From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #1276 Reply-To: canslim Sender: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-No-Archive: yes canslim-digest Friday, April 13 2001 Volume 02 : Number 1276 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] 52 wk highs vs 26 wk highs Re: [CANSLIM] 52 wk highs vs 26 wk highs Re: [CANSLIM] Will rally continue--EPIQ Re: [CANSLIM] Funds Ownership Re: [CANSLIM] Funds Ownership Re: [CANSLIM] 52 wk highs vs 26 wk highs Re: [CANSLIM] 52 wk highs vs 26 wk highs Re: [CANSLIM] 52 wk highs vs 26 wk highs [CANSLIM] DGO Special Report Re: [CANSLIM] 52 wk highs vs 26 wk highs Re: [CANSLIM] DGO Special Report Re: [CANSLIM] DGO Special Report Re: [CANSLIM] DGO Special Report [CANSLIM] DRI Re: [CANSLIM] 52 wk highs vs 26 wk highs ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 14:03:35 -0600 From: esetser Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 52 wk highs vs 26 wk highs If he wasn't a friend, I would agree. We have been talking to him about CANSLIM for some time now, but he lost 8% on one stock purchase and wasn't happy with that. That was probaby his cheapest lesson of the last year, but I'm not sure he gets it! I really feel for him. At 12:47 PM 4/13/01 -0700, you wrote: >ROFLMAO! > >On 12:36 PM 4/13/01, esetser Said: >>As far as bases, I think you underestimate the desperation of people who >>must break even. I saw this in a Money article on investing the other day, >>"Don't give in to "Get-Even-Itis". Simply put, once we're underwater in a >>stock, we'd do anything - undergo a root canal without anestesia, attend an >>Adam Sandler film festival - rather than sell that baby until it gets back >>to even. This makes no sense, of course, ..." I have a friend I need to >>show this article. He is clinging to some pretty good tech stocks, but he >>got in at the worst possible time. He is sitting on 80-90% losses on some >>of these, but he just isn't willing to get out. He is also very near >>retirement, or at least he was a year ago, so he should be the last one to >>hang on when things are so bad. > >Tim Fisher >Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites > >Tim@OreRockOn.com >WWW: http://OreRockOn.com >See naked fish and rocks! > > >- >-To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" >-In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or >-"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. > > - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 16:06:57 EDT From: Spencer48@aol.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 52 wk highs vs 26 wk highs Tim: I'm not sure totally what "ROFLMAO" means. But I believe ROFL means rolling on the floor laughing, and I don't see where the humor is in someone near retirement losing 80-90% of his tech stocks value? I think we've all been there, and know that "deer in the headlight" feeling of paralysis and hope. Jans In a message dated 4/13/2001 3:47:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Tim@OreRockOn.com writes: << ROFLMAO! On 12:36 PM 4/13/01, esetser Said: >As far as bases, I think you underestimate the desperation of people who >must break even. I saw this in a Money article on investing the other day, >"Don't give in to "Get-Even-Itis". Simply put, once we're underwater in a >stock, we'd do anything - undergo a root canal without anestesia, attend an >Adam Sandler film festival - rather than sell that baby until it gets back >to even. This makes no sense, of course, ..." I have a friend I need to >show this article. He is clinging to some pretty good tech stocks, but he >got in at the worst possible time. He is sitting on 80-90% losses on some >of these, but he just isn't willing to get out. He is also very near >retirement, or at least he was a year ago, so he should be the last one to >hang on when things are so bad. Tim Fisher >> - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 16:15:45 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Will rally continue--EPIQ Hi Dave, EPIQ is not, in my opinion, a buy at present. It is way too extended. And just as its previously high PE of 70+ fell during the past year as earnings growth caught up, until it's PE was down into the 20s, so too will this happen again in the future on strong earnings. The trailing PE will not always remain high. I suspect MSN is including some non-recurring charges related to EPIQ's acquisition of a B2B firm nearly a year ago. DGO shows a trailing PE of 54, based on trailing recurring earnings of 0.46. The 4.14 sounds a little high, but I know it did dip a few times after I bot it a year ago, so could be correct from the absolute low. As for the trailing PE, that doesn't worry me a lot in my position. Remember, I already recovered my original investment, plus about a 15% profit, back on 2/2/01. So whatever I collect from the eventual sale of the remaining half position only adds to my profit. The first time I bot it, about two years ago, I hit it nearly perfectly, made 70% in seven straight weeks, and got out nearly at the high. When I bot it, the trailing PE was 70 (granted, "M" was a little sweeter then, as well). Next two trips made 20% and 30%, so with the last sale of half a position, I am so far ahead of the game it could go to zero by Monday and I have still done well. I have seen the forecasts you mention, unless DGO changed the rules there must be a third one I have not found as DGO shows forecasts only when there are three or more