From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #2669 Reply-To: canslim Sender: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-No-Archive: yes canslim-digest Sunday, July 28 2002 Volume 02 : Number 2669 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] Health of the small cap growth sector Re: [CANSLIM] Fanus - CTSH Re: [CANSLIM] Health of the small cap growth sector [CANSLIM] Fw: Ken Kam's Market Outlook Re: [CANSLIM] Fw: Ken Kam's Market Outlook HPLAE (was Re: [CANSLIM] Fw: Ken Kam's Market Outlook) RE: [CANSLIM] Intro: Jeffrey Gasta ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 12:12:37 -0400 From: "Donald Wallker" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Health of the small cap growth sector - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Worley" To: "CANSLIM" Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 10:15 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] Health of the small cap growth sector > With some time on my hands this weekend and so few stocks worth looking at, > I decided to expand my normal review of stocks in my VR (Virtual Reality) > Fund. Since we are well into the quarterly earnings reporting, I wanted to > assess which ones had reported, and the quality and direction of the > results, more than looking at how the chart looked. Basically, a drop back > to more emphasis on fundamentals. I used my VR Fund rather than what I own, > or indexes, as it gave me a broader review of stocks with expected strong > growth. > > In all, I was looking at 42 different stocks, mostly under $500 million > market capitalization. Most I already hold in the Fund, several of which > have not yet been purchased but are being monitored, or I missed an initial > entry point and am waiting to see if I can find an appropriate (tho higher) > entry. > > Of the 42, 18 have reported for the period ending 6/30/02, and of these 14 > were up year over year, and most were also up sequentially. Three were down > either sequentially or year over year, or both. One was flat sequentially, > but still up strong year over year. Of the remainder, 19 have yet to report, > and the remaining 5 are on a non-standard fiscal year with the quarter > ending other than 6/30/02. > > Of the 19 yet to report, I sold one last week (naturally it immediately > spiked 35%) for a loss, and dropped another from watching because of its > fall in the past week. Very few of the 42 have good charts right now, altho > several were forming long consolidation patterns. I am encouraged, however, > with the earnings results, and continue to believe that fundamentals will > win out in the long term. I suspect a similar review of mid cap, and higher > priced, stocks would show similar results. > > "M" is clearly still saying to remain in cash for now. CANSLIM says to take > this time to find the future leaders, and be ready for when they emerge into > a more favorable market. This review confirmed my belief that, at least in > the small cap growth sector, earnings are improving, fundamentals are > intact, and in time "M" will begin to reflect this. Although the market did > look healthier last week, there is still not conclusive evidence that a > bottom has been reached. More and more, though, it is looking to me like > this will be a bottom reached without screaming evidence of capitulation. > > Good luck to all, > > Tom Worley > stkguru@bellsouth.net > AIM: TexWorley > > > > - > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" > -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 12:58:25 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Fanus - CTSH This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_029C_01C23636.75BF2430 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Andy, could I ask why you no longer work there? Reading your observations made me wonder if this was a prime short just = waiting to happen, so took another, harder, look at the DGO chart. One = thing I did notice that I missed before is that Management only owns 5% = of the issue, but there is a total difference being reported between = issue and float of 11.27 million shares, so after substracting = management's 5%, that still leaves over 10 million shares in outsider = hands, but not a part of the float. Otherwise, rest of the data looks promising (ROE, debt, cash flow, = forecasts, etc.). So I took a look at INFY as well, and it also has good = looking data, but price wise has already crashed. Interesting. - ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Andy Hilliard=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 7:54 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Fanus - CTSH I worked at CTSH for 2 years (2000-2002) and knowing their model and = their current situation, initiatives, plans, pipeline, etc...I do not = see why they have done so well - in relation to the market, inrelation = to their primary competitors (e.g., INFY). CTSH is the 6th largest = provider of Indian Tech services (significantly smaller than the largest = 4-5), can't compete on price (which is this game) with the largest = companies (TaTa, Wipro, Infy, HCL), even though the model of business is = the same across the board. US consultancies are rushing into building = their own offshore development center so that means more competition. = And with regional instability, I personally can't see much of an upside. = I hope this helps. ----- Original Message -----=20 From: RWElmer@aol.com=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 2:55 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] Fanus - CTSH Fanus,=20 I had CTSH on my short list of stocks for a breakout all week, (BLUD = and CECO were the other two I had) but the Market kept me from acting on = it. I wish you success with it; I personally think it has merit, = although it seems a bit overvalued. Had M been better, I might have = bitten too.=20 Disclosure: I am not strictly CANSLIM, so I can't speak from that = perspective.=20 Best of luck. If Market holds you could have the last laugh.=20 Regards,=20 Robert W. Elmer=20 Coldwell Banker First Shasta=20 2837 Bechelli Ln.=20 Redding, CA 96002=20 RWElmer@aol.com=20 221-9556 or 1-800-348-7939 ext.156=20 www.robertelmer.com=20 - ------=_NextPart_000_029C_01C23636.75BF2430 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Andy, could I ask why you no longer work=20 there?
 
