From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #273 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 273 In this issue: [CANSLIM] Rolatzi - "M" Re: [CANSLIM] Re.Tom (why a web page etc) Re: [CANSLIM] Re: O'Neil's Seminar on June 6 Re: [CANSLIM] Rolatzi - "M"--Jeffry Re: [CANSLIM] Rolatzi - "M"--Jeffry Again Re: [CANSLIM] PRARS Top 50 [CANSLIM] Laszlo Birinyi's Prize-Winning MF Re: [CANSLIM] Birinyi's MF--TA!! Re: [CANSLIM] KTIE for JW only Re: [CANSLIM] KTIE for JW only Re: [CANSLIM] EDAC moving again [CANSLIM] Tom (all others excuse the waste of bandwidth) [CANSLIM] Re: SPX Daily Prices Re: [CANSLIM] Re: SPX Daily Prices--Tim Re: [CANSLIM] Re: SPX Daily Prices [CANSLIM] Pump & Dump CANSLIM site? [CANSLIM] Non-CS Investment Idea [MU: Connie] Re: [CANSLIM] Pump & Dump CANSLIM site? [CANSLIM] For Connie: other members excuse me please Re: [CANSLIM] Re: SPX Daily Prices--Tim ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 21:11:13 -0400 From: Jeffry White <"postwhit@sover.net"@sover.net> Subject: [CANSLIM] Rolatzi - "M" > 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 You got it, dude!! But not a very pretty low to work from, in my experience. Like the probabilities and messages sent out by those huge reversals like May 27. Now, next question: What do we make of the NYSE and SP not making a new low after May 27? Gonna have to ponder that one, myself... Thanks for the data. JW - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 09:21:23 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re.Tom (why a web page etc) Jans, fair questions and I will try to answer them. I have thought of setting up a home page for some time, it's a free service with my ISP. However, as a licensed broker (however inactive) it required prior approval of all content, and change, by the NASD. Too much hassle before now. I have also gone thru periodic stages where I felt my thoughts on the market, economics, "M", and other events and influences I thought were pertinent to an investing group, were not deemed useful or appropriate by the group. Certainly were considered and criticized as being "non CANSLIM" which mostly they were, altho I still object to the label of them as "noise". Yet some members still wanted those comments. I went thru a period where I only sent those kind of comments to a private mail list, by request only. Since I didn't have a mail manager, the header became quite cumbersome with over 50 addresses on it. I also follow, for various personal reasons, small and micro cap stocks, some under $12 a share, for which I have been criticized as posting on "non CANSLIM" stocks (even tho I have personally seen WON recommend $6 and $8 stocks to his institutional clients). Lately, I have restricted my "picks" list to only stocks over $12, and will keep the ones under that "magical" threshold to myself (such as EDAC and EPIQ, my two biggest winners, were trading at the time I first posted them to this group). No, I am not planning to leave the group at this time, altho may switch to the digest version to cut down the volume of email. But if I set up a web page, then at least I know I'm not interfering with how the group wants the group to run, and still not withholding my thoughts on economics, the market, or my picks from those members that still want to read them. It will be their choice to go visit or not. In the meantime, I will try to post any "non CANSLIM" responses or comments privately. I am not using the 10/50/200 EMA lines for any entry/exit decisions, I am using MACD crossing the zero line for that. I include these EMA lines in my charting at BigCharts solely to allow me to view them at the same time as I view MACD as, to me, they represent significant support and resistance levels. If I am contemplating an action on a stock, I want this info in front of me. Why don't I use traditional volume/price parameters? Well, I do to some extent still, used to use them heavily when I had daily access to live quotes as well as the ability to trade my own acct at work. Now that I am more removed from the real time happenings, I find I must try to anticipate what a stock will do, or else wait for it to tell me what it has already done. That is why I am exploring MACD now, since I didn't find that OBV/MF could do this for me without being able to also watch the stock during actual trading. If I was able to enter buy limit orders based on volume rather than price, or better still a combo of both, then I would incorporate this more. However, as I mentioned some time ago, when dealing with small and micro cap stocks, you usually can't afford to wait for a 6-8 week base before acting. It has been my experience that you have to "sneak up" on them, interestingly also mentioned by some of my critics this weekend using different methods than mine. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: JANSI1AUG1@aol.com To: CANSLIM@xmission.com Date: Thursday, June 04, 1998 11:45 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] Re.Tom >Tom, > > (I'm posting here because I thought the group might be interested). >Thanks for your response concerning additions to your "stock watch list". But >why would you want to create a Web page for your Market perspectives, >economics and stock's you select to watch. Isn't this what Canslim is for? >Personally, I don't think your Canslim views are "a waste of band width". If >I did, I wouldn't subscribe to Canslim Digest. The only thing I believe a Web >page will do, in this instance, is force Canslimmers to go to two rather than >one Web site if they value your instructive tidbits and educational >perspectives. (As an aside, if you create a Web page to convey all your >Canslim information, then does that mean that you are intending to leave the >group?) > > Tom, perhaps I missed it, but I'm really surprise no one has asked how >you use the 10, 50 and 200 EMAs. Do you wait for entry for the day price to >pass the 10, 50, 200? Or do you look for the 10 to pass the 50 or 200? Or 50 >to pass the 200? Also, does the slower moving data have to be moving up >before it is penetrated? > > Tom: Since WON emphasizes the importance of volume in determining stock >entry points, why don't you use volume indicators in your TA analysis? > > Jans > > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 09:38:20 -0400 From: "Gary M. Pess" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: O'Neil's Seminar on June 6 Mary, Thanks for the tips from the seminar. This is very helpful for those of us who couldn't attend. Sincerely, Gary M. Pess 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, 7 Jun 1998 07:20:59 -0700 (PDT) From: dbphoenix Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Rolatzi - "M"--Jeffry <> Jeffry, the Naz was .04 lower on the third than the twenty-seventh, but I'd be reluctant to claim that O'N's observation can be reduced to that level of mathematical hair-splitting. Even if we get the "follow-through", anyone reentering here should remember those fake-outs you mentioned and watch closely with tight stops. - --Db _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 07:36:46 -0700 (PDT) From: dbphoenix Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Rolatzi - "M"--Jeffry Again <<> 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 You got it, dude!! But not a very pretty low to work from, in my experience. Like the probabilities and messages sent out by those huge reversals like May 27. Now, next question: What do we make of the NYSE and SP not making a new low after May 27? Gonna have to ponder that one, myself... Thanks for the data. JW>> Interesting that my numbers are different from these, though only slightly. I brought up the historical database from stocktools and got the following: 5/27: 1742.50 6/01: 1741.69 6/03: 1742.02 So, according to them, the first was lowest, though as I said, this may all be hairsplitting. My recommendations remain the same. While there's more support at 1700, 1750 has held awfully well. I have no idea if this is as far as the Naz correction goes or not since I no longer indulge in scenarios (or try not to). Given the number of constructive chart patterns I'm seeing, though, for me it's worth the risk (given my personal level of risk-tolerance) to enter a few positions here. But then I don't plan on taking a long vacation on Tuesday, either. - --Db _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 07:56:18 -0700 From: Bill Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] PRARS Top 50 At http://www.prars.com Be advised that the rankings are based on polled data as submitted by visitors to the PRARS site. ie its a subjective ranking. I don't agree with results in that there are many great locations that were not represented. eg http://quote.yahoo.com is about as good as they get for a free site and not making their top 50 list - shame, shame, shame.... ;-) Bill-->> - ------ At 3:32 AM -0700 6/7/98, Alexander Herrmann wrote: >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, 07 Jun 1998 10:55:10 -0400 From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: [CANSLIM] Laszlo Birinyi's Prize-Winning MF . Members-- My use of OBV/MF as indicators for screening stocks has not set well with one or two vocal members, and perhaps some not so vocal. The positive and negatiave divergences were thought "imaginary" and an aspect of technical "tricks" that one should avoid. I've edited a short essay even shorter to offer this comment on MF. There are two points worth noting in the essay: [1] Not all investors think MF divergences are imaginary or trickery. [2] Why may price rise and MF fall; or the reverse? Money flow analysis links volume to changes in stock price, with the goal to predict a stock's price movement. . . . By Bryan R. Bradford Laszlo Birinyi enhanced his already-impressive reputation as a money manager by winning last year's Louis Rukeyser Wall $treet Week stock-picking roundtable, booking a return of some 54.8%. One of Birinyi=92s secrets is money flow analysis, which is a sophisticated technique for linking volume to changes in stock price. Briefly, Birinyi=92s money flow calculation takes every uptick (or downtick) in a stock=92s price, and adds together the number of shares that caused that movement. At the end of one week the difference in the uptick number of shares and the downtick number of shares produces a single number that usually matches the upward or downward trend in stock prices. Obviously, if sales were much higher than purchases, then the market will punish that stock with a lower price. Only markets aren=92t perfect: in the case of a handful of stocks, despite heavy selling or buying volumes, the stock price moves in a counterintuitive direction. The reason for this is fairly simple. In the case of a stock with highly negative money flows that rises nonetheless, the downtick trades were apparently much larger in volume than the uptick trades. Still, because of the timing and frequency of the uptick trades, the stock rose despite heavy selling. Birinyi drew the conclusion that a stock that =91defies gravity=92 by rising or falling in the face of a contrary money flow will eventually correct itself and find its appropriate price. According to the theory, the market may be inefficient over the short term, but is fairly efficient over the long. - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 08:19:09 -0700 (PDT) From: dbphoenix Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Birinyi's MF--TA!! <> Unfortunately for your effort, the MF referred to in the article has nothing to do with the MF you use from bigcharts. And there's no mention at all of OBV. Since you linger over my use of the words "imaginary" and "tricks", I'll assume that suggesting that you read my comments again would do no good. Suffice it to say that if some of these "divergences" were not in fact imaginary, every chartist on the planet would agree on them. This, as we know, is not the case. As far as "tricks" are concerned, an education in stock selection or evaluation of any sort that runs from A to Z cannot begin at P if the investor is to enjoy consistent, long-term success. Those are the dues that must be paid. Those who try to start at P with a variety of formulaic short-cuts wind up paying a higher price. - --Db _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 08:41:53 -0700 From: Bill Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] KTIE for JW only Surprised to hear that HTMMIS includes TA talk/application and has advice on how to deal with speculative binges as exibited by a non-CANSLIM stock such as LCOS. Thanks for the pointer to the TAGuru site. O'Neill will roll over in his grave with this one. He died last week, you know, or was that Bob Hope? Bill-->> - ------------------------- At 6:07 AM -0700 6/7/98, 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 > >- - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 08:41:53 -0700 From: Bill Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] KTIE for JW only Surprised to hear that HTMMIS includes TA talk/application and has advice on how to deal with speculative binges as exibited by a non-CANSLIM stock such as LCOS. Thanks for the pointer to the TAGuru site. O'Neill will roll over in his grave with this one. He died last week, you know, or was that Bob Hope? Bill-->> - ------------------------- At 6:07 AM -0700 6/7/98, 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 > >- - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 08:50:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EDAC moving again Then you expected a little too much, IMHO. I did not say "breakout! sell everything you have to get in!" I said it was "moving again". I didn't even look at the volume. At 08:42 PM 6/6/98 +0200, you wrote: >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. > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 23:11:33 -0400 From: Jeffry White <"postwhit@sover.net"@sover.net> Subject: [CANSLIM] Tom (all others excuse the waste of bandwidth) Tom, I must respond. > 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). I think you would do well to go back and read study posts you write like this one. The "tone" is so seemingly "high and mighty" that some, including me of course, cannot help but take offense. What a divine curtosey that you gave us time to speak our piece....Why must you take all this so personally? Is it because you view yourself with such self importance that a simple disagreement provides grounds for you to stomp off on an "unsubscribe" tirade? Try a little objectivity, Tom. Please. > 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). But will you favor us with a response to the questions you've been ducking for almost a month, or will you simply continue to fob off on garbage like "your a trial lawyer, aha!!"? You want to discuss CANSLIM, but on your terms only? Is that what we are to take from your posts? If so, then give us a break. > 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). Don't want you to apologize for it, just not sure why you expected a "ticker tape parade". If it works for you, terrific, I'm happy for you. Hope it turns out well for you. Snipped... > 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. Darn generous of you, Tom, to favor me with an arrogant statement like: you "let [me] study it as much as [I] wish". I studied it for about 10 minutes and wrote you a detailed note, privately. You never responded to my note, and then post a bunch of weepy noise to the group about nobody ever pays any attention to my "drum roll please" posts. You seemingly avoid discussion prompted by any single question which is other than one where you can answer the question with some finality and avoid discussion. You also dodge questions about some of your responses or comments. Perhaps you are the trial lawywer, because as they say, "a good trial lawyer never asks a question without knowing in advance the answer." Is there anything about CANSLIM that you don't know better than the rest of us 800 members? > 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 > A couple of things --- first, I said directly in my posts on EDAC (to you privately and to the group), I'm not trying to persuade you of squat. Not trying to prove you "wrong", embarass you, or anything else. At first, I just thought you might be willing to work with me to post a comparison of indicators and reads on a "CANSLIM" type stock, particularly one which "you" have an interest in. Of course, then when you whined to the group (nobody likes me, I'm being ignored), I gave that up and got a bit heavy handed with my "ticker tape parade" comments. But this cry baby stuff really gets my goat, Tom. Can you leave that at home for a few days, at least? Obviously, no matter what I do, it's going to be percieved by you as trying to cross examine you, or make you out the fool, persuade you, teach you something, etc. Apparently not worth any additional effort on my part to try and have a meaningful discourse with you. Second, your perception of the posts on EDAC as belated interest in the issue as a current or impending buy is a great example of my call for a little objectivity on your part. Or, at least, a little closer reading of the posts. Is this an "I told you so, but you wouldn't listen" comment? Or, is this a tantrum along the lines of "nobody likes my picks" or "nobody listens to me"? Nobody posted any comment about EDAC which even suggested that they were going to buy the dang thing. If you will take the time to remove those filtering glasses you wear, you will recognize that most of us are in cash and were simply using EDAC as an example of various ways of analyzing entry point. Is there something proprietary in your past or present involvement with EDAC that makes you think that everybody is now foaming at the mouth over this issue? Again, a little objectivity, please. You really want to "take something of value away from this group"? Then how 'bout a little effort on your part to avoid taking all this so personally, lighten up, attempt a little objectivity about the posts you are reading and the posts you are sending out. In my view, you are now the exclusive reason this group is spending so much bandwidth on non-CANSLIM topics. You have posted nothing on CANSLIM in days. However, I think there is some of the best CANSLIM discussion going on now than I've seen since I've been a member. Are you reading those posts, or are they so filtered out by those glasses of yours that you can't see that? Objectivity, please, Tom? Jeffry - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 09:11:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Tim Fisher Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: SPX Daily Prices FWIW, I own a few shares of VFINX (Vanguard Index Trust 500), and when I want to know how the SPX is doing on a daily closing basis, I just pull up my Quicken chart of VFINX prices. Quicken is good for quickie charts which you don't have to connect to the net to generate, all you have to do is download the prices once a week. You could just track it by entering the symbol in Quicken without buying any. The only drawback is you have to find another source for historical data, which you have to import yourself. VFINX 5/29 101.44 6/1 101.47 6/2 101.67 6/3 100.71 6/4 101.84 6/5 103.62 At 07:36 AM 6/7/98 -0700, you wrote: >Interesting that my numbers are different from these, though