Go to Jeff Salisbury LWGate Home Page.From: "Tom Worley" <stkguru@bellsouth.net>
Subject: SMD (was Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Funds)
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 08:55:06 -0500
Next Article (by Subject): [CANSLIM] "M" "Tom Worley"
Articles sorted by: [Date]
[Author]
[Subject]
I took another look at this one, and note that the data appears stale (last
report of # of funds holding was for March 02 at 1 fund, qtr before was 2
funds, and for the two qtrs before that was also N/A). So bottom line is
that funds are not interested in it apparently, and there may either no
longer be any fund reporting holding the position, or is so small in
quantity to be inconsequential.
While I often buy stocks where funds have not yet started to accumulate, or
are at best only low single digit percentage owners, the trend on this one
appears bad.
- ----- 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.
Next Article (by Subject): [CANSLIM] "M" "Tom Worley"
Articles sorted by: [Date]
[Author]
[Subject]