Unemployment was = 4.7%, 370,000=20 jobs created. Unemployment was in line with expectations but jobs = created=20 were much stronger then predicted. Initial reaction by stock and = bond=20 traders were to sell off but after everyone reviewed the average hourly = earnings=20 they came back. Hourly earnings were only +.01 cents an = hour. =20 For the entire year wages only rose +3.7 cents. S & P 500 = futures were=20 off -6.00 points before the number was released and rallied to only = being down=20 - -1.00 point but are now falling again. The 30 year bond was only = down=20 - -3/32nds but is now selling off on profit taking, moving down = - -21/32nds. =20 It looks like the news is being forgotten fast. Back to the Asian=20 woes!!

Ken
www.agoraoutlook.com

The information = contained in=20 this commentary is based upon data that is believed to be accurate, but = is not=20 guaranteed, and subject to change without notice. All projections, = forecasts, opinions, and track records cannot be guaranteed to = equal our=20 past performance. Persons reading this are responsible for their=20 actions. Officers and employees of this publication may at times = have a=20 position in the securities mentioned, or related services. =20

- ------=_NextPart_000_014F_01BD1CC2.8812AB80-- - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 06:11:05 -0800 From: "Ken Davidson" Subject: [CANSLIM] oops This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_017B_01BD1CC5.5E7FA2C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sorry the yearly figure for hourly earnings was 3.7% not 3.7 cents. = Bonds and stocks have flattened out 20 minutes before the open.=20 Ken=20 www.agoraoutlook.com=20 The information contained in this commentary is based upon data that is = believed to be accurate, but is not guaranteed, and subject to change = without notice. All projections, forecasts, opinions, and track records = cannot be guaranteed to equal our past performance. Persons reading = this are responsible for their actions. Officers and employees of this = publication may at times have a position in the securities mentioned, or = related services.=20 - ------=_NextPart_000_017B_01BD1CC5.5E7FA2C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Sorry = the yearly=20 figure for hourly earnings was 3.7% not 3.7 cents. Bonds and = stocks have=20 flattened out 20 minutes before the open.

Ken
www.agoraoutlook.com

The=20 information contained in this commentary is based upon data that is = believed to=20 be accurate, but is not guaranteed, and subject to change without = notice. =20 All projections, forecasts, opinions, and track records cannot be=20 guaranteed to equal our past performance. Persons reading = this are=20 responsible for their actions. Officers and employees of this = publication=20 may at times have a position in the securities mentioned, or related=20 services.

