From: canslim-owner@xmission.com (canslim Digest) To: canslim-digest@xmission.com Subject: canslim Digest V1 #263 Reply-To: canslim@xmission.com Sender: canslim-owner@xmission.com Errors-To: canslim-owner@xmission.com Precedence: canslim Digest Wednesday, August 13 1997 Volume 01 : Number 263 In this issue: re: [CANSLIM] Quietness of CANSLIM list RE: [CANSLIM] A trader looks at canslim. RE: [CANSLIM] MFAC News Re: [CANSLIM] A trader looks at canslim. Re: [CANSLIM] Amerilink (ALNK) Re: [CANSLIM] Market Leaders Re: [CANSLIM] Quietness of CANSLIM list Re: [CANSLIM] MFAC News Re: [CANSLIM] Quietness of CANSLIM list Re: [CANSLIM] Quietness of CANSLIM list Re: [CANSLIM] [CANSLIM - NOT] ACAT transfer horror 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: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 12:00:06 -0400 From: Michael A Langston Subject: re: [CANSLIM] Quietness of CANSLIM list > Unless anyone objects, I will stop posting my "no joke" message... we just want the good jokes jeff -- screen em for us would ya? hey, put down that rock! :) mike ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 09:20:16 -0700 From: Brian Nash Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] A trader looks at canslim. I'm probably the least qualified individual in this group to respond to this, but, what the hell, here goes: > "I infer from just a few postings that you have not profited as > you expected though you have kept the canslim faith." > > Not the case. I've had the best run of my limited CANSLIM career. > Whereas individual investor sentiment is a contraindicator, on this > list, quietness seems to indicate lack of opportunity. This was > manifest during the dead of last winter, right before the spring > correction, and now. And, indeed, all I'm seeing, aside from the > occasional MFAC, etc., is a bunch of roach motel S&Ls. > > I assume you mean 'faith' metaphorically. I choose to treat CANSLIM as > the ultimate cynicism. > > "your principles, if adhered to, religiously filter out too many > good stocks, respectable stocks" > > To which the CANSLIMmer says: "Name two". They also prevent you from > entering broken growth stories and value suckholes ('cats and dogs', > if you will). It may be an article of 'faith', but I cannot imagine > how a great growth stock would fail to pass through here eventually. > > "And it seems to me that timing?in and out?is reason for much > that causes dissatisfaction with canslim" > > Maybe "worthwhile pain in the ass" is a more appropriate > characterization. With the real rockets, you have to be ready to rock > with the opportunity. This entails anticipatory monitoring of many > high growth stocks. > > "The cup|handle is one base but others are equally as powerful. > However, I do not know how much canslim gives priority to this figure; > as I recall, it is a heavy dependence" > > My impression is that WON feels that the cup & handle represents the > best combination of risk and reward for the individual investor. He > presents the double bottom, base on a base, and high tight flags as > well. I have bought and sold all these at one time or another. > > ---------- > From: Connie Mack Rea[SMTP:rea1@dp.net] > Reply To: canslim@mail.xmission.com > Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 1997 9:04 PM > To: canslim@mail.xmission.com > Subject: [CANSLIM] A trader looks at canslim. > > Members of Canslim: > > I am a bit of an academic voyeur, a canslim key hole spectator > who > recently has spied into your house of principles. > > At the same time I am a registered short term trader by IRS > definition > and am therefore a sole proprietorship in the business of buying > and > selling equities. I am a short term trader who most prefers day > trading. Most of my trades, long and short, are directed to > short term > speculative holding; my longest held stock this year has been > for three > weeks. You may infer why I watch rather than post to your > group. > > The last couple of weeks some postings of the group have > saddened me > some, for a part of you have become uninterested rather than > disinterested investors. I infer from just a few postings that > you > have not profited as you expected though you have kept the > canslim > faith. > > From other groups I have learned?as you may have if you migrated > from > investor these groups to canslim?that what passes for > intellectual and > investing principles is little more than gossip, and often the > most > inviting gossip?statistical gossip. > > In fifteen years of part-time trading and in five of trading > almost > every day, I have looked at, either cursorily or minutely, at > most > systems, however mathematical, however mechanical, and however > disinterested. I, too, have read O?Neill and still read IBD. I > look > mostly at the charts. Cups and handles still interest me, but > for > reasons different from the canslimer. More of this in a minute. > > Most of us have purified our errors by amending recollection. > Losses > diminish and gains advance in retrospect. > > Stock picking can never be like the jump of my cat?always > perfect, never > in excess, never deficient. It seems to me that the principles > of > canslim, because they are several and exact (if one can > warrantee the > source, which one can?t) and are expected to be more like my > cat. Stock > picking is much more like the jump of my dog?overleaping, > underleaping, > lacking traction, and often collapsing stunned and ass up. > Some of the very smartest people gather at