Re: [CANSLIM] Law Suits (was ACRT or MXT?)

From: Spencer48@aol.com
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Law Suits (was ACRT or MXT?)
Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 20:58:46 EDT

Next Article (by Date): Re: Growth Estimates (was: [CANSLIM] Updated CANSLIM hunting list) "Katherine Malm"
Previous Article (by Date): Re: [CANSLIM] Law Suits (was ACRT or MXT?) "Tom Worley"
Top of Thread: Re: [CANSLIM] Law Suits (was ACRT or MXT?) Spencer48@aol.com
Articles sorted by: [Date] [Author] [Subject]

Norm & Katherine:

     I would add to the statement of Katherine's.  Not only has WON stated 
that the technicals of chart reading will many times illustrate a company's 
fundamental shortcomings (or its imminent earnings rise or new 
manfufacturing/marketing technique); but also WON answered a query in 
investors.com or IBD recently printed an article which is I think very 
appropos, and which declares that-while analysts know inside out the company 
they research, one should not buy the stock BECAUSE an analyst says the 
earnings will rise or the company has discovered a new technique.  Only 
timing-by reading stock charts or, as Katherine points out, looking at the 
RS-can tell you WHEN to buy.  

jans


In a message dated 5/27/2002 7:16:18 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
kmalm@earthlink.net writes:

<< When reading the details of ACRT's lawsuit, it seems plausible that 
there's something fishy in the works.  If you take a look at the fundamental 
summary indicators, ACRT looks pretty grand, but WON always states that 
technicals will tell the story long before the "reason" shows up in the 
fundamentals and that's reason enough to stay away. All that in total is 
enough for me to throw something like this in the stinky fish pile. Is t >>

- -
- -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.