- ------=_NextPart_000_017B_01BD1CC5.5E7FA2C0-- - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 09:49:04 -0500 From: joani@mindspring.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Short Term Loss U.S. IRS Rule Info Sought >A friend was trying to describe a U.S. tax rule that prevents one from >considering losses on a stock that was purchased again within X amount >of days. He referred to it as the "wash rule". If anyone is familiar >with this please point to documentation on the law/rule. > >Thanks, > >Bill Daniels > >- Bill, see section 1091 IR Code. JPS Joan Sherman, /\~~~/\ /\~~~/\ /\~/\ /\~/\ ** ** ** ** Help Support Animal Rescue - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 10:59:45 -0500 (EST) From: Mark Schiffner Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: canslim-digest V2 #75 On Thu, 8 Jan 1998, Tom Worley wrote: > If costs my firm $19 to clear an OTC trade; $23 plus $.0125/share to clear a > listed security; and $19 plus $1.75 to $1.25 per contract to clear an option > trade. This is without counting any operating expenses, my salary or Thanks Tom for the interesting info! I thought you and a few other have mentioned not doing trades for more that $20 roundtrip (sorry if I have attributed it to you and it wasn't you :) Anyways, it seems like that philosophy would rely on these companys. I guess I figured you could trade at that level at your company and that the "big guys" were inflating the prices for their services - well that is true even if the trade costs the 19. Schwab is going to a flat $29.95 for web trades, which builds in a little profit. What is the chance that they get better than a $19 rate, or is that "industry" standard? Thanks for the insight!!! Mark Schiffner - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 05 Jan 1998 23:19:43 -0500 From: Jeffry White <"postwhit@sover.net"@sover.net> Subject: [CANSLIM] "M" Tom: You wrote: "However, I don't recall WON ever saying to disregard upcoming events nor suggesting you should not try to anticipate the mkt. In fact, much of CANSLIM is designed to HELP you anticipate the future mkt." I agree with this as a general statement, but I think that if we discuss this more thouroughly, the polarity of our interpretations of what those statements mean would be complete. I doubt we could ever do that, and I guess it suffices to say that you look at every report and I ignore all of them (I cheat a bit and know when the employment report and a few other come out, but I try not to let it influence me or to admit to having even looked). I watch the indices religiously for WON's price and volume indicators for the "M". I never see you include that analysis in your discussions, but assuming it is in the mix, you add a whole lot of cerebral, interpretive, complicated, disputed, opinion to what is a really simple process. My way doesn't always work, but it's pretty reliable when mixed with contrarian indicators like puts/calls ratios and most importantly, sentiment. Don't really know how you can reliabily or comfortably interpret all that noisy stuff you listen to without running huge risks of being distracted from the pure price and volume signals. Perhaps you are the "great mind" after all!! :) More particularly, I don't recall WON saying in HTMMIS that, in determining "M", you should montior every little squeak and squirt of economic noise that somebody who pretends to be a "grand mind" spues forth. And I don't think that the purely objective "M" criteria for determining Market Direction allow for much influence of these types of factors without damaging the beauty of their objectivity. I've read HTMMIS many times, and I just don't read your economic commentary as part of that. I enjoy reading it, but I really wonder how far afield it lets folks run from the focus of getting the "M" right. Each will make his or her own judgment on that, I hope. I appreciate your acceptance of my point of view, whether you agree or not. BTW, who is this Ken guy who spues forth all this noise about some "M" he seems to be watching with great gusto and fanfare? Ken's "M" is one I just don't recognize. Is he trading the same market? Is he trading at all? Does he know what CANSLIM is, or is he just lost while out fishing for a buck or two from a web site somewhere? Ken? Thanks for allowing me to participate, Tom. Jeffry - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 05 Jan 1998 20:43:19 -0800 (PST) From: Scott Violet Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Economic Calendar, week of January 5, 1998 I vote keep it around, informative to me. -Scott Violet - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 Jan 1998 19:01:29 +0000 (LOC) From: Tim Sowden Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] BTO LBOR MODT Hi, After seeing the post about LBOR I thought it was time for me to stop lurking and introduce myself. My name is Tim Sowden and I am a contract software engineer working in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area. I have been lurking here since August. A friend of mine introduced me to CANSLIM and told me how to subscribe to this list. I read the discussions for about 2 months before I went and bought HTTMIS. I have read the book twice since then. I personally found it very helpful to read thru all the messages for a couple months before reading the book. When I did read the book it made so much more sense cause I could look back on the discussions