Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR CVH Failed breakouts Post Analysis


From: "Katherine Malm" <kmalm@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR CVH Failed breakouts Post Analysis
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 09:27:52 -0500

Next Article (by Author): Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR CVH Failed breakouts Post Analysis Sol Mayer
Previous Article (by Author): Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR CVH Failed breakouts Post Analysis "Katherine Malm"
Top of Thread: Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR CVH Failed breakouts Post Analysis Sol Mayer
Articles sorted by: [Date] [Author] [Subject]


This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- ------=_NextPart_000_0103_01C254BE.8248E550
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Sol,

The I-Watch site is just a way of looking at institutional v. retail =
buying and a summary of institutional buying vs. selling "interest." =
There's really no direct correlation between what you see here and the =
actual volume on the stock, but it does give a clue as to which =
direction the institutional buyers are leaning. I've attached a quick =
mark up of the monthly summary so you can see what I was looking at on =
the chart.=20

http://WallStreet-LLC.com/canslim/CSTRIWatch090402.jpg

The Institutional interest at 2:1 is actually a *good* thing if the =
interest is primarily buying interest. I only get nervous if most of the =
activity is institutional selling interest and/or most of the activity =
pushing the price up is retail.

Katherine
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Sol Mayer=20
  To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20
  Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 9:01 AM
  Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR CVH Failed breakouts Post Analysis


  Katherine=20

  Firstly, thank you for your informative links almost everyone goes =
into my "favorites"=20

  Concrerning the failed b/o of CSTR  from 8/16 until the stk broke down =
all the action was on low volume so I'd think even though the =
institutional vol. was 3:1 on 8/22 I probably wouldn't have thought it =
to be distribution I would have thought it was just consolidation of b/o =
on low vol.  . Also, the monthly institutional 2:1 volume I would have =
attributed to buying the b/o  Obviously I missed something can you =
clarify.=20

  Thanks=20

   Katherine Malm wrote:=20

    Hi James,

    I'll add to John's "thanks for a great post" as it's info like this =
that
    helps bring out the more subtle clues when making buy/sell =
decisions. I've
    only recently gotten into the habit of looking at hourly charts, as =
DGO
    didn't have this feature in the older version. Your post is a great =
insight
    as to how this can be helpful as a sanity check on price/volume =
action.

    Here's a resource I use regularly which also helps pick up on the =
more
    subtle aspects of buying/selling in the market:

    http://makeashorterlink.com/?J1B8643B1 (Thomspon I-Watch, view 8/22)


    This shows the trend in institutional vs. retail buying/selling over =
a
    period of time. The link above is for the view on 8/22, where it's =
clear
    there's heavy sell interest by institutions. (that day, about 3:1
    Institutions:Retail activity, and 2:1 for the month to that point.) =
Click to
    a monthly view and the heavy sell interest shows up leading into the =
gap
    down.

    http://makeashorterlink.com/?N6C8523B1 (view to date, 1 month)

    Katherine

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "John Calkins"=20
    To:=20
    Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 7:16 AM
    Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR CVH Failed breakouts Post Analysis