universities. I have > spent > most of my life in one. An axiom derived is that one doesn?t > have to be > enormously smart to trade or invest. Like the poet?s hedgehog, > one > needs to know one thing and know it exceedingly well. And that > one > thing is not unknown to any of you. > > Discipline. Disinterested discipline. And therein lies the > problem for > each of us. The canslim principles are your discipline. They > let you > filter and choose. Irrespective that some of your principles, > those > that can be numerically specified, are not always valid, for > different > numbers are delivered by different sources. These principles > give a > protective coloration to your stocks, such that any one > satisfying the > principles is puncture-proof and inamenable to diminution or > sleepless-nights? breakdown. > > Stock picking invites investor ineptness and incompetence, and > stock > malfunction?which is hardly better than buying machines that > were broke > from the beginning. My take on stock picking is that you must > be > modestly arrogant, at one moment denying that you made a mistake > and in > the next recanting?which is another way of saying that I made a > mistake, > I see the mistake, and now I believe differently (I?m getting > out). > Mistakes are like wrinkled skin on once smooth fresh milk. Once > inviting, now uninviting. > > I do understand, I believe, that the principles of canslim are > for the > investor, not the trader, for one who goes long the market and > never > shorts (perhaps cannot short, for I don?t recall any shorting > principles > in canslim). > > May I offer, as an outsider, but a friendly outsider, a few > observations. > > First, it seems that your principles, if adhered to, religiously > filter > out too many good stocks, respectable stocks. If, on the other > hand, > one picks and chooses degrees of acceptableness, then the system > becomes, by default, corrupted. Always, one is tempted to leap > like my > cat, only to succumb to weaknesses of my dog. > > Second, perhaps you will now infer the meaning of my animal > metaphor? > It is this. One does not have to leap with the perfection of my > cat to > make money. All systems are like the inefficiencies and > deficiencies?and the collapsible ass-up failures?of my dog. My > point > here is that one must not let his dog jump too often (which the > canslim > principles attempt) and, when he has jumped and succeed?for the > dog?s > leaps are not of uninterrupted failure?not to leave him elevated > without > reason. Both my cat and the dog must come down. Hence, the > principle > inherent in all stock leaps is timing. And it seems to me that > timing?in and out?is reason for much that causes dissatisfaction > with > canslim. > > From my casual observation of stocks noted in your postings, > much of the > youthful juices have been drawn out. A stock with an 80|80 or > 90-|90 > EPS and RS may be a strong stock. And there is nothing wrong > with > buying only stocks that are making new highs, but much depends > on what > kind of base they have rallied from and a half dozen other > considerations. The cup|handle is one base but others are > equally as > powerful. However, I do not know how much canslim gives > priority to > this figure; as I recall, it is a heavy dependence. > > To reconfigure my two points into canslim would necessarily make > it less > of a long term investing system. What I have only implied, but > which > would be necessary, would be application of some short or, at > least, > shorter term indicators. And shorter term indicators mean more > trading > and shorter holding periods?which means that what was once > canslim is no > longer canslim. > > I have not intended to be presumptuous with my comment. I am > just > saddened to see such a close knit and friendly group, at least > for the > moment, doubting their principles. > > Respectfully, > > Connie Mack Rea > > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 10:42:39 -0700 From: Simon Lee Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] MFAC News How much longer do you think this stock will post up? It's gapped up 4 days in a row. It's coming from a very low base of $4 (over 500% increase! in just a few months!) What kind of action could we see on this stock in the next few days? Do you think it'll level out or "correct"? I'm interested, because I've seen stocks that go vertical before, but usually fades back quickly also. Wonder what's making this stock such a hot mover? - -Simon > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Worley [SMTP:stkguru@netside.net] > Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 1997 6:20 PM > To: canslim@mail.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] MFAC News > > Hit a high of 21 on extremely heavy volume. Third day straight in > which it has gapped up, totally ignoring mkt action. When these > small float stocks move, ride 'em or get out of the way. > > Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my > employer. My comments should not be intrepreted as a recommendation > of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active > investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any > investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Hopefully > my comments will better inform and educate all investors. > > tom w > > ---------- > > From: Tim Fisher > > To: canslim@mail.xmission.com > > Subject: [CANSLIM] MFAC News > > Date: Tuesday, August 12, 1997 8:52 PM > > > > MARKET FACTS (Nasdaq:MFAC) gained $2 1/8 to $20 after the market > research > > firm said it has been given > > the green light by the Chinese government to commence a joint > venture in > > that country. > > > > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists > > Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site > > PFB Information > > tfish@spiritone.com > > WWW http://www.spiritone.com/~tfish -- See naked fish and rocks! > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 15:07:20 -0400 From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] A trader looks at canslim. - --------------26938832C993AF47AA65D70D Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Carl-- I see my ironies entangle themselves, and my parentheses evaporate, and a few less subtle points glance tangentially off one member. One always wants to be the prince rather than the whipping boy. Carl, I am grateful to you for the kind words. I am grateful also to Tom Worley; his disinterested view of my post characterizes his disinterested and knowledgeable view of the market prompts me to read his comment often. One member thought too much of my life spent in the university's ivory tower. However, when I was not there I worked the Louisiana oil rigs, was cloistered in a bank, played professional basketball, and, as implied, poked around in a lot of libraries. Some investors are no smarter than the cat in the library curled up next to the Encyclopedia of Market Analysis, which is also an allusion to me. A trader friend and I spent a lot of money on some pretty sophisticated trading programs and read through stifling market and government statistics. Carl, the result you will think not true. However, this is the truth: I've returned to many of the market indicators that I learned from my father, also a trader. Rarely can I not find exactly what I need free on the net. What is useful to me can be useful to you even though our market intentions are quite different. E.g., I use the most inexpensive market program: Don Worden's TeleChart 2000; it is advertised every day in IBD. I suggest it to my friends. I've discovered that they don't use its many programmable features, for most of the indicators are pre-programmed; there is much else available if you will read the manuals. I use little information that you are not familiar with. I respect, and fear, volume most of all. Volume readings do two powerful things: [1] Large volume (a corollary of float) protects me from wild volatility; I rarely trade a stock that doesn't trade 300,000-500,000 shares; I will not trade a stock with more than an 1/8th difference in bid|ask, and I prefer one that trades in 1/16ths or less. Surely no one should think that out of the thousands of stocks around that these criteria are restrictive. [2] I depend on the ancient exponential 3|10 moving average for an embarrassingly large number of my trades. Run your favorite stock through this filter and adjust the filter to fit the stock; take the run back at least three years. If the stock is faithful to the filter for the period, hold it against further criteria (see below); if it can't be trusted, chuck it; there are thousands of others, and one or two faithful ones will pay your rent and maybe pay off the house. There haven't been a half dozen stocks that weren't faithful that I spent even a day with; the unfaithful were flyers that were never kept beyond the day's close. If the 3|10 marker doesn't give enough separation on the chart, there is probably not enough volatility for me. This is a buy and sell marker. [3] I have another simple favorite filter: a stochastic setting of 12-5 [period of 12; MA of 5] and a second MA [moving average] of 10. When the 10 MA passes up through the 12-5 line, I consider this to be a strong marker. On occasion, this marker occurs before the 3|10 marker; this event is even stronger. I use also 23|5|10 and 45|7|10. All three are buy and sell markers. [4] I look at, in order of no absolute significance, MACD (moving average convergence|divergence); OBV (on balance volume). Worden's program has nine or ten others and a couple of their own derivations (TSV: time segmented volume; BOP: balance of power, which is an accumulation|distribution marker). A couple of my site suggestions below allow for variable settings for several indicators. [5] A marker that I am again paying attention to is the reading of candlesticks. As of now, they are relevant for day trading; they are provocative, though. Here are the free sites that I think most useful: [A] bigcharts.com [most of the indicators you'll need for charting] [B] iqc.com [good site; believe it is going commercial in a month or so; not available sometimes; believe this site has examples and definitions of several indicators; though I've forgotten, candlestick examples may be at this site]] [C] timely.com/chart.html [average] [D] pcfn.com [nearly as good as BigCharts] [E] stockmart.com [much here of interest for canslim] [F] inforel.com [rarely look at it] [G] techstocks.com [H] stockwiz.com [no comment] [I] bozeman.com [believe that this brings up Zacks [Zacks.com]] as do some other URLs [J] CPCUG.com [haven't looked at this for six months] Carl, if you like to chat or just listen, check: stockchat.com and chat@avidinfo.com. If you're bound to inquire into some of that soporific economic stuff look at fedworld.gov. Some of this stuff will put you and the flies on the wall to sleep. Respectfully, Connie Mack Rea - --------------26938832C993AF47AA65D70D Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Carl--