here. I want to say how much I have learned from this discussion group. I thought I knew quite a bit about the stock market but I now know I have a lot to learn still. My investing history is not a lot. Since 1989 (when I graduated from Univ) I have been investing in Mutual funds (in Canada where I am from originally) as part of my retirement there. I got interested in investing in individual stocks in the last year when I finally got enough extra money to play with. I am also investing in mutual funds here (the Dow select 10 method which I happen to like for a 401k plan since it seems a 'safe' vehicle for retirement and WON himself say it's OK in HTTMIS if you plan to stay in thru several cycles) in addition to stocks. > LBOR - vol has picked up the past two days, but slightly to the downside. > Trailing PE of 77, projected PE for this year in mid-50s. Otherwise looks > worth watching. With regard to LBOR. I bought about 2500 worth of this stock last April when it traded for 9.00 and I sold after the split at around 36.00 for a very nice gain. I bought the stock on a recommendation of a college friend who is well placed in the company. He was telling me that the company was about to show great profits for quarter 2 (end of June when stock took off) and that I should buy as much as possible (Note to Tom. Is this considered insider info since he had access to company financial info?). I am glad I bought what I did but I wish I bought more. Unfortunately I invested my other 8000 or so in ORCL at 26.00 and watched it rise to 40.00. I was greedy and wanted my money to double so I hung on as it slumped down to 33.0. Then I hoped for it to rise up to 40.00 again but as you have probably guessed I hung on and watched it take a 33% drop :( I did not have stops in place (Won't EVER EVER make that mistake again after I am up a lot of $$$) so I am hanging on to it in hope it rises up to 26.00 again and then I'll sell it off and break even. If I had bought all LBOR ..... Anyway. Talking to my friend recently revealed the following information which may be useful to anyone putting it on their lists. 1) They are undergoing a management philosophy change which is going to cause my friend to leave soon. They are in the process of re-cycling (I saw that word on the official document) all old (more than 2 years) employees so that new ones can be brought in to learn the new philosophy which is to make each office like a McDonalds (ie. you can go to any office and it looks and functions like any other office) even tho there are all kinds of regional problems with this. So while this may qualify as 'N', my friend assures me it is annoying the hell out of a lot of managers (who may themselves be re-cycled) and may cause short term turmoil. 2) They are opening 140 new offices this year (they have about 400 or so now). This is good news for the stock. They did this same thing last year when they opened 200 new offices. My friend explained to me that they open their offices in the Oct-Mar timeframe which is their LEAST busy time. These new offices generally don't make money for six months so their profits for this timeframe will be lower than expected so watch for the stock price to go lower (as it have been doing for the last month or so). Then during their busy time in Quarter 2 and 3 the new offices will start to turn a profit so the June/July report and Sept/Oct report will be better than expected and the stock will take off. So for anyone considering LBOR, I would wait (as I am doing) until the Q4 and Q1 report to see how the new offices are doing. Then when the stock slumps it's time to buy. Obviously I will make a friendly call to my buddy and ask 'how business is going' around April/May for anyone who is interested. A couple of other things before this message gets too big. I don't have an IBD subscription and I don't have a lot of time to surf around on the net at the various sites using indicators so I really appreciate it when people mention stocks they are considering buying with the CANSLIM numbers. Then I can just check out those stocks to see if I am interested in them. Also would it be possible for someone with an IBD subscription to post the top 10 industry groups say once a month so we can know when to get out/into a particular group. This might have saved me some $$$ in ORCL if I had known that the tech's were falling out of favor in industry groups. What do people do about taxes on stocks they sell for a profit. I make 75k+ a year so I am in a pretty hefty tax bracket. If I make money on a stock and sell it, I pay about 33% tax (unless I hold for 18 months another reason I held on to ORCL). Along with the brokerage fee's (I don't have a cheap discount broker yet) it means I need to make WAY more than 10-15% on an individual stock to may any real $$$. How does anyone do it? I mean if I buy 5000.00 in a stock, if it rises 20% I make 1000. After taxes it's 666. After paying about 60-80 for the trade I am left with under 600 dollars or about 12% gain. This is not that great. Is there any better method out there (Connie, what about becoming a registered business/investor?). My feeling is that if I sell a stock and buy more stock I should not have to pay taxes until I cash out totally and plan to spend the money. Too bad Uncle Sam does not see it that way. Once upon a time (until 1995) in Canada everyone had a 100,000 personal capitol gains exemption. It was great for people who wanted