From: canslim-owner@xmission.com (canslim Digest) To: canslim-digest@xmission.com Subject: canslim Digest V1 #157 Reply-To: canslim@xmission.com Sender: canslim-owner@xmission.com Errors-To: canslim-owner@xmission.com Precedence: canslim Digest Tuesday, April 29 1997 Volume 01 : Number 157 In this issue: Re: [Fwd: [CANSLIM] Probing for stock vital signs] re: [CANSLIM] MFAC Re: [CANSLIM] MFAC Fw: [CANSLIM] Company Debt [CANSLIM] longterm inflation-corrected DJT DJU DJI [CANSLIM] H&Q Tech Conference updates [CANSLIM] Economics 101 [CANSLIM] Future FOMC rate hikes Re: [CANSLIM] Economics 101 Re: [CANSLIM] Economics 101 [CANSLIM] CLFY [CANSLIM] CLFY Re: [CANSLIM] CLFY [CANSLIM] Re: probing for stock vital signs [CANSLIM] Earnings Re: [CANSLIM] Re: probing for stock vital signs [CANSLIM] Re: How is Daily Graphs Online working this morning? [CANSLIM] ECI/Durable Goods [CANSLIM] Today's Investor's Corner Re: [CANSLIM] Today's Investor's Corner Re: [CANSLIM] Today's Investor's Corner Re: [CANSLIM] Today's Investor's Corner Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Daily Graphs Online [CANSLIM] Bull or Bear? (was Today's Investor's Corner) re: [CANSLIM] Re: Daily Graphs Online Re: [CANSLIM] Today's Investor's Corner re: [CANSLIM] Re: Daily Graphs Online Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Daily Graphs Online Re: [CANSLIM] ECI/Durable Goods re: [CANSLIM] Re: Daily Graphs Online See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the canslim or canslim-digest mailing lists and on how to retrieve back issues. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 21:28:03 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [Fwd: [CANSLIM] Probing for stock vital signs] I'll take a look at the charts on HPBC, MEH (think I looked at it this weekend, don't remember how I found it, I was so cross eyed by then), and MI. The two low priced ones are wrong for this big cap mkt, may work, but I already got too many non-performing little stocks. I'll post what I find. tom w - ---------- > From: derek b > To: canslim@mail.xmission.com > Subject: [Fwd: [CANSLIM] Probing for stock vital signs] > Date: Monday, April 28, 1997 7:46 AM > > > AEIS 9.25 > GRCO 4.00 > HPBC 20.25 > MEH 42 would like some retracement (high tight flag) > MI 31.875 > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 21:36:28 -0400 From: Michael A Langston Subject: re: [CANSLIM] MFAC > Market Facts (MFAC) announced after the close (4:42PM) that it is still carrying an outrageous spread? > doing a 2:1 split that will go effective (be paid) May 27. oh, a 2-for-1 -- but on a $20 stock? -- it must be one thin rascal, or have a tiny float, or both > that is when, in this case, the price will be cut in half. yea, i've seen a lot of em cut in half lately -- just w/o the extra shares :) mike ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 21:54:14 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] MFAC Mike, you're being too cynical, it's hard for me to maintain my cheery smile and optimism! It does have a small float, as well as small nr of shares issued, so this could/should more than tighten up the spread some. Should have more liquidity as well. And at least with this one you get the addl shares! Actually, without this news, was kinda looking like a new entry point for anyone not too strict at applying CANSLIM chart patterns and willing to hold for a while. Traded up a little today, even before NASDAQ turned positive. tom w - ---------- > From: Michael A Langston > To: canslim@mail.xmission.com > Subject: re: [CANSLIM] MFAC > Date: Monday, April 28, 1997 9:36 PM > > > Market Facts (MFAC) announced after the close (4:42PM) that it > > is still carrying an outrageous spread? > > > doing a 2:1 split that will go effective (be paid) May 27. > > oh, a 2-for-1 -- but on a $20 stock? -- it must be one thin > rascal, or have a tiny float, or both > > > that is when, in this case, the price will be cut in half. > > yea, i've seen a lot of em cut in half lately -- just w/o > the extra shares :) > > mike ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 21:58:26 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Fw: [CANSLIM] Company Debt Snipped from a private response, hope it clarifies (no, no not CLFY!!!). tom w - ---------- > From: Tom Worley > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Company Debt > Date: Monday, April 28, 1997 9:08 PM > > It seems I may have confused more than helped here. I'll try again. > What I was mentioning was an anomoly, you know, one of those things > you don't expect and can't easily explain (like profitable trades > lately!). > While I do expect big cap stocks to carry substantial debt due to > their credit rating (they can borrow money at rates cheaper than > their growth), I don't expect to find younger cos that are growing > at more rapid rates in near or actual debt free condition. Even tho > they may have to pay higher rates, they need that capital for > growth, for new equipment, new plants, new personnel, new > technology, research and development, etc. That is one reason why a > "growth" co rarely pays a dividend, it is plowing all its profits > right back into the company. It is capital intensive. And since it > can grow at 20 or 30 percent, the higher rates it must pay on debt > is still low. Yet, the more charts I look at of "young" companies, > the more I see with insignificant debt levels. Can't explain it, > just interesting, esp in light of likely rate hikes. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 22:35:38 -0400 From: derek b Subject: [CANSLIM] longterm inflation-corrected DJT DJU DJI Very interesting charts. Longterm inflation-corrected comparison of DJ Transports, Utilities, Industrials. http://cpcug.org/user/invest/djtcon.gif http://cpcug.org/user/invest/djucon.gif http://cpcug.org/user/invest/djicon.gif And some explanation: http://cpcug.org/user/invest/inflcorp.html Derek ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 22:44:50 -0400 From: derek b Subject: [CANSLIM] H&Q Tech Conference updates Updated several times a day from the H&Q current tech conference: http://www.dbc.com/cgi-bin/htx.exe/newsroom/special/hq.html?source=3Dcore= /dbc Updated: Mon Apr 28 16:20:16 1997=20 By DBC NewsRoom's Tom Murphy H&Q's Case sees growth for tech shares SAN FRANCISCO (DBC) -- Hambrecht & Quist Chief Executive Daniel Case says the prospects for technology stocks look "excellent" in the upcoming quarter even amid a "poor" performance in the first quarter.=20 Speaking at the opening of his investment firm's yearly technology conference, Case on Monday pointed to companies such as Netscape Communications Corp. as examples of stocks that are "at very attractive levels" following this year's fall in their stock market valuations.=20 "We needed a correction. We expected one. But that doesn't mean we're enjoying it," Case told some of the 3,000 money managers, company executives and analysts gathered for the four-day conference in San Francisco. "We know the first quarter of 1997 was a poor one by our standards and yours, and our investment recommendations and a lot of our recent underwritings have given back some, all or more than all of their gains."=20 Case's comments were welcomed by the audience, which has watched tech stocks fall steadily during the past two months. The Pacific Stock Exchange Technology Index, for example, tumbled to about 237 recently from a high of 267.11 in mid-February.=20 Case said H&Q believes "the cure's at hand," and that the "investment performance in technology stocks and especially in emerging growth will be excellent in the period ahead." More news from the conference: =95 Tech investors have fingers crossed =95 Iomega tries to preserve margins =95 Sun hot on Java revenue =95 Netscape sees 'biggest product cycle ever' =95 Hambrecht & Quist's web site - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ See Tech Report for latest H&Q news - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tom Murphy is managing editor of the Data Broadcasting Corp. NewsRoom ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 22:44:12 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] Economics 101 The Durable Goods report is due at 8:30AM on Wednesday, could be wild as estimates vary from down 0.8% to up 2.0%, consensus is for up 0.3% and I would not be surprised if it beats this by 1 or 2 tenths or even a whole lot more. Dec was down 1.7%, Jan was up 3.8%, Feb up 1.5%, so trend is no predictor. March New Home Sales were down 2.5% from Feb, what does this mean? In actual nrs, it means an annualized unit sales drop from 834K in Feb to 813K in March. Worth noting, this is the first three month period where annualized sales were over 800K since the spring of 1978! And who's saying sales are slow, now! And remember what I said about early estimates being revised sharply higher, the Feb estimate was originally reported at down 0.7%, later revised to up 1.1%. January was originally reported at up 3.5%, later revised to up 3.9%. Wanna bet against March's drop being revised to a lesser nr, or even up, against this pattern? Biggest drops were felt in the Northeast and the South, biggest gains came in the West Coast. While the inventory of existing homes grew in March, it dropped for new homes, down 10K, reaching the same low nr set back in April 1994, threee years ago. Average price increased by $1600. Actual sales for March were 8000 over February's. Sorry, James, sales in your neighborhood may be sluggish, but not so nationwide from this data. Q1 GDP: Consensus is now for a report of a 4% growth in Q1 GDP, per 25 economists. Estimates range from 3.3% to 4.9%, with several forecasts at 4%. All seem to generally agree the nrs were driven by a surge in consumer spending. Addl reports this week: NAPM reports on Thursday, and employment report on Friday. Both of these are reporting on the month of April, vice other reports that are on March, so are more timely as we approach the FOMC meeting next month. Note that this will be the last major employment report before that meeting, however. tom w Any opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments are based on a variety of sources and are intended strictly to assist and inform. In no way am I suggesting a buy, sell, or hold decision based on my comments or observations. I always urge an investor to do his or her own homework, and be sure the risk of the market can be tolerated and any losses accepted gracefully. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 22:47:06 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] Future FOMC rate hikes New bodies wading into the argument over whether Greenspan should further tighten rates include G7 at this weekend's meeting and IMF (Int'l Monetary Fund). Both appear to support another half a pt raise this year in order to maintain a healthy, growing US economy. tom w Any opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments are based on a variety of sources and are intended strictly to assist and inform. In no way am I suggesting a buy, sell, or hold decision based on my comments or observations. I always urge an investor to do his or her own homework, and be sure the risk of the market can be tolerated and any losses accepted gracefully. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 23:04:52 -0400 From: derek b Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Economics 101 Anyone surprised bonds were up today given all the important economic news due this week? From Bloomberg: "U.S. bonds rose for the first time in four days after the Federal Reserve bought $1.924 billion of Treasury securities for its own account." Don't have Bloomberg terminal here. Can anyone confirm this story? Derek ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 23:25:54 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Economics 101 no point to confirming, this is a normal occurrence. Bonds are arguing that rates won't go higher, volatility further swinging around thanks to shorts, then short covering, then more shorting. On the other hand, utility stocks are behaving predictably, look at the chart for the Utilities Index. tom w - ---------- > From: derek b > To: canslim@mail.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Economics 101 > Date: Monday, April 28, 1997 11:04 PM > > Anyone surprised bonds were up today given all the important economic > news due this week? > > >From Bloomberg: "U.S. bonds rose for the first time in four days after > the Federal Reserve bought $1.924 billion of Treasury securities for its > own account." > > Don't have Bloomberg terminal here. Can anyone confirm this story? > > Derek ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 00:20:58 -0500 From: "Brenda" Subject: [CANSLIM] CLFY - ---------- > From: Tom Worley > To: CANSLIM > Subject: Fw: [CANSLIM] Company Debt > Date: Monday, April 28, 1997 8:58 PM > > Snipped from a private response, hope it clarifies (no, no not > CLFY!!!). > >Tom, You must not have looked at CLFY the last couple of days. Don't say nay, nay before you look. A TON of money being made here! James ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 00:20:58 -0500 From: "Brenda" Subject: [CANSLIM] CLFY - ---------- > From: Tom Worley > To: CANSLIM > Subject: Fw: [CANSLIM] Company Debt > Date: Monday, April 28, 1997 8:58 PM > > Snipped from a private response, hope it clarifies (no, no not > CLFY!!!). > >Tom, You must not have looked at CLFY the last couple of days. Don't say nay, nay before you look. A TON of money being made here! James ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 05:59:49 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CLFY Yeah, I'm aware CLFY has moved back up a little, one broker in my office has bot 10,000 shares for his own acct, so he's happy. But for investors that own it from a month or so ago, there's a long way to go before they see daylight. tom w - ---------- > From: Brenda > To: canslim@mail.xmission.com; CANSLIM > Subject: [CANSLIM] CLFY > Date: Tuesday, April 29, 1997 1:20 AM > ---------- > > From: Tom Worley > > To: CANSLIM > > Subject: Fw: [CANSLIM] Company Debt > > Date: Monday, April 28, 1997 8:58 PM > > > > Snipped from a private response, hope it clarifies (no, no not > > CLFY!!!). > > > >Tom, > You must not have looked at CLFY the last couple of days. Don't say > nay, nay before you look. A TON of money being made here! > James ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 06:40:33 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: probing for stock vital signs No offense intended, Derek, but your list of five would require some major probing to find "mock-canslim" candidates here. You mentioned all had positive earnings, in fact AEIS and MI both had earnings drops for the last two qtrs (and MI forecast for '97 was a further 18% drop), while GRCO had earnings drop for past two qtrs. Definitely not canslim here. Several are extremely thinly traded (AEIS 34k, GRCO 14,900, HPBC 4K, MEH 19,800). The only one with RS and EPS over 90 was MEH, and it is way too extended to be a canslim entry pt (trading at 44 on vertical spike, base is at 37-38). Unless you coded your "system" wrong, I would try another system. good luck tom w Any opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments are based on a variety of sources and are intended strictly to assist and inform. In no way am I suggesting a buy, sell, or hold decision based on my comments or observations. I always urge an investor to do his or her own homework, and be sure the risk of the market can be tolerated and any losses accepted gracefully. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 06:57:55 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] Earnings In case you missed it, SYMC did report after the close op earnings net of 30 cents, est was for 25 cents. With NASDAQ having closed strong and on upward momentum, I would normally bet on a gap up here. However, the opening bell will be controlled by the eci report due at 8:30, so wouldn't bet on a dog, much less a stock. After Boeing surprised the mkt and reported earnings early (.87, est was for 1.00) and took the dow 30 on a roller coaster (at closing bell, BA was down 6 5/8, which equaled 21.67 down pts on the Dow 30, further minimizing the good day the dow 30 had by still closing up 44), I decided not to take the chance on SYMC, so natch, they report good earnings and will probably gap up a hundred or so pts today. The eci will probably report we all worked for free, cos will announce because of huge profits they will give away their durable goods, and Greenspan will preemptively cut the interest rate by a record pt and a half, making James gleeful. Meantime, Japan will announce that, because of the weakness in yen and strength in dollar, they are changing their monetary system over to the US dollar, dropping all trade barriers, and applying for statehood ahead of Puerto Rico (if they can't be first, they don't want to be 52nd!). tom, tom, wake up, you're dreaming again (yeah, but if you think that's bad, I'm talking to myself as well!) Oh well, here's my wish list for today's lesson in economics, not likely, but then many still don't believe in a May hike either. Not to lose sight of why we are here, if today's news should tank the mkt big time, there may be some nice short term trading opportunities on the better big caps. Stay with liquidity, and pick ones that have shown solid earnings and sales growth. I took a look at IBM, DELL, MSFT and INTC this AM. All look decent, esp the last three. This is NOT a recommendation, simply a comment on some leadership tech stocks. I am sure there are many more out there like this. There is certainly increased risk in today's mkt, but money can be made by the aggressive investor. tom w Any opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments are based on a variety of sources and are intended strictly to assist and inform. In no way am I suggesting a buy, sell, or hold decision based on my comments or observations. I always urge an investor to do his or her own homework, and be sure the risk of the market can be tolerated and any losses accepted gracefully. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 06:59:25 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: probing for stock vital signs My typo, earnings for AEIS and MI had dropped for four consecutive qtrs. tom w - ---------- > From: Tom Worley > To: CANSLIM > Cc: Jacques Ferron > Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: probing for stock vital signs > Date: Tuesday, April 29, 1997 6:40 AM > > No offense intended, Derek, but your list of five would require > some major probing to find "mock-canslim" candidates here. You > mentioned all had positive earnings, in fact AEIS and MI both had > earnings drops for the last two qtrs (and MI forecast for '97 was a > further 18% drop), while GRCO had earnings drop for past two qtrs. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 07:43:04 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: How is Daily Graphs Online working this morning? Great news, Jody, how do they sign up (I suspect from my CC: line you could get about a hundred of so new "beta testers" in the next day or so!)