I see my ironies entangle themselves, and my parentheses evaporate, and a few less subtle points glance tangentially off one member.

 One always wants to be the prince rather than the whipping boy.

Carl, I am grateful to you for the kind words.  I am grateful also to Tom Worley; his disinterested view of my post characterizes his disinterested and knowledgeable view of the market prompts me to read his comment often.

One member thought too much of my life spent in the university's ivory tower.  However, when I was not there I worked the Louisiana oil rigs, was cloistered in a bank, played professional basketball, and, as implied, poked around in a lot of libraries.

Some investors are no smarter than the cat in the library curled up next to the Encyclopedia of Market Analysis, which is also an allusion to me.  A trader friend and I spent a lot of money on some pretty sophisticated trading programs and read through stifling market and government statistics.

Carl, the result you will think not true.  However, this is the truth:  I've returned to many of the market indicators that I learned from my father, also a trader.  Rarely can I not find exactly what I need free on the net.

What is useful to me can be useful to you even though our market intentions are quite different.  E.g., I use the most inexpensive market program: Don Worden's TeleChart 2000; it is advertised every day in IBD.  I suggest it to my friends.  I've discovered that they don't use its many programmable features, for most of the indicators are pre-programmed; there is much else available if you will read the manuals.

I use little information that you are not familiar with.  I respect, and fear, volume most of all.  Volume readings do two powerful things: [1] Large volume (a corollary of float) protects me from wild volatility; I rarely trade a stock that doesn't trade 300,000-500,000 shares; I will not trade a stock with more than an 1/8th difference in bid|ask, and I prefer one that trades in 1/16ths or less.  Surely no one should think that out of the thousands of stocks around that these criteria are restrictive. 

[2] I depend on the ancient exponential 3|10 moving average for an embarrassingly large number of my trades.  Run your favorite stock through this filter and adjust the filter to fit the stock; take the run back at least three years.  If the stock is faithful  to the filter for the period, hold it against further criteria (see below); if it can't be trusted, chuck it; there are thousands of others, and one or two faithful ones will pay your rent and maybe pay off the house.   There haven't been a half dozen stocks that weren't faithful that I spent even a day with; the unfaithful were flyers that were never kept beyond the day's close.  If the 3|10 marker doesn't give enough separation on the chart, there is probably not enough volatility for me.  This is a buy and sell marker.