analysts on a stock (and they show these same forecasts). I did pick up one signal that there is a Whisper number of 16 cents for the first qtr, official forecast is for 12 cents. That may be causing the recent move. I am not convinced the Whisper has credibility, unless they picked up some major new clients early in the quarter that have not been announced. I have stayed with this stock for so long because I saw it as my hedge against a recession driven market crash. As a maker of software for bankruptcy trustees, and doing well in good economic times, it could only do better in bad economic times when the economy faltered (and it had to do that eventually, but even if it didn't EPIQ was likely to continue doing well). I have never bought into future price predictions based on PEs, nor do I accept these forecasts. Only way I think these prices might happen is if some big financial related company wanted the business they already control (and they are to bankruptcy software like MSFT is to operating systems, too bad it's such a niche business, but they control it, what little they don't already have is not enough for a new company to compete for it). Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net - ----- Original Message ----- From: Dave Massaglia To: Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 10:15 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] Will rally continue--EPIQ Tom, these MSN Money Central's price estimates for EPIQ using its current P/E multiple. I was looking at stocktables.com's assessment of EPIQ. Its CPM number is 4.14, in other words the stock is up 4.14 times from its 52 week low...Anything to be concerned about? Valuation using EPIQ Systems's current multiple (P/E): Fis. YR Est Low/High Price Range Avg. Est. Price % Chng for Avg 12/2001 $49.62-$49.62 $49.62 100.00% 12/2002 $63.68-$66.16 $65.33 163.33% EPIQ Systems current price: $24.81 EPIQ Systems current multiple (P/E): 82.70 EPIQ Systems average 12/2001 estimate: $0.60 EPIQ Systems low 12/2001 estimate: $0.60 EPIQ Systems high 12/2001 estimate: $0.60 EPIQ Systems average 12/2002 estimate: $0.79 EPIQ Systems low 12/2002 estimate: $0.77 EPIQ Systems high 12/2002 estimate: $0.80 >From: "Tom Worley" >Reply-To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >To: >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Will rally continue? >Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 19:22:58 -0400 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [198.60.22.7] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id >MHotMailBC9F84D9003140043110C63C1607CA940; Thu Apr 12 16:27:27 2001 >Received: from domo by lists.xmission.com with local (Exim 2.12 #2)id >14nqTA-0000pm-00for canslim-gooutt@lists.xmission.com; Thu, 12 Apr 2001 >17:25:44 -0600 >Received: from [205.159.140.2] (helo=netside.net)by lists.xmission.com with >esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2)id 14nqT6-0000pZ-00for canslim@lists.xmission.com; Thu, >12 Apr 2001 17:25:40 -0600 >Received: from txw (sunny.netside.net [205.159.140.2]) by netside.net >(8.8.8/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA06715 for ; Thu, >12 Apr 2001 19:24:24 -0400 (EDT) >From owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com Thu Apr 12 16:28:49 2001 >Message-ID: <003a01c0c3a7$dd8af4c0$0f02000a@txw> >References: <20010412182743.26073.qmail@web4304.mail.yahoo.com> >X-Priority: 3 >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 >Sender: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com >Precedence: bulk >X-No-Archive: yes > >Kent, > >Check out EPIQ, up seven days in a row and six on above average >volume. Twice before this year it was up 5 days in a row, and >back in Jan up nine days straight. > >Tom Worley >stkguru@netside.net > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Kent Norman >To: >Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 2:27 PM >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Will rally continue? > > >Just my 2 cents... It approaches a statistical rarity >for a stock to go up more than 4 days without >interruption. > >Kent > >--- esetser wrote: > > I find this difficult to evaluate. Yes, the NASDAQ > > traded lower all day. > > However, the stocks did hold onto good gains from > > the previous day also. > > It seems to me, gains from close to close are what > > are important overall. > > I DO agree that this shows some weakness, as opposed > > to a day that advances > > all day and closes at the high. > > > > Is it unusual for the market to show so much > > volatility from close to open? > > I have noticed that the NASDAQ is showing (what I > > consider) HUGE moves > > between the closing price and the open. Yesterday > > was a great example, > > where the NASDAQ opened up 4.2% higher than the > > previous day's close. Here > > are some of the recent days numbers: > > > > Open price vs previous day closing price on Nasdaq > > > > 4/11 +4.2% > > 4/10 +1.0% > > 4/9 +1.1% > > 4/6 -1.6% > > 4/5 +4.3% > > 4/3 -1.4% > > > > This shows that the NASDAQ opened at least 1% off > > the close on 6 of the > > last 7 trading days. Is there anything this should > > be telling us? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At 08:16 AM 4/12/01 -0600, you wrote: > > >I believe what he means is that the nasdaq gapped > > up in the > > >morning and traded lower for the rest of the day, > > so actually there > > >was selling thoughout the day, although because of > > the gap, the > > >index was still able to close above the close of > > the previous day. I > > >guess the best way to say this is - Close to Close > > it was up, Open > > >to Close it was down. > > > > > >On 11 Apr 01, at 22:48, Tom Worley wrote: > > > > > >> You must be only looking at the DOW, S&P 500, > > and/or NYSE > > >> Composite. Certainly you could not have looked at > > the Naz index, > > >> and said this. > > >> > > >> Tom Worley > > >> stkguru@netside.net > > >> > > >> > > >> ----- Original Message ----- > > >> From: > > >> To: > > >> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2001 10:02 PM > > >> Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Will rally continue? > > >> > > >> > > >> I believe today to be a distribution day. This is > > because it > > >> opened > > >> higher and closed lower. IBD had once mentioned > > such a day with > > >> higher > > >> volume as being a distribution day. > > >> > > >> Regards, > > >> Pritish > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: bmcgillatlcom.ne > > [SMTP:bmcgillatlcom.ne@mindspring.com] > > >> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2001 9:54 PM > > >> To: canslim > > >> Subject: [CANSLIM] Will rally continue? > > >> > > >> Just looking at a couple big cap techs, csco, > > chkp, it seems they > > >> opened > > >> and > > >> closed at their lows? Does this mean the rally > > was short-lived? > > >> > > >> > > >> - > > >> -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email > > "majordomo@xmission.com" > > >> -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > > >> -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in > > your email. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> - > > >> -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email > > "majordomo@xmission.com" > > >> -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > > >> -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in > > your email. > > > > > > > > > > > >- > > >-To subscribe/unsubscribe, email > > "majordomo@xmission.com" > > >-In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > > >-"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your > > email. > > > > > > > > > > - > > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email > > "majordomo@xmission.com" > > -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > > -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your >email. > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. >http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > >- >-To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" >-In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or >-"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. > > > >- >-To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" >-In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or >-"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 16:20:35 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Funds Ownership Sorry, Earl, I meant "A" as in the rating of the fund, not the institutional sponsorship rating of the stock. My point simply is that a good portfolio manager tends to remain good, one making mistakes tend to make even more mistakes, in some cases trying too hard to make up for the prior mistakes. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net - ----- Original Message ----- From: esetser To: Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 3:11 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Funds Ownership I'm not sure you are using the correct terms here, or maybe I just misuderstand. Here are a couple of questions. Did you mean A in Institutional Sponsorship Rating of the stock (given in IBD each Tuesday) or A in the Mutual Fund 36 month performance rating? Your answer seems to refer to the Fund rating rather than the stock rank, but the way I read the message the first time, I would have thought you were referring to the stock rating. I agree that using the 3 year performance rating of a fund will give you their history given the particulars in that period of time. One year ago, all you needed was overweigthing in technology to have a fabulous rating. Given the tech crash, it's less clear what characteristics lead to a high ranking right now, but these kind of performance numbers will always favor groups in the hottest area. However, I think the IBD is saying a high performing fund, particularly a diversified growth fund, is on a roll picking solid growth stocks, and their support for a stock you are buying is an important piece of CANSLIM. It seems I've read that funds that perform above average continue to do so at a better rate than those who have recently underperformed. It may be far from perfect, but it does help your odds. Back to the stock Institutional Sponsorship Rating. I have noticed that the average ratings seem to move around quite a bit. In my recent lists, I would say the average stock has a "D" rating, while ratings above "C" are very unusual. I would also say a "C" rating was the clear average rating during the bull, and I saw quite a few stocks with "B" ratings, and even some "A" ratings. So in summary, it appears that the A-E rankings are not split into an even 20% of stocks each, but are ranked on some scale that is affected by market conditions. Part of my point here is that there are very few stocks out there with "A" ratings right now. From my latest leaders list (stocks above a certain size with EPS/RS rankings