From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #272 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 Sunday, June 7 1998 Volume 02 : Number 272 In this issue: [CANSLIM] Subject lines Re: [CANSLIM] EDAC moving again--Db & Jeffry (TA!)--Frank Re: [CANSLIM] EDAC moving again Re: [CANSLIM] EDAC moving again--Db & Jeffry (TA!)--Frank [CANSLIM] Re: Elephants Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Elephants [CANSLIM] Re: O'Neil's Seminar on June 6 [CANSLIM] KTIE for Bill only [CANSLIM] 10-Ribbon EMA & DB [CANSLIM] Rolatzi - "M" Re: [CANSLIM] Need some advice Re: [CANSLIM] Re: O'Neil's Seminar on June 6 Re: [CANSLIM] Re: O'Neil's Seminar on June 6 Re: [CANSLIM] KTIE for Bill only Re: [CANSLIM] KTIE for Bill only [CANSLIM] Psychological/Sentiment Indicators Re: [CANSLIM] Rolatzi - "M" Re: [CANSLIM] PRARS Top 50 Re: What happened to this group? (was [CANSLIM] Quality of toolb Re: [CANSLIM] Members - a drum roll please ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 19:17:30 +0200 From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: [CANSLIM] Subject lines DB wrote: >Whether you are successful or not is beside the point. I hope you >are. But CS is not meant for daytrading. Be that as it may, and even >if CS can be used for daytrading whether it's meant to be or not, >yours is not the only voice. It does bother me that your stock >selections are often not CANSLIM and that the charting techniques you >use and the patterns you look for are not those on which CS encourages >one to focus. Newbies have a tough enough time learning the markets >without being persuaded that daytrading is generally lucrative, >particularly if the methods they're being taught have nothing to do >with the subject of the group, i.e., CANSLIM. > >Whether you contribute or not is up to you and the members of the >group, but if I think you're giving dangerous advice, particularly >when it comes to novice investors, I reserve the right to state my >opinion. Those who depart from the subject of whatever a particular >message board or e-mail group is devoted to often feel that a "do your >own homework" or similar disclaimer is enough. It is not, >particularly when the novice lurkers haven't even begun to learn what >"doing your own homework" means. This is why I rarely if ever mention >stocks, instead concentrating on helping people learn how to select >and evaluate their own stocks as opposed to relying on others' "picks". > >I still don't understand why you don't use CANSLIM stocks for your >examples, but that's your choice which you are free to make. But >whatever history you may have with the group, I remind you that new >members are added all the time, at least some of whom have only the >vaguest idea of what CANSLIM is. As long as there's a possibility >that these newcomers might think that your selections are CS and that >your techniques for finding entry points are CS, I will question those >choices when I think it's appropriate. To Connie, OBV/MF students and everyone else: Wouldn't it be a good idea to give the OBV/MF posts that relate to Connie's trading technique a more appropriate subject header such as [Connie's OBV/MF] instead of [CANSLIM]? It would make it easier to separate the two topics. Not only for those who are new to the list or/and new to CANSLIM, but also for those who want to separate the topics anyway. Johan Van Houtven CLICK! N.V. / Wilrijk, Belgium - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 12:32:36 -0400 From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EDAC moving again--Db & Jeffry (TA!)--Frank Thank you kind sir for the enlightenment. You've given me much that confirms my experience and observations. I'm not confused by all the TA mumbo jumbo. It has its place. I use it to substantiate my interpretation of price/volume activity. Before I even pull up an indicator, I know pretty well what it is going to tell me. The trap of TA seems to be when one says "Hey look at this! The exact right time to buy XYZ, was when the 37day fractozoid was crossed over by the 7minute umberbars". "I'll create a search for that exact pattern and then sit back on easy street while I collect my riches!" Of course, uvw company is one that also triggered the indicator, but didn't know the rules, so it didn't trade according to them! Looking at a chart of ACAI, Atlantic Coast Airlines since June of 97, makes one wonder at what point during that time it would have been a bad buy? Frank Wolynski (I like the ones going up!) At 08:12 6/6/98 -0700, dbphoenix wrote: ><mean by the third crossover?>> > >Sorry, Frank. It's early. What I meant was that the 3 crosses the >15, then the 5 crosses the 15, then the 8 crosses the 15. If you're >really aggressive, you could move when the 3 crosses the 5, then they >both cross the 8, etc., but unless you're going for fractions of a >point, I don't see the advantage. > ><you meant below? If not, will it often times follow the price pattern?>> > >Base-building has several functions. If it's the right kind of base, >i.e., it's fairly tight and volume is relatively quiet (relatively in >terms of what it was before the base began to form), the price level >it's at represents what both bulls and bears AT THE TIME think the >stock is worth. Bases also serve those who want to accumulate the >stock in preparation for an advance. The longer the base, the more >time there is. These are two of the reasons why O'N likes long bases. > There is also the added benefit that if the base is long enough, it >will eventually meet up with the 50d MA and they can stroll into the >sunrise together until that old devil volume comes along and seduces >price into breaking away and ascending the stairway to paradise, >leaving the 50d MA behind to take the bus. > >OTOH, if volume continues to be high and erratic, it represents an >ongoing battle between bulls and bears as to fair value, and you can't >know which way the game is going to go regardless of how long the base >is. > > > ><<>>One often sees a volume build-up before the price actually moves. >And one can go by that alone.<< > >By "One can go by that alone", do you mean, during the stage preceding >the "third crossover" there is volume build up, thus occuring before >any breakout in price?