[3] I have another simple favorite filter: a stochastic setting of 12-5 [period of 12; MA of 5]  and  a second MA [moving average] of 10.  When the 10 MA passes up through the 12-5 line, I consider this to be a strong marker.  On occasion, this marker occurs before the 3|10 marker; this event is even stronger.  I use also 23|5|10 and 45|7|10.  All three are  buy and sell markers.

[4] I look at, in order of no absolute significance, MACD (moving average convergence|divergence);  OBV (on balance volume).  Worden's program has nine or ten others and a couple of their own derivations (TSV: time segmented volume; BOP: balance of power, which is an accumulation|distribution marker).  A couple of my site suggestions below allow for variable settings for several indicators.

[5] A marker that I am again paying attention to is the reading of candlesticks.  As of now, they are relevant for day trading;  they are provocative, though.

Here are the free sites that I think most useful:

    [A] bigcharts.com  [most of the indicators you'll need for charting]
    [B] iqc.com [good site; believe it is going commercial in a month or so; not              available sometimes; believe this site has examples and definitions of several indicators; though I've forgotten, candlestick examples may be at this site]]
    [C] timely.com/chart.html [average]
    [D] pcfn.com [nearly as good as BigCharts]
    [E] stockmart.com [much here of interest for canslim]
    [F] inforel.com [rarely look at it]
    [G] techstocks.com
    [H] stockwiz.com [no comment]
    [I] bozeman.com [believe that this brings up Zacks [Zacks.com]] as do some other URLs
    [J] CPCUG.com [haven't looked at this for six months]
 
 Carl, if you like to chat or just listen, check: stockchat.com and chat@avidinfo.com.
 
If you're bound to inquire into some of that soporific economic stuff look at fedworld.gov.   Some of this stuff will put you and the flies on the wall to sleep.