Reading your observations made me wonder if this = was a=20 prime short just waiting to happen, so took another, harder, look at the = DGO=20 chart. One thing I did notice that I missed before is that Management = only owns=20 5% of the issue, but there is a total difference being reported between = issue=20 and float of 11.27 million shares, so after substracting management's = 5%, that=20 still leaves over 10 million shares in outsider hands, but not a part of = the=20 float.
 
Otherwise, rest of the data looks promising = (ROE, debt,=20 cash flow, forecasts, etc.). So I took a look at INFY as well, and it = also has=20 good looking data, but price wise has already crashed. = Interesting.
 
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Andy=20 Hilliard
Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 7:54 AM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Fanus - CTSH

I worked at CTSH for 2 years = (2000-2002) and=20 knowing their model and their current situation, initiatives, plans, = pipeline,=20 etc...I do not see why they have done so well - in relation to the = market,=20 inrelation to their primary competitors (e.g., INFY). CTSH is the 6th = largest=20 provider of Indian Tech services (significantly smaller than the largest = 4-5),=20 can't compete on price (which is this game) with the largest companies = (TaTa,=20 Wipro, Infy, HCL), even though the model of business is the same across = the=20 board. US consultancies are rushing into building their own offshore = development=20 center so that means more competition. And with regional instability, I=20 personally can't see much of an upside. I hope this helps.
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 RWElmer@aol.com=20
Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 = 2:55=20 PM
Subject: [CANSLIM] Fanus - = CTSH

Fanus, =

I had=20 CTSH on my short list of stocks for a breakout all week, (BLUD and = CECO were=20 the other two I had) but the Market kept me from acting on it. I wish = you=20 success with it; I personally think it has merit, although it seems a = bit=20 overvalued. Had M been better, I might have bitten too. =

Disclosure: I=20 am not strictly CANSLIM, so I can't speak from that perspective. =