    | Hi James,
    |
    | Thanks for your incredible responce to my Failed Breakout and =
Stops! I've
    | tried to look at the intraday charts before but didn't take them =
seriously
    | enough I guess. I have noted before that big moves on high volume =
during
    | the day seemed to be connected to some news or something, but was =
afraid
    it
    | was just market makers or day trading. I can't get more than 10 =
days ago
    at
    | BigCharts for a history on CSTR for the time frame but I think I
    understand
    | that when you see a CWH pattern within a 5 day then watch for a =
handle to
    | form or breakdown or up in price with high volume. Do you look at
    BigCharts
    | for this intraday charting and what is you setting preference, =
such as 5
    or
    | 10 day/ 1 hour or 15 min.? I had been getting my volume/price =
information
    | each day from my telephone service with TD Waterhouse but it looks =
like
    your
    | intra-day charts work much better.
    |
    |
    |
    |
    |
    |
    | ---- Original Message -----
    | From: "James Bond"=20
    | To:=20
    | Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 6:44 PM
    | Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR CVH Failed breakouts Post Analysis
    |
    |
    | > CSTR presents an interesting example of the importance
    | > of intraday charts. There is no clue of impending
    | > trouble on the daily chart until the stock broke down.
    | > The intraday chart, however, telegraphed the bad news
    | > well in advance.
    | >
    | > Like many other people, I too cannot follow the market
    | > during the day and have to check charts during the
    | > evening. When I have a position open, I check the
    | > chart every night with no exception.
    | >
    | > On Thursday, Aug 22, when this rally was still
    | > advancing, I was surprised that evening to see many
    | > bearish charts among the leading stocks. For example,
    | > FCN had a deterioting relative strength, CCR made a
    | > new high but its relative strength lagged, DORL gapped
    | > to a new high but saw no progress in daily price
    | > (distribution), and PIXR had formed an evening star
    | > candlestick pattern. If one or two stocks were acting
    | > poorly it probably wouldn't have bothered me so much.
    | > When most of the leading stocks were showing signs of
    | > weakness the market was in trouble. At that time I was
    | > long CCR, CSTR, DORL, NUTR, and PIXR. My first
    | > decision was to sell CCR, DORL and PIXR at the open
    | > next morning, and but to keep CSTR and NUTR.
    | >
    | > I changed my mind when I looked at the intraday chart
    | > for CSTR. On the daily chart, CSTR had formed an
    | > impeccible CwH base, with pp at 31.22. The breakout
    | > was on very good volume, and reached a high of 34.2.
    | > Because of a little overhead resistance (as mentioned
    | > by others), it was expected to form a second handle
    | > before breaking out to new highs. This was also noted
    | > by the issue of IBD the day after its breakout. It
    | > consolidated between 32 and 34 the next 5 days, with
    | > nothing extraordinary shown on the daily chart. I was
    | > several times tempted to add shares when it pulled to
    | > low 32's but thougt better of it. My plan was to add
    | > to my position when it broke out of the second handle.
    | > I wasn't even thinking about selling it before I
    | > looked at the intraday chart.
    | >
    | > I was alarmed by the intraday chart. On the intraday
    | > chart, the consolidation between 32 and 34 showed up
    | > as a five day CwH formation, with the appropriate
    | > volume actions (large volume on left and right sides,
    | > dryups on bottom and in handle). Handle high was 33.76
    | > which was the intraday high on Thursday. Everything
    | > was great except for the last hour or so of Thursday.
    | > Some heavy selling came in and broke the handle
    | > formation (little did I know that the Off Wall Street
    | > report was issued to its clients on that Thursday).
    | > WON told us that heavy selling in handle was a sign of
    | > trouble, and a good short can be entered when the
    | > handle low was broken as the volume picked up. Of
    | > course he was refering to daily charts. Intraday
    | > charts work the same way except its validity is much
    | > shorter in duration. If the market were healthy, I
    | > probably would have expected CSTR to pullback and test
    | > the pp and a decision could be made after the test.
    | > But with the other leading stocks weakening, there was
    | > no question at that point that CSTR was going to break
    | > below its pivot point. So I decided to sell it the
    | > next morning along with the others for a small profit.
    | >
    | > I was kicking myself a few days later when CSTR barely
    | > dipped below the pp and then rallied past my sell
    | > price. But that lasted only one day. Thank goodness
    | > the intraday chart gave me the only clue there was.
    | >
    | > As far as CVH was concerned, I ruled it out as a buy
    | > candidate early on. There were several issues with
    | > CVH. First was the lack of confirming strength in the
    | > group - although the group ranking was high, other
    | > stocks in the group either didn't have a proper base
    | > (SIE), or had a wide and loose base (MME). I avoid
    | > groups like this. Second CVH was overowned by
    | > institutions - over 90% of ownership. WON's rule was
    | > less than 50% institutional ownership. Third was a
    | > non-CANSLIM issue: CVH was being investigated for
    | > overcharging government. Although it was an old issue,
    | > as long as it remained unresolved, there could always
    | > be surprises.
    | >
    | > One final note. I don't think taking a 7% loss on
    | > every losing trade is ok. If one takes a 7% loss in a
    | > string of 5 trades (a finite probability), that's a
    | > third of capital lost - too much for any trading
    | > method, considering how hard it is to have a 50%
    | > return (the amount needed to come back). My
    | > understanding of it is that WON didn't intend 7% to be
    | > where you place the stop order. Instead it's the
    | > maximum allowable loss for a single trade. Usually it
    | > should take a screwup to have a 7% loss. If one buys a
    | > stock correctly, a 2-3% loss is achievable if the
    | > stock fails. Sometimes one can even exit with a small
    | > profit if the chart is read correctly.