Respectfully,
 

Connie Mack Rea
  - --------------26938832C993AF47AA65D70D-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 21:35:03 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Amerilink (ALNK) Any "momentum" stock which also has either convertible bonds and/or options creates an arbitrage play. Short the stock and cover (protect the position from excessive losses) with one or the other. When neither exist, the likelihood of a sig short position is greatly minimized as the risks are too great. Has little to do with what stocks are in an index, simply put "this stock has gone from 20 to 50 in XXX months, it's gotta collapse any day, short it". But as we all know, solid momentum stocks can keep on rolling to 80 before taking a breather, kinda painful for a shorter with no protection. And then it may only consolidate before doing a 2 or 3 for 1 split and rolling again. So, without an upside protector such as conv bonds or options, the risk potential far exceeds the reward potential, discouraging potential shorters. Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be intrepreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Hopefully my comments will better inform and educate all investors. tom w - ---------- > From: Jay Cliburn > To: canslim@mail.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Amerilink (ALNK) > Date: Wednesday, August 13, 1997 9:51 AM > > [deletia] > > > Characteristic of many small cap stocks, no short interest, > > no options, no potential arbitrage play that I can see. > > Interesting comment, Tom. About the arbitrage play, that is. > My guess is that *very* few CANSLIM stocks are subject to > arbitrage activity, since such activity is generally confined > to index portfolios. Granted, there are some comprehensive > indices out there (Russell 2000, e.g.), but don't most arbitrageurs > play SPX, which contains very few NASDAQ-listed stocks, and > even fewer CANSLIM candidates? > > -- > Jay Cliburn | Space Dynamics Laboratory > Computational Sciences Division | 1747 North Research Park Way > Jay.Cliburn@sdl.usu.edu | Logan, Utah, USA 84341 > (801) 755-4317 (voice) | (801) 755-4366 (fax) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 21:49:53 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Market Leaders Also, if aging memory serves me right, didn't KO just come out with either a bad earnings report or a warning of same?? Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be intrepreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Hopefully my comments will better inform and educate all investors. tom w - ---------- > From: Jack Markowitz > To: canslim@mail.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Market Leaders > Date: Wednesday, August 13, 1997 8:29 AM > > Look at the difference between two of the stocks you pointed out... > KO is trading at somewhere around a 40 PE, has very consistent earnings > growth, but this growth is in the neighborhood of 15% a year and the KO > management is very adapt at buybacks designed to keep the growth of > earnings in that area..... Yes, in my opinion KO is overvalued and tired > at this level... > > INTC on the other hand holds a PE of 25, under the 30 plus that it's > peers hold and under the over 30% three year growth rate of both earnings > and revenues. With the whole world getting on line and INTC's proven > ability to create new markets (I have a perfectly capable 166 MHz Pentium > but I can't wait to get my hands on a 300 MHz one!!) there is every reason > to believe INTC is undervalued. > > You are correct, there are overvalued stocks in the market, KO is one of > them, but INTC has a long way to go... > > See ya, > Jack > jack@jackm.com > http://www.jackm.com > Jack's Picks > > ---------- > > From: Greg Nyberg > > To: 'canslim@mail.xmission.com' > > Subject: [CANSLIM] Market Leaders > > Date: Wednesday, August 13, 1997 1:00 AM > > > > Hello all- > > Anyone else worried about the market leaders of this long bull market > > starting to look tired and/or rolling over? Stocks like KO, MSFT, INTC > > have been the "nifty-fifty" of the last few years, it seems to me. > > Everyone talked about "safety" and "large cap vs small cap" on the way > > up, as if large cap stocks were immune to simple things like P/E vs EPS > > growth rate. Doesn't WON talk about looking for tops when the leaders > > start to top? > > What stocks do you guys consider the "leaders" of the last 1-2 years? > > -Greg > > > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Greg Nyberg, Senior Consultant > > BORN Information Services Group > > (612) 404-4217 Fax: (612) 404-4440 > > > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 21:47:01 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Quietness of CANSLIM list And truth is, it's far easier to spot the few stocks that can still make you money in a bear mkt, than it is in this raging (aging) bull where everything seems to be rising. Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be intrepreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Hopefully my comments will better inform and educate all investors. tom w - ---------- > From: Jack Markowitz > To: canslim@mail.