Go to Jeff Salisbury LWGate Home Page.From: "Katherine Malm" <kmalm@earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Big Money AGAIN, oh dear! Hay look Andy!
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 10:41:11 -0600
Previous Article (by Author): [CANSLIM] Re: stops "Jeff Mulder"
Articles sorted by: [Date]
[Author]
[Subject]
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
- ------=_NextPart_000_0016_01C2AE5D.A35603B0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi John,
I think in for me the most useful weekly activity is to simply flip through a
lot of charts. Over the years, this has been the single most important tool in
feeling comfortable with "reading" the price/volume and determining if a stock
might be a good candidate. Whether using something like DGO, TC2000, HGS, VV or
other services, the ability to look at a lot of charts is helpful.
I agree with you that volume is a key in bringing your eye to stocks that are
*currently* moving, but you also want a methodology that will draw your eye to
strong stocks in general. I think that WON's emphasis on relative strength (RS
Rank and RS relative to the market) are key in this regard. In other words, by
eliminating stocks with unacceptable (laggard) RS Ranks, you have half the work
done for you when looking for sound basing patterns. That doesn't help you sort
through stocks that are basing vs. stocks that have already broken out, however,
so you need other tools to do that. For years, I've used technical indicators
in VV to draw my eye to stocks that are moving in the right direction, but there
are many ways to do this. For example, HGS uses the relationship of a stock to
particular moving averages, the relationship of one moving average to another,
plus a few other technical indicators such as the ADX, DI etc.
(http://stockcharts.com/education/Resources/glossary/ADX.html) Others use
indicators such as the MACD to help draw their eye.
(http://stockcharts.com/education/Resources/glossary/MACD.html). The bottom line
is just to find something that consistently works for you, then have a means for
flipping through the resultant charts. I don't bother "grading" the charts when
I do this manually. I simply throw out the charts that aren't of interest in the
upcoming week and go from there.
In general, you might not want to limit your view to stocks within 15% of their
highs. The reason for this is simply that a valid breakout can occur as long as
the stock is in the upper half of the base. While WON suggests that many
breakouts occur within 5-15% of the 52 wk high, this is not the *only* place
that they can occur. In particular, with stocks moving within or out of a Bear
Market, many of the movers will not necessarily be coming off long uptrends, so
you have to keep your eye pealed for all possibilities. When the majority of
stocks are going up, as in a Secular Bull market, this is a good way to limit
your view to the creme de la creme. However, in rotational or downward markets,
it's too limiting.
As to whether you would limit your chart review to only those stocks meeting
certain pre-conditions fundamentally, I think that's really a matter of
preference. My personal preference is to use nothing more than forward growth in
the first pass and then look at the strong charts. That allows me to see what is
working regardless of a more stringent application of CANSLIM fundamental
indicators. Once I find good charts, *then* I eliminate the fundamental stinkers
and then perform due diligence on the remainder. There's no right or wrong on
this one.
Katherine
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com
[mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of John Calkins
Sent: Friday, December 27, 2002 5:09 PM
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: [CANSLIM] Big Money AGAIN, oh dear! Hay look Andy!
Hi Andy, Katherine, Mike or maybe anyone who sees things this way.
I don't know if you have seen some of my original posts where I demonstrated
how I mined the paper (IBD)physically for data. I did this because first I was
a beginner and wanted to have firmly established something in my mind that I
could hang my hat on. The sorting of my database worked similar to yours,Andy
and Katherine's although on a much simpler scale because mine was a sort of a
sort (sort of speek..ha!). This worked for me for about 4 years until I ran out
of time and patients with the paper. Also, as you say, I knew there were better
ways to get the data, technology has made it possible to have a high speed
internet for quick downloads, a laptop to take the offline data with me and an
established backbone to keep from straying too far off what I have learned. At
first I was like a kid in a candy store and couldn't make up my mind, but the
more I follow a plan, the better I feel about it.
Your's, Andy, and Katherine's was probably the best advice for me to use the
paper as a follow up. I now have the tools to look for a screener (a wireless
laptop and highspeed internet). I understand what you and Katherine have done
with the Excel sheets for doing the sorting of the data, now I just need to try
a site as you say. My only problem here is that I would like to try a couple of
free sites like MSN to at least get the terminology down so I don't get too
confused right off. I read through Your and Katherine's sheets and see how you
sift through your picks. I'm confidant I can follow your guide.
