Re: [CANSLIM] LU

From: "Tom Worley" <stkguru@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] LU
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 21:40:08 -0400
Next Article (by Author): Re: [CANSLIM] M where will it bottom? "Tom Worley"
Previous Article (by Author): Re: [CANSLIM] LU "Patrick Wahl"
Top of Thread: [CANSLIM] LU "Donald Wallker"
Next in Thread: Re: [CANSLIM] LU "Patrick Wahl"
Articles sorted by: [Date] [Author] [Subject]
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- ------=_NextPart_000_016D_01C231C8.596C1170
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Donald, while I don't follow LU, I do know enough generally about it to =
be surprised you might find it a CANSLIM candidate. Your original =
comment (It Looks like LU formed a na cup between 6/18 (2/7) and 7/16, =
and, as of yesterday completed a handle. Perhaps it is a good canslim =
candiadate.  Comments?) confused me. This later comment below does not =
help clarify. Yes, the price was about the same on the dates you =
mention. But that doesn't make a cup. Nor does the price dropping 25% or =
so since 7/16 make a handle. But more importantly, a lot of charts can =
form patterns without ever being CANSLIM.=20

Granted, the past two qtrs did show substantial decreases in losses, but =
they still lost money. And both qtrs showed sharp drops in revenues =
(-18% and -40%).  The RS is at 10, which is 70 points shy of what is =
recommended. EPS is at 50, 30 points shy of recommendations. I know of =
nothing that Lucent offers to meet the criteria of new ("N"), and it =
certainly is not considered a leader ("L"). It is a big cap, so presents =
nothing for size ("S"). And institutional holders, including funds, have =
been steadily dumping it, now down to 10% holdings by funds, so "I" is =
not good. And once again today, "M" told us to stay in cash.

I will give you that the forecasts for both this year (ending Sept) and =
next do reflect decreasing losses. But even that minor plus right now =
does not remotely make this CANSLIM.

I would be interested in your reasoning for seeing this as a CANSLIM =
candidate, am I missing something here?

- ----- Original Message -----=20
From: Donald Wallker=20
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 4:05 PM
Subject: [CANSLIM] LU


It looks like I got the price mixed up with one of the dates .  Sorry =
about that.  The time period should have been 6/18 to 7/16. the prices =
at the start and finish of  the cup are $2.70 Thereafter, the handle is =
formed.  Comments?=20

- ------=_NextPart_000_016D_01C231C8.596C1170
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>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2716.2200" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>Donald, while I don't follow LU, I do know =
enough=20
generally about it to be surprised you might find it a CANSLIM =
candidate. Your=20
original comment (<FONT size=3D2>It Looks like LU formed a na cup =
between 6/18=20
(2/7) and 7/16, and, as of yesterday completed a handle. Perhaps it is a =
good=20
canslim candiadate.&nbsp; Comments?) </FONT><FONT size=3D3>confused me. =
This later=20
comment below does not help clarify. Yes, the price was about the same =
on the=20
dates you mention. But that doesn't make a cup. Nor does the price =
dropping 25%=20
or so since 7/16 make a handle. But more importantly, a lot of charts =
can form=20
patterns without ever being CANSLIM. </FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>Granted, the past two qtrs did show substantial =
decreases=20
in losses, but they still lost money. And both qtrs showed sharp drops =
in=20
revenues (-18% and -40%).&nbsp; The RS is at 10, which is 70 points shy =
of what=20
is recommended. EPS is at 50, 30 points shy of recommendations. I know =
of=20
nothing that Lucent offers to meet the criteria of new ("N"), and it =
certainly=20
is not considered a leader ("L"). It is a big cap, so presents nothing =
for size=20
("S"). And institutional holders, including funds, have been steadily =
dumping=20
it, now down to 10% holdings by funds, so "I" is not good. And once =
again today,=20
"M" told us to stay in cash.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>I will give you that the forecasts for both this =
year=20
(ending Sept) and next do reflect decreasing losses. But even that minor =
plus=20
right now does not remotely make this CANSLIM.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>I would be interested in your reasoning for =
seeing this as=20
a CANSLIM candidate, am I missing something here?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message -----=20
<DIV style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A=20
title=3Ddougald@dmv.com href=3D"mailto:dougald@dmv.com">Donald =
Wallker</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> Monday, July 22, 2002 4:05 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> [CANSLIM] LU</DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>It looks like I got the price mixed up =
with one of=20
the dates .&nbsp; Sorry about that.&nbsp; The time period should have =
been 6/18=20
to 7/16. the prices at the start and finish of&nbsp; the cup are $2.70=20
Thereafter, the handle is formed.&nbsp;=20
Comments?&nbsp;</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

- ------=_NextPart_000_016D_01C231C8.596C1170--



- -
- -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.