? Do they just go to http://www.dailygraphs.com and sign up as if they were subscribing? I understand only dummy bills are being sent at this point, is this correct? When will DG Online be fully operational? Any hope of a policy change to provide screening options? How is it working? Fabulous, as usual, the only thing I have noticed is that it tends to disconnect real quick if I pause to study a chart or print it (which I tend to do a lot of, going thru reams of paper). This morning I probably went thru about 60 or so charts already, maybe more. Response time is excellent, even when I have been disconnected it only takes a few seconds to reconnect, and you don't have to log back on. tom w - ---------- From: Jody Mulkey To: 'stkguru@netside.net' Subject: How is Daily Graphs Online working this morning? Date: Tuesday, April 29, 1997 7:23 AM Tom, I appreciate your comments about Daily Graphs Online. All of your suggestions have been brought up at our product development meetings. We are now welcoming everyone as beta testers so please spread the word. Thank you, Jody Mulkey - ---------- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 9:06:15 CDT From: David F. Cameron Subject: [CANSLIM] ECI/Durable Goods Well... the ECI rose just 0.6 percent in the first quarter, less than the economists 'average' - and less than Tom had predicted. Although, Tom is probably just as happy to be wrong. (See Tom, I point out when you're wrong ... you were complaining that no one lauded your IBM pick - so what the heck - I'll mention your overestimate. But... please don`t take it wrong. I respect your knowledge and judgment, I just have to have SOME fun...) In addition, durable goods orders for March were reported to have fallen 3.0 percent ( I think economists expected roughly flat - if I remember correctly ). February orders, originally reported as having been up 1.5 percent were revised to an 0.8 percent increase. Based on this, I don't think a .50 hike is in the offing. I think this has turned the tide back to .25. Can I beat Tom to be on record for this? Of course, he may have come to the same conclusion. Anyway... I'm reasonably confident we'll hear Tom's interpretation on the effect of this on next week's FOMC meeting. An interpretation which would hold more weight than mie. (Goes without saying...) Dave Cameron p.s. IBD's front page reporting of the 30-yr. bond rate is back to reality. A one-day typo that was not acknow- ledged - maybe they were looking at 2-yr. bonds? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 23:40:37 GMT+7 From: Peter Christiansen Subject: [CANSLIM] Today's Investor's Corner I read in the online version of IBD that William O'Neil will have comments in Tuesday's Investor's Corner column. Investor's Corner hasn't appeared in the online version for sometime. I was hoping that someone with access to the print version could post a summary of the article. Thanks in advance. Peter Christiansen Bangkok, Thailand Connected with OS/2 Warp 3.0 & The Post Road Mailer _____________________________________________________________________________________ "It compiled? The first screen came up? Ship it!" -- Bill Gates ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 13:41:14 -0400 (EDT) From: PPNewell@aol.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Today's Investor's Corner Here it is: William O'Neil, founder and chairman of IBD, recently participated in an ''auditorium event'' on America Online in which he discussed current conditions in the stock market. In response to requests from readers, we've asked Mr. O'Neil to elaborate on the points made in that discussion. In this, the first of a three-part interview, he talks about the general market. Q: Are we in a bear market? A: Yes, I believe this is a normal or mild bear that began on Jan. 23 with the Nasdaq reversing on the largest one-day volume in six months. Q: What do you mean by a ''normal'' bear market? A: Normally in a bear market one of your key market averages is off 18% to 20% or more. If it's only off 10% or 15%, that might be termed an intermediate-term correction. That's based on past precedent. With the Dow representing only 30 stocks, and with institutions having enormous buying power, there's a tendency for the Dow to be propped up. So the market looks like it isn't quite as bad as it really is. But the reality is individual investors could get hurt because Podunk Electronics is down 60%. And they don't own Procter & Gamble (which has risen recently); they own Podunk Electronics. So you could have the Dow off by a mild or normal amount, but you could still do damage to a lot of individuals who don't know how to handle themselves in a market like this. They don't cut losses or get off margin. Q: What do you mean that institutions may be ''propping up'' the Dow? Do you mean they're just ''parking'' money in big, supposedly safe stocks until they decide what their next move is? A: There IS a certain amount of parking that goes on with some big-cap stocks - -like Exxon or Disney or Pfizer or General Electric. These are stocks investors believe they don't have to worry about because they're steady, dependable, high quality. And even if they come off, they may come off only a few points - whereas something else comes off twice or three times as much. But when I talk about propping things up, I mean institutions go in and buy some General Electric and Procter & Gamble one day and those stocks move up a few points and that provides some support for the Dow. That probably serves an important function in that you don't create panic in the market. I'm not saying it's bad or wrong, but it does happen. Q: Has there been evidence of this recently? A: A week ago, when the Dow was up 173 points, it looked really fantastic. Meanwhile, every growth fund was DOWN for the day, which you don't see happen very often. That gave a little clue that investors ran a few things up - -Procter & Gamble and General Electric and Merck - but it wasn't really quite as strong as it should have been. That's why IBD is so great. On the general market page (today on A25), you've got all these different indexes and you're watching what the leading stocks are doing and what the sectors are doing, and you see your growth sector didn't bounce at all. You can put it all together and see if the rally is for real or not. Anybody who understands this and looks at that page will have a tremendous feel for the market. They're not going to be sucked into something. They're going to realize there's a problem, and they're going to back away and raise at least a little cash. Q: When you say that a key index in a bear market may come off 18%- 20% or more, does that also apply to the Nasdaq? A: That's a little different, particularly in this cycle. The overspeculation for a few years was mainly in the Nasdaq high-techs, which by nature are twice as volatile and risky as other stocks. Many of these stocks went up five or 10 times - the Ascend Communications and Cascades and Ciscos - and a number of them have topped. A few may come back if they're really great and sound. But a fair number will probably come down twice as fast and may not lead in the next upcycle. So you could have the Dow off a certain percentage, but this sector could be off two to three times as much. The Nasdaq is weaker than your other indexes, and it's been underperforming for quite a while. When it comes down, it doesn't really rally, which implies that sooner or later you may have more damage to be done. Q: Should investors be looking for support levels? At Nasdaq 1200, for example, where it seems to have held five times in the last six months? A: The Nasdaq has broken sharply, gotten below its 200-day moving average, held below it and hasn't really rallied. Somebody might say, ''It's held at this level or that level.'' But my interpretation is it's dropped a lot and can't rally any substantial distance. That means it'll probably either have to put in an awful lot of time (moving sideways) or it's going to go lower. So the fact that it temporarily holds somewhere means nothing. Q: How much time before a bear market runs its course? A: I don't think any bear market gets over with it until it's had at least six or seven months' time. Typically, they've taken nine months. But for some of them, the time's been shortened a bit. So, if it topped on Jan. 23, you've probably got more rough weather with certain individual stocks until you get into June or July. You can't tell the market what to do. Q: How about individual investors -what do you tell them to do? A: They should keep in mind the methods we suggest, which is the need to learn how to interpret the market each day - the price and volume action on the Dow, the S&P 500 and the Nasdaq. Look at them every day. In a market like this, it's critical to learn to interpret what the market says. If it's not following through right, for example, you can conclude the rally's failing. So now you need to cut back a little bit more. Q: What steps should investors take to protect themselves? A: The first rule is to cut your loss at 8% or 10%. If you've got something you bought at 50 and it's 45, cut back. Don't just sit there with the loss, because maybe it goes to 20. You don't know. Rule No. 2 is get off margin because you're in a tough market and why compound your problems by running the risk of losing twice as much? Rule No. 3 is don't average down in individual stocks. Q: Does that same rule hold true for mutual funds? A: Mutual funds are completely different. They're spread all over the place, so they'll come back with each new bull market. So I wouldn't sell a good fund. In an individual stock, you don't have any idea where it's going to go, and it may not necessarily come back. Q: If that's the case, should investors add even more money to their funds when they're down? A: It depends on the individual and their tolerance for taking risks. If I had a fund that was a really sound growth fund and it was off 25% to 30%, I think at some point it should be bought because two years later it's going to (be up). I look at that completely differently than I do stocks. Any one stock can go anywhere and may or may not come back. But a fund will always come back if it's a capable fund. I wouldn't sell a good fund even if it comes off more. (Tomorrow: The opportunities that lie immediately ahead.) //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Copyright (c) 1997 Investors Business Daily, All rights reserved. Investor's Business Daily - Investor's Corner (04/29/97) IBD Chairman O'Neil On The Stock Market Transmitted: 4/28/97 8:58 PM (r2afyttx) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 