- ------=_NextPart_000_0103_01C254BE.8248E550
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>Hi Sol,</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>The I-Watch site is just a way of looking at institutional v. =
retail buying=20
and a summary of institutional buying vs. selling "interest." There's =
really no=20
direct correlation between what you see here and the actual volume on =
the stock,=20
but it does give a clue as to which direction the institutional buyers =
are=20
leaning. I've attached a quick mark up of the monthly summary so you can =
see=20
what I was looking at on the chart. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://WallStreet-LLC.com/canslim/CSTRIWatch090402.jpg">http://Wa=
llStreet-LLC.com/canslim/CSTRIWatch090402.jpg</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>The Institutional interest at 2:1 is actually a *good* thing if the =

interest is primarily buying interest. I only get nervous if most of the =

activity is institutional selling interest and/or most of the activity =
pushing=20
the price up is retail.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Katherine</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=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=3Dsmaye1211@yahoo.com href=3D"mailto:smaye1211@yahoo.com">Sol =
Mayer</A>=20
  </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>=
 </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, September 05, =
2002 9:01=20
  AM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR CVH =
Failed=20
  breakouts Post Analysis</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <P>Katherine=20
  <P>Firstly, thank you for your informative links almost everyone goes =
into my=20
  "favorites"=20
  <P>Concrerning the failed b/o of CSTR&nbsp; from 8/16 until the stk =
broke down=20
  all the action was on low volume so I'd think even though the =
institutional=20
  vol. was 3:1 on 8/22 I probably wouldn't have thought it to be =
distribution I=20
  would have thought it was just consolidation&nbsp;of b/o&nbsp;on low =
vol.=20
  &nbsp;. Also, the monthly institutional 2:1 volume I would have =
attributed to=20
  buying the b/o&nbsp; Obviously I missed something can you clarify.=20
  <P>Thanks=20
  <P>&nbsp;<B><I>Katherine Malm <KMALM@EARTHLINK.NET></I></B>wrote:=20
  <BLOCKQUOTE=20
  style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px =
solid">Hi=20
    James,<BR><BR>I'll add to John's "thanks for a great post" as it's =
info like=20
    this that<BR>helps bring out the more subtle clues when making =
buy/sell=20
    decisions. I've<BR>only recently gotten into the habit of looking at =
hourly=20
    charts, as DGO<BR>didn't have this feature in the older version. =
Your post=20
    is a great insight<BR>as to how this can be helpful as a sanity =
check on=20
    price/volume action.<BR><BR>Here's a resource I use regularly which =
also=20
    helps pick up on the more<BR>subtle aspects of buying/selling in the =

    market:<BR><BR>http://makeashorterlink.com/?J1B8643B1 (Thomspon =
I-Watch,=20
    view 8/22)<BR><BR><BR>This shows the trend in institutional vs. =
retail=20
    buying/selling over a<BR>period of time. The link above is for the =
view on=20
    8/22, where it's clear<BR>there's heavy sell interest by =
institutions. (that=20
    day, about 3:1<BR>Institutions:Retail activity, and 2:1 for the =
month to=20
    that point.) Click to<BR>a monthly view and the heavy sell interest =
shows up=20
    leading into the =
gap<BR>down.<BR><BR>http://makeashorterlink.com/?N6C8523B1=20
    (view to date, 1 month)<BR><BR>Katherine<BR><BR>----- Original =
Message=20
    -----<BR>From: "John Calkins" <JCALKINS@OLYPEN.COM><BR>To:=20
    <CANSLIM@LISTS.XMISSION.COM><BR>Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 =
7:16=20
    AM<BR>Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR CVH Failed breakouts Post=20
    Analysis<BR><BR><BR>| Hi James,<BR>|<BR>| Thanks for your incredible =