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Quietness of CANSLIM list > Date: Wednesday, August 13, 1997 8:54 AM > > We will have a bear market... at some point. The basic principles of > CANSLIM are independent of the state of the Market. While it is true that > 70% of the companies move with the market, it is also true that when the > market is bad, I want to be in the top companies. Even in a bear market > there will be winners. > See ya, > Jack > jack@jackm.com > http://www.jackm.com > Jack's Picks > > > ---------- > > From: pwahl@postoffice.worldnet.att.net > > To: canslim@mail.xmission.com > > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Quietness of CANSLIM list > > Date: Wednesday, August 13, 1997 12:01 AM > > > > > From: Jerry Sze > > > > > I am new to this list, but I too share your thoughts on the state of > > > CANSLIM, is it going to work when "the correction" comes, if it ever > > > > What do you mean when you say is it going to work in a correction? > > If you mean will you make money, I don't think so, only because it is > > very hard to make money in a bear market, or correction, whatever you > > want to call it. But adhering to the idea of cutting losers means > > that CANSLIM will "work", in the sense of preserving your capital and > > allowing you to get back in the market when things improve again. > > The one hard part, which no system will probably give you a magic > > formula for, is getting out of profitable stocks with your profit > > before most of it erodes, should we ever have a bear market. > > > > > > > > Patrick Wahl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 21:43:48 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] MFAC News Extremely strong earnings coupled with an extremely small float. Sure wish I had had some spare cash to buy it back before its 2:1 split, or even when I mentioned it to this group last week at 14 and change. Could have used a quick, one week gain of 9 plus pts on a 14 dollar stock. Don't recall the last time I saw a stock gap up four days running, esp when the mkt was dropping a hundred or more pts at the same time. Granted, they timed things right, coverage in New America followed by a new contract in China, but geeezzz, what a sweet winner for those that bot at 14. BTW, for similiar reasons, I am watching MSON (float 1.5 mil) and ALNK (float 1.1 mil share float). Both have good CS nrs and look ready to break higher. Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be intrepreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Hopefully my comments will better inform and educate all investors. tom w - ---------- > From: Simon Lee > To: 'canslim@mail.xmission.com' > Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] MFAC News > Date: Wednesday, August 13, 1997 1:42 PM > > How much longer do you think this stock will post up? It's gapped up 4 > days in a row. It's coming from a very low base of $4 (over 500% > increase! in just a few months!) What kind of action could we see on > this stock in the next few days? Do you think it'll level out or > "correct"? I'm interested, because I've seen stocks that go vertical > before, but usually fades back quickly also. Wonder what's making this > stock such a hot mover? > > -Simon > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Tom Worley [SMTP:stkguru@netside.net] > > Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 1997 6:20 PM > > To: canslim@mail.xmission.com > > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] MFAC News > > > > Hit a high of 21 on extremely heavy volume. Third day straight in > > which it has gapped up, totally ignoring mkt action. When these > > small float stocks move, ride 'em or get out of the way. > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 21:54:15 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Quietness of CANSLIM list An update: I discovered that "who" has been disabled to avoid the list membership being stolen by bulk and spam emailers. Jeff advised me however that the current membership continues to grow, now at 209 receiving the regular CANSLIM posts and another 337 getting the digest version, for a total of 546. Jeff mentions that he has been getting 3-6 unsolicited commercial and spam emails a day, which is about the same as I had been getting, altho I suspected another site where I am registered which is much larger. Thanks for the added security, Jeff. Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be intrepreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Hopefully my comments will better inform and educate all investors. tom w - ---------- From: Surindra J. Singh To: canslim@mail.xmission.com Cc: majordomo@mail.xmission.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Quietness of CANSLIM list Date: Tuesday, August 12, 1997 12:34 PM WHO canslim help canslim ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 19:34:18 -0800 From: pwahl@postoffice.worldnet.att.net Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Quietness of CANSLIM list > From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) > OK, what *is* the Omega list? Its the list for people with Tradestation and Supercharts. A lot of the discussion is just about data feeds and Tradestation problems, but there is also some general talk about trading. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 22:46:59 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] [CANSLIM - NOT] ACAT transfer horror In my several years experience running Operations, I have cleared thru two major wirehouses (Morgan Stanley and Bear Stearns). My "norms" are based more on actual experience than on a fictictious industry standard. I have previously heard suggestions that my "norms" are anything but normal, gee, maybe I'm a better Ops Manager than I realized, maybe I should demand a raise?? In truth, I have also heard a lot about how discount firms have cut their "back office support" so as to appear to give good service since most investors are concerned about placing an order or order execution. After all, they do that many more times than they transfer an acct. I am also aware (from experience) that many major wirehouses will actively work to sabatoge the ACAT process so as to delay losing an acct. Maybe it's just my twelve hour days, or maybe good fortune, but my typical delivery time on average