01:22:53 GMT+7 From: Peter Christiansen Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Today's Investor's Corner ** Reply to note from PPNewell@aol.com Tue, 29 Apr 1997 13:41:14 -0400 (EDT) > Here it is: Thanks! Did you get that online?? It didn't appear in my online version. Peter Christiansen Bangkok, Thailand Connected with OS/2 Warp 3.0 & The Post Road Mailer _____________________________________________________________________________________ I tried an internal modem, but it hurt when I walked. cc: PPNewell@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 14:25:24 -0400 From: Craig Griffin Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Today's Investor's Corner Peter, Cool. How did you do that? I gather you did not type it based on the "transmitted" line. Or did you type it? Either way, thank you. I had not gotten my paper yet (comes in the mail) ... very nice to read this now. Thanks again! Regards, Craig At 01:41 PM 4/29/97 -0400, you wrote: >Here it is: > > William O'Neil, founder and chairman of IBD, recently participated in an ........... >//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// >Copyright (c) 1997 Investors Business Daily, All rights reserved. >Investor's Business Daily - Investor's Corner (04/29/97) >IBD Chairman O'Neil On The Stock Market > > >Transmitted: 4/28/97 8:58 PM (r2afyttx) > > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 16:01:38 -0400 From: derek b Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Daily Graphs Online Tom, Thanks for the heads up. Took a couple of hours for the activation and the software was unavailable for d/l until this PM, but I'm now a DG beta tester!!! Everyone should jump on this window of opprtunity. Not sure how long open enrollment will last. Beta (thus free) scheduled to last until July. Derek Tom Worley wrote: > Great news, Jody, how do they sign up (I suspect from my CC: line > you could get about a hundred of so new "beta testers" in the next > day or so!)? Do they just go to http://www.dailygraphs.com and sign > up as if they were subscribing? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 16:02:20 -0400 From: Craig Griffin Subject: [CANSLIM] Bull or Bear? (was Today's Investor's Corner) On 4/29, IBD said >>>> > William O'Neil, founder and chairman of IBD, recently participated in an >''auditorium event'' > >Q: Are we in a bear market? > >A: Yes, I believe this is a normal or mild bear that began on Jan. 23 with >the Nasdaq reversing on the largest one-day volume in six months. > Mr. O'Neil, Then what about that followthrough day your newspaper mentioned last week on the S&P500. Some of us here on this list noticed it too. Did this simply indicate a short term uptrend in a bear market (ie. a rally w/in a bear)? I have to agree the markets do still look a bit weak, and so I did not jump in with both feet. But, I have been nibbling and things do seem ok after today's rally (Tuesday 4/29) and even when I was behind, the stocks I was holding seemed to be acting right. So what gives? Guess the followthrough is somehow not quite valid because the other divergences are still in place ... or is the interview old and so the market is now telling us something different? That would be fine and fits with your concept of "bending like a tree in the breeze", ie. reading what the market tells you today. But, in that case, better stop your editorial staff from publishing old news. If this is truely a kind of sucker rally (suck in the suckers), I'm lightly invested, so ok. If not, I'd like to up the weighting of my next purchases. How can we tell (watch and wait, I suppose)? Anybody got any insights? PS. I am finding that my workload is preventing as much focus on this list as I would like. So, probably I will be posting less than I have been even lately (can't believe I missed SRA, look at all those up volume days going back to 01/13, saying "buy me" and then the earnings news concurrent with the breakout ...). I did pick up BAANF, a day or two before you mentioned it, Tom. SYMC looks like it has potential, too, Tom. But don't like to buy 'em down in the base like that. Tempting, however. Just looking for the better ones like SRA and BAANF (ie. coming out of their bases, no overhead supply, great charts and fundies). Gotta be ready for the other good ones if this market continues to regain its footing (and to jump back to the sidelines if it doesn't). ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 16:48:03 -0400 From: Michael A Langston Subject: re: [CANSLIM] Re: Daily Graphs Online > Everyone should jump on this window of opprtunity. really? -- you mean it now works on unix??? mike langston ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 16:52:24 -0400 (EDT) From: PPNewell@aol.