at 80/80 and GRS of 75 or better, here are the totals for each rating: A - 0 stocks B - 1 stock C - 16 stocks D - 137 stocks E - 8 stocks Given this, you can see that picking out an A stock for Sponsorship rating would be quite difficult, and would perform a level of screening that is probably beyond what any of us want. In fact, if you limited yourself to stocks rated A right now, I would guess you could use this as your entire screening process, since you would have very few candidates left. Overall, I use this rating, along with SMR and A/D as strength indicators. That is, after I've reduced my list to several hundred candidates using EPS, RS, and GRS, then I combine all of these rankings to generate a composite rank that I use to focus in on the best stocks. At 11:13 PM 4/12/01 -0500, you wrote: >I posed this question to the investors.com support folks. > >Question: >A few of my friends and I have an ongoing 'discussion' about what >percentage of a company's stock should be owned by funds. What is a >good rule of thumb for a minimum %. [I really do discuss this with non >listserv folks] > >Answer: >There really isn't a minimum percentage per se. You would like to see >at least 1 or 2 of the top performing mutual funds in the market owning >the stock. Look for an A in the Sponsorship ranking to determine that. > > >But now I have another question. If the sponsorship ranking is based on how >well the funds did over the last 3 years then the sponsorship of stocks such >as builders may not be so high just because the "hot" funds during that time >period (excluding 2000) have been tech funds. Maybe with last years returns >this is changing, but for sure this was true during 2000. So, is the fund >sponsorship that relevant when sector rotation is so dramatic >(techs ->builders & retail-shoe/apparel)? > >Norman Boyd >Port Lavaca (Port of the Cow), TX >theboyd@tisd.net > - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 14:32:58 -0600 From: esetser Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Funds Ownership Yes, I was referring to Norman's note that he got from investors.com. At 04:20 PM 4/13/01 -0400, you wrote: >Sorry, Earl, I meant "A" as in the rating of the fund, not the >institutional sponsorship rating of the stock. My point simply >is that a good portfolio manager tends to remain good, one making >mistakes tend to make even more mistakes, in some cases trying >too hard to make up for the prior mistakes. > >Tom Worley >stkguru@netside.net > > - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 16:37:19 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 52 wk highs vs 26 wk highs Thanks, Jans, my mind wasn't working well enough to figure it out, with your help I remembered, the rest of it is "my a - - off". I doubt Tim meant it in a cruel sense, but having been in the same position more than once ( I just sold out an entire position for about $84 net last month just to avoid having it stuck in my IRA after it went completely worthless, along with a few others like that where I was not so smart(?) or quick), I know the feeling of being so deep in the hole that it becomes completely hysterical. Pain can do that to us. I think it has something to do with preventing us losing our mind completely, and going postal. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net - ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 4:06 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 52 wk highs vs 26 wk highs Tim: I'm not sure totally what "ROFLMAO" means. But I believe ROFL means rolling on the floor laughing, and I don't see where the humor is in someone near retirement losing 80-90% of his tech stocks value? I think we've all been there, and know that "deer in the headlight" feeling of paralysis and hope. Jans In a message dated 4/13/2001 3:47:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Tim@OreRockOn.com writes: << ROFLMAO! On 12:36 PM 4/13/01, esetser Said: >As far as bases, I think you underestimate the desperation of people who >must break even. I saw this in a Money article on investing the other day, >"Don't give in to "Get-Even-Itis". Simply put, once we're underwater in a >stock, we'd do anything - undergo a root canal without anestesia, attend an >Adam Sandler film festival - rather than sell that baby until it gets back >to even. This makes no sense, of course, ..." I have a friend I need to >show this article. He is clinging to some pretty good tech stocks, but he >got in at the worst possible time. He is sitting on 80-90% losses on some >of these, but he just isn't willing to get out. He is also very near >retirement, or at least he was a year ago, so he should be the last one to >hang on when things are so bad. Tim Fisher >> - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 13:44:24 -0700 From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 52 wk highs vs 26 wk highs It was in response to the Adam Sandler film festival quip. Chill, dude. On 01:06 PM 4/13/01, Spencer48@aol.com Said: >Tim: > > I'm not sure totally what "ROFLMAO" means. But I believe ROFL means >rolling on the floor laughing, and I don't see where the humor is in someone >near retirement losing 80-90% of his tech stocks value? I think we've all >been there, and know that "deer in the headlight" feeling of paralysis and >hope. > >Jans > > >In a message dated 4/13/2001 3:47:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time, >Tim@OreRockOn.com writes: > ><< ROFLMAO! > > On 