Go to Jeff Salisbury LWGate Home Page.From: Gene Ricci <genr@swbell.net>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Boomer Babies
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 22:04:25 -0500
Next Article (by Date): RE: [CANSLIM] Boomer Babies "Duke Miller"
Top of Thread: RE: [CANSLIM] Boomer Babies "Duke Miller"
Next in Thread: RE: [CANSLIM] Boomer Babies "Duke Miller"
Articles sorted by: [Date]
[Author]
[Subject]
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0096_01C27BA9.50A2C810 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MessageHi Duke, is it possible to repost your Boomer Babies or point me = to the URL? Thanks, Gene ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Duke Miller=20 To: CANSLIM=20 Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 11:16 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] Boomer Babies The Boomer Babies concept that that I passed on several weeks ago was = so poorly received by this group that I hesitate to bring it up again! = I'm not hurt, I promise. I've never been known to run with the crowd, = more often than not taking Frost's road less traveled. =20 However, dear friends, I have been doing some analysis on the list = that now contains 84 stocks, and I've discovered and interesting lack = of correlation. Interesting to me, at any rate. I'll explain: The weekend of October 9, I created a Boomer Babies Watch List = portfolio using the closing price on October 8 as the basis for each = stock. As of yesterday's close, this whole group is up about 4.5%, or = over $12,000 if you'd purchased 100 shares of each. No great shakes. =20 I thought it would be interesting to indicate on my spreadsheet the = dates any of the stocks appear on IBD's Screen of the Day. At risk of = eliciting a "duh", the assumption is the SODs more than likely feature = the better performing stocks to watch. At least that's what WON often = suggests. Going back to October 3rd's SOD and working forward, I found: = Out of the 84 stocks on the Boomer Babies list, 38 (45%) have made at = least one SOD appearance since 10/3. (The most is 7 appearances by a = total of five of the stocks.) Sorting the list based on the number of appearances by each stock = revealed stocks that appeared more than five times increased an average = of 5.5%; those appearing one to four times rose less than half that at = an average of 2.3%. As for the five that have appeared seven times, = they're up a little over 8%. But what of the 56 stocks not appearing on a SOD since October 3? = Holy assumption, Batman, they're up an average of 9.3%!! In other = words, none of these stocks appeared in screens ranging from ROE leaders = to Total Composite Ratings. What does all this prove? =20 It tells me the Boomer Babies list is producing the kind of prospects = I'm interested in: Solid companies across a broad range of industries = that stand to profit from the aging and eventual retirement of boomers. = (The "solid" is derived from, I think, the fact that all the candidates = were culled from nine months of New America features. A plus for IBD, = the publication.) However, a) It has prompted me to consider ceasing the downloading = every SOD for future study; b) I intend to follow the progress of each = stock with CANSLIM on my mind, but not obsessively so; c) It has raised = a level in cynicism regarding devotion to analysis of bases, breakouts, = etc. Those narratives are somewhat befuddling and often contradictory = at best). Sorry if that seems blasphemous, but that's my = observation(s). It just seems every time a breakout fails, they can = spot the reason, in hindsight, of course. Same theme, different day. Have a great weekend. Duke =20 PS: It was my intent to post the results of my survey as described = above, citing the specific stocks. But, alas, as some of you know, I = received a certified wrist-spanking from IBD's SS troops after posting a = SOD analysis back in July. Heaven forbid a further possible suspected = violation of IBD's proprietary blah, blah, blah... - ------=_NextPart_000_0096_01C27BA9.50A2C810 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><TITLE>Message</TITLE> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; = charset=3Diso-8859-1"> <META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4916.2300" name=3DGENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff> <DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS">Hi Duke, is it possible to repost your = Boomer=20 Babies or point me to the URL?</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS"></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS">Thanks,</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS">Gene</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </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=3Ddukemill@tampabay.rr.com = href=3D"mailto:dukemill@tampabay.rr.com">Duke=20 Miller</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</A> </DIV> <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, October 24, = 2002 11:16=20 AM</DIV> <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [CANSLIM] Boomer = Babies</DIV> <DIV><BR></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT face=3DArial>The Boomer=20 Babies concept that that I passed on several weeks ago was so = poorly=20 received by this group that I hesitate to bring it up again! I'm = not=20 hurt, I promise. I've never been known to run with the = crowd, more=20 often than not taking Frost's road less traveled. =20 </FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT=20 face=3DArial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002>However, dear = friends, I=20 have been doing some analysis on the list that now contains 84 stocks, = and I've discovered and interesting <EM>lack</EM> of = correlation. =20 Interesting to me, at any rate.