>> > >What I meant was that you don't absolutely have to use moving averages >or technical indicators or any other aid as long as you have price and >volume and a pencil. All indicators are based on price, though many >factor in volume as well. Their only function is to enable you to see >more clearly what is right in front of you (though some seem designed >to make the activity even cloudier than it already is). In fact, I >encourage new investors to use nothing but price and volume in order >to learn how to detect horizontal price-support and resistance and >draw trendlines. I (and, eventually, they) find it far easier to >evaluate what indicators are telling them if they know the basics >first. It's like painting the kids' room. You can't fix your orange >unless you know it's made up of red and yellow. > ><patterns myself. Chased there by technical indicators that work on one >stock, but not on another, during one market, but not during another. >Heck, even don't work on the same stock twice!>> > >Not at all, and what you've noticed is not at all uncommon. Some >stocks follow a 50d SMA (simple moving average). Some follow a 50d >exponential. Some follow a 40d. While some follow a 200d, others >follow a 150. And trendlines change all the time. Which you follow >depends on your timeframe and the kind of investor you are. > >This doesn't mean that you have to change your indicator set with >every stock. The time-saving aspect would go right out the window. >What you want to do is find something that works most of the time with >most stocks (after all, how many stocks can you own?). And if your >net catches a stock that just doesn't quite fit one of your plots, >maybe just one of your indicators is inappropriate for that particular >stock. Or it's the wrong length. In other words, it's not the >indicator--it's the fit. If a shoe doesn't fit, it's not the shoe's >fault, nor is it yours. If you particularly like the stock for some >other reason, you might want to fiddle with your indicator set for >that particular stock in order to find what works and what will give >you a good entry point. > >Or you could just blow all this off and stick with price and volume >and be far less confused than many investors are. What you do depends >in large part on whether you think all this is endlessly fascinating >or a monumental pain in the neck (though if the latter, you'd probably >be in funds). > >--Db > > > > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________ >DO YOU YAHOO!? >Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 20:42:33 +0200 From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EDAC moving again Jeffry, Wow! When Tim posted his note about EDAC, I expected to see something wonderful. Something to the point that if I had bought 3 weeks ago when Tim sold, I would now have been rich beyond my wildest dreams. I typed in EDAC in Interquote to get a real time quote and saw: +1 3/6 (16x16.5) on 12400 shares. Then I pulled up a chart in DGO and I did not see anything that excited me (except the CANSLI number which I was already familiar with) keeping in mind the current 'M' (underline and boldface the 'keeping in mind the current 'M'). Maybe I should have pointed out that I only did a 1 minute evaluation. Even though that was enough for me to reach the 'not interested in this stock at this particular moment'-state. If (yes, I did notice the if's and when's in your post) the 'M' was pointing up, I indeed might have considered this a nice 'momentum trading' add/begin point. But when I note that 2 x 200DMA is approx 17.75 and 1.5 x 50DMA is approx 19.5, while the ask is already 16.5 and the spread 0.5 on relatively low volume, I'd rather say 'pass'. There are prettier trains that look ready to leave the station. On the other hand: Damn good CANSLIM numbers and damn strong stock considering 'M' lately. BTW, (I think) I do understand what your perspective is in your post, I'm just pointing out my perspective at the moment I posted my remarks. And I do hope that anyone who did buy it will make a fortune on it. - ---- And now for something completely different: Free charting freaks might want to take a look at: http://cbs.marketwatch.com/data/_charts/achart.htx You can have several stacked indicators on the same page here. Haven't seen that anywhere else. Too bad the charts are so small. At 08:57 PM 06-06-98 -0400, you wrote: >> Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 19:13:16 +0200 >> From: Johan Van Houtven >> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EDAC moving again >> >> Tim Fisher wrote: >> >> >Of course I was stopped out 3 weeks ago...that should have been your buy >> >signal! >> >> Up 1 3/6 (16x16.5) on 12400 shares... nothing to write home about >> considering the volume. >> >> >> >> Johan Van Houtven >> CLICK! N.V. / Wilrijk, Belgium >> >> >True Johan, but doesn't it look nice and "dry"? And now take a look at >the chart with 3/7/10 EMA and slo stos on the chart. See it? Looks >like some measure of short term confirmation of the move having been >digested, an absence of selling and a possible resumption of the move to >me. What do you think? > >This is just what I would be looking for (without the indicators) to >signal a possible "add" to an open position or, if the "M" were >behaving, initiate a position in a stock which is already on the move >out of a nice base. I would have liked to see more volume, but with the >added comfort of the 3/7/10 and slow stos, and a good "M", I might lean >toward giving it a whirl with a much nicer stop placement than your >likely going to get if you give the stock a couple of days to run and >try an entry before it takes out 18, don't you think? > >You buy this thing when the volume starts to swell and heads toward 18, >where's your 7-10% stop gonna be and how does it look technically as far >as the likelihood of getting that order triggered? Particularly >important if it doesn't ultimately break out after that volume surge and >you have to ride it around for a while? True, if you wait till it breaks >18 and the volume is right, your stop is going to look just as good >technically as entering