Re: [CANSLIM] PNRA base criterion

From: "Katherine Malm" <kmalm@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] PNRA base criterion
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 14:22:35 -0500
Next Article (by Author): [CANSLIM] PNRA base criterion "david frank"
Previous Article (by Author): Re: [CANSLIM] Wedging example: CECO "Katherine Malm"
Top of Thread: [CANSLIM] PNRA base criterion "david frank"
Articles sorted by: [Date] [Author] [Subject]
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- ------=_NextPart_000_0179_01C254E7.ADF35860
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Good grief, David. I read that and went "news to me!".....not sure I've =
ever heard WON describe something quite this way, so will have to read =
it a few times to absorb the point of view. I look at that "short-term =
correction" area very differently. That is, I see it as an invalid base =
from which I would have avoided chasing any sort of breakout.  See my =
read on things at:

http://WallStreet-LLC.com/canslim/PNRA090502.jpg

Maybe "short term correction" is just a fancy term for "invalid base." =
Oh well, live and learn.

Katherine
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: david frank=20
  To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20
  Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 2:06 PM
  Subject: [CANSLIM] PNRA base criterion


  I found something very interesting in the ASK BILL section of today's =
IBD. It talks about PNRA and its fourth stage base. The interesting part =
of the answer is that the previous CwH base, although 9 weeks long, did =
not really count as a base, because it was shorter in duration and =
shallower; didn't dip closer to to its 200-day moving average, than the =
other 3 bases. Also, spent lesser time under its 50-day moving average =
before climbing again. Thus, they don't count this as a base. Read this, =
and look at both the daily and weekly charts of PNRA. Am I missing =
something here? David

- ------=_NextPart_000_0179_01C254E7.ADF35860
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>Good grief, David. I read that and went "news to me!".....not sure =
I've=20
ever heard WON describe something quite this way, so will have to read =
it a few=20
times to absorb the point of view. I look at that "short-term =
correction" area=20
very differently. That is, I see it as an invalid base from which I =
would have=20
avoided chasing any sort of breakout.&nbsp; See my read on things =
at:</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://WallStreet-LLC.com/canslim/PNRA090502.jpg">http://WallStre=
et-LLC.com/canslim/PNRA090502.jpg</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Maybe "short term correction" is just a fancy term for "invalid =
base." Oh=20
well, live and learn.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</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=3Dcamelot.homes@charter.net=20
  href=3D"mailto:camelot.homes@charter.net">david frank</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>=
 </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, September 05, =
2002 2:06=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [CANSLIM] PNRA base=20
  criterion</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I found something very interesting in =
the ASK=20
  BILL section of today's IBD. It talks about PNRA and its fourth stage =
base.=20
  The interesting part of the answer is that the previous CwH base, =
although 9=20
  weeks long, did not really count as a base, because it was shorter in=20
  duration&nbsp;and shallower; didn't dip closer to to its 200-day =
moving=20
  average, than the other 3 bases. Also, spent lesser time under its =
50-day=20
  moving average before climbing again. Thus, they don't count this as a =
base.=20
  Read this, and look at both the daily and weekly charts of PNRA. Am I =
missing=20
  something here? David</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

- ------=_NextPart_000_0179_01C254E7.ADF35860--


- -
- -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.