only >slightly. I brought up the historical database from stocktools and >got the following: > >5/27: 1742.50 >6/01: 1741.69 >6/03: 1742.02 > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 09:17:41 -0700 (PDT) From: dbphoenix Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: SPX Daily Prices--Tim <> Could you accomplish the same objective by following SPY (or MDY for midcaps)? - --Db _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 09:33:22 -0700 From: Bill Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: SPX Daily Prices Try this: Go to http://www.bigcharts.com and display the interactive chart for SPX. Select the time period of your choice and play with the indicators in REAL-TIME! VFINX closing prices don't get published by Vanguard for about 2 hours after market close and you don't get any intraday data. Never have to worry about importing data - let the ISP/Web master worry about that. Now, don't argue with me, I know what I'm doing. ;-) Bill-->> - ---------------------------- At 9:11 AM -0700 6/7/98, Tim Fisher wrote: >FWIW, I own a few shares of VFINX (Vanguard Index Trust 500), and when I >want to know how the SPX is doing on a daily closing basis, I just pull up >my Quicken chart of VFINX prices. Quicken is good for quickie charts which >you don't have to connect to the net to generate, all you have to do is >download the prices once a week. You could just track it by entering the >symbol in Quicken without buying any. The only drawback is you have to find >another source for historical data, which you have to import yourself. > >VFINX >5/29 101.44 >6/1 101.47 >6/2 101.67 >6/3 100.71 >6/4 101.84 >6/5 103.62 > >At 07:36 AM 6/7/98 -0700, you wrote: >>Interesting that my numbers are different from these, though only >>slightly. I brought up the historical database from stocktools and >>got the following: >> >>5/27: 1742.50 >>6/01: 1741.69 >>6/03: 1742.02 >> >Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists >Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site >PFB Information >mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com >WWW http://OreRockOn.com > > >- - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 10:29:57 -0700 From: Bill Subject: [CANSLIM] Pump & Dump CANSLIM site? Anyone have any experiences with http://www.canslim.net? Pump and Dump site or what? Bill-->> - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 14:01:36 -0400 From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: [CANSLIM] Non-CS Investment Idea [MU: Connie] Members-- Just as the C & H is a powerful pattern for CS, the double bottom is a powerful pattern for trader and investor. I do not know if CS is attentive to the double bottom because of the nature of the pattern [a decline to an earlier decline, which may or may not be a 52-wk low]. Stocks that are making double bottoms would fail by several of CS numbers, I would assume. Because a double bottom need not be satisfied on a 52-wk low, it is useful to recognize the pattern. If I recall my O'Neill, and I haven't looked at him in years, it doesn't seem that a minor double bottom couldn't appear in the handle of the C & H. It would be a minor pattern, but not irrelevant in that you are looking for a breakout above the handle. Too, there would be no reason why a double bottom could not appear in the cup base; you would prefer it to appear on the right side of the cup and at least half way up toward the handle. For my investment account, I am preparing to buy Micron Technology [MU] sometime Monday. Other than knowing that several of the electronic sectors have been pounded, I am buying on technical indicators. On a 6-mos chart, you can see the completing of a double bottom followed by a couple of good Volume+ days. I am anticipating that the 3/7/10 EMA will continue to incline and give first, second, and third level buys. I anticipate that the SAR will turn buy within two days. The SloSto gave a buy about three days ago from a much oversold level. The SloSto is not without its worry to me. Notice that on May 18, the indicator was at the same level as now; the price then was 27; today it is 24. I will not forget the point. Much the same can be said of the MACD. At the end of March, the indicator was at the same level [look at the black vertical bars] as today; in March the price was 29; today it is 24. The OBV/MF are neither depressing nor promising in the sense that they are tracking a much beat down stock. To look at them would not give much hope. One of the most important points about each of them is that they, unlike several other indicators, are capable of diverging. I.e., either may fall while price is increasing [bearish divergence] or rise while price is falling [bullish divergence]. Secondary divergence occurs when price falls and the OBV or MF hold steady against price; this, too, is positive divergence. There also occurs a divergence when the price rises and the OBV or MF do not accompany the rise; this is a negative divergence, but not of the order of significance when price is rising and either indicator is falling. The OBV/MF are not buy or sell indicators; they are macro rather than micro. I look for positive divergence in both indicators when I screen for trading stocks. I look first at a 3-month chart, probably out of habit. If this time frame looks promising, I go to a 1-mos. These two perspectives can give most surprising results, just as a switch to a 5-day chart can make you think you're looking at a different stock. Last, but not always, I take a quick look at a 6-mos chart, only to check for significant support/resistance points. The OBV/MF tells me what to buy [stocks that have both OBV/MF positive divergence]. The EMA tells me when to buy. There is no reason not to use the SloSto and/or MACD for buy points. I know a couple of men who buy on nothing but the SloSto and MACD. They are always in the market, on one side or the other. [Their brokerage fees are such that they can be in and out for $50, irrespective of lot size.] The reason for checking support/resistance lines on the 6-mos chart is that it might make me decide to alter rising buy stops if I were buying more than a single lot. The 3/7/10 EMA will give a first level buy with just an uptick or two on Monday. I'll watch the stock closely, for there have been a lot of bad things happen to MU. There have been 17 straight down days, a horrendous and debilitating stretch of losses. Among all these down days there is no clear support/resistance area. About the best you can do is look at the volume indicators and look for spikes; there are a couple in mid-May. If, indeed, these are to be support/resistance, there ought to be a fairly uninterrupted run up to 27 or so. I'll be watching the 5-day hourly chart and the Time/Price chart [not on BC] for support/resistance levels. I'd like to see some large blocks pass on upticks. Connie Mack - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 11:12:43 -0700 (PDT) From: dbphoenix Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Pump & Dump CANSLIM site? <>>> CANSLIM devotees seem to have split themselves up over the years into three groups: the value crowd which stresses fundamentals, the momentum crowd which stresses RS, and the technical crowd which goes well beyond rectangular bases and cups-and-handles to include a wider variety of patterns and analytical tools. Most people, of course, are a combination of two or all three, perhaps leaning toward one camp rather than another. This is a pretty-good site or a not-bad site, depending on how you look at it and how much you know about CS. It gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "do your own homework", and if one doesn't know what the phrase means, he can wind up in big trouble (some of their picks have been extraordinarily painful losers). But if one is grown-up and disciplined and business-like about the whole thing, I think the site has real value. Anyone who's done this for a while could find these stocks by himself, but one never knows if something has somehow slipped through the cracks in his methodology. This is bit more momentum-based than the value players will like, but far less TA-based than other CS sites I've seen. On the whole, as I said, it has real value, but one must look at it as a source for ideas, not as a source of picks. - --Db _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 14:28:40 -0700 From: David Reid Subject: [CANSLIM] For Connie: other members excuse me please > Netscape Connie I want to ask a favor of you and I promise I wont bug you again.Will you look at NSCP's chart and give me your T/A feeling on it for the short term. I have some friends and we share a little info and they have some differing opinions on the charts.. I have been holding this stock for a while and missed a sell oppurtunity a couple weeks ago at 32 because I was out of town and it slipped up on me. It is hovering around my entry point now and I am wanting to move out of this stock asap. Thanks in advance and if you cant get to it that will be ok too. thanks Dave - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 11:43:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: SPX Daily Prices--Tim I imagine you could, haven't tried it. I know you can't just get index quotes and follow them since Quicken doesn't understand the "^" At 09:17 AM 6/7/98 -0700, you wrote: ><when I want to know how the SPX is doing on a daily closing basis, I >just pull up my Quicken chart of VFINX prices.>> > >Could you accomplish the same objective by following SPY (or MDY for >midcaps)? > >--Db > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #273 ***************************** 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.