it here, but I prefer the earlier entry on this >type of running stock (when the "M" is right, of course) and use the new >high as yet another possible "add". > >I tend NOT to use those two indicators (EMA and Sto crossovers) in front >of the initial breakout for obvious reasons (unless they are confirming >an unmistakeable volume push off the bottom of a handle, etc.), but for >confirming the initial "dry up" after a collosal breakout (on no news or >upgrade), for "adds/pyramid buys" or, like I said, when we are trending >and possibly looking at an LLUR run, I'll use them to confirm an entry. > >Additional postive technical behavior is EDAC's respect for the 20 day >EMA. Hit it on the head on Thursday, and bounce Friday. > >BTW, pull up the MACD - lagging... OBV/MF - zero help, IMO... Let's >see if the early signals pan out, and where the MACD is at the time they >are confirmed or belied by the price action. > >Disclaimer: Entry point is one of the areas where I likely make a >fairly heavy departure from "pure" CANSLIM. However, it has always been >one of the most difficult parts of the discipline, for me. I find >"getting off the pot" a psychological danger point and a bad entry when >the move might appear to be commencing or resuming is where my history >with this game reveals the most errors. Once I make a mistake in an >issue, I'm destined to make more (like pulling my stop because my entry >was technically poor). Consequently, it's one of my perpetual focuses >on the "trading" side of CANSLIM. > > >J > >- > > Johan Van Houtven CLICK! N.V. / Wilrijk, Belgium - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 12:54:52 -0700 (PDT) From: dbphoenix Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EDAC moving again--Db & Jeffry (TA!)--Frank <> When that happens, just stroll down by the commodity channel and pick some yellow stochastics. You'll feel better. - --Db _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 13:01:58 -0700 (PDT) From: dbphoenix Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: Elephants <> Actually, individual investors are pygmies that walk through the jungle at 5 o'clock in the afternoon ;) - --Db _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 23:23:54 +0200 From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Elephants ><investors are the ants. > >Johan Van Houtven>> > >Actually, individual investors are pygmies that walk through the >jungle at 5 o'clock in the afternoon ;) > >--Db Good one! :-) But consequently there are very few pygmies left and you got to admit that there are lots of investors/traders. I chose the ant analogy because there are many of us. The tracks that we leave are mostly insignificant compared to those of the elephants. Leaving tracks is not goal. Our goal is to get on the back of an elephant. That's why we are actively looking for or should I say scanning for elephants. Sometimes however when have managed to get on the back of an elephant, the elephant suddenly stops or unexpectedly changes direction. If that happens we often fall or jump of his back. Occasionally we get trampled by the elephant or the other elephants that are following him. It also happens that we think we have managed to get on the back of an elephant, when in fact we are on the back of an anteater. There are different kinds of anteaters. The type or species that some of us particularily hate are the (in Latin) Market makeriae. They do not only eat us alive, they even like to toy around with us for a while before doing so. Anyway, my imagination is getting tired and this has as little to do with CANSLIM as positively divergent OBV/MF trading. So I'll leave it at this, particularily because I do not want to upset Tom. Now that we, hopefully, are on our way to filter out the 'pure TA-trading' related posts, we do not want see them replaced with a bunch of 'elephant' related messages. ;^) Johan Van Houtven CLICK! N.V. / Wilrijk, Belgium - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 18:37:52 -0500 (CDT) From: mckeener@ix.netcom.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: O'Neil's Seminar on June 6 Hello Everyone, Just returned from O'Neil's seminar. The value for me was that it "got me back on track". Too easy to hear and worse, listen to all the noise that diverts one from CANSLIM. Some points I found helpful: 1) Chart your trades to see where you bought and sold. This will help you to note both failures and successes. 2) A lot of negativism out there. Never mind what the analysts think, what the experts predict. Watch the market. It is way ahead and usually takes into account events in the prices of stocks before everyone begins pondering the significance of these events. To do this, look at the charts of the NASDAQ, S&P and NY. 3) Make a list of those stocks you wished you had bought. Note their characteristics to help you in the future. 4) Look carefuly at the groups with the greatest % of stocks making new highs. Is that where your stock is? If not, have a good reason. 5) A market correction is a good time to do more research. Watch those stocks that don't go down significantly. Leaders will be the first to reach new highs when the correction is over. Be ready. Beginning the end of June or early July, there will be a section of the IBD devoted to some aspect of C A N S L I M. This will continue for 26 weeks. Finally, if you follow CANSLIM, you'll be successful, your confidence will grow and you'll be another believer in this country and contributor to its continued growth. Regards, Mary Keener - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 09:07:01 -0400 From: Jeffry White <"postwhit@sover.net"@sover.net> Subject: [CANSLIM] KTIE for Bill only > Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 09:58:36 -0700 > From: Bill > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] KTIE for JW only! > > How do you read the action on KTIE? Can this qualify as a 'climax run?' > > Bill-->> I don't think so, Bill. Read HTMMIS, and look at the LCOS chart at: http://www.taguru.com/amzn_lcos.html KTIE looks reasonably well behaved, I think. JW - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 09:24:52 -0400 From: Jeffry White <"postwhit@sover.net"@sover.net> Subject: [CANSLIM] 10-Ribbon EMA & DB > Why is it that I feel modestly guilty and vaguely obligated to return > the money I've made in trading on imaginary divergences and shaky > indicators? But to whom will I return the money? Won't the IRS be > nonplussed when I write them a refund check? Not only a skilled technician and teacher, but a talented and colorful writer, Connie Mack. I read this post, and marvel at the breadth of your knowlege, vocabualry and education. From "reservation of rights" to sui generis to "adjacent power of absolution arrogated by the few for the select many", it is poetry (albeit on a hostile and, might I say, sarcastic note). I am a big fan, nevetheless, CM. Hope you and Db wear out this banter. The group will be richer from the continuing and civil presence of both of you. JW - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 09:38:36 -0400 From: Jeffry White <"postwhit@sover.net"@sover.net> Subject: [CANSLIM] Rolatzi - "M" > Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 06:44:16 -0700 (PDT) > From: rolatzi > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Members - a drum roll please - Bill > > Jeffry: > > I have not gotten into the habit of mind of watching and understanding > the market -M. Where do we stand in the count? I think that market > analysis is a large part of the battle of picking winning stocks by > CANSLIM and would appreciate it if you would post your reading of the > current market conditions. Are we in a potential up market again? > > Thanks, > Rolatzi Tell me this, and I believe it will answer your question. Did the Nasdaq take out the Wednesday, May 27 low on June 1 or 3? If not, then we are three trading days away from closing the window for "follow through" off that low. If we took out that low, then we count for the 3-10 day window from June 1 or 3. Would appreciate the numbers, Rolatzi. I returned to work this week and have been a little scattered in my "M" efforts. Notice that the Dow took out it's Wednesday low, but the NYSE and SP did not. Sentiment is likely too bullish for a sustained move, but I'm not going to agrue with a follow through day off the proper Nas low. I will, however, be cautious if we follow through here because we had a similar false signal back in December (not to mention the IBD report of a "late follow through day in November). At the time, the leadership groups were utilities and soaps. Currently, it doesn't look much better. Let me know what you find on the June 1 and 3 lows compared to May 27. Thanks. JW - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 21:14:31 -0500 From: Dave Cameron Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Need some advice Tim Sowden wrote: > > I need some advice here on a non-canslim stock. I'm not sure if anyone ever responded, but I don't think so... if they did, it was privately. I'll go ahead and post mine to the forum as a respite from all the OBV/MF/TA talk... > > A few months ago a bought some shares of DSC communications (DIGI) on the > advice of a friend who worked for the company. I paid about 19.00 a share > and bought about 3K worth of the stock. I had kind of forgotten about it > as it had been languishing around the 17-19 range. > > Today it jumped from 19 to 27 on 42 million shares traded. It's going to > be aquired by Alcatel in a stock swap. Each share of DSC will be worth > .815 of a share of Alcatel (currently about 43 a share) which works out > to about 35 a share. The deal will be finalized around October. I suspect it'll stabilize soon. As I look, it is around 29-1/2. Alcatel will likely come down to the point where DIGI stock is worth 81% of it. > > My question is this. Should I hold the stock and wait till it gets > converted or rises to somewhere near 35 a share and then sell, or should I > take the money now and run? I read that Alcatel slumped on the news but > that Analysts liked it. Also, the deal can be called off if Alcatel shares > fall to below 37 a share. Is this likely that the deal might get cancelled > for this reason? 1. I would take the money and run. There is NO guarantee it will rise to 35; it is more likely that Alcatel will continue to drop a bit in the current environment. 2. There's no easy way of knowing if the deal will get cancelled. Its not worth risking it for a couple more dollars. > > Any/all advice appreciated. That's my 2 cents - Dave Cameron > > Tim > > > - - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 00:12:47 -0400 From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: O'Neil's Seminar on June 6 Thanks for the update Mary. Good points you made. Sounds like it was worthwhile for you. Best Regards, Frank Wolynski At 18:37 6/6/98 -0500, mckeener@ix.netcom.com wrote: >Hello Everyone, > >Just returned from O'Neil's seminar. The value for me was that it >"got me back on track". Too easy to hear and worse, listen to all >the noise that diverts one from CANSLIM. > >Some points I found helpful: > >1) Chart your trades to see where you bought and sold. This will > help you to note both failures and successes. > >2) A lot of negativism out there. Never mind what the analysts > think, what the experts predict. Watch the market. It is way > ahead and usually takes into account events in the prices of > stocks before everyone begins pondering the significance of these > events. To do this, look at the charts of the NASDAQ, S&P and NY. > >3) Make a list of those stocks you wished you had bought. Note their > characteristics to help you in the future. > >4) Look carefuly at the groups with the greatest % of stocks making new > highs. Is that where your stock is? If not, have a good reason. > >5) A market correction is a good time to do more research. Watch those > stocks that don't go down significantly. Leaders will be the first > to reach new highs when the correction is over. Be ready. > >Beginning the end of June or early July, there will be a section of the IBD >devoted to some aspect of C A N S L I M. This will continue for 26 weeks. > >Finally, if you follow CANSLIM, you'll be successful, your confidence will >grow and you'll be another believer in this country and contributor to its >continued growth. > >Regards, >Mary