    responce to my Failed Breakout and Stops! I've<BR>| tried to look at =
the=20
    intraday charts before but didn't take them seriously<BR>| enough I =
guess. I=20
    have noted before that big moves on high volume during<BR>| the day =
seemed=20
    to be connected to some news or something, but was afraid<BR>it<BR>| =
was=20
    just market makers or day trading. I can't get more than 10 days=20
    ago<BR>at<BR>| BigCharts for a history on CSTR for the time frame =
but I=20
    think I<BR>understand<BR>| that when you see a CWH pattern within a =
5 day=20
    then watch for a handle to<BR>| form or breakdown or up in price =
with high=20
    volume. Do you look at<BR>BigCharts<BR>| for this intraday charting =
and what=20
    is you setting preference, such as 5<BR>or<BR>| 10 day/ 1 hour or 15 =
min.? I=20
    had been getting my volume/price information<BR>| each day from my =
telephone=20
    service with TD Waterhouse but it looks like<BR>your<BR>| intra-day =
charts=20
    work much better.<BR>|<BR>|<BR>|<BR>|<BR>|<BR>|<BR>| ---- Original =
Message=20
    -----<BR>| From: "James Bond" <JAMES_BOND_3RD@YAHOO.COM><BR>| To:=20
    <CANSLIM@LISTS.XMISSION.COM><BR>| Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 =
6:44=20
    PM<BR>| Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR CVH Failed breakouts Post=20
    Analysis<BR>|<BR>|<BR>| &gt; CSTR presents an interesting example of =
the=20
    importance<BR>| &gt; of intraday charts. There is no clue of =
impending<BR>|=20
    &gt; trouble on the daily chart until the stock broke down.<BR>| =
&gt; The=20
    intraday chart, however, telegraphed the bad news<BR>| &gt; well in=20
    advance.<BR>| &gt;<BR>| &gt; Like many other people, I too cannot =
follow the=20
    market<BR>| &gt; during the day and have to check charts during =
the<BR>|=20
    &gt; evening. When I have a position open, I check the<BR>| &gt; =
chart every=20
    night with no exception.<BR>| &gt;<BR>| &gt; On Thursday, Aug 22, =
when this=20
    rally was still<BR>| &gt; advancing, I was surprised that evening to =
see=20
    many<BR>| &gt; bearish charts among the leading stocks. For =
example,<BR>|=20
    &gt; FCN had a deterioting relative strength, CCR made a<BR>| &gt; =
new high=20
    but its relative strength lagged, DORL gapped<BR>| &gt; to a new =
high but=20
    saw no progress in daily price<BR>| &gt; (distribution), and PIXR =
had formed=20
    an evening star<BR>| &gt; candlestick pattern. If one or two stocks =
were=20
    acting<BR>| &gt; poorly it probably wouldn't have bothered me so =
much.<BR>|=20
    &gt; When most of the leading stocks were showing signs of<BR>| &gt; =

    weakness the market was in trouble. At that time I was<BR>| &gt; =
long CCR,=20
    CSTR, DORL, NUTR, and PIXR. My first<BR>| &gt; decision was to sell =
CCR,=20
    DORL and PIXR at the open<BR>| &gt; next morning, and but to keep =
CSTR and=20
    NUTR.<BR>| &gt;<BR>| &gt; I changed my mind when I looked at the =
intraday=20
    chart<BR>| &gt; for CSTR. On the daily chart, CSTR had formed =
an<BR>| &gt;=20
    impeccible CwH base, with pp at 31.22. The breakout<BR>| &gt; was on =
very=20
    good volume, and reached a high of 34.2.<BR>| &gt; Because of a =
little=20
    overhead resistance (as mentioned<BR>| &gt; by others), it was =
expected to=20
    form a second handle<BR>| &gt; before breaking out to new highs. =
This was=20
    also noted<BR>| &gt; by the issue of IBD the day after its breakout. =
It<BR>|=20
    &gt; consolidated between 32 and 34 the next 5 days, with<BR>| &gt; =
nothing=20
    extraordinary shown on the daily chart. I was<BR>| &gt; several =
times=20
    tempted to add shares when it pulled to<BR>| &gt; low 32's but =
thougt better=20
    of it. My plan was to add<BR>| &gt; to my position when it broke out =
of the=20
    second handle.<BR>| &gt; I wasn't even thinking about selling it =
before=20
    I<BR>| &gt; looked at the intraday chart.<BR>| &gt;<BR>| &gt; I was =
alarmed=20
    by the intraday chart. On the intraday<BR>| &gt; chart, the =
consolidation=20
    between 32 and 34 showed up<BR>| &gt; as a five day CwH formation, =
with the=20
    appropriate<BR>| &gt; volume actions (large volume on left and right =