I guess I am kind of hung up on this one very important caractristic of
CANSLIM that I just cannot seem to get past. VOLUME. As I looked at the paper,
all my data started with high volume first as to try to follow the right side of
the cup up to its pivot point. This seemed to eliminate the unnessary screening
when I was using the manual data entry method. I have brought this up
repeatidly in this forum. IBD and WON make such a big deal about volume. I
notice how quiet the general media is about it. It's like I have the key to one
of the Myst Worlds or something.
I know that V for VOLUME is not one of the CANSLIM accronymns, but I believe
it is in the "I" for institutional sponcership. If you don't have ABOVE AVERAGE
VOLUME in the right side of the cup, then from what I have read, you don't have
a Full CANSLIM canidate.
I see from your sheet, you show average volume such as Katherine does. You
have a scoring system on your personal cryteria. I'm guessing that Katherine
sticks with her forward growth > 15%, Price > $6, Average Daily Volume > 30, RS
>60, < 15% Below 50 day MA, > (above) 200 day MA. Then does she manually look
at each and every stock on a chart to see if it has a proper base? Is this what
you do too? You don't have as many stocks in your list, and I haven't tried to
examine their charts to see if you picked these because of their
bases.
OR NOW, because of my tools, do I just enter as close to my prefered CANSLIM
cyteria into the screener that I feel the most comfortable with and end up with
a few hundred stocks and simply bring up each and every chart and build some
sort of chart scoring system that I can sort to give me my list.
I understand when building a database that you need to start with the final
product and work backwards. So in this case (and what I did with the paper) is
to get my list down to a managable size of stocks that were close to their
piviots to send myself cell phone alerts and emails to get my attention so I
can do my day job.
I understand that I could just simply take out a subscription to a service
that does most of this for me such as what Mike and Katherine have but the
reason I got involved in CANSLIM in the first place was because I had someone
else doing most of it for me. I might have stayed with them but not
understanding how everything worked made me feel like something was wrong with
the method. So before I can feel confident in using a service that takes most
of the work out of this method, I need to prove to myself what I'm looking at.
After I see that this is indeed the method that I want, and I know that to be a
fact, to build on the confidence to replicate the data as close as possible to
end up with similar results is my goal as is everyone else's.
In screening for volume, do you recommed that I fiddle around with one of the
free sites or do you have a site you know of that might help me with this. Am I
beating a dead horse with this, do you get the same results when you screen,
somehow, for stocks <= 15% of 52 week high and then just flip through the charts
like grease lightning! If I could just mind meld with a few of you for a few
hours, I won't have to reinvent the wheel again or rewrite "The Universe in a
Nutshell"!
Thanks any input.
JC
----- Original Message -----
From: AJAskey@aol.com
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com
Sent: Sunday, November 17, 2002 11:56 AM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] stock chart
In a message dated 11/17/2002 12:10:16 PM Central Standard Time,
jcalkins@olypen.com writes:
Now let me get this straight. This group is studying WON's concept of
CANSLIM. Granted, it doesn't mean you need to take a subscription to his paper
to follow his teaching, BUT! How do you find the quality stocks that the big
money is moving into? I use IBD's Where The Big Money's Flowing to get started
with my lists. This follows everything that WON teaches. If you do not get the
paper, then how do you find those same stocks?
JC,
Almost everything that IBD provides can be calculated and screened thru
subscriptions to other data services such as AAII Stock Investor Pro and TC2000.
These relatively inexpensive services did not exist when IBD was created but are
popping up regularly since the internet has made it into everyones home. I am
hoping that IBD recognizes this and somehow provides more data or it will
eventually go out of business. DGO provides services to screen stocks but they
are extremely overpriced and under featured based on what is available for free
of fee elsewhere.
