Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Funds

From: "Tom Worley" <stkguru@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Funds
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 21:33:51 -0500

Next Article (by Author): Re: [CANSLIM] my first charts "Tom Worley"
Previous Article (by Author): [CANSLIM] Re: Funds Spencer48@aol.com
Top of Thread: [CANSLIM] Re: Funds Spencer48@aol.com
Articles sorted by: [Date] [Author] [Subject]

I would write DGO and ask them about that specific stock and its funds
ownership. In some cases the NA may mean they don't have current data, in
other cases it may mean that funds ownership is less than 1%

- ----- Original Message -----
From: <Spencer48@aol.com>
To: <canslim@lists.xmission.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 9:26 PM
Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: Funds


Tom:

      What do you make of a stock where the DG-Online stat. for funds is
"NA".  I'm looking at SMD, and it has nice aggregate number for mgt. which
is
holding the stock (39%); the weekly chart looks like I'd want to watch it;
earnings are very nice as is cash flow; it has no debt and ROE is a
spectacular 59%.  However, not knowing how many funds are holding the stock
gives me pause.

     How do you analyze a stock when the everything else seems nice, but
funds say "NA"?

jans




- -
- -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
- -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
- -"unsubscribe canslim".  Do not use quotes in your email.



- -
- -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.