Best=20 of luck. If Market holds you could have the last laugh. =

Regards,=20

Robert W. Elmer
Coldwell Banker First Shasta
2837 = Bechelli=20 Ln.
Redding, CA 96002
RWElmer@aol.com
221-9556 = or=20 1-800-348-7939 ext.156
www.robertelmer.com=20 - ------=_NextPart_000_029C_01C23636.75BF2430-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 13:08:35 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Health of the small cap growth sector Donald, I made no projection about reaching the bottom, just expressed my opinion that when we get there it will not be clearly marked by one or two days of capitulation. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Donald Wallker" To: Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 12:32 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Health of the small cap growth sector Tom ---I hope your projection about reching the bottom of the downturn comes to pass in the near future. I personally believe that the market is caught in a viscious downturn cycle. And that one of the big drivers is frightened investors withdrawing their money from Mutual Funds. Since such withdrawals are forcing the Mutual Funds to sell out of their positions in order to cover their redemption payment needs, they , paint an very untruthful picture of the health of the individual stocks. Moreover,since the redemption needs of the Funds are massive, they tend to drive the market to new lows that further frighten investors and cause them to withdraw more money from the market --and so on. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Worley" To: "CANSLIM" Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 10:15 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] Health of the small cap growth sector > With some time on my hands this weekend and so few stocks worth looking at, > I decided to expand my normal review of stocks in my VR (Virtual Reality) > Fund. Since we are well into the quarterly earnings reporting, I wanted to > assess which ones had reported, and the quality and direction of the > results, more than looking at how the chart looked. Basically, a drop back > to more emphasis on fundamentals. I used my VR Fund rather than what I own, > or indexes, as it gave me a broader review of stocks with expected strong > growth. > > In all, I was looking at 42 different stocks, mostly under $500 million > market capitalization. Most I already hold in the Fund, several of which > have not yet been purchased but are being monitored, or I missed an initial > entry point and am waiting to see if I can find an appropriate (tho higher) > entry. > > Of the 42, 18 have reported for the period ending 6/30/02, and of these 14 > were up year over year, and most were also up sequentially. Three were down > either sequentially or year over year, or both. One was flat sequentially, > but still up strong year over year. Of the remainder, 19 have yet to report, > and the remaining 5 are on a non-standard fiscal year with the quarter > ending other than 6/30/02. > > Of the 19 yet to report, I sold one last week (naturally it immediately > spiked 35%) for a loss, and dropped another from watching because of its > fall in the past week. Very few of the 42 have good charts right now, altho > several were forming long consolidation patterns. I am encouraged, however, > with the earnings results, and continue to believe that fundamentals will > win out in the long term. I suspect a similar review of mid cap, and higher > priced, stocks would show similar results. > > "M" is clearly still saying to remain in cash for now. CANSLIM says to take > this time to find the future leaders, and be ready for when they emerge into > a more favorable market. This review confirmed my belief that, at least in > the small cap growth sector, earnings are improving, fundamentals are > intact, and in time "M" will begin to reflect this. Although the market did > look healthier last week, there is still not conclusive evidence that a > bottom has been reached. More and more, though, it is looking to me like > this will be a bottom reached without screaming evidence of capitulation. > > Good luck to all, > > Tom Worley > stkguru@bellsouth.net > AIM: TexWorley > > > > - > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" > -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 13:22:53 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] Fw: Ken Kam's Market Outlook This letter comes to me from the site where I maintain my VR Fund, have read it several times, and it continues to make sense to me, even after spending some time reading this morning about how the CEO of HPLA has disappeared, and the company now says that the cash reported in past qtrs has not been in possession of the company, nor is likely ever to be (last report nearly $60 million, up from under $1 million a year ago). Always amazes me how analysts and brokerage houses can miss such trivial details before making buy recommendations. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marketocracy" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 2:14 AM Subject: Ken Kam's Market Outlook Market Outlook July 22, 2001 Largely precipitated by accounting scandals at Worldcom and Enron, the public flogging of corporate CEOs, both from Congress and the President, may be backfiring. Instead of giving reassurance that the mess will be cleaned up, it has actually convinced many people that most of corporate America is dishonest. These high profile scandals guarantee that more government regulation is forthcoming. The new proposals sound great at first blush. After all, who would oppose sending corporate executives to jail when they knowingly release misleading financial information? However, no amount of regulation will make equity investing a risk-free endeavor. And bad regulation could make the problem worse. Ultimately, though, stock prices are about corporate earnings and their prospects for future growth, and as I see it, the earnings outlook is improving. --> Earnings are rising According to Thomson Financial/First Call, of the 221 S&P 500 companies that have reported their results for the second quarter, 59.7 percent beat Wall Street's earnings expectations, 28.1 percent matched projections and only 12.2 percent fell short of consensus targets. Many companies are reporting upside surprises in the second quarter, but have given cautious guidance for the rest of the year. In our view, the third quarter is showing signs of significant improvement, but CEO's don't want to stick their necks out. I suspect this is because many executives are unwilling to expose themselves to the risk of being prosecuted for honest mistakes. --> P/Es look reasonable Despite rising earnings and falling stock prices, many believe that the market is still expensive because the S&P 500's current price-to-earnings ratio is still above historic averages. However, I believe that Greenspan's model is a better gauge of the market's value because it takes interest rates into consideration. According to Barron's, the Fed Model, as it is known, now suggests that the S&P 500 is 30% undervalued. This model, which compares the yield on the 10-year Treasury with the so-called earnings