Keener > > > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 00:12:47 -0400 From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: O'Neil's Seminar on June 6 Thanks for the update Mary. Good points you made. Sounds like it was worthwhile for you. Best Regards, Frank Wolynski At 18:37 6/6/98 -0500, mckeener@ix.netcom.com wrote: >Hello Everyone, > >Just returned from O'Neil's seminar. The value for me was that it >"got me back on track". Too easy to hear and worse, listen to all >the noise that diverts one from CANSLIM. > >Some points I found helpful: > >1) Chart your trades to see where you bought and sold. This will > help you to note both failures and successes. > >2) A lot of negativism out there. Never mind what the analysts > think, what the experts predict. Watch the market. It is way > ahead and usually takes into account events in the prices of > stocks before everyone begins pondering the significance of these > events. To do this, look at the charts of the NASDAQ, S&P and NY. > >3) Make a list of those stocks you wished you had bought. Note their > characteristics to help you in the future. > >4) Look carefuly at the groups with the greatest % of stocks making new > highs. Is that where your stock is? If not, have a good reason. > >5) A market correction is a good time to do more research. Watch those > stocks that don't go down significantly. Leaders will be the first > to reach new highs when the correction is over. Be ready. > >Beginning the end of June or early July, there will be a section of the IBD >devoted to some aspect of C A N S L I M. This will continue for 26 weeks. > >Finally, if you follow CANSLIM, you'll be successful, your confidence will >grow and you'll be another believer in this country and contributor to its >continued growth. > >Regards, >Mary Keener > > > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 00:24:27 -0400 From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] KTIE for Bill only At 09:07 6/7/98 -0400, Jeffry White wrote: >> Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 09:58:36 -0700 >> From: Bill >> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] KTIE for JW only! >> >> How do you read the action on KTIE? Can this qualify as a 'climax run?' >> >> Bill-->> > >I don't think so, Bill. Read HTMMIS, and look at the LCOS chart at: > >http://www.taguru.com/amzn_lcos.html > >KTIE looks reasonably well behaved, I think. > >JW > I concur with Jeffry. The base put in from October thru late March is extremely strong support. Very constructive pattern. Looking at a weekly chart also confirms the interest in the stock. Volume is expanding. I'm not much on breakouts and figuring the exact entries based on them, but using some rules I've recently read about, (rules for selling that is), 2 times 200day MOV and 1.5 times the 50day MOV, I would say that would place a price target between $30 to $32 if you were judging it on those characteristics. From climax runs I have observed, it usually takes longer to develop and exhaust itself. Thereby implying more parabolic appearance. Frank Wolynski - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 00:24:27 -0400 From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] KTIE for Bill only At 09:07 6/7/98 -0400, Jeffry White wrote: >> Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 09:58:36 -0700 >> From: Bill >> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] KTIE for JW only! >> >> How do you read the action on KTIE? Can this qualify as a 'climax run?' >> >> Bill-->> > >I don't think so, Bill. Read HTMMIS, and look at the LCOS chart at: > >http://www.taguru.com/amzn_lcos.html > >KTIE looks reasonably well behaved, I think. > >JW > I concur with Jeffry. The base put in from October thru late March is extremely strong support. Very constructive pattern. Looking at a weekly chart also confirms the interest in the stock. Volume is expanding. I'm not much on breakouts and figuring the exact entries based on them, but using some rules I've recently read about, (rules for selling that is), 2 times 200day MOV and 1.5 times the 50day MOV, I would say that would place a price target between $30 to $32 if you were judging it on those characteristics. From climax runs I have observed, it usually takes longer to develop and exhaust itself. Thereby implying more parabolic appearance. Frank Wolynski - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 00:39:01 -0400 From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: [CANSLIM] Psychological/Sentiment Indicators According to the data in IBD the Investment Advisor community remains predominantly Bullish. According to the Sentiment Indicators in Barrons, the investment communities opinions are predominantly Bullish. Friday and Saturdays IBD had N/A for Put/Call premiums and volume. Anyone know why they did not list them? I had to go to Thursdays IBD to get either figures. After reading an article in May's Technical Analysis of Stocks and Commodities on the very subject I became curious if there are any other Sentiment Indicators that anyone finds usefull? Frank Wolynski - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 21:59:32 -0700 (PDT) From: rolatzi Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Rolatzi - "M" Jeffry: The NASDAQ numbers are: Date Hi Lo Close 5/27 1781.32 1741.72 1781.1 6/01 1779.34 1741.1 1746.82 6/02 1764.84 1746.82 1761.79 6/03 1774.78 1740.75 1742.31 6/04 1769.96 1742.31 1769.95 So the new low was reached on June 3 and we look for follow through on days 3-10, which if I remember correctly should be greater than 1% up on increased volume (compared with previous day?). Thanks, Rolatzi - ---Jeffry White <"postwhit@sover.net"@sover.net> wrote: > > > Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 06:44:16 -0700 (PDT) > > From: rolatzi > > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Members - a drum roll please - Bill > > > > Jeffry: > > > > I have not gotten into the habit of mind of watching and understanding > > the market -M. Where do we stand in the count? I think that market > > analysis is a large part of the battle of picking winning stocks by > > CANSLIM and would appreciate it if you would post your