to invest. Too bad it got removed in Canada and too bad it's not here :( Tim - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 09:13:42 -0800 From: "Robert Venchiarutti" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] BTO LBOR MODT >With regard to LBOR. I bought about 2500 worth of this stock last April when >it traded for 9.00 and I sold after the split at around 36.00 for a very nice >gain. I bought the stock on a recommendation of a college friend who is well >placed in the company. He was telling me that the company was about to show >great profits for quarter 2 (end of June when stock took off) and that I should >buy as much as possible (Note to Tom. Is this considered insider info since he >had access to company financial info?). FWIW, generally if you are receiving information that is "material" to a company's performance (such as earnings) from a well placed employee of the company before that information is publicly disseminated, and trading on that information before it is public, then that is insider trading. Now based on what you've told this group, it is difficult to say whether you actually traded on insider information. But, it may be prudent for you to keep any further details about your (very profitable) trade to yourself. Now the other information you are getting from your friend regarding change in management philosophy, general moral of managers, employment practices, etc. seems to me to be fair game, particularly if your are getting your information after these policy changes have been announce to company employees or managers. Because of your connection to your friend, you have access to better information than most of us. There is no prohibition on trading on "beter" information, and I think that members of this list would appreciate any additional insights you provide. >Anyway. Talking to my friend recently revealed the following information which >may be useful to anyone putting it on their lists. > >1) They are undergoing a management philosophy change which is going to cause > my friend to leave soon. They are in the process of re-cycling (I saw that > word on the official document) all old (more than 2 years) employees so > that new ones can be brought in to learn the new philosophy which is to make > each office like a McDonalds (ie. you can go to any office and it looks and > functions like any other office) even tho there are all kinds of regional > problems with this. So while this may qualify as 'N', my friend assures me > it is annoying the hell out of a lot of managers (who may themselves be > re-cycled) and may cause short term turmoil. > >2) They are opening 140 new offices this year (they have about 400 or so now). > This is good news for the stock. They did this same thing last year when > they opened 200 new offices. My friend explained to me that they open their > offices in the Oct-Mar timeframe which is their LEAST busy time. These new > offices generally don't make money for six months so their profits for this > timeframe will be lower than expected so watch for the stock price to go > lower (as it have been doing for the last month or so). Then during their > busy time in Quarter 2 and 3 the new offices will start to turn a profit > so the June/July report and Sept/Oct report will be better than expected and > the stock will take off. > >So for anyone considering LBOR, I would wait (as I am doing) until the Q4 >and Q1 report to see how the new offices are doing. Then when the stock slumps >it's time to buy. Obviously I will make a friendly call to my buddy and ask >'how business is going' around April/May for anyone who is interested. > - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Jan 1998 10:06:30 -0700 From: "James B. Andrews" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: canslim-digest V2 #75 I am quite sure that Schwab clears for themselves and therefore the clearing costs would be much lower... At 10:59 AM 1/9/98 -0500, you wrote: > >On Thu, 8 Jan 1998, Tom Worley wrote: > >> If costs my firm $19 to clear an OTC trade; $23 plus $.0125/share to clear a >> listed security; and $19 plus $1.75 to $1.25 per contract to clear an option >> trade. This is without counting any operating expenses, my salary or > > >Thanks Tom for the interesting info! I thought you and a few other have >mentioned not doing trades for more that $20 roundtrip (sorry if I have >attributed it to you and it wasn't you :) Anyways, it seems like that >philosophy would rely on these companys. I guess I figured you could >trade at that level at your company and that the "big guys" were >inflating the prices for their services - well that is true even if >the trade costs the 19. Schwab is going to a flat $29.95 for web >trades, which builds in a little profit. What is the chance that they >get better than a $19 rate, or is that "industry" standard? > > >Thanks for the insight!!! > >Mark Schiffner > > >- > > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 11:02:16 -0800 From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] R2000 - long live the small caps!! > From: "Tom Worley" > Anybody else besides me hoping they are seeing a cup&handle on the Russell > 2000 currently??? I see a series of lower highs, nothing like a C&H on the thing. With all the negative news announcements coming out of the high tech companies lately, I have a hard time seeing how the market can go higher anytime soon. At best we might go sideways for a