yield on the S&P 500, suggests fair value for the S&P 500 of about 1200. Barron's also notes that other, more sophisticated models indicate the S&P 500 is undervalued to an even greater extent. --> Earnings doubts? Leading up to the August 14 deadline for CEOs to personally sign-off on their financial statements, the risk of more scandals raises doubt about earnings estimates. But consider this -- the S&P 500's total projected earnings for the year ending next March is $495 billion. According to Barron's estimates using the Fed model, earnings could decline by 30 percent -- or $148 billion -- and the market would still be fairly valued. Getting to this level would require the unlikely revelation of 39 additional Worldcom size restatements of $3.8 billion. Offsetting further restatements is the possibility that earnings growth is stronger than anyone currently expects. I take solace in Greenspan's recent testimony to Congress: "We do have a set of profits data which, for all practical purposes, are free of spin. ... [The national income and product accounts numbers] are improving fairly dramatically, as indeed they must because the necessary implications of productivity growth at a 7 percent annual rate in the average of the fourth and first quarters is very difficult to engender without a very major increase in operating earnings. And, indeed, that's exactly what is happening." Translation: Behind all the spin, profits are improving dramatically. --> Summary It is impossible to pick a bottom in the market. History teaches that if you are prepared to ride out the short-term then the long-term is safe. Some of the best investors I know are buying equities now because they don't expect stocks to fall much further given forecasts for an economic recovery. The potential for new revelations of corporate fraud makes the market look and feel grim right now. But I don't think fraud is so widespread as to justify the significant plunge in all major indices. I believe that the sensational headlines about today's wrongdoers represent a tiny fraction of the publicly traded companies. The overwhelming majority of managements are honest and trustworthy even when "nobody is looking." We should invest accordingly. Ken Kam President and CEO Marketocracy, Inc. July 22, 2002 - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 14:03:21 -0400 From: "Gary A. Snyder" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Fw: Ken Kam's Market Outlook >From: "Tom Worley" >Reply-To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >To: "CANSLIM" >Subject: [CANSLIM] Fw: Ken Kam's Market Outlook >Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 13:22:53 -0400 > >This letter comes to me from the site where I maintain my VR Fund, have >read >it several times, and it continues to make sense to me, even after spending >some time reading this morning about how the CEO of HPLA has disappeared, >and the company now says that the cash reported in past qtrs has not been >in >possession of the company, nor is likely ever to be (last report nearly $60 >million, up from under $1 million a year ago). Always amazes me how >analysts >and brokerage houses can miss such trivial details before making buy >recommendations. > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Marketocracy" >To: >Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 2:14 AM >Subject: Ken Kam's Market Outlook > > >Market Outlook >July 22, 2001 > >Largely precipitated by accounting scandals at Worldcom and Enron, >the public flogging of corporate CEOs, both from Congress and the >President, may be backfiring. Instead of giving reassurance that the >mess will be cleaned up, it has actually convinced many people that >most of corporate America is dishonest. > >These high profile scandals guarantee that more government regulation >is forthcoming. The new proposals sound great at first blush. After >all, who would oppose sending corporate executives to jail when they >knowingly release misleading financial information? However, no >amount of regulation will make equity investing a risk-free endeavor. >And bad regulation could make the problem worse. > >Ultimately, though, stock prices are about corporate earnings and >their prospects for future growth, and as I see it, the earnings >outlook is improving. > > --> Earnings are rising >According to Thomson Financial/First Call, of the 221 S&P 500 >companies that have reported their results for the second quarter, >59.7 percent beat Wall Street's earnings expectations, 28.1 percent >matched projections and only 12.2 percent fell short of consensus >targets. Many companies are reporting upside surprises in the second >quarter, but have given cautious guidance for the rest of the year. >In our view, the third quarter is showing signs of significant >improvement, but CEO's don't want to stick their necks out. I >suspect this is because many executives are unwilling to expose >themselves to the risk of being prosecuted for honest mistakes. > > --> P/Es look reasonable >Despite rising earnings and falling stock prices, many believe that >the market is still expensive because the S&P 500's current >price-to-earnings ratio is still above historic averages. However, I >believe that Greenspan's model is a better gauge of the market's >value because it takes interest rates into consideration. >According to Barron's, the Fed Model, as it is known, now suggests >that the S&P 500 is 30% undervalued. This model, which compares the >yield on the 10-year Treasury with the so-called earnings yield on >the S&P 500, suggests fair value for the S&P 500 of about 1200. >Barron's also notes that other, more sophisticated models indicate >the S&P 500 is undervalued to an even greater extent. > > --> Earnings doubts? >Leading up to the August 14 deadline for CEOs to personally sign-off >on their financial statements, the risk of more scandals raises doubt >about earnings estimates. But consider this -- the S&P 500's total >projected earnings for the year ending next March is $495 billion. >According to Barron's estimates using the Fed model, earnings could >decline by 30 percent -- or $148 billion -- and the market would >still be fairly valued. Getting to this level would require the >unlikely revelation of 39 additional Worldcom size restatements of >$3.8 billion. > >Offsetting further restatements is the possibility that earnings >growth is stronger than anyone currently expects. I take solace in >Greenspan's recent testimony to Congress: > >"We do have a set of profits data which, for all practical purposes, >are free of spin. ... [The national income and product accounts >numbers] are improving fairly dramatically, as indeed they must >because the necessary implications of productivity growth at a 7 >percent annual rate in the average of the fourth and first quarters >is very difficult to engender without a very major increase in >operating earnings. And, indeed, that's exactly what is happening." > >Translation: Behind all the spin, profits are improving dramatically. > > --> Summary >It is impossible to pick a bottom in the market. History teaches that >if you are prepared to ride out the short-term then the long-term is >safe. Some of the best investors I know are buying equities now >because they don't expect stocks to fall much further given forecasts >for an economic recovery. > >The potential for new revelations of corporate fraud makes the market >look and feel grim right now. But I don't think fraud is so >widespread as to justify the significant plunge in all major indices. >I believe that the sensational headlines about today's wrongdoers >represent a tiny fraction of the publicly traded companies. The >overwhelming majority of managements are honest and trustworthy even >when "nobody is looking." We should invest accordingly. > >Ken Kam >President and CEO >Marketocracy, Inc. >July 22, 2002 > > > > > > >- >-To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" >-In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or >-"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. Right on Tom: A quick look at WSJ Online has a item 0n July 22: HPA Technology has found massive accounting fraud involving fictitious transactions and falsified documents orchestrated by former CEO and founder David Leperjian and an update dated July 25 with HPLA rating moving from 1.3 to 1 with five analysts rating the company strong buy. Gary _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 14:15:26 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: HPLAE (was Re: [CANSLIM] Fw: Ken Kam's Market Outlook) With NASDAQ halting trading prior to the open on Friday, 7/19/02, you would think the news would be enough to make every analyst pull their recommendation, especially since the stock was not trading. I guess the bright side of this one is that everyone, insiders included (except for the disappearing CEO) got caught holding. Volume the day prior disclosure was only half ADV. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary A. Snyder" To: Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 2:03 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Fw: Ken Kam's Market Outlook >From: "Tom Worley" >Reply-To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >To: "CANSLIM" >Subject: [CANSLIM] Fw: Ken Kam's Market Outlook >Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 13:22:53 -0400 > >This letter comes to me from the site where I maintain my VR Fund, have >read >it several times, and it continues to make sense to me, even after spending >some time reading this morning about how the CEO of HPLA has disappeared, >and the company now says that the cash reported in past qtrs has not been >in >possession of the company, nor is likely ever to be (last report nearly $60 >million, up from under $1 million a year ago). Always amazes me how >analysts >and brokerage houses can miss such trivial details before making buy >recommendations. Right on Tom: A quick look at WSJ Online has a item 0n July 22: HPA Technology has found massive accounting fraud involving fictitious transactions and falsified documents orchestrated by former CEO and founder David Leperjian and an update dated July 25 with HPLA rating moving from 1.3 to 1 with five analysts rating the company strong buy. Gary - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 14:27:34 -0400 From: "Edward McDonough" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Intro: Jeffrey Gasta This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_00B2_01C23642.EA7012B0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jeffrey, I feel I should respond to Mr. Richards so you can be satisfactorily informed. It seems he suggests "I do not have the temperament nor risk capital to be in the stock market." A common ploy from certain personality types; when they don't like the message they have just heard. "Attack the messenger". This gentleman doesn't even know me or my investment experience, yet because my facts disputed his opinion, he felt it necessary to attack That's ok. In fact I am quite pleased with my investment results. I find it somewhat amusing that my facts elicited such a defensive, opinion filled response. In fact, most of the response is his "opinion:" I prefer to deal in facts. I'm not attacking him because his stated opinions are based simply on guesswork on his part. Let me pose this: Perhaps it is he that does not have the temperament and risk capital to be in the market. I bear no malice, and wish Mr O'Neil and yourself and Mr. Richards further success. In fact I like Mr. O'Neil's work. Just understand CANSLIM for what it is. It is not the panacea. Nothing is. I stand behind my facts as stated earlier. Play the game to win!! Best of luck!! Call me crazy. Ed - -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Fred Richards Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 6:25 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Intro: Jeffrey Gasta From WON's college efforts to his nights at an Alaskan Air Force base up to today, he has been first and foremost a student of the market. I would have to agree that some people regard him as a salesman. But make no mistake, first and foremost, he has dedicated himself to learning about the market and finding aspects of it which assist people to increase their stock market performance. CANSLIM is the result and over time, certain formula's and so-called rules are revised to reflect the current market conditions. Over the years, he found excellent people to design the marketing effort for his study results. The O'Neil Stock Graphs revolutionized the institutional business more than the development by Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette of corporate research in the early 1960's. WON has consistently made money in the stock market and on occasion, done extremely well with M on his side. You are right that CANSLIM has been very profitable for WON. In fact, it enabled him to bankroll the IBD for several years before it broke even. And it was costly! It is probably incorrect to assume that he gets more profit from IBD, and William O'Neil + Co than from trading in the market each year. WON lives for trading and has had an electronic brokerage board in his office at his home beside the swimming pool for years. While the corporations which WON has built are profitable, don't ever discount his passion for trading and trying to pass on that knowledge to others. In other words, getting paid $795 per person for an Investor's Workshop seminar probably isn't going to change his lifestyle. It probably barely covers the expenses of putting the event on. WON is probably unlike most CEO's you know. It ain't the money that's important . . . it's helping people beat the odds! It costs a tremendous amount of money to provide the computer power behind IBD, Investor.com, and DGO. One of these days, I'll ask him if he thinks he is making a fair return for all the money invested. At least, the cost is significantly less than the original quarterly cost for the O'Neil Stock Graphs. The only question before the house . . . did you make enough money using the web services, paper, DGO, books to make a profit on your investment of time and money. If the answer is "Yes," be happy. If not, ask yourself, why. Perhaps, you should do not have the temperament and risk capital to be in the stock market. [Fred Richards] -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Edward