12:36 PM 4/13/01, esetser Said: > >As far as bases, I think you underestimate the desperation of people who > >must break even. I saw this in a Money article on investing the other day, > >"Don't give in to "Get-Even-Itis". Simply put, once we're underwater in a > >stock, we'd do anything - undergo a root canal without anestesia, attend an > >Adam Sandler film festival - rather than sell that baby until it gets back > >to even. This makes no sense, of course, ..." I have a friend I need to > >show this article. He is clinging to some pretty good tech stocks, but he > >got in at the worst possible time. He is sitting on 80-90% losses on some > >of these, but he just isn't willing to get out. He is also very near > >retirement, or at least he was a year ago, so he should be the last one to > >hang on when things are so bad. > > Tim Fisher >> > >- >-To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" >-In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or >-"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. Tim Fisher Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites Tim@OreRockOn.com WWW: http://OreRockOn.com See naked fish and rocks! - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 13:45:04 -0700 From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 52 wk highs vs 26 wk highs I own SEBL. 'nuff said ;{ On 01:37 PM 4/13/01, Tom Worley Said: >Thanks, Jans, my mind wasn't working well enough to figure it >out, >with your help I remembered, the rest of it is "my a - - off". > >I doubt Tim meant it in a cruel sense, but having been in the >same position more than once ( I just sold out an entire position >for about $84 net last month just to avoid having it stuck in my >IRA after it went completely worthless, along with a few others >like that where I was not so smart(?) or quick), I know the >feeling of being so deep in the hole that it becomes completely >hysterical. Pain can do that to us. I think it has something to >do with preventing us losing our mind completely, and going >postal. > >Tom Worley >stkguru@netside.net > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: >To: >Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 4:06 PM >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 52 wk highs vs 26 wk highs > > >Tim: > > I'm not sure totally what "ROFLMAO" means. But I believe >ROFL means >rolling on the floor laughing, and I don't see where the humor is >in someone >near retirement losing 80-90% of his tech stocks value? I think >we've all >been there, and know that "deer in the headlight" feeling of >paralysis and >hope. > >Jans > > >In a message dated 4/13/2001 3:47:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time, >Tim@OreRockOn.com writes: > ><< ROFLMAO! > > On 12:36 PM 4/13/01, esetser Said: > >As far as bases, I think you underestimate the desperation of >people who > >must break even. I saw this in a Money article on investing >the other day, > >"Don't give in to "Get-Even-Itis". Simply put, once we're >underwater in a > >stock, we'd do anything - undergo a root canal without >anestesia, attend an > >Adam Sandler film festival - rather than sell that baby until >it gets back > >to even. This makes no sense, of course, ..." I have a friend >I need to > >show this article. He is clinging to some pretty good tech >stocks, but he > >got in at the worst possible time. He is sitting on 80-90% >losses on some > >of these, but he just isn't willing to get out. He is also >very near > >retirement, or at least he was a year ago, so he should be the >last one to > >hang on when things are so bad. > > Tim Fisher >> > >- >-To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" >-In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or >-"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. > > > > >- >-To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" >-In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or >-"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. Tim Fisher Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites Tim@OreRockOn.com WWW: http://OreRockOn.com See naked fish and rocks! - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 15:17:24 -0700 From: DougC Subject: [CANSLIM] DGO Special Report I was just taking a look at DGO's Report list and noticed at the bottom a report I hadn't seen before. It's called Top Companies in Top Industry Groups. It's a list of up to 5 of the best performing stocks in the 9 best performing Industry groups. Only 29 stocks in it. DGO says the list will only be up until April 15. Interesting. Maybe they are saying don't despair...There are a few out there. Textile Apparel-Mfg and Bldg-Residential/Commerical each had 5 stocks. Leisure-Gaming had 4 and so did Medical -Outpatient/Hm Care. I saw 5 stocks that I would consider...one in each of 5 different groups. Some of the stocks I couldnt figure what they were doing in there. High Fund ownership, like over 40%, or high debt of over 50%.Other than that they were all relatively strong stocks. EPS was greater than 77. Same with RS. GRS greater than 93. Majority of them had SMR of A or B. Overall it was an interesting list to put out there. Doug Chiurato dzc@qwest.net - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 17:21:50 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 52 wk highs vs 26 wk highs I really hate admitting my mistakes, but they seem to be the ones I learn the most from (or at least remember longer!). It never ceases to amaze me just how far a growing company can get tanked. The market is so fickle!!! Of course, the trailing PE of 76 is not helping, any more than the group RS is doing. Do you ever violate the rules and average down on something like this, where you may hold it longer term than you intended? Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net - ----- Original Message ----- From: Tim Fisher To: Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 4:45 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 52 wk highs vs 26 wk highs I own SEBL. 'nuff said ;{ On 01:37 PM 4/13/01, Tom Worley Said: >Thanks, Jans, my mind wasn't working well enough to figure it >out, >with your help I remembered, the rest of it is "my a - - off". > >I doubt Tim meant it in a cruel sense, but having been in the >same position more than once ( I just sold out an entire position >for about $84 net last month just to avoid having it stuck in my >IRA after it went completely worthless, along with a few others >like that where I was not so smart(?) or quick), I know the >feeling of being so deep in the hole that it becomes completely >hysterical. Pain can do that to us. I think it has something to >do with preventing us losing our mind completely, and going >postal. > >Tom Worley >stkguru@netside.net > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: >To: >Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 4:06 PM >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 52 wk highs vs 26 wk highs > > >Tim: > > I'm not sure totally what "ROFLMAO" means. But I believe >ROFL means >rolling on the floor laughing, and I don't see where the humor is >in someone >near retirement losing 80-90% of his tech stocks value? I think >we've all >been there, and know that "deer in the headlight" feeling of >paralysis and >hope. > >Jans > > >In a message dated 4/13/2001 3:47:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time, >Tim@OreRockOn.com writes: > ><< ROFLMAO! > > On 12:36 PM 4/13/01, esetser Said: > >As far as bases, I think you underestimate the desperation of >people who > >must break even. I saw this in a Money article on investing >the other day, > >"Don't give in to "Get-Even-Itis". Simply put, once we're >underwater in a > >stock, we'd do anything - undergo a root canal without >anestesia, attend an > >Adam Sandler film festival - rather than sell that baby until >it gets back > >to even. This makes no sense, of course, ..." I have a friend >I need to > >show this article. He is clinging to some pretty good tech >stocks, but he > >got in at the worst possible time. He is sitting on 80-90% >losses on some > >of these, but he just isn't willing to get out. He is also >very near > >retirement, or at least he was a year ago, so he should be the >last one to > >hang on when things are so bad. > > Tim Fisher >> > >- >-To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" >-In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or >-"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. > > > > >- >-To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" >-In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or >-"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. Tim Fisher Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites Tim@OreRockOn.com WWW: http://OreRockOn.com See naked fish and rocks! - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 17:32:43 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DGO Special Report You are right, Doug, this report was just added this week. But looks like they are cutting it off at the GRS 93 level, which cuts it pretty high. I would have expected a GRS down to 80 anyway. It's a sad statement when Tobacco is one of the top nine groups! Especially when Medical / Outpatient - Home Care, and Retail Drug Stores, and Pollution Control - Services, are three of the other 8 groups. Maybe a synergy?? I am a smoker, so guess I am helping support all four of these industry groups at the same time? Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net - ----- Original Message ----- From: DougC To: Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 6:17 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] DGO Special Report I was just taking a look at DGO's Report list and noticed at the bottom a report I hadn't seen before. It's called Top Companies in Top Industry Groups. It's a list of up to 5 of the best performing stocks in the 9 best performing Industry groups. Only 29 stocks in it. DGO says the list will only be up until April 15. Interesting. Maybe they are saying don't despair...There are a few out there. Textile Apparel-Mfg and Bldg-Residential/Commerical each had 5 stocks. Leisure-Gaming had 4 and so did Medical -Outpatient/Hm Care. I saw 5 stocks that I would consider...one in each of 5 different groups. Some of the stocks I couldnt figure what they were doing in there. High Fund ownership, like over 40%, or high debt of over 50%.Other than that they were all relatively strong stocks. EPS was greater than 77. Same with RS. GRS greater than 93. Majority of them had SMR of A or B. Overall it was an interesting list to put out there. Doug Chiurato dzc@qwest.net - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 14:57:38 -0700 From: "Perry Stanfield" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DGO Special Report Actually this is a new feature in the checkup option on IBD website, so we DGO deprived ones