while, but a decline wouldn't be too surprising either. Seems like Seagate and Adaptec have recently warned of problems with earnings, and I am sure they are indicative of what a number of other companies are experiencing due to the Asia problems. If anything, some of the Asian markets have accelerated their declines this week. Indonesia's currency lost 25% of its value in one day this week, its market fell 12% that day. Anyway, I'll be waiting to see some stability in our market before making any purchases. - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 11:33:34 -0800 From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] BTO LBOR MODT > From: Tim Sowden > wish I bought more. Unfortunately I invested my other 8000 or so in ORCL at > 26.00 and watched it rise to 40.00. I was greedy and wanted my money to double > so I hung on as it slumped down to 33.0. Then I hoped for it to rise up to > 40.00 again but as you have probably guessed I hung on and watched it take a > 33% drop :( I did not have stops in place (Won't EVER EVER make that mistake > again after I am up a lot of $$$) so I am hanging on to it in hope it rises > up to 26.00 again and then I'll sell it off and break even. If I had bought > all LBOR ..... This is why we have that 8% stop loss rule in CANSLIM. You should be bailing out of ORCL and not waiting to get out even. You've made a mistake and the best thing to do is cut your losses and get on to the next stock. You are using the same thinking (get out when you are even) that you were using when you were waiting for the stock to double. You are hoping the stock will do what you want it to do and not listening to what the stock is telling you. Also, as I am sure you know, you shouldn't let a profit that large turn into a loss. Incidentally, you are a great example of the infamous "overhead supply" term, that is, holding a stock until it is back to where you bought it so you can sell it. Whenever a stock declines, there are always investors who bought near a high that are saying the same thing, and they are what make a stock stuggle to make new highs after a price decline. - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 11:33:34 -0800 From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] "M" > From: Jeffry White <"postwhit@sover.net"@sover.net> > BTW, who is this Ken guy who spues forth all this noise about some "M" If you are going to insult people, at least spell it right - spews. - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Jan 1998 14:35:08 -0500 From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: [CANSLIM] Stocks to look at. - --------------7D33ED62DD8A1C5C0FBDADD0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Members-- Stocks that have met the OBV/MoneyFlow criteria have done acceptably well in the recent down days. Three are modestly up. I am 75% cash. I closed out IMSI though my stop still had a bit to run; didn't want to lose the small gain. I was closed out of ORCL with a 7% stop loss. I am still holding CRY, BMRQ, TTNP, VSAT, and XIRC. You might consider these stock when you consider returning to the market. They have met the OBV/MF criteria: RGFC CAIR IDMC.W SHCR BOBE ILCO There are two general interpretations of how to read the divergence of OBV/MF and price. The first, the less strong positive divergence, occurs when the price of a stock is declining but the OBV/MF is holding steady. Imagine an x-axis and a y-axis. Let the right x-axis be the top of a triangle; let the bottom y-axis be the the lower side of the triangle. The top of the triangle represents OBV/MF; the lower side represents the stock price. If this triangle represented an actual relation between OBV/MF and price, it would be read this way. The stock would be in a 180 deg. free fall; OBV/MF would be absolutely stable. In this context, the stock is acting contrary to the OBV/MF. There is extraordinary money and volume pressure building up which, if we are right, will be resolved to the upside. Obviously, the stock will not forever free fall, irrespective of OBV/MF. [No one has ever seen this context.] What the investor infers is that the recovery will not be just a modest recover but rather a powerful recovery. Imagine this actual context. The x-axis is still the top of our triangle. Let the stock be in a 10-35 deg. decline, which covers 95% of all declines lasting more than a month. The greater the angle of decline, the more powerful will be the expected recovery as long as the OBV/MF [x-axis] line remains stable. And the longer the positive divergence, the more pressure is building for a recovery. I infer that a stock in a 35 deg. decline will, if the OBV/MF remains level with the x-axis, recover a greater percentage than a stock recovering from a 10 deg. decline. A positive divergence, then, occurs when the OBV/MF line is either holding against the stock decline [as in the previous instances] or the OBV/MF line is rising as the stock is declining. The latter is an instance of the second general interpretation. In the second instance, the OBV/MF is rising while the stock is declining. This implies the building up of buying and up volume pressure that will be resolved on the upside. At another time I'll explain how angles of decline and the levels from which a stock's declines allows for certain inferences about a its recovery. Connie Mack - --------------7D33ED62DD8A1C5C0FBDADD0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Members--