McDonough Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 2:39 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Intro: Jeffrey Gasta Jeffrey, Sorry for my skepticism as I'm sure Mr. O'Neil derives great pleasure from helping people make money using his CANSLIM principles, but don't be misled into thinking he is doing it out of the goodness of his heart. Mr. O'Neil at his most basic level is a salesman. He has something to sell: his methodology, his newspaper, his web services for both individuals and institutions. What better way than to have products to sell to people that follow his very own CANSLIM Method. Pretty cool. He sells you the gas that makes the car run and he even sells you the car. Pretty neat, and highly profitable for Mr. O'Neil. Also, profitable for the investor that follows it, if the investor doesn't crash the car while following his principals. Don't get me wrong, I have benefited from his knowledge and information. But individual's performance in using CANSLIM will vary widely. I don't doubt for a moment the AAII study results. But studies can be used to demonstrate all sorts of things. Be aware of one thing. The returns you personally derive from CANSLIM can vary widely from the numbers presented in the AAII study. For example, there are several studies that demonstrate the difference in return between what mutual funds show as performance and what individual investors actually receive. In other words, what the average investor derives in terms of return can vary greatly from what the mutual fund shows as performance because the average holding period of a mutual fund for an average investor is not buy and hold forever. Mutual fund investors typically buy and sell at some point. The moving parts for a mutual fund investor are few, buy or sell. The moving parts for a canslim investor are many: buy,sell,C,A,N,S,L,I,M. Consequently more room for error and therefore even more widely varying results. Best of Luck!! Call me crazy, ED - -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Katherine Malm Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 2:20 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Intro: Jeffrey Gasta Hi Jeffrey, First of all, thanks for that great intro and welcome to the list. I'll take a stab at your question (1) as this is something that comes up often when people talk generally about CANSLIM. I think it's refreshing that O'Neil (WON) has never found the need to tout specific returns to inform others of the benefits of CANSLIM investing. There are as many ways to pull profits from the markets as there are people in China, but if you were to boil any one system down to its essence, the successful methodologies all have two things in common: MASTERY and DISCIPLINE in applying the methodology. How many times have you seen your friends flit from one investment "guru" to the next or one "investing system" to the next? I see it happen constantly....somehow it's easier to blame losses on "the system" than on themselves, so off they go to find another holy grail. CANSLIM has its place in investing. It's based on sound and time-proven investing principles, it has a specific set of rules, and it works. Why would O'Neil tell people how to do it? Because his profits in trading this discipline are not compromised by the success of others. He can afford to mentor and develop good investors/traders and profit from it, because he knows that it is not CANSLIM itself that creates investing profits for those he mentors, it is the successful application of CANSLIM principles as applied by knowledgeable users. I think of it as the principle of abundance. Imagine if you were to have a child and in order to love another child, you had to decrease your love for the first by half. It just doesn't work that way. There are plenty of profits in the market, and thank goodness there are people like WON who are willing to teach the rest of us how to find and *keep* them. OK, now that I've had my weekly rant....I'll post (separately) a study done by AAII that shows profits from various investment strategies. This was done for the year 2001...remember *that* year? Take a look at the 45% returns for CANSLIM. Pretty hard to sneeze at that. Katherine - ----- Original Message ----- From: Gasta, Jeffrey To: 'canslim@lists.xmission.com' Cc: Gasta, Jeffrey Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 12:32 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] Intro: Jeffrey Gasta Hello, Thank you for providing this group. It is so cool to find independent, non-biased sources of information. The net is great for that. Aside from funding my 401K with mutual funds, I'm new to investing. My brother-in-law is a mortgage banker and he did VERY well in the 90s by investing. After years of asking he finally told me that he is now using the CANSLIM method (although he did well before he adopted this). Also, he won't have a dialog with him on this - in-laws are weird sometimes. For the past two months I've been reading IBD, IBD.com, and two of Mr. O'Neil's books. During the past year I have read two of John Bogle's books, read the financial section in the Washington Post weekly and watched the market with increasing interest. I live in the DC metro area and am 39 years old. My degree is in Applied Mathematics and I perform technical work daily as a telecom. engineer. I have no background in finance or investing. However, I do have strong analytical skills and like working in an environment with rules/guidelines. Incidentally, in the book "The Millionaire Next Door" the authors point out that Engineers tend to do well with investing because of their belief in and adherence to rules/laws. Will try to lurk for a while before posting any messages. I do have a couple starter questions if that doesn't offend the group. If these questions shouldn't be asked yet, or they are answered in the archive, please let me know. 1) The success stories Mr. O'Neil mentions are incredible. But he doesn't mention how his overall portfolio (including losses) has done over the years. Can anyone give me guidance on independent studies and/or personal experience with this system? For example, a 5-year total return of 15% on the entire portfolio that also includes the 8% loses. Also if CANSLIM is so profitable, why is Mr. O'Neil spending lots of his time writing books and giving seminars? It makes me wonder where his wealth is really coming from. 2) I have found several "ride-the-coattails" web sites for CANSLIM. A quick survey of these sites seem to show that they simply regurgitate the info. already provided by IBD and thus are not worth the price. Any thoughts on these sites would be appreciated. 3) Does Daily Graphs Online really provide added value for a beginner like me? After viewing their tutorial I can't figure out what they provide beyond standard IBD membership. Many thanks for your time! Jeffrey Gasta Telecommunications Engineering Marriott International Voice: 301.380.6204 Fax: 301.380.8649 jeff.gasta@marriott.com - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - ------=_NextPart_000_00B2_01C23642.EA7012B0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Jeffrey,<= /p>