</SPAN> <SPAN = class=3D607294613-24102002>=20 I'll explain:</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN=20 class=3D607294613-24102002></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT face=3DArial>The weekend = of October 9,=20 </FONT></SPAN><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT face=3DArial>I = created a=20 Boomer Babies Watch List portfolio using the closing price=20 on October 8 as the basis for each stock. As of yesterday's = close,=20 this whole group is up about 4.5%, or over $12,000 if you'd = purchased 100=20 shares of each. No great shakes. = </FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT=20 face=3DArial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT face=3DArial>I thought it = would be=20 interesting to indicate on my spreadsheet the dates any of the = stocks=20 appear on IBD's Screen of the Day. At risk of eliciting a = "duh",=20 the <EM>assumption </EM>is the SODs more than likely feature the = better=20 performing stocks to watch. At least that's what WON often=20 suggests. </FONT></SPAN><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT=20 face=3DArial>Going back to October 3rd's SOD and working forward, I=20 found: </FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT=20 face=3DArial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT face=3DArial>Out of = the 84 stocks=20 on the Boomer Babies list, 38 (45%) have made at least one = SOD=20 appearance since 10/3. (The most is 7 appearances by a = total of=20 five of the stocks.)</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT=20 face=3DArial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT face=3DArial>Sorting the = list based on=20 the number of appearances by each stock revealed stocks that = appeared=20 more than five times increased an average of 5.5%; those appearing one = to four=20 times rose less than half that at an average of 2.3%. As = for the=20 five that have appeared seven times, they're up a little over=20 8%.</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT=20 face=3DArial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT face=3DArial>But what of = the 56 stocks=20 <EM>not</EM> appearing on a SOD since October 3? Holy = assumption,=20 Batman, they're up an average of 9.3%!! In other words, none of = these=20 stocks appeared in screens ranging from ROE leaders to Total Composite = Ratings.</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT=20 face=3DArial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT face=3DArial>What does all = this=20 prove? </FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT=20 face=3DArial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT face=3DArial>It tells me = the Boomer=20 Babies list is producing the kind of prospects I'm interested = in: Solid=20 companies across a broad range of industries that stand to profit = from=20 the aging and eventual retirement of boomers. (The "solid" = is=20 derived from, I think, the fact that all the candidates were culled = from nine=20 months of New America features. A plus for IBD, the=20 publication.)</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT=20 face=3DArial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT face=3DArial>However, a) = It has=20 prompted me to consider ceasing the downloading every SOD for future = study; b)=20 I intend to follow the progress of each stock with CANSLIM on my = mind,=20 but not obsessively so; c) It has raised a level in cynicism = regarding=20 devotion to analysis of bases, breakouts, etc. Those = narratives=20 are somewhat befuddling and often contradictory at = best). =20 Sorry if that seems blasphemous, but that's my observation(s). = It just=20 seems every time a breakout fails, they can spot the reason, in = hindsight, of=20 course. Same theme, different day.</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002></SPAN><SPAN=20 class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT = face=3DArial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT face=3DArial>Have a great=20 weekend.</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002></SPAN><SPAN=20 class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT = face=3DArial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT face=3DArial>Duke =20 </FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002></SPAN><SPAN=20 class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT = face=3DArial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT face=3DArial> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT face=3DArial>PS: It was my = intent to=20 post the results of my survey as described above, citing the specific=20 stocks. But, alas, as some of you know, I received a certified=20 wrist-spanking from IBD's SS troops after posting a SOD analysis = back in=20 July. Heaven forbid a further possible suspected violation of = IBD's=20 proprietary blah, blah, = blah...</FONT></SPAN></DIV></FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT=20 face=3DArial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D607294613-24102002><FONT=20 face=3DArial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML> - ------=_NextPart_000_0096_01C27BA9.50A2C810-- - - - -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 Date): RE: [CANSLIM] Boomer Babies "Duke Miller"
Top of Thread: RE: [CANSLIM] Boomer Babies "Duke Miller"
Next in Thread: RE: [CANSLIM] Boomer Babies "Duke Miller"
Articles sorted by: [Date]
[Author]
[Subject]