AW: [CANSLIM] Point of View: Why bother with fundamentals?

From: Andreas Himmelreich <judgejimmy@web.de>
Subject: AW: [CANSLIM] Point of View: Why bother with fundamentals?
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:16:58 +0100
Next Article (by Date): Re: [CANSLIM] Point of View: Why bother with fundamentals? John Kruger
Previous Article (by Date): AW: [CANSLIM] Point of View: Why bother with fundamentals? Andreas Himmelreich
Articles sorted by: [Date] [Author] [Subject]
Ryan looks first at Charts !!! (Thats what he said in Market Wizzards, do not know I he still using this aproach)
Ryan states that RS is slightly more important then EPS Rating

> -----Ursprungliche Nachricht-----
> Von:	larry l worden [SMTP:worden33@juno.com]
> Gesendet am:	Monday, December 17, 2001 7:24 AM
> An:	canslim@lists.xmission.com
> Betreff:	Re: [CANSLIM] Point of View: Why bother with fundamentals?
> 
> Maybe the question should be, do you get the best fundamental stocks and
> then look at the charts, or get the best charts and then look at the
> fundamentals? Thanks for the watchlist, I appreciate all of the work.    
> Larry
> 
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2001 20:36:53 -0500 "Tom Worley" <stkguru@netside.net>
> writes:
> Actually, Warren, I didn't hold onto it thru "thick and thin". My first
> trip well over two years ago was a near perfect CANSLIM play, only rules
> I violated was buying a stock then around $12, and with limited
> liquidity. Timed it near perfect, went up in an almost continuous trend
> for 7 straight weeks. There I violated the other rule, sold a stock with
> more than a 20% gain in less than 8 weeks (sold for a 70% gain in 7
> weeks). Exit turned out also correct, later bought it a 2nd and 3rd time
> for 20% and 30% gains. Last buy was nearly 18 months ago, and sold half
> after 10 months for a 220% gain, then sold another qtr position several
> months later for over 400% gain. 
> 
> I have made it clear, through over five years of posting here, that I
> violate many CANSLIM rules. Simply by buying thinly traded, low priced
> small caps, I am out of the mainstream of modern day CANSLIM. That's just
> one of many reasons why I do not normally post my stocks. But with my
> years of experience in investing, and many painful lessons learned, plus
> over a decade of trying to work with CANSLIM and WON products, I feel I
> can take those risks with my own money.
> 
> EPIQ is just one example of where early profits, combined with an
> exceptional business model, and solid fundies, allowed me to hold thru
> numerous corrections that would have stopped out the typical short term
> investor.  That is why my remaining holding in EPIQ is up 408% in under 2
> years. And why I will buy more at the right price. But I never could have
> done it without knowing how to invest in thinly traded, low priced small
> and micro cap stocks.
> 
> CANSLIM is designed for individual customization.
> 
> Tom Worley
> stkguru@netside.net
> AIM: TexWorley
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: Warren Keuffel 
> To: canslim@lists.xmission.com 
> Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2001 7:20 PM
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Point of View: Why bother with fundamentals?
> 
> 
> Yes, but if you held on to EPIQ through thick and thin, you're violating
> the sell rules of CANSLIM.  So are you saying you only follow the buy
> rules but not the sell rules?
> 
> Warren
> 
> Tom Worley wrote:
> 
> > CON - I like fundies Aside from artificial stimulus like a wire house
> > upgrade, or a firm being paid to hype / tout a stock, price movement
> > is driven by expectations for the future. And those expectations are
> > based on fundamentals of the stock. I also disagree with a belief that
> > a solid, quality CANSLIM purchase will only make you money for a few
> > weeks or a few months. Had I played EPIQ for every updraft and
> > downdraft, I would undoubtedly have found myself on the wrong side
> > more than once. Instead I held for over 14 months and saw it go up
> > over 500%. Fundamentals also build a degree of confidence that during
> > major events such as the 9/11 attacks, a good company can survive and
> > recover value. Fundamentals, and their rate of growth, also help us
> > see leadership. Tom Worley
> > stkguru@netside.net
> > AIM: TexWorley
> >
> >      ----- Original Message -----
> >      From: Katherine Malm
> >      To: canslim@lists.xmission.com
> >      Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2001 11:12 AM
> >      Subject: [CANSLIM] Point of View: Why bother with
> >      fundamentals?
> >       Proposed: If a typical CANSLIM/Intermediate term move in a
> >      stock lasts only a few weeks, and in good markets, only a
> >      few months, why bother selecting portfolio candidates using
> >      any sort of fundamental analysis? Returns in this time
> >      period are strictly based on price movement and can be
> >      maximized based on technical indicators and price/volume
> >      action alone. Thoughts pro/con? Katherine
> >
> 
> 
> -
> -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
> -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
> -"unsubscribe canslim".  Do not use quotes in your email. << Datei: ATT00013.htm >> 

- -
- -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
- -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
- -"unsubscribe canslim".  Do not use quotes in your email.
Go to Jeff Salisbury LWGate Home Page.