 

I feel I should respond to Mr. = Richards so you can be satisfactorily informed.

 

It seems he suggests “I do = not have the temperament nor risk capital to be in the = stock market.” A common ploy from certain personality types; when they = don’t like the message they have just heard.  “Attack the messenger”. This gentleman doesn’t = even know me or my investment experience, yet because my facts disputed his = opinion, he felt it necessary to attack   That’s ok.  In fact I am quite = pleased with my investment results.

 

I find it somewhat amusing that = my facts elicited such a defensive, opinion filled response.   In fact, most of the = response is his “opinion:” I prefer to deal in facts.  I’m not attacking him = because his stated opinions are based simply on guesswork on his part. Let me pose this: = Perhaps it is he that does not have the temperament and risk capital to be in the = market.

 

I bear no malice, and wish Mr = O’Neil and yourself and Mr. Richards further = success. In fact I like Mr. O’Neil’s work. Just understand CANSLIM for what = it is. It is not the panacea. Nothing is.  I stand behind my facts as stated earlier.

 

Play the game to = win!!

 

Best of = luck!!

 

Call me = crazy.

 

Ed

 

-----Original = Message-----
From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com = [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Fred Richards
Sent: = Friday, July 26, = 2002 6:25 PM
To: = canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] = Intro: Jeffrey Gasta

 

From WON's = college efforts to his nights at an Alaskan Air Force base up to today, he has = been first and foremost a student of the market.

 

I would have to = agree that some people regard him as a salesman. But make no mistake, first = and foremost, he has dedicated himself to learning about the market and = finding aspects of it which assist people to increase their stock market = performance. CANSLIM is the result and over time, certain formula's and so-called = rules are revised to reflect the current market conditions. Over the years, he = found excellent people to design the marketing effort for his study = results.

 

The O'Neil Stock = Graphs revolutionized the institutional business more than the development by Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette of corporate research in the early 1960's.  WON has consistently made money in the stock market and on occasion, done extremely well with M on his = side.

 

You are right = that CANSLIM has been very profitable for WON. In fact, it enabled him to = bankroll the IBD for several years before it broke even. And it was = costly! It is probably incorrect to assume that he gets more profit from IBD, and = William O'Neil + Co than from trading in the market each = year.

 

WON lives for = trading and has had an electronic brokerage board in his office at his home beside = the swimming pool for years.  While the corporations which WON has = built are profitable, don't ever discount his passion for trading and trying to = pass on that knowledge to others.

 

In other words, = getting paid $795 per person for an Investor's Workshop seminar probably isn't = going to change his lifestyle.  It probably barely covers the expenses of = putting the event on.  WON is probably unlike most CEO's you know.  It = ain't the money that's important . . . it's helping people beat the = odds!   It costs a tremendous amount of money to provide the computer power = behind IBD, Investor.com, and DGO.  One of these days, I'll ask him if he = thinks he is making a fair return for all the money invested.  =

 

At least, the = cost is significantly less than the original quarterly cost for the O'Neil Stock Graphs.  The only question before the house . . . did you make = enough money using the web services, paper, DGO, books to make a profit on your investment of time and money.  If the answer is = "Yes," be happy.  If not, ask yourself, why.  =

 

Perhaps, you = should do not have the temperament and risk capital to be in the stock = market.


[Fred Richards] 

 

 -----Original Message-----
From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com = [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Edward McDonough
Sent: = Friday, July 26, = 2002 2:39 PM
To: = canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] = Intro: Jeffrey Gasta

Jeffrey,<= /p>

 

Sorry for my skepticism as I’m sure Mr. O’Neil derives great pleasure = from helping people make money using his CANSLIM principles, but don’t = be misled into thinking he is doing it out of the goodness of his = heart. 

 

Mr. O’Neil at his most basic level is a salesman.  He has something to sell: his methodology, his newspaper, his web services for both individuals and institutions. What better way than to have products to sell to people = that follow his very own CANSLIM Method. Pretty = cool.

 

He = sells you the gas that makes the car run and he even sells you the car. Pretty = neat, and highly profitable for Mr. O’Neil.  Also, profitable for the investor that follows it, if the = investor doesn’t crash the car while following his principals. Don’t get me wrong, = I have benefited from his knowledge and information. But individual’s performance in using CANSLIM will vary widely. 

 

I = don’t doubt for a moment the AAII study results. But studies can be used to demonstrate all sorts of things. Be aware of one thing. The returns you personally derive from CANSLIM can vary widely from the numbers = presented in the AAII study.

 

For example, there are several studies that demonstrate the difference in return = between what mutual funds show as performance and what individual investors = actually receive. In other words, what the average investor derives in terms of = return can vary greatly from what the mutual fund shows as performance because = the average holding period of a mutual fund for an average investor is not = buy and hold forever. Mutual fund investors typically buy and sell at some = point. The moving parts for a mutual fund investor are few, buy or sell.  The moving parts for a canslim = investor are many: buy,sell,C,A,N,S,L,I,M.  Consequently more room for error and therefore even more widely = varying results.

