Go to Jeff Salisbury LWGate Home Page.From: "Fred Richards" <ffradrich@attbi.com>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Why Professionals go astray
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 18:54:10 -0500
Next Article (by Subject): Re: [CANSLIM] Why Professionals go astray "david frank"
Previous Article (by Subject): Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR CVH Failed breakouts Post Analysis "Tom Worley"
Top of Thread: Re: [CANSLIM] Why Professionals go astray "david frank"
Next in Thread: Re: [CANSLIM] Why Professionals go astray "david frank"
Articles sorted by: [Date]
[Author]
[Subject]
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
- ------=_NextPart_000_0044_01C2537B.49FA04C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Heavens to Betsie . . .
I have even shown actual brokerage house statements to people and they still
don't believe the results.
In fact, one newspaper reporter had the gall to suggest that the statements
were obviously forgeries.
You are right . . . It's a "no-win" situation.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com
[mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Katherine Malm
Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 6:36 PM
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Why Professionals go astray
Hi Wyndy,
My comment about chucking CANSLIM was tongue-in-cheek. You can't measure a
system unless there are firm recommendations and/or nonsubjective components
for entry/exit.* CANSLIM is not about telling you specifically which stocks
you should and shouldn't buy, it doesn't recommend stocks---it's a process
of investing long in fundamentally sound high-growth stocks using an
intermediate term entry/exit strategy based on technicals. It's a long
strategy intended for uptrending markets rather than an "all weather"
strategy.
My intended point was that if someone prefers a system that has no
subjective components, is mechanically based and/or requires statistical
evidence before following it, then CANSLIM is not the right strategy for
them. If they are instead sufficiently confident in anecdotal evidence of
success and are comfortable with interpreting subjective criteria, then
CANSLIM will "fit" the person.
Katherine
* What can and has been done is to take a rule-based interpretation of
CANSLIM and then enter/exit only on quantifiable elements. When this is
done, one can measure the performance (and it's quite good, by the way).
However, every time I show a study that did this to someone, they find some
reason to doubt the results. There's just no pleasing some people. They
don't believe it if you *don't* show statistics, and when you *do* show them
statistics, they say that "statistics lie." Sounds no-win to me.
----- Original Message -----
From: Cwyndham@aol.com
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 5:48 PM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Why Professionals go astray
In a message dated 9/3/2002 5:14:16 PM Central Daylight Time,
kmalm@earthlink.net writes:
If track record is a prerequisite for judging content, then you may as
well
chuck CANSLIM out the window....as there is no official record of
WON's
yearly results since 1960-something when he began. Guess that means
that
CANSLIM has no value because WON and/or the IBD doesn't even *have* a
Hulbert rating.
Katherine
From the loss in subscribers to the newspaper and other offerings I
think that many people are chucking CANSLIM. Folks didn't care about
performance with a bull markets wind at their back but now it's a different
story. I for one want to know "where's the beef." I am sad to say I couldn't
find any data.
Wyndy
- ------=_NextPart_000_0044_01C2537B.49FA04C0
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><SPAN class=3D420245223-03092002><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>Heavens to Betsie . . . </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D420245223-03092002><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D420245223-03092002><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>I have=20
even shown actual brokerage house statements to people and they still =
don't=20
believe the results.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D420245223-03092002><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D420245223-03092002><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>In=20
fact, one newspaper reporter had the gall to suggest that the statements =
were=20
obviously forgeries.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D420245223-03092002><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D420245223-03092002><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>You=20
are right . . . It's a "no-win" situation.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>=20
owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com=20
[mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Katherine =
Malm<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, September 03, 2002 6:36 PM<BR><B>To:</B> =
canslim@lists.xmission.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [CANSLIM] Why =
Professionals=20
go astray<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>Hi Wyndy,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>My comment about chucking CANSLIM was tongue-in-cheek. You can't =
measure=20
a system unless there are firm recommendations and/or nonsubjective =
components=20
for entry/exit.* CANSLIM is not about telling you specifically which =
stocks=20
you should and shouldn't buy, it doesn't recommend stocks---it's a =
process of=20
investing long in fundamentally sound high-growth stocks using an =
intermediate=20
term entry/exit strategy based on technicals. It's a long strategy =
intended=20
for uptrending markets rather than an "all weather" strategy.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>My intended point was that if someone prefers a system that =
has no=20
subjective components, is mechanically based and/or requires =
statistical=20
evidence before following it, then CANSLIM is not the right strategy =
for them.=20
If they are instead sufficiently confident in anecdotal evidence of =
success=20
and are comfortable with interpreting subjective criteria, then =
CANSLIM will=20
"fit" the person.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Katherine</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>* What can and has been done is to take a rule-based =
interpretation of=20
CANSLIM and then enter/exit only on quantifiable elements. When this =
is done,=20
one can measure the performance (and it's quite good, by the way). =
However,=20
every time I show a study that did this to someone, they find some =
reason to=20
doubt the results. There's just no pleasing some people. They don't =
believe it=20
if you *don't* show statistics, and when you *do* show them =
statistics, they=20
say that "statistics lie." Sounds no-win to me.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
<A title=3DCwyndham@aol.com=20
href=3D"mailto:Cwyndham@aol.com">Cwyndham@aol.com</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> Tuesday, September 03, =
2002 5:48=20
PM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [CANSLIM] Why=20
Professionals go astray</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT lang=3D0 =
face=3DArial size=3D2=20
FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF">In a message dated 9/3/2002 5:14:16 PM Central =
Daylight=20
Time, <A href=3D"mailto:kmalm@earthlink.net">kmalm@earthlink.net</A> =
writes:<BR><BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff =
2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"=20
TYPE=3D"CITE">If track record is a prerequisite for judging content, =
then=20
you may as well<BR>chuck CANSLIM out the window....as there is no =
official=20
record of WON's<BR>yearly results since 1960-something when he =
began.=20
Guess that means that<BR>CANSLIM has no value because WON and/or =
the IBD=20
doesn't even *have* a<BR>Hulbert=20
rating.<BR><BR>Katherine</BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>From the loss in =
subscribers to=20
the newspaper and other offerings I think that many people are =
chucking=20
CANSLIM. Folks didn't care about performance with a bull markets =
wind at=20
their back but now it's a different story. I for one want to know =
"where's=20
the beef." I am sad to say I couldn't find any=20
=
data.<BR><BR>Wyndy<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></FONT></BODY></HT=
ML>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0044_01C2537B.49FA04C0--
- -
- -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): Re: [CANSLIM] Why Professionals go astray "david frank"
Previous Article (by Subject): Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR CVH Failed breakouts Post Analysis "Tom Worley"
Top of Thread: Re: [CANSLIM] Why Professionals go astray "david frank"
Next in Thread: Re: [CANSLIM] Why Professionals go astray "david frank"
Articles sorted by: [Date]
[Author]
[Subject]