for a cash acct or an IRA remains within the norms. I have educated my brokers, and try to educate investors when I have the chance, so that they will speak up when the norms are not honored. I have also used Del Charter as a custodian when I was an active broker. While their fees are excessive unless you have a complicated portfolio of artwork, mortgages, real estate, notes, stocks, Limited Partnerships, bonds, etc, I always found them to be professional and efficient. In this particular case, it is apparent to me that Datek didn't recognize that you were maintaining the same third party custodian and only a Broker Dealer change was involved. hence all the unnecessary paperwork being sent to you. I believe some of the delay must be laid at Datek's doorstep. Since no change of custodian was involved, this acct should have been "transferred" within two business weeks of the acct being created by Datek. It is also possible that Datek sent paperwork via snail mail to Del Charter (vice a phone call, again reflecting the level of service and expertise in their "back office") to confirm their agreement to a change in Broker Dealer designation. It is also possible, altho less likely, that Datek had no existing agreement already in place with Del Charter, and had to do this paperwork before the transfer could be completed. This is frankly one advantage I have in running Operations for a relatively small correspondent BD clearing thru a large wirehouse. I am at least involved, if not actually performing, virtually all aspects of Operations, and I have a high degree of demand for quality service honed from my years as a broker. Truthfully, there is no excuse for any firm large or small not meeting this same degree of performance. It's up to you, the investor, to demand this when you don't get it automatically. BTW, if for some stupid reason the application form (either online or on paper) doesn't have a block for middle name/initial, then just include this in the "first name" block, e.g. "Robert G." instead of "Robert". However, so long as the SS# was the same and all other info was accurate, like delivering acct nr, then it should not have ever caused any delay. Common sense is supposed to prevail, if it doesn't yell at an Operations Manager, skip the IRA clerk, he's just doing the job the way someone told him to, by rote, no thought, no intelligence, no judgement. Actually, let me correct this, yell at the receiving broker so as to make him go yell at his Ops Manager, one of the perks of my job is that I no longer have to deal with "clients". What a relief, some can be so demanding@@@!!!##@#@ Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be intrepreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Hopefully my comments will better inform and educate all investors. tom w - ---------- > From: Robert Gammon > To: canslim@mail.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] [CANSLIM - NOT] ACAT transfer horror > Date: Wednesday, August 13, 1997 8:55 AM > > Tom, thanks for setting the baseline expectations. I have > some comments. > > >I will review the norms: > >ACAT of a cash/margin acct - eight business days > >ACAT of an IRA - max of 15 business days from acceptance by the new > >custodian (which should happen within two business days of delivery > >of the paperwork) > >DTC of some or all of a cash/margin acct - no more than three > >business days > >DTC of some or all of an IRA - 5 to 8 business days > > The custodian is Delaware Charter. They are the custodian for > both firms. > > Titling. There may be an issue with titling. The sending account > is 'Robert G Gammon', and the receiving account is 'Robert Gammon'. > There was no place on the receiving firms new account form to put > middle initials or names. > > Since Delaware Charter is the custodian for both firms, no physical > transfer of assets is required, other than for cash. The accounts > hold only medium to large cap NYSE, AMEX, and NASDAQ stocks. No > penny stocks, no BB stocks, no foreign holdings, no mutual funds, > no options, no futures contracts are in these accounts. > > > The sending firm is J.B Oxford. The receiving firm is Datek. > > I contacted Datek after I mailed the original forms, indicating > that I already had an account with Delaware Charter, so I did not > enclose the new IRA account form and the application fee. > > When they retuend my forms, they also insisted that I fill > out the New IRA account form for Delaware Charter and enclose the > new account application fee for Delaware Charter. I enclosed a > note with the forms, addressing it to Delaware Charter, complaining > about the rigid rules that the clerks at Datek were following, asking > them to apply the funds to the annual fee (which is due in about > September). The IRA application form, the check, and my note to > Delaware Charter were returned to me a few days after the account > number assignment. > > I also sent the same message to James's list. James experiences in > transferring many, many IRA accounts roughly matches mine. So while > your baseline transfer times above should be what we experience, > the norm appears to be far from that. I am getting the feeling from > the responses I have gotten that my experience is far from being a > horror, it is closer to being the norm than an unusual occurence. > Large firms, small firms, deep-discounts, discounters, full service > firms, it does not really appear to make much difference. > > So, I need to start hollering at Datek on or after August 26. > That is 15+1 days from the date on the Delaware Charter letter > to J.B. Oxford. > > Robert > ------------------------------ End of canslim Digest V1 #263 ***************************** 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.