 

Best of Luck!!

 

Call me crazy,

ED      =

 

-----Original = Message-----
From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com = [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Katherine Malm
Sent: = Friday, July 26, = 2002 2:20 PM
To: = canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] = Intro: Jeffrey Gasta

 

Hi Jeffrey,

 

First of all, thanks for that great intro and = welcome to the list.

 

I'll take a stab at your question (1) as this = is something that comes up often when people talk generally about CANSLIM. = I think it's refreshing that O'Neil (WON) has never found the need to tout specific returns to inform others of the benefits of CANSLIM = investing. There are as many ways to pull profits from the markets as there are = people in = China, but if you were to boil any one system down to its essence, the = successful methodologies all have two things in common: MASTERY and DISCIPLINE in = applying the methodology. How many times have you seen your friends flit from one investment "guru" to the next or one "investing = system" to the next? I see it happen constantly....somehow it's easier to blame = losses on "the system" than on themselves, so off they go to find = another holy grail. CANSLIM has its place in investing. It's based on sound and = time-proven investing principles, it has a specific set of rules, and it works. Why = would O'Neil tell people how to do it? Because his profits in trading this = discipline are not compromised by the success of others. He can afford to mentor = and develop good investors/traders and profit from it, because he knows that = it is not CANSLIM itself that creates investing profits for those he mentors, = it is the successful application of CANSLIM principles as applied by = knowledgeable users. I think of it as the principle of abundance. Imagine if you were = to have a child and in order to love another child, you had to decrease your = love for the first by half. It just doesn't work that way. There are plenty of = profits in the market, and thank goodness there are people like WON who are = willing to teach the rest of us how to find and *keep* them.

 

OK, now that I've had my weekly rant....I'll = post (separately) a study done by AAII that shows profits from various investment strategies. This was done for the year 2001...remember *that* = year? Take a look at the 45% returns for CANSLIM. Pretty hard to sneeze at = that.

 

Katherine

----- Original Message = - -----

From: Gasta, Jeffrey =

Cc:<= /font> Gasta, Jeffrey

Sent: Friday, July 26, = 2002 12:32 PM

Subject: [CANSLIM] Intro: Jeffrey Gasta

 

Hello,

Thank you for providing this group. It is so cool to find = independent,
non-biased sources of information.  The net is great for that.

 Aside from funding my 401K with mutual funds, I'm new to = investing.  My
brother-in-law is a mortgage banker and he did VERY well in the 90s = by
investing.  After years of asking he finally told me that he is now = using
the CANSLIM method (although he did well before he adopted this).  = Also, he
won't have a dialog with him on this - in-laws are weird = sometimes.  For the
past two months I've been reading IBD, IBD.com, and two of Mr. = O'Neil's
books.  During the past year I have read two of John Bogle's books, = read the
financial section in the Washington Post weekly and watched the market = with
increasing interest.  I live in the DC metro area and am 39 years old. 

My degree is in Applied Mathematics and I perform technical work daily = as a
telecom. engineer.  I have no background in finance or = investing.  However,
I do have strong analytical skills and like working in an environment = with
rules/guidelines.  Incidentally, in the book "The Millionaire = Next Door" the
authors point out that Engineers tend to do well with investing because = of
their belief in and adherence to rules/laws.

Will try to lurk for a while before posting any messages.  I do = have a
couple starter questions if that doesn't offend the group.  If = these
questions shouldn't be asked yet, or they are answered in the = archive,
please let me know.

1)  The success stories Mr. O'Neil mentions are incredible.  = But he doesn't
mention how his overall portfolio (including losses) has done over = the
years.  Can anyone give me guidance on independent studies and/or = personal
experience with this system?  For example, a 5-year total return of = 15% on
the entire portfolio that also includes the 8% loses.  Also if = CANSLIM is so
profitable, why is Mr. O'Neil spending lots of his time writing books = and
giving seminars?  It makes me wonder where his wealth is really = coming from.

2)  I have found several "ride-the-coattails" web sites = for CANSLIM.  A
quick survey of these sites seem to show that they simply regurgitate = the
info. already provided by IBD and thus are not worth the price.  = Any
thoughts on these sites would be appreciated.

3)  Does Daily Graphs Online really provide added value for a = beginner like
me?  After viewing their tutorial I  can't figure out what = they provide
beyond standard IBD membership.

Many thanks for your time!

Jeffrey Gasta
Telecommunications Engineering
Marriott International
Voice:  301.380.6204
Fax:  301.380.8649
jeff.gasta@marriott.com



- -
- -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
- -"unsubscribe canslim".  Do not use quotes in your = email.

- ------=_NextPart_000_00B2_01C23642.EA7012B0-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #2669 ****************************** 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.