reading of the > > current market conditions. Are we in a potential up market again? > > > > Thanks, > > Rolatzi > > > Tell me this, and I believe it will answer your question. Did the > Nasdaq take out the Wednesday, May 27 low on June 1 or 3? > > If not, then we are three trading days away from closing the window for > "follow through" off that low. If we took out that low, then we count > for the 3-10 day window from June 1 or 3. Would appreciate the numbers, > Rolatzi. I returned to work this week and have been a little scattered > in my "M" efforts. > > Notice that the Dow took out it's Wednesday low, but the NYSE and SP did > not. > > Sentiment is likely too bullish for a sustained move, but I'm not going > to agrue with a follow through day off the proper Nas low. I will, > however, be cautious if we follow through here because we had a similar > false signal back in December (not to mention the IBD report of a "late > follow through day in November). At the time, the leadership groups > were utilities and soaps. Currently, it doesn't look much better. > > Let me know what you find on the June 1 and 3 lows compared to May 27. > > Thanks. > > JW > > - > > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 12:32:01 +0200 From: "Alexander Herrmann" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] PRARS Top 50 Hi, thanks for the top50... where can I find this site on the net bye, Alexander Herrmann eMail: alex@who.net - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- PENTIUM - Produces Erroneous Numbers Thru Incorrect Understanding of Mathematics - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 08:44:38 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: What happened to this group? (was [CANSLIM] Quality of toolb Patrick, I respect your contributions to this group. In fact, I have sent several private emails to Connie regarding the fact that most stocks suitable for his day trading are not even vaguely CANSLIM. I have on occasion also responded to some of his posts pointing out this same thing. Why haven't I objected more vigorously? Because I felt his understanding of TA would (and has) added an important dimension to this group. In fact, before he joined the group, it wasn't discussed much at all. You are correct, Patrick, that my response to a member's post asking for advice on a buyout scenario on DSC Communications was "off topic". My error, for which I apologize, was in responding to the original post which was sent to the entire group. You are correct, I should have sent private email to the originator. I stupidly thought that my comments about owning a buyout stock were pertinent and useful to all members. One of the valuable resources of this group is that, with over 800 members, new websites are being discovered daily. Yes, I do value that, even when they may not be useful to me, still I check them out as time permits and bookmark those I like. I also print the original post and save it for future reference, even if I don't bookmark it then. I also agree that these types of posts end the thread in a day or so, if not sooner. Notice I didn't complain about this type of "off topic" posting, however. The back and forth squabbling over whether Yahoo index quotes were or were not real time was probably what tipped me over the edge ultimately. I do hope all members will start watching their subject line entry more carefully, as I will no longer attempt to read all posts. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: Patrick Wahl To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Friday, June 05, 1998 9:54 AM Subject: Re: What happened to this group? (was [CANSLIM] Quality of toolb > From: "Tom Worley" > To: > CANSLIM rules, I am just missing the whole point of all these posts > lately about which technical indicators to use, and what software > package works better, and whose opinion is right on whether Yahoo > provides real time or delayed index quotes, or whether one tool in the > toolbox is better than another. I agree with part of your complaint here, but I'm a bit confused why all of a sudden you are critical of people talking about technical indicators. Seems like you have been the most supportive of Connie Macks posts on 3-10 etc. MA and the like. If he is going to post those, it is naturally going to lead to further discussion. Are you now saying he should not post on those things anymore? I agree, I think it leads too many people astray from a focus on CANSLIM stocks. I have been deleting all those posts on TA without reading them for months if I can identify them as such from the subject header. The other complaints of yours I don't agree with. Discussions of web sites and software are helpful, and those threads resolve themselves in a day or two. How many web sites do you suppose you have found because of suggestions from the group? Also, the collective resources of this group of investors is fairly substantial, so what better place to pick up the odd tidbit on the tools of the trade? The reason I don't object to those non-canslim posts, while objecting to the TA non-canslim posts, is that the TA has become an ongoing part of the group, and it is too far astray from trying to just pick a good CANSLIM stock. Finally, how do some of these posts differ in merit from some of your non-canslim posts, such as one today on buyouts (which, BTW, I am not objecting to)? I think the occasional off top post is fine, as long as it doesn't evolve into an on-going sub-topic in this group, and that is what all the Technical analysis talk has become. Anyway, end of ranting. If people will continue to post on TA, I won't leave, just continue deleting such posts if my early warning system can spot them soon enough. - - - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 08:33:29 -0400 From: Tom Worley Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Members - a drum roll please Well, I have done my lurking for the weekend, and given the group time to speak their piece. It is clear to me that I am in the distinct minority, apparently of one, objecting to the direction of this group, thus I will shut up and use my delete key more aggressively (NOTE: half the posts this weekend