I subscribe to IBD because I like the articles and the constant reminders of
CANSLIM rules, but not because I cannot find stocks that have the best IBD
rankings without IBD. In fact, using only IBD EPS ranking stocks of 80 or
better will keep one out of some of the future best performing stocks. (See a
recent "Ask Bill" question as IBD states this.) By using a tool that screens
the fundamentals instead of the rankings, one will find the best stocks that may
miss some arbitrary cut off by a statistically anomally. By this I mean it
makes more sense to screen for companies meeting CANSLIM criteria than to look
at a subset of stocks that a good growers to determine if they meet CANSLIM
criteria. Stocks that meet CANSLIM criteria will magically have good IBD
rankings. If I wanted I could buy one IBD every week or two for verification of
my data.
To try to duplicate the actual IBD rankings requires some programming
knowledge and therefore everyone cannot do it. I do it as I don't want to tie
my future to a paper that may go out of business at some point. But my point is
that IBD does not do anything mystical to generate this information and the
rankings are not the most important thing needed to find quality growers. The
data behind the rankings is more important and the data is not available from
IBD.
Andy
- ------=_NextPart_000_0016_01C2AE5D.A35603B0
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 6.00.2800.1126" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D390382016-28122002>Hi John,</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D390382016-28122002></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D390382016-28122002>I think in for me the most useful =
weekly=20
activity is to simply flip through a lot of charts. Over the years, this =
has=20
been the single most important tool in feeling comfortable with =
"reading" the=20
price/volume and determining if a stock might be a good candidate. =
Whether using=20
something like DGO, TC2000, HGS, VV or other services, the ability to =
look at a=20
lot of charts is helpful.</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D390382016-28122002></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D390382016-28122002>I agree with you that volume is a =
key in=20
bringing your eye to stocks that are *currently* moving, but you also =
want a=20
methodology that will draw your eye to strong stocks in general. I think =
that=20
WON's emphasis on relative strength (RS Rank and RS relative to the =
market) are=20
key in this regard. In other words, by eliminating stocks with =
unacceptable=20
(laggard) RS Ranks, you have half the work done for you when looking for =
sound=20
basing patterns. That doesn't help you sort through stocks that are =
basing vs.=20
stocks that have already broken out, however, so you need other =
tools to=20
do that. For years, I've used technical indicators in VV to draw my eye =
to=20
stocks that are moving in the right direction, but there are many ways =
to do=20
this. For example, HGS uses the relationship of a stock to particular =
moving=20
averages, the relationship of one moving average to another, plus a few =
other=20
technical indicators such as the ADX, DI etc. (<A=20
href=3D"http://stockcharts.com/education/Resources/glossary/ADX.html">htt=
p://stockcharts.com/education/Resources/glossary/ADX.html</A>)=20
Others use indicators such as the MACD to help draw their eye. (<A=20
href=3D"http://stockcharts.com/education/Resources/glossary/MACD.html">ht=
tp://stockcharts.com/education/Resources/glossary/MACD.html</A>).=20
The bottom line is just to find something that consistently works for =
you, then=20
have a means for flipping through the resultant charts. I don't bother =
"grading"=20
the charts when I do this manually. I simply throw out the charts that =
aren't of=20
interest in the upcoming week and go from there.</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D390382016-28122002></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D390382016-28122002>In general, you might not want to =
limit your=20
view to stocks within 15% of their highs. The reason for this is simply =
that a=20
valid breakout can occur as long as the stock is in the upper half of =
the base.=20
While WON suggests that many breakouts occur within 5-15% of the 52 wk =
high,=20
this is not the *only* place that they can occur. In particular, with =
stocks=20
moving within or out of a Bear Market, many of the movers will not =
necessarily=20
be coming off long uptrends, so you have to keep your eye pealed for all =
possibilities. When the majority of stocks are going up, as in a Secular =
Bull=20
market, this is a good way to limit your view to the creme de la creme. =
However,=20
in rotational or downward markets, it's too limiting.</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D390382016-28122002></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D390382016-28122002>As to whether you would limit your =
chart=20
review to only those stocks meeting certain pre-conditions =
fundamentally, I=20
think that's really a matter of preference. My personal preference is to =
use=20
nothing more than forward growth in the first pass and then look at the =
strong=20
charts. That allows me to see what is working regardless of a more =