Stocks that have met the OBV/MoneyFlow criteria have done acceptably well in the recent down days. Three are modestly up.

I am 75% cash. I closed out IMSI though my stop still had a bit to run; didn't want to lose the small gain. I was closed out of ORCL with a 7% stop loss. I am still holding CRY, BMRQ, TTNP, VSAT, and XIRC.

You might consider these stock when you consider returning to the market. They have met the OBV/MF criteria:

RGFC CAIR IDMC.W SHCR BOBE ILCO

There are two general interpretations of how to read the divergence of OBV/MF and price.

The first, the less strong positive divergence, occurs when the price of a stock is declining but the OBV/MF is holding steady. Imagine an x-axis and a y-axis. Let the right x-axis be the top of a triangle; let the bottom y-axis be the the lower side of the triangle.

The top of the triangle represents OBV/MF; the lower side represents the stock price. If this triangle represented an actual relation between OBV/MF and price, it would be read this way. The stock would be in a 180 deg. free fall; OBV/MF would be absolutely stable. In this context, the stock is acting contrary to the OBV/MF. There is extraordinary money and volume pressure building up which, if we are right, will be resolved to the upside.

Obviously, the stock will not forever free fall, irrespective of OBV/MF. [No one has ever seen this context.] What the investor infers is that the recovery will not be just a modest recover but rather a powerful recovery.

Imagine this actual context. The x-axis is still the top of our triangle. Let the stock be in a 10-35 deg. decline, which covers 95% of all declines lasting more than a month. The greater the angle of decline, the more powerful will be the expected recovery as long as the OBV/MF [x-axis] line remains stable. And the longer the positive divergence, the more pressure is building for a recovery.

I infer that a stock in a 35 deg. decline will, if the OBV/MF remains level with the x-axis, recover a greater percentage than a stock recovering from a 10 deg. decline.

A positive divergence, then, occurs when the OBV/MF line is either holding against the stock decline [as in the previous instances] or the OBV/MF line is rising as the stock is declining. The latter is an instance of the second general interpretation.

In the second instance, the OBV/MF is rising while the stock is declining. This implies the building up of buying and up volume pressure that will be resolved on the upside.

At another time I'll explain how angles of decline and the levels from which a stock's declines allows for certain inferences about a its recovery.

Connie Mack

- --------------7D33ED62DD8A1C5C0FBDADD0-- - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Jan 1998 15:14:13 -0500 From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: [CANSLIM] To buy or not to buy? - --------------CF02AB2435736EEC2C0DD432 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Members-- I just finished a post I had begun this morning. I have been watching the market and writing in between times. That post has been sent. I have been writing this second and will finish it now. In the earlier post I mentioned some stocks that had met the criteria of OBV/MoneyFlow. After watching the market, with the TICK at -1000 and the ARMS at 2.27, I have decided to do some buying. This morning I was 75% cash; I will buy down to 50%. I have made these buys in small lots: ORCL @ 19 3/16ths BOBE @ 19 7/8ths CAIR @ 17 1/4 CRY @ 15 3/4 PACC @ 20 SHCR @ 14 3/8ths RGFC @ 20 1/4 [not filled] One reason for buying into a down market is that the TICK and ARMS are at overbought levels. A second reason, and of less significance, is that you often get better fill prices if you enter buys between the bid/ask, or lower. E.g., the PACC lot was entered at 20.375 but filled at 20. I, therefore, bought another lot a 20. In the last 20 minutes the TICK has improve to -564; the ARMS has fallen to 2.43. If the TICK improves to -200 and the ARMS to 1.00, I will try to buy second small lots at a 1/4 point above the first price. I do not consider that these stocks are trader's stocks. They just happen to be sound stocks that a trader can feel at ease with. An investor ought to feel equally at ease, though they are not Canslim purchases--at least I never gave a thought to that end. They are just stocks that meet my OBV/MoneyFlow criteria. I was stopped out of ORCL a couple of days ago. My reason for buying back in is one I don't advise, nor will anyone else who is heavily principled in market strategy: I have a hunch about ORCL. And it is my money. I have just this minute had a second fill on PACC at 19.375, though the buy in price was higher. Connie Mack - --------------CF02AB2435736EEC2C0DD432 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Members--

I just finished a post I had begun this morning. I have been watching the market and writing in between times. That post has been sent.

I have been writing this second and will finish it now. In the earlier post I mentioned some stocks that had met the criteria of OBV/MoneyFlow. After watching the market, with the TICK at -1000 and the ARMS at 2.27, I have decided to do some buying.

