Re: [CANSLIM] Institutional Ownership

From: Spencer48@aol.com
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Institutional Ownership
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 10:27:24 EDT

Next Article (by Subject): RE: [CANSLIM] SHFL Tomas
Previous Article (by Subject): Re: [CANSLIM] Institutional Ownership Spencer48@aol.com
Top of Thread: RE: [CANSLIM] Institutional Ownership Dave Cameron
Articles sorted by: [Date] [Author] [Subject]

Dave:

     That's a good point, denoting, I believe, the owner selling when the 
stock is high and buying it back when the stock falls (ie. manipulating the 
stock).  This also illustrates the point that the SEC is not going to hold 
your hand.  Caveat Emptor.

jans


In a message dated 5/12/2003 7:42:50 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
dfcameron@yahoo.com writes:

<< f the float is particularly low - because a good chunk of stock is
 owned by insiders (as contrasted to institutions), a dramatic shift
 in the stock price is more likely than if the float is high.
 
 Take a look at a graph of USNA over the last 3-5 years
 (www.bigcharts.com can do this).   USNA is roughly 65%-70% owned by
 one man - the founder.   Their business model has been consistent
 over the last several years, yet the stock price is all over the
 place (although it does trend well).   Its been picked up on CANSLIM
 screens several times.   I owned it on a couple occasions, and always
 lost money.   If I'd held it since the initial purchase, I'd have
 been ahead though.
 
 Anyway... its just one example, but my experience is that if
 institutional ownership is really low because the shares are
 concentrated in one hand, then wild fluctuations are more likely.
  >>

- -
- -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.