Re: [CANSLIM] Stock lists

From: larry l worden <worden33@juno.com>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stock lists
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 19:13:12 -0800

Next Article (by Subject): Re: [CANSLIM] Stock lists "Tom Worley"
Previous Article (by Subject): Re: [CANSLIM] Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2002 15:11:27 -0500 "Katherine Malm"
Next in Thread: Re: [CANSLIM] Stock lists "Tom Worley"
Articles sorted by: [Date] [Author] [Subject]

  I appreciate members putting stocks lists on the board. I like to
investigate them to see why they apply to CANSLIM and where the stock may
go. I get more out of this than the IBD stock examples. Anybody can go
back and find stocks that follow a pattern after the fact like IBD does.
I also appreciate Tom's weekly list.  Thanks Tom.        Larry

On Mon, 25 Feb 2002 18:19:45 -0500 "Tom Worley" <stkguru@netside.net>
writes:
> Cash flow is also only 56 cents compared to 73 cents earned last 
> year.
> 
> Tom Worley
> stkguru@netside.net
> AIM: TexWorley
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <Spencer48@aol.com>
> To: <canslim@lists.xmission.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 5:28 PM
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stock lists
> 
> 
> > Patrick:
> >
> >      You're right.  CMX does have an interesting looking chart.  
> And its
> > earnings and sales are nice.  Moreover, its short interest is high 
> (8.1),
> and
> > its PEG (as Ian, and now I, calculate it) is a nice .79
> >
> >      However, DG lists its ROE as "NA" which makes me wonder how 
> competent
> > the company is in investing its equity (I've see DG's "NA" in ROE 
> only
> when
> > the company has had minus earnings in the last quarter or two).  I 
> also
> > wonder at a company that refuses to convey it's stats:  The 
> earnings and
> > equity are known by the company-why doesn't it reveal its ROE (Its 
> website
> is
> > not highlighted in DG)?  Also,  its SMR is unrated by DG.
> >
> >      In addition cash flow is less than 2001 earnings:  This makes 
> me
> wonder
> > (along with the above) how trustworthy its accounting is.   From a 
> Canslim
> > perspective I'd pass because it's float is owned by 41% funds 
> (moreover,
> what
> > appears to be a skittish manangement owns only 5%).  There is also 
> over
> 220
> > million shares in the float.
> >
> > jans
> >
> >
> > In a message dated 2/25/2002 3:05:33 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> > pjwahl@attbi.com writes:
> >
> > << Well, only one stock, certainly worth a look and of course do 
> your own
> > homework,
> >  figure things out for yourself, caveat emptor, etc etc.  Anyway 
> Caremark
> > (CMX) has
> >  got a pretty nice looking chart, decent earnings.  The question 
> mark
> might
> > be that
> >  revenue growth has slowed a bit, but its not a substantial 
> slowdown, and
> > earnings
> >  growth continues to be very strong. >>
> >
> > -
> > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
> > -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
> > -"unsubscribe canslim".  Do not use quotes in your email.
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -
> -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
> -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
> -"unsubscribe canslim".  Do not use quotes in your email.
> 

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

Go to Jeff Salisbury LWGate Home Page.