can access it sort of.........check out any stock in checkup, the new part shows the five strongest stocks in the same group as the ticker you are researching. So, it wouldn't take long to construct the same information as long as you could plug in companies from each group. Perry - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 16:06:19 -0600 From: esetser Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DGO Special Report Yes, according to the note, "From time to time we produce special screens from the O'Neil Database=AE as market action may warrant. We've prepared a screen of the 9 best performing Industry Groups and listed up to the top five performing stocks among each group. Stocks under $15 have been eliminated. This is a list of "ideas". It is essential that you do your own research on any of these stocks. No offer on our part with respect to the sale or purchase of any securities is intended or implied. This screen will be available through Sunday, April 15, 2001." It looks to me like they took stocks with EPS/RS of 87 or better, and then selected the top 5 for each group using the sum of EPS and RS. I believe you could perform this scan yourself each weekend by sorting the DG Index report put out each Friday. I got a very similar list by using last weekends list, with only a couple of stocks different (based on when they did the list I bet). At 03:17 PM 4/13/01 -0700, you wrote: >I was just taking a look at DGO's Report list and noticed at the bottom a= =20 >report I hadn't seen before. >It's called Top Companies in Top Industry Groups. It's a list of up to 5 of= =20 >the best performing stocks in >the 9 best performing Industry groups. Only 29 stocks in it. DGO says the= =20 >list will only be up until >April 15. Interesting. Maybe they are saying don't despair...There are a=20 >few out there. Textile >Apparel-Mfg and Bldg-Residential/Commerical each had 5 stocks. >Leisure-Gaming had 4 and so did Medical -Outpatient/Hm Care. I saw 5 stocks= =20 >that >I would consider...one in each of 5 different groups. Some of the stocks I= =20 >couldnt figure what they >were doing in there. High Fund ownership, like over 40%, or high debt of=20 >over 50%.Other than that >they were all relatively strong stocks. EPS was greater >than 77. Same with RS. GRS greater than 93. Majority of them had SMR of A or B. >Overall it was an interesting list to put out there. > > > > > > > >Doug Chiurato >dzc@qwest.net > >- >-To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" >-In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or >-"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. > > - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 18:22:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Steve F Subject: [CANSLIM] DRI Note the chart on DRI. Looks like it tried to breakout earlier this week. Would you consider this a failed breakout or just a pullback. The 'pullback' is on considerably lower volume. How do you read the action on this stock. I bought at what I thought was the breakout, paid 25.50. I am still a far way from the 8% stop out but would love to hear some comments. Thanks Steve __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 20:59:12 -0500 From: "Norman" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 52 wk highs vs 26 wk highs This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0237_01C0C45C.97B7BBD0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hey Tom, Thanks for the good discussion. =20 About the base thing, that's what I was getting at when I mentioned = stocks passing a pivot point at resistance levels. You're right, there = aren't many well formed bases in "MANSLIC" stocks, but a few have formed = 'trends'. For example look a chart of VSEA. It appears to be in an = upward channel. If it breaks above the upper channel line is this the = equivalent of breaking above the pivot in a cup-n-handle base? I = realize this isn't a strong base formation but it may strengthen if the = rally continues making these stocks the first techs to come out of any = type of base. Doesn't mean this will be the best sector to grab though. I don't know; just stumbling in the dark here. Norman Boyd Port Lavaca (Port of the Cow), TX theboyd@tisd.net ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Tom Worley=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 4:51 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 52 wk highs vs 26 wk highs Nothing in CANSLIM requires you to buy a stock at a new high, it's = just a good practice because then there is no overhead resistance for at = least the past 12 months. And the "N"ew high fulfills the requirement = for something new in caNslim. I have said it many times before, there is a lot of institutional = money that wants to be in the biggest, best big cap tech stocks. Even = MOT held up well, esp for having its first loss in many years, and = missing estimates to the downside at that.=20 I don't think the key to any buying decision on the beaten down techs = depends on either the 26 or 52 week high. Rather it depends on the trend = of the RS, up/down ratio, EPS, and earnings forecasts. Also critical is = what the company says about its expectations for the rest of the year. Assuming the bottom was truly reached either March 22 or April 4, I = would look for stocks that bottomed earlier, showed strength at the end, = and potential leadership in the future. On the other hand, we have seen = apparent bottