and DG alternatives (Part >One)--Larry > > >><>holdings on a quarterly basis, and this data is usually shown in >Daily >>Graphs charts within anything from several weeks later to as much as >6 >>weeks later. In a few special situations (e.g. where a single fund or >>in some cases a family of funds with common management) exceeds a 5% >>ownership stake in a single company, this will be reported on a >>monthly basis or less.>> >> >>You may be right. I read that it was six months. At any rate, even >>at several weeks, it's old news. A lot can happen in six weeks. >That >>is, the funds that held it six weeks ago needn't necessarily be >>holding it now or be holding tomorrow or next week. Turnover is >>simply higher now than it was 15 years ago. Therefore, I'd rather >>just follow the chart. >> >>--Db >> >> > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 19:59:41 -0400 From: "PHYLLIS ROBINSON" Subject: Re: Glass half full (was Re: [CANSLIM] "M", and DG alternatives (Part One)--Larry) I bought 100 shares of RUSh(don't have much money) today and then when I checked the Canslim.net site, i noticed that it was there! I am beginning to like this! Phyllis - -----Original Message----- From: Tom Worley To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Friday, May 29, 1998 1:42 AM Subject: Glass half full (was Re: [CANSLIM] "M", and DG alternatives (Part One)--Larry) >Or, you could see a stock that shows no institutional ownership, but >has all the qualities of attracting a small cap fund, or patient >pension fund, yada yada yada, and not be turned away by the lack of >institutional ownership despite its sterling CS elements and top >drawer chart. That's why I am not scared away by the lack of funds >ownership, only by the excess of it. And that's why of the some 19 >stocks on my watch list, I felt good about having one of the ten on >NASDAQ that managed to hit a new high today (RUSH) and having 13 of >the 19 manage to close up for the day. > >I don't think I have yet added or deleted a stock from my watch list, >or just avoided it, solely on "I" reasons, nor do I think it has ever >directly affected my buy or sell actions. I consider "I" to be a >lagging indicator, and on those stocks where I had the patience to >wait and watch, have often been able to "see" where the funds finally >got on the bandwagon. > >Tom W > >-----Original Message----- >From: dbphoenix >To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >Date: Thursday, May 28, 1998 10:12 PM >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CANSLIM, "M", and DG alternatives (Part >One)--Larry > > >><>holdings on a quarterly basis, and this data is usually shown in >Daily >>Graphs charts within anything from several weeks later to as much as >6 >>weeks later. In a few special situations (e.g. where a single fund or >>in some cases a family of funds with common management) exceeds a 5% >>ownership stake in a single company, this will be reported on a >>monthly basis or less.>> >> >>You may be right. I read that it was six months. At any rate, even >>at several weeks, it's old news. A lot can happen in six weeks. >That >>is, the funds that held it six weeks ago needn't necessarily be >>holding it now or be holding tomorrow or next week. Turnover is >>simply higher now than it was 15 years ago. Therefore, I'd rather >>just follow the chart. >> >>--Db >> >> > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 17:09:03 -0700 (PDT) From: dbphoenix Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Db!!!!--Jeffry <<> <<"Dead cat bounce"--That's why we wait for the "follow through day" before taking action, right?>> > > Supposedly.< I guess you better help me along with at least a few more words, Db. :0)>> That didn't come out the way I intended. Yes, we are supposed to wait for the follow-through day(s). And, in my experience, they've been pretty reliable except for that debacle last Winter. I only said "supposedly" because sometimes the market does just decide it wants to go back up again thank you very much and there you are watching it leave without you. But odds are that you're better off waiting for confirmation. <<> That's one of the reasons why, over the past year, I've tried to get into the spirit of CS rather than the piddly details.< Guess your gonna have to elaborate on this one as well, I didn't follow it, completely.>> I've been a part of several forums over the last couple of years and I've been amazed (I'm pretty easily amazed) at how many people get all wrapped up in whether earnings were up 25% or 35% (for example). Or whether a particular company missed a quarter in 1995. These, to me, are completely trivial details. What really matters is whether or not a given company is kicking ass or is not kicking ass. If it is kicking ass, I'm going to use pullbacks as an opportunity to buy more shares, not wring my hands in a fit of angst over whether or not I should trigger my stops. If it is not kicking ass, why would I want to own it at all, even if it did manage an earnings surprise and an upgrade? But that's just me. <> You're welcome ;) - --Db _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 20:16:01 -0400 From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] IPO's & the IBD Nice Site, thanks! Frank At 09:34 AM 5/29/98 EDT, DCSquires@aol.com wrote: >Frank, > >This is an excellent IPO site. They have strict ranking system and often pick >good performers. > >http://gaskinsco.com/reviews.htm > >DSquires > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 17:26:24 -0700 (PDT) From: dbphoenix Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] "Internet" stocks--Tom <> If I gave that impression, I didn't do it right. I'll try again. Short version. An EPS number of 80 tells me very little. By looking at the balance sheet, I can see what profit margins are and if they're improving, I can see what the ROE is and if it's improving, I can relate revenues to earnings over time, I can see what's happening to inventories, etc. I can't buy a stock without having some familiarity with all this. One EPS number is no substitute for even the most superficial research effort. If one "doesn't have time" to do this, his risk tolerance is far greater than mine, and far more than CANSLIM demands. An RS number of 80 tells me very little. It doesn't tell me if it's down from 90 or up from 70. It doesn't tell me anything about acceleration or deceleration. It doesn't tell me anything about slope or divergence. A relative strength line does, just as in DG. I wouldn't say my software program "clones" the line since a relative strength line is hardly proprietary, any more than a closing price quote is proprietary. The only difference is that DG costs $800 a year and my software program cost $200. - --Db _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 20:19:38 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: LGWX & EDAC (was Re: Glass half full (was Re: [CANSLIM] -Larry)) Phyllis, unless my grey matter has aged faster than I realize, buying LGWX is the same mistake I made about 2 months ago. It was then under a buyout offer for stock, thus its price performance will be dictated by the acquiring company, which at the time at least did not have as good a picture for CS elements, and one I would not have chosen to buy directly. I managed to escape my "mistake" by an actual net profit, altho after discovering my mistake I was simply trying to cut my then net loss on it. I have not followed it since, so don't know if the deal fell apart, or for some reason the stock price may have become more attractive, but would strongly suggest you check news for the past several months, and any other fundamentals issues, if you have not already done so. Congrats on EDAC, a profit is a profit, no matter what happens later. And please, if anyone continues this thread, slice and dice the subject line, it's already too long!! Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: PHYLLIS ROBINSON To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Friday, May 29, 1998 7:58 PM Subject: Re: Glass half full (was Re: [CANSLIM] "M", and DG alternatives (Part One)--Larry) >Well I am learnign well from CANSLIM, I sold EDAC at 17 today! I hope that I >didnot make a mistake! At least I made a profit! I am begginning to >understand Canslim more and more now. I looked at LGWX and I think that it >fits Canslim criteria. > >Phyllis - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 20:30:39 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: RUSH (was Re: Glass half full (was Re: [CANSLIM] "M", and DG alternatives (Part One)--Larry)) Phyllis, Just because a stock may be mentioned by me or any other member in this forum, and also listed or mentioned by any other site attempting to follow CANSLIM, doesn't by itself mean it is a worthwhile CS candidate for you or any other investor. You have to do your own homework. If I were to go visit ten different CS oriented sites (however good or bad they may be) and mention the same stock (not that I would, but just using an example), it would in no means improve the legitimacy of that stock as a CS candidate or alter my basis for mentioning it in the first of those ten sites. Please, please be aware of how volatile the internet is. Yes, I like RUSH, but only within the qualifiers I have mentioned here many times. Anybody, however good or bad, can post a stock. That doesn't change a thing. I have no bone to pick with canslim.net site, in fact I think the site is operated by one of our members (which also means that mention of the same stock there can be simply a repetition of it being mentioned here) thus the duplicate mention is, in no way, a confirmation of its merits. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: PHYLLIS ROBINSON To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Friday, May 29, 1998 8:01 PM Subject: Re: Glass half full (was Re: [CANSLIM] "M", and DG alternatives (Part One)--Larry) >I bought 100 shares of RUSh(don't have much money) today and then when I >checked the Canslim.net site, i noticed that it was there! I am beginning to >like this! > >Phyllis - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 20:41:46 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] "Internet" stocks--Tom I think I am beginning to understand. BTW, buying one DG book of the month, plus DG Online, will cost me $530/year vice $720 for DGO alone, still not cheap but well worth the price to me. Having all the data pertinent to my decision making process in one site saves me enough time alone to make it cheap. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: dbphoenix To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Friday, May 29, 1998 8:21 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] "Internet" stocks--Tom ><sounds like you are saying you can't rely on the EPS and RS nrs shown >in IBD, but can rely on the cloned nrs produced by a commercial >software package.>> > >If I gave that impression, I didn't do it right. > >I'll try again. Short version. > >An EPS number of 80 tells me very little. By looking at the balance >sheet, I can see what profit margins are and if they're improving, I >can see what the ROE is and if it's improving, I can relate revenues >to earnings over time, I can see what's happening to inventories, etc. > I can't buy a stock without having some familiarity with all this. >One EPS number is no substitute for even the most superficial research >effort. If one "doesn't have time" to do this, his risk tolerance is >far greater than mine, and far more than CANSLIM demands. > >An RS number of 80 tells me very little. It doesn't tell me if it's >down from 90 or up from 70. It doesn't tell me anything about >acceleration or deceleration. It doesn't tell me anything about slope >or divergence. A relative strength line does, just as in DG. I >wouldn't say my software program "clones" the line since a relative >strength line is hardly proprietary, any more than a closing price >quote is proprietary. The only difference is that DG costs $800 a >year and my software program cost $200. > >--Db > > > > > >_________________________________________________________ >DO YOU YAHOO!? >Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 20:46:16 -0400 From: "PHYLLIS ROBINSON" Subject: Re: RUSH (was Re: Glass half full (was Re: [CANSLIM] "M", and DG alternatives (Part One)--Larry)) Oh, I have lost enough of my money to 'blindly' invest on rumors or suggestion. I looked up Rush and i though thast it was a great buy. It alsomahd the Canslim criteria that I was looking for. Phyllis - -----Original Message----- From: Tom Worley To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Friday, May 29, 1998 8:42 PM Subject: RUSH (was Re: Glass half full (was Re: [CANSLIM] "M", and DG alternatives (Part One)--Larry)) >Phyllis, >Just because a stock may be mentioned by me or any other member in >this forum, and also listed or mentioned by any other site attempting >to follow CANSLIM, doesn't by itself mean it is a worthwhile CS >candidate for you or any other investor. You have to do your own >homework. If I were to go visit ten different CS oriented sites >(however good or bad they may be) and mention the same stock (not that >I would, but just using an example), it would in no means improve the >legitimacy of that stock as a CS candidate or alter my basis for >mentioning it in the first of those ten sites. > >Please, please be aware of how volatile the internet is. Yes, I like >RUSH, but only within the qualifiers I have mentioned here many times. >Anybody, however good or bad, can post a stock. That doesn't change a >thing. > >I have no bone to pick with canslim.net site, in fact I think the site >is operated by one of our members (which also means that mention of >the same stock there can be simply a repetition of it being mentioned >here) thus the duplicate mention is, in no way, a confirmation of its >merits. > >Tom W > >-----Original Message----- >From: PHYLLIS ROBINSON >To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >Date: Friday, May 29, 1998 8:01 PM >Subject: Re: Glass half full (was Re: [CANSLIM] "M", and DG >alternatives (Part One)--Larry) > > >>I bought 100 shares of RUSh(don't have much money) today and then >when I >>checked the Canslim.net site, i noticed that it was there! I am >beginning to >>like this! >> >>Phyllis > > > >- > - - ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #260 ***************************** 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.