This morning I was 75% cash; I will buy down to 50%. I have made these buys in small lots:

    ORCL    @    19 3/16ths
    BOBE    @    19 7/8ths
    CAIR     @     17 1/4
    CRY      @    15 3/4
    PACC    @    20
    SHCR    @    14 3/8ths
    RGFC    @    20 1/4 [not filled]

One reason for buying into a down market is that the TICK and ARMS are at overbought levels. A second reason, and of less significance, is that you often get better fill prices if you enter buys between the bid/ask, or lower. E.g., the PACC lot was entered at 20.375 but filled at 20. I, therefore, bought another lot a 20.

In the last 20 minutes the TICK has improve to -564; the ARMS has fallen to 2.43. If the TICK improves to -200 and the ARMS to 1.00, I will try to buy second small lots at a 1/4 point above the first price.

I do not consider that these stocks are trader's stocks. They just happen to be sound stocks that a trader can feel at ease with. An investor ought to feel equally at ease, though they are not Canslim purchases--at least I never gave a thought to that end. They are just stocks that meet my OBV/MoneyFlow criteria.

I was stopped out of ORCL a couple of days ago. My reason for buying back in is one I don't advise, nor will anyone else who is heavily principled in market strategy: I have a hunch about ORCL. And it is my money.

I have just this minute had a second fill on PACC at 19.375, though the buy in price was higher.

Connie Mack - --------------CF02AB2435736EEC2C0DD432-- - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 15:24:44 -0500 From: "Robert K. Henry" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Short Term Loss U.S. IRS Rule Info Sought On Friday, January 09, 1998 8:35 AM, WILLIAM = DANIELS[SMTP:bill.daniels@fedex.com] wrote: >A friend was trying to describe a U.S. tax rule that prevents one from >considering losses on a stock that was purchased again within X amount >of days. He referred to it as the "wash rule". If anyone is familiar >with this please point to documentation on the law/rule. > >Thanks, > >Bill Daniels > >- > You can read about the rule in IRS Publication 550, "Investment Income & = losses" in the section on "Wash Sales." You can order the publication = from the IRS or you can download a PDF file of the document from the IRS = web site. - -- Bob Henry in Tennessee - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 12:32:17 -0800 From: "Ken Davidson" Subject: [CANSLIM] Insults This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_023F_01BD1CFA.9F414AE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Just wanted to pass on this message to Jeffrey. Unfortunately I don't = think that I spew out my opinion on anything on this group. Why, I'm an = index trader! Not all economic indicators affect the market but the = unemployment report is the most important indicator of the month and = some people like to know about it as soon as possible! Sorry to say but = not everyone has access to getting the information as fast as you do. = As a matter of a fact its rare that I ever say anything anyway. When = the Asian debacle first started I was constantly supplying information = for everyone but Tom is doing such a great job at it now I don't need = to. I will give my opinion on one thing though. I have been in this = market for over 16 years and have found that economic data does affect = stocks, even WON stock recommendations at different times!! Here's a = question for anyone to consider; why are we selling off if Asia's = ECONOMIC crisis isn't affecting us. Sorry to those for being so = cynical!! Ken - ------=_NextPart_000_023F_01BD1CFA.9F414AE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Just wanted to pass = on this=20 message to Jeffrey. Unfortunately I don't think that I spew out my = opinion=20 on anything on this group. Why, I'm an index trader! Not all = economic indicators affect the market but the unemployment report is the = most=20 important indicator of the month and some people like to know about it = as soon=20 as possible! Sorry to say but not everyone has access to getting = the=20 information as fast as you do. As a matter of a fact its = rare that I=20 ever say anything anyway. When the Asian debacle first started I = was=20 constantly supplying information for everyone but Tom is doing such a = great job=20 at it now I don't need to. I will give my opinion on one thing=20 though. I have been in this market for over 16 years and have = found that=20 economic data does affect stocks, even WON stock recommendations at = different=20 times!! Here's a question for anyone to consider; why are we = selling off=20 if Asia's ECONOMIC crisis isn't affecting us. Sorry to those for = being so=20 cynical!!

Ken

- ------=_NextPart_000_023F_01BD1CFA.9F414AE0-- - - ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #82 **************************** To unsubscribe to canslim-digest, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe canslim-digest" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message.