Go to Jeff Salisbury LWGate Home Page.From: "Tom Worley" <stkguru@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: TOO (was:[CANSLIM] WebLinks)
Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 23:03:08 -0400
Next Article (by Subject): [CANSLIM] Off-topic: IRA question Dave Cameron
Previous Article (by Subject): RE: TOO (was:[CANSLIM] WebLinks) "Duke Miller"
Top of Thread: RE: TOO (was:[CANSLIM] WebLinks) "Duke Miller"
Articles sorted by: [Date]
[Author]
[Subject]
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
- ------=_NextPart_000_0139_01C1FC64.ADCD5A10
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MessageDuke, not that many years ago, WON's exhortations to pick stocks =
with a few (but not many) institutional investors already holding it was =
the gospel. But that seems to have gone out the window along with the =
rules on "S"
- ----- Original Message -----=20
From: Duke Miller=20
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 11:00 PM
Subject: RE: TOO (was:[CANSLIM] WebLinks)
Thanks, Katherine,
I just am guilty of interpreting WON too tightly, sometimes. His whole =
point (I thought) seems to be you got to get in before they do, lest you =
be subject to their whims, blah, blah...
Duke
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com =
[mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Katherine Malm
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 3:41 PM
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: TOO (was:[CANSLIM] WebLinks)
Hi Duke,
I see plenty of stocks doing well and/or setting up good bases that =
have lower institutional sponsorship. Unless the % is extraordinarily =
high, it doesn't bother me all that much. Afterall, CANSLIM is about =
riding on the coat tails of the big money, so no institutional money, no =
coat tails!
Katherine
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Duke Miller=20
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:19 AM
Subject: RE: TOO (was:[CANSLIM] WebLinks)
So, Katherine,
What's your take on the institutional domination of a lot of the =
better looking stocks (at least for now). Could it be these are in the =
limelight because it's the only place the institutions have been =
venturing into?
Duke
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com =
[mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Katherine Malm
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 2:03 AM
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: TOO (was:[CANSLIM] WebLinks)
Hi Tom,
I'm not surprised by the low management ownership, as it's common =
when a stock is a spin-off. (This, from LTD in Aug '99). While I know =
you much prefer companies still in the entrepreneurial stage with high =
mgmt ownership, spin-offs have a history of doing very well in most =
cases. Freedom from the mother-ship allows the new company to focus on =
their specific product/marketing niche. TOO seems pretty savvy at =
attacking the pre-teen girl niche. They have few competitors that serve =
the market as comprehensively.
I don't remember exactly when, but TOO was added to the S&P Small =
Cap 600 recently. I remember at the time that there was a big runup in =
price in anticipation. Once it was officially added, the price took a =
hike South. The addition to the index may explain the fairly high =
institutional ownership.
Katherine
PS...Darn...was hoping the weblink was gone for good!! :)) I =
really HATE all those eyeballs....
- ------=_NextPart_000_0139_01C1FC64.ADCD5A10
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Message</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2715.400" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>Duke, not that many years ago, WON's =
exhortations to pick=20
stocks with a few (but not many) institutional investors already holding =
it was=20
the gospel. But that seems to have gone out the window along with the =
rules on=20
"S"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message -----=20
<DIV style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A=20
title=3Ddukemill@tampabay.rr.com =
href=3D"mailto:dukemill@tampabay.rr.com">Duke=20
Miller</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=3Dcanslim@lists.xmission.com=20
href=3D"mailto:canslim@lists.xmission.com">canslim@lists.xmission.com</A>=
</DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, May 15, 2002 11:00 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> RE: TOO (was:[CANSLIM] WebLinks)</DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D295595802-16052002><FONT face=3DArial>Thanks,=20
Katherine,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D295595802-16052002><FONT =
face=3DArial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D295595802-16052002><FONT face=3DArial>I just am =
guilty of=20
interpreting WON too tightly, sometimes. His whole point (I =
thought) seems=20
to be you got to get in before they do, lest you be subject to their =
whims,=20
blah, blah...</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D295595802-16052002><FONT =
face=3DArial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D295595802-16052002><FONT =
face=3DArial>Duke</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader lang=3Den-us dir=3Dltr =
align=3Dleft><FONT=20
face=3DTahoma size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> <A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com">owner-canslim@lists.xmis=
sion.com</A>=20
[mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] <B>On Behalf Of =
</B>Katherine=20
Malm<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, May 15, 2002 3:41 PM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
canslim@lists.xmission.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: TOO (was:[CANSLIM]=20
WebLinks)<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>Hi Duke,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I see plenty of stocks doing well and/or setting up good bases =
that have=20
lower institutional sponsorship. Unless the % is extraordinarily high, =
it=20
doesn't bother me all that much. Afterall, CANSLIM is about riding on =
the coat=20
tails of the big money, so no institutional money, no coat =
tails!</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Katherine</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
<A title=3Ddukemill@tampabay.rr.com=20
href=3D"mailto:dukemill@tampabay.rr.com">Duke Miller</A> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3Dcanslim@lists.xmission.com=20
=
href=3D"mailto:canslim@lists.xmission.com">canslim@lists.xmission.com</A>=
=20
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, May 15, 2002 =
7:19=20
AM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: TOO =
(was:[CANSLIM]=20
WebLinks)</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D124171812-15052002><FONT face=3DArial>So,=20
Katherine,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D124171812-15052002><FONT=20
face=3DArial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D124171812-15052002><FONT face=3DArial>What's your =
take on the=20
institutional domination of a lot of the better looking stocks (at =
least for=20
now). Could it be these are in the limelight because it's the =
only=20
place the institutions have been venturing into?</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D124171812-15052002><FONT=20
face=3DArial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D124171812-15052002><FONT=20
face=3DArial>Duke</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader lang=3Den-us dir=3Dltr =
align=3Dleft><FONT=20
face=3DTahoma size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> =
<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com">owner-canslim@lists.xmis=
sion.com</A>=20
[mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] <B>On Behalf Of =
</B>Katherine=20
Malm<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, May 15, 2002 2:03 AM<BR><B>To:</B> =
canslim@lists.xmission.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: TOO =
(was:[CANSLIM]=20
WebLinks)<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>Hi Tom,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I'm not surprised by the low management ownership, =
as it's=20
common when a stock is a spin-off. (This, from LTD in Aug =
'99).=20
While I know you much prefer companies still in the =
entrepreneurial stage=20
with high mgmt ownership, spin-offs have a history of doing very =
well in=20
most cases. Freedom from the mother-ship allows the new company to =
focus=20
on their specific product/marketing niche. TOO seems pretty savvy =
at=20
attacking the pre-teen girl niche. They have few competitors that =
serve=20
the market as comprehensively.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I don't remember exactly when, but TOO was added to the =
S&P Small=20
Cap 600 recently. I remember at the time that there was a big =
runup in=20
price in anticipation. Once it was officially added, the price =
took a hike=20
South. The addition to the index may explain the fairly high =
institutional=20
ownership.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Katherine</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>PS...Darn...was hoping the weblink was gone for good!! :)) I =
really=20
HATE all those eyeballs....</DIV>
=
<DIV> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0139_01C1FC64.ADCD5A10--
- -
- -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
- -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
- -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email.
Next Article (by Subject): [CANSLIM] Off-topic: IRA question Dave Cameron
Previous Article (by Subject): RE: TOO (was:[CANSLIM] WebLinks) "Duke Miller"
Top of Thread: RE: TOO (was:[CANSLIM] WebLinks) "Duke Miller"
Articles sorted by: [Date]
[Author]
[Subject]