stringent=20
application of CANSLIM fundamental indicators. Once I find good charts, =
*then* I=20
eliminate the fundamental stinkers and then perform due diligence on the =
remainder. There's no right or wrong on this one.</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D390382016-28122002></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D390382016-28122002>Katherine</SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>=20
owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com=20
[mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]<B>On Behalf Of </B>John=20
Calkins<BR><B>Sent:</B> Friday, December 27, 2002 5:09 =
PM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
canslim@lists.xmission.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> [CANSLIM] Big Money =
AGAIN, oh=20
dear! Hay look Andy!<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hi Andy, Katherine, Mike or maybe =
anyone who sees=20
things this way.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I don't know if you have seen some of =
my original=20
posts where I demonstrated how I mined the paper (IBD)physically for=20
data. I did this because first I was a beginner and wanted to =
have=20
firmly established something in my mind that I could hang my hat =
on. The=20
sorting of my database worked similar to yours,Andy and Katherine's =
although=20
on a much simpler scale because mine was a sort of a sort (sort of=20
speek..ha!). This worked for me for about 4 years until I =
ran out=20
of time and patients with the paper. Also, as you say, I knew =
there were=20
better ways to get the data, technology has made it possible to have a =
high=20
speed internet for quick downloads, a laptop to take the offline data =
with me=20
and an established backbone to keep from straying too far off what I =
have=20
learned. At first I was like a kid in a candy store and couldn't =
make up=20
my mind, but the more I follow a plan, the better I feel about=20
it.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Your's, Andy, and Katherine's =
was probably=20
the best advice for me to use the paper as a follow up. I now =
have the=20
tools to look for a screener (a wireless laptop and highspeed =
internet). =20
I understand what you and Katherine have done with the Excel sheets =
for doing=20
the sorting of the data, now I just need to try a site as you say. My =
only=20
problem here is that I would like to try a couple of free sites like =
MSN to at=20
least get the terminology down so I don't get too confused right =
off. I=20
read through Your and Katherine's sheets and see how you sift through =
your=20
picks. I'm confidant I can follow your guide.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I guess I am kind of hung up =
on this one=20
very important caractristic of CANSLIM that I just cannot seem to =
get=20
past. VOLUME. As I looked at the paper, all=20
my data started with high volume first as to try to follow =
the right=20
side of the cup up to its pivot point. This seemed to eliminate =
the=20
unnessary screening when I was using the manual data entry =
method. I=20
have brought this up repeatidly in this forum. IBD and WON =
make=20
such a big deal about volume. I notice how quiet the =
general=20
media is about it. It's like I have the key to one of the Myst =
Worlds or=20
something.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I know that V for VOLUME is not one =
of the=20
CANSLIM accronymns, but I believe it is in the "I" for institutional=20
sponcership. If you don't have ABOVE AVERAGE VOLUME in the right =
side of=20
the cup, then from what I have read, you don't have a Full CANSLIM=20
canidate.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I see from your sheet, you show =
average volume=20
such as Katherine does. You have a scoring system on your =
personal=20
cryteria. I'm guessing that Katherine sticks with her forward =
growth=20
> 15%, Price > $6, Average Daily Volume > 30, RS >60, < =
15%=20
Below 50 day MA, > (above) 200 day MA. Then does she manually =
look at=20
each and every stock on a chart to see if it has a proper base? =
Is this=20
what you do too? You don't have as many stocks in your list, and =
I=20
haven't tried to examine their charts to see if you picked these =
because of=20
their </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>bases.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>OR NOW, because of my tools, do =
I just=20
enter as close to my prefered CANSLIM cyteria into the screener that I =
feel=20
the most comfortable with and end up with a few hundred stocks and =
simply=20
bring up each and every chart and build some sort of chart scoring =
system that=20
I can sort to give me my list.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I understand when building a database =
that you=20
need to start with the final product and work backwards. So in =
this case=20
(and what I did with the paper) is to get my list down to a =
managable=20
size of stocks that were close to their piviots to send myself cell =
phone=20
alerts and emails to get my attention so I can do my day=20
job.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I understand that I could just =
simply take=20
out a subscription to a service that does most of this for me such as =
what=20