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Today's Investor's Corner <> It was on AOL at 10:00 pm last night, not sure why the web site had nothing. Anyhow I will post the new one when I see it. Peter Newell ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Apr 97 16:11:37 +0500 From: "Robert Gammon" Subject: re: [CANSLIM] Re: Daily Graphs Online On Tue, 29 Apr 1997 16:48:03 -0400, Michael A Langston wrote: >> Everyone should jump on this window of opprtunity. > >really? -- you mean it now works on unix??? > >mike langston I visited the site, and found to my sorry that they still have this VERY narrow view of the world that only includes Win95/NT. Unix, OS/2, and Mac/PowerPc need not apply. We are not welcome. Hah, as though we are not serious investors who use the WWW, newsgroups, majordomo lists, e-mail, ftp, etc. It gives me concern about any subscription that I might make to any of their printed media. What might they do to it to exclude a certain class or classes of potential subscribers in North America, Europe, Asia? Daily Graphs, do you hear??? Boo, Hiss!!! *----------------------------------------------------------------------* Robert Gammon My opinions are my own. In no way do rgammon@micro.ti.com I represent the views of my employer Using OS/2 Warp Connect, and a user of every version of OS/2 since v1.0 *----------------------------------------------------------------------* ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 17:16:53 -0400 (EDT) From: Zoran Mitrovski Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Daily Graphs Online > > > Everyone should jump on this window of opprtunity. > > really? -- you mean it now works on unix??? > > mike langston And on MacOS, too??? ;^) Zoran ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 17:34:44 -0400 From: Craig Griffin Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ECI/Durable Goods Dave, You wrote: > >Well... the ECI rose just 0.6 percent in the first quarter, less >than the economists 'average' ... > >In addition, durable goods orders for March were reported to >have fallen 3.0 percent ( I think economists expected roughly >flat - if I remember correctly ). February orders, originally >reported as having been up 1.5 percent were revised to an 0.8 >percent increase. > >Based on this, I don't think a .50 hike is in the offing. >... If you are correct and the markets do continue in a renewed uptrend ... then, the 1% followthrough on the S&P will have "predicted" that the economic news this week would be such that the market would continue to stablize. And, MSFT would have been the leader ... leading the market out of its near term doldrums. And thus an early warning "buy" signal, even before the S&P follow-through. See my related post questioning whether this is a rally in a bear market or the renewal of the uptrend. Craig ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 16:35:31 CDT From: David F. Cameron Subject: re: [CANSLIM] Re: Daily Graphs Online I sent a couple messages to the Daily Graphs on-line people who've identified themselves on this list. They are generally in agree- ment - that the site should use Java and be platform independent. Top management at DG, however, does not agree. I'm sure DG-On-Line will make money - and that is their primary motivation, right? Perhaps they think the cost of adding non-Win95/NT users is not worth the expected return. FWIW, I just bought a new PC for home (even though I use UNIX at work). It uses the new AMD-k6 chip and Win95. I feel like SUCH a conformist ;-( > > On Tue, 29 Apr 1997 16:48:03 -0400, Michael A Langston wrote: > > >> Everyone should jump on this window of opprtunity. > > > >really? -- you mean it now works on unix??? > > > >mike langston > > I visited the site, and found to my sorry that they still > have this VERY narrow view of the world that only includes > Win95/NT. Unix, OS/2, and Mac/PowerPc need not apply. > We are not welcome. Hah, as though we are not serious > investors who use the WWW, newsgroups, majordomo lists, > e-mail, ftp, etc. It gives me concern about any > subscription that I might make to any of their printed > media. What might they do to it to exclude a certain > class or classes of potential subscribers in North > America, Europe, Asia? Daily Graphs, do you hear??? > Boo, Hiss!!! > > *----------------------------------------------------------------------* > Robert Gammon My opinions are my own. In no way do > rgammon@micro.ti.com I represent the views of my employer > Using OS/2 Warp Connect, and a user of every version of OS/2 since v1.0 > *----------------------------------------------------------------------* > > > ------------------------------ End of canslim Digest V1 #157 ***************************** To subscribe to canslim Digest, send the command: subscribe canslim-digest in the body of a message to "majordomo@xmission.com". If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-canslim": subscribe canslim-digest local-canslim@your.domain.net A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "canslim-digest" in the commands above with "canslim". Back issues are available for anonymous FTP from ftp.xmission.com, in pub/lists/canslim/archive. These are organized by date.