    sides,<BR>| &gt; dryups on bottom and in handle). Handle high was =
33.76<BR>|=20
    &gt; which was the intraday high on Thursday. Everything<BR>| &gt; =
was great=20
    except for the last hour or so of Thursday.<BR>| &gt; Some heavy =
selling=20
    came in and broke the handle<BR>| &gt; formation (little did I know =
that the=20
    Off Wall Street<BR>| &gt; report was issued to its clients on that=20
    Thursday).<BR>| &gt; WON told us that heavy selling in handle was a =
sign=20
    of<BR>| &gt; trouble, and a good short can be entered when the<BR>| =
&gt;=20
    handle low was broken as the volume picked up. Of<BR>| &gt; course =
he was=20
    refering to daily charts. Intraday<BR>| &gt; charts work the same =
way except=20
    its validity is much<BR>| &gt; shorter in duration. If the market =
were=20
    healthy, I<BR>| &gt; probably would have expected CSTR to pullback =
and=20
    test<BR>| &gt; the pp and a decision could be made after the =
test.<BR>| &gt;=20
    But with the other leading stocks weakening, there was<BR>| &gt; no =
question=20
    at that point that CSTR was going to break<BR>| &gt; below its pivot =
point.=20
    So I decided to sell it the<BR>| &gt; next morning along with the =
others for=20
    a small profit.<BR>| &gt;<BR>| &gt; I was kicking myself a few days =
later=20
    when CSTR barely<BR>| &gt; dipped below the pp and then rallied past =
my=20
    sell<BR>| &gt; price. But that lasted only one day. Thank =
goodness<BR>| &gt;=20
    the intraday chart gave me the only clue there was.<BR>| &gt;<BR>| =
&gt; As=20
    far as CVH was concerned, I ruled it out as a buy<BR>| &gt; =
candidate early=20
    on. There were several issues with<BR>| &gt; CVH. First was the lack =
of=20
    confirming strength in the<BR>| &gt; group - although the group =
ranking was=20
    high, other<BR>| &gt; stocks in the group either didn't have a =
proper=20
    base<BR>| &gt; (SIE), or had a wide and loose base (MME). I =
avoid<BR>| &gt;=20
    groups like this. Second CVH was overowned by<BR>| &gt; institutions =
- - over=20
    90% of ownership. WON's rule was<BR>| &gt; less than 50% =
institutional=20
    ownership. Third was a<BR>| &gt; non-CANSLIM issue: CVH was being=20
    investigated for<BR>| &gt; overcharging government. Although it was =
an old=20
    issue,<BR>| &gt; as long as it remained unresolved, there could =
always<BR>|=20
    &gt; be surprises.<BR>| &gt;<BR>| &gt; One final note. I don't think =
taking=20
    a 7% loss on<BR>| &gt; every losing trade is ok. If one takes a 7% =
loss in=20
    a<BR>| &gt; string of 5 trades (a finite probability), that's a<BR>| =
&gt;=20
    third of capital lost - too much for any trading<BR>| &gt; method,=20
    considering how hard it is to have a 50%<BR>| &gt; return (the =
amount needed=20
    to come back). My<BR>| &gt; understanding of it is that WON didn't =
intend 7%=20
    to be<BR>| &gt; where you place the stop order. Instead it's =
the<BR>| &gt;=20
    maximum allowable loss for a single trade. Usually it<BR>| &gt; =
should take=20
    a screwup to have a 7% loss. If one buys a<BR>| &gt; stock =
correctly, a 2-3%=20
    loss is achievable if the<BR>| &gt; stock fails. Sometimes one can =
even exit=20
    with a small<BR>| &gt; profit if the chart is read=20
correctly.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

- ------=_NextPart_000_0103_01C254BE.8248E550--


- -
- -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 Author): Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR CVH Failed breakouts Post Analysis Sol Mayer
Previous Article (by Author): Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR CVH Failed breakouts Post Analysis "Katherine Malm"
Top of Thread: Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR CVH Failed breakouts Post Analysis Sol Mayer
Articles sorted by: [Date] [Author] [Subject]


Go to Jeff Salisbury LWGate Home Page.