Mike and Katherine have but the reason I got involved in CANSLIM in =
the first=20
place was because I had someone else doing most of it for me. I =
might=20
have stayed with them but not understanding how everything worked made =
me feel=20
like something was wrong with the method. So before I can feel =
confident=20
in using a service that takes most of the work out of this method, I =
need to=20
prove to myself what I'm looking at. After I see that this is =
indeed the=20
method that I want, and I know that to be a fact, to build on the =
confidence=20
to replicate the data as close as possible to end up with similar =
results is=20
my goal as is everyone else's.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>In screening for volume, do you =
recommed that I=20
fiddle around with one of the free sites or do you have a site you =
know of=20
that might help me with this. Am I beating a dead horse with =
this, do=20
you get the same results when you screen, somehow, for stocks <=3D =
15% of 52=20
week high and then just flip through the charts like grease =
lightning! =20
If I could just mind meld with a few of you for a few hours, I won't =
have to=20
reinvent the wheel again or rewrite "The Universe in a =
Nutshell"!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks any input.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>JC</FONT></DIV> </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=3DAJAskey@aol.com =
href=3D"mailto:AJAskey@aol.com">AJAskey@aol.com</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>=
=20
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, November 17, =
2002 11:56=20
AM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [CANSLIM] stock=20
chart</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT size=3D2>In a =
message dated=20
11/17/2002 12:10:16 PM Central Standard Time, <A=20
href=3D"mailto:jcalkins@olypen.com">jcalkins@olypen.com</A>=20
writes:<BR><BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff =
2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"=20
TYPE=3D"CITE">Now let me get this straight. This group is studying =
WON's=20
concept of CANSLIM. Granted, it doesn't mean you need to =
take a=20
subscription to his paper to follow his teaching, BUT! How =
do you=20
find the quality stocks that the big money is moving into? I =
use=20
IBD's Where The Big Money's Flowing to get started with my =
lists. =20
This follows everything that WON teaches. If you do not get =
the=20
paper, then how do you find those same stocks?</FONT><FONT =
lang=3D0=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 =
size=3D3=20
FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"><BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR></FONT><FONT lang=3D0=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 =
size=3D2=20
FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"><BR>JC,<BR><BR>Almost everything that IBD =
provides can be=20
calculated and screened thru subscriptions to other data services =
such as=20
AAII Stock Investor Pro and TC2000. These relatively =
inexpensive=20
services did not exist when IBD was created but are popping up =
regularly=20
since the internet has made it into everyones home. I am =
hoping that=20
IBD recognizes this and somehow provides more data or it will =
eventually go=20
out of business. DGO provides services to screen stocks but =
they are=20
extremely overpriced and under featured based on what is available =
for free=20
of fee elsewhere.<BR><BR>I subscribe to IBD because I like the =
articles and=20
the constant reminders of CANSLIM rules, but not because I cannot =
find=20
stocks that have the best IBD rankings without IBD. In fact, =
using=20
only IBD EPS ranking stocks of 80 or better will keep one out of =
some of the=20
future best performing stocks. (See a recent "Ask Bill" =
question as=20
IBD states this.) By using a tool that screens the =
fundamentals=20
instead of the rankings, one will find the best stocks that may miss =
some=20
arbitrary cut off by a statistically anomally. By this I mean =
it makes=20
more sense to screen for companies meeting CANSLIM criteria than to =
look at=20
a subset of stocks that a good growers to determine if they meet =
CANSLIM=20
criteria. Stocks that meet CANSLIM criteria will magically =
have good=20
IBD rankings. If I wanted I could buy one IBD every week or =
two for=20
verification of my data.<BR><BR>To try to duplicate the actual IBD =
rankings=20
requires some programming knowledge and therefore everyone cannot do =
it. I do it as I don't want to tie my future to a paper that =
may go=20
out of business at some point. But my point is that IBD does =
not do=20
anything mystical to generate this information and the rankings are =
not the=20
most important thing needed to find quality growers. The data =
behind=20
the rankings is more important and the data is not available from=20
IBD.<BR><BR>Andy</FONT> =
</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0016_01C2AE5D.A35603B0--
- -
- -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
- -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
- -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email.
Previous Article (by Author): [CANSLIM] Re: stops "Jeff Mulder"
Articles sorted by: [Date]
[Author]
[Subject]