had titles such as this one, yet didn't have a single word about the original post, most were on either EDAC or IGEN, so I may miss a lot of posts because of bad use of subj lines). Jeffry, I appreciate your first comments below on MACD, at least they are responsive to my original post. Now that I understand that you are a trial lawyer, I better understand my emotional response to your questions and why I felt I was being questioned, interrogated, badgered and sometimes ridiculed. I will try to take into account your professional background and my emotional response (BTW: this is why I consider intros such a vital part of this group, at least we have the opportunity to understand the professional background of the poster and his or her point of view). As for my excitement on my original post, I will not apologize for it, I was, and remain, quite enthusiastic about what this approach may do for me in overcoming my personal inertia in opening a position. Imagine yourself ready to commence a case where you are virtually certain you will lose, and at the last minute your private investigator locates a desperately needed witness. Suddenly, your presentation of the case changes from a 80:20 likelihood of a loss to a 90:10 probability of a victory. Well, that's what happened to me. I'm comfortable with my ability to identify solid CANSLIM stocks, my problem has been in buying them in a timely fashion. And, yes, that applys to small caps as well as to stocks below $12/share. I have seen far more winners from my list (witness GCABY this past week up over 8% for a new high) get away from me than I have acted on. That's why I continue to search for that "extra" item to push me over the edge of indecision (indecision is usually worse than no decision at all). I would disagree that MACD has been actively discussed. Aside from Connie mentioning that he uses it as confirmation after finding positive divergence on OBV/MF using very short term time lines, I have seen virtually no discussion on MACD. And, aside from my original post using this subj line, there has been absolutely no discussion of using one year charts with the MAs set as long as I am now trying. Virtually all discussion on TA since Connie joined the group has centered on using his 3/7/10 MA, until his post about the "ropes", and the responses, which ultimately inspired my "blasts" to the group. Jeffry, you are also incorrect in saying I did not respond to your attempts to show me how I could have bot EDAC better, or at least justified the buy better using the TA indicators you favor. I gave you the approximate date, and exact price ($10) where I bot it, and let you study it much as you wish. Just because I don't immediately change my TA indicators to what you favor should mean nothing, I am just embarking on using an approach I have developed. If it works FOR ME, then I am satisfied and will likely not look further for another approach. If it fails, then I will try other means, and Slo Stos will be considered. But frankly, having bot EDAC correctly at $10 (even tho criticized for posting non-CANSLIM stocks, presumably because it was below the magical $12 at the time) I am not likely to be convinced today at $16 that I made a bad decision, even if I didn't incorporate TA into my buy decision at that time. And truthfully, I have been amused by all the posts on EDAC and sudden interest in it at $16 (after hitting a high of $18) in an otherwise sloppy market with uncertain "M". Maybe, like Connie, I should send my 60% profit to somebody, with an apology. But who?? But I did tell you that I would look at what you suggested next time I was at BigCharts, and I did so, and was not convinced to abandon my present project using long term MAs and MACD. As to how long I have studied this, obviously only briefly. However, by using a one year chart, one aspect I have been studying is how well MACD conformed with the price on the stock over that year. And I was impressed, in almost every one of the several hundred charts I looked at before posting my original post, MACD would have gotten me in earlier than any other methods I was using at the time, including price/volume) and would have resulted in profits in all but several cases. It would also have kept me in the stock as it backed off slightly after a big move, and would have taken me out before almost every major move to the downside. So my "historical perspective" was that it seemed to do what I needed, next was practical application which I am doing now. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: Jeffry White <"postwhit@sover.net"@sover.net> To: canslim@mail.xmission.com Date: Friday, June 05, 1998 11:51 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] Members - a drum roll please >> Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 06:52:52 -0400 >> From: Tom Worley >> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Members - a drum roll please >> >> Frank, there has been virtually no discussion on my project. There has >> been none at all on the merits of using MACD vs any other indicator >> except for what Connie gave me. There has been no constructive >> criticism, nor other comments, on the concept I came up with. What I >> am working on is solidly and intrinsically CANSLIM based, using TA at >> the tail end to try and fine tune entry and exit. >> > >O.K., Tom, here you go. > >MACD is a lagging indicator. I watch it, but for timing entry it's >usually to late, in my opinion. You would do equally well using >traditional price and volume movements (dry ups, climax tops, etc.) > >Just because you studied it for a few weeks, or even months, and decided >it is an indicator you'd believe you can use to help enter stocks (in a >market under distribution with no leadership) is no reason to expect >that we'll all suddenly jump in and confirm or dispute what you think >you've observed as useful or helpful. > >Your comment that no discussion has taken place on "your concept" is not >accurate. There has been continuing discussion since CM's arrival that >has focused on all these indicators, including "your" MACD and EMA's. >Just because your interest was recently piqued to the point of actually >pulling up a few charts and announcing your discovery of a very >simplistic approach to entry points with TA (with a lot of fanfare and >hoopla, to boot) is no cause for a ticker tape parade, or even a passing >comment, IMO. > >Nevertheless, more recently, I approached you in private with the >following notes hoping that you might respond (which you never did) and >that we might work jointly to present your latest jewell (EDAC) to the >group, in light of the MACD and 3/7/10 EMA and slow stochastics (the >latter of the two you commented to the group were of no assistance to >you. > >I'm with the lurkers...what's eating you? And here's our exchange on >EDAC: > >********************************************************************* ***************************************** > >Subject: > Re: EDAC > Date: > Tue, 02 Jun 1998 20:22:54 -0400 > From: > Jeffry White <"postwhit@sover.net"@sover.net> > To: > Tom Worley >References: > 1 > > >Tom Worley wrote: >> >> I'd have to dig out the confirm for a precise date, but it was almost >> exactly two months ago as it moved up from a slight descending base. >> My price was $10, so the buy point should be pretty clear. Keep in >> mind that today was the first time I have timed my buy decision using >> TA, EDAC was bot purely on the basis of CS and my experience with the >> mkt, along with a volume indicator that came early in the day as I >> recall. >> >> Tom W >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jeffry White <"postwhit@sover.net"@sover.net> >> To: Tom Worley >> Date: Tuesday, June 02, 1998 2:38 PM >> Subject: Re: EDAC >> >> > >> >Now, Tom, I've read you MACD message. Would you mind sharing your >> first >> >entry date of EDAC? I'd like to see exactly where the EMA/slow sto >> >crossover was, and illustrate it to you, if I can. >> > >> >Thanks. >> > > >Your note sounds a little cautious, I don't know. But just so we are >clear, given the past tension, I'm not writing you about EDAC to try and >prove some point. > >Also, I hadn't seen your post on MACD when I dropped you a note this >morning which suggests that you haven't found much confirmation from >these two indicators. Not sure I can provide that for you, but I >thought it might be interesting to look at a stock you know well, and >show you what I see. Then, see if you can recall what you were looking >at (without the indicators) and try to decide whether they are of any >potential assistance. I think they work exceedingly well when the "M" >is trending. But what doesn't? Still they help me get off the pot >sometimes, which is worth something. > >Just happened to punch in EDAC while I was browsing around at BC this >morning and noticed the slow stochs and EMA crossovers in the chart. >Looking back through charts with these indicators is a little hard, I >find, because the crossovers may be a little more obvious at the time >they happen. But due to the "tight" price pattern compared to the move >that ensued, they become a bit compressed on the chart. Much easier, >and I think more convincing when they are watched on the actual stock >you are monitoring or trading. > >But, I see three buy points on a three month chart, all of which were >low risk, in my view. I also think they would have been lower risk than >the day of or following the more obvious entry where the thing broke to >another new high after consolidating. > >First one is right in front of the day you probably bought, which is >4/2. Can't really see the volume well until 4/1, but the stochastics on >3/27 crossed, and then the EMA on 3/31. These two points might have >given you some added comfort, but it was (as I'm sure you know well) >really low risk when you took it at 10. You had a 10% stop at 9 which >was ripe for a flush, don't you think? And 7% under 10 was not safe at >all, IMO. Might have entered a day or two earlier on the stochastic >cross and had a safer 7% stop. > >What exactly was the "volume indicator" to which you refer early in the >day? A block? > >Next point is a crossover around 4/28-29, I think. You'd have added at >around 12 5/8, but still a decent stop placement on the add, or entire >position by pulling up an averaged stop. Kind of a fake out, not ready >to resume, but another signal to consider in any event. > >Third, May 12 or 13 crossovers in front of a huge volume surge, to boot. >Stochs might have had you add at a little higher than 12, but safe entry >even on the volume spike. > >Do you read the stos and EMA the same way I do on these points? > >Looks like today will cross the EMA to the downside, but the slow stochs >are a few days from oversold. Possible crossovers coming in front of >another move? > >BTW, I don't need to tell you this is a beauty of a chart, Tom. >Exceedingly tight, well behaved. So much so, that I'm not sure these >indicators help much, but maybe a day or two worth of comfort for what >you obviously saw as it was happening. > >I find them useful when I'm watching a stock that has already broken >out, but was not on my watch list. Helps setting a lower risk stop than >I am accustomed to getting when the volume doesn't "dry" in an orderly >fashion and fakes you in a day or two early. > >I also find them helpful where you are "stalking" one like this one, I >think. Love the indicators for "adds", but I tend to think that they >work best for "adds" when the "M" is clearly trending higher (but again >what doesn't, huh?). > >Noticed that the MACD would have been late on the March entry, a good >indicator that the April 28 crossover was not likely reliable, but again >a day late in May. > >Interesting stuff, I think. > >Hope this is coherent. Just finished a brief in the Supreme Court which >tested my recovery, and proved I'm not as strong as I thought. Weary of >writing. Two days of depositions coming, and a three day rest. Thought >I'd have a bit more time to recover, but no one will wait. > >Regards. > > >********************************************************************* ****** > > >Connie Mack, > >Would you double check my work here, please? > > >Thanks, Jeffry > > > >- > - - ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #272 ***************************** 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.