Re: [CANSLIM] Institutional Ownership

From: Spencer48@aol.com
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Institutional Ownership
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 10:18:57 EDT

Next Article (by Date): Re: [CANSLIM] Institutional Ownership Spencer48@aol.com
Previous Article (by Date): [CANSLIM] CANSLIM List FAQ (Monthly Posting) "Katherine Malm"
Top of Thread: RE: [CANSLIM] Institutional Ownership Dave Cameron
Next in Thread: Re: [CANSLIM] Institutional Ownership Spencer48@aol.com
Articles sorted by: [Date] [Author] [Subject]

Katherine, et al:

     If I'm not mistaken, the "undiscovered gems" analysis-that Katherine 
mentions-is the same type of evaluation that Tom would use.  

     I recall him commenting time and time again, that he didn't pay much 
attention to the lack of ownership of a stock he was purchasing by 
institutions-mainly because (as I understood him) he enjoyed beating the 
big-boys to the punch.  (He would, however, employ caution whenever too many 
institutions owned a stock.  If they all sold at once..., he would say)   

jans   


In a message dated 5/12/2003 3:24:51 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
kmalm@earthlink.net writes:

<< At the same time, while I say I don't pay much attention to percentage
 ownership, I *do* tend to prefer "undiscovered gems." I click my heals when I
 find a new company that's never crossed my radar and that I've never seen
 mentioned in an article. For the most part, those *tend* to have low
 institutional ownership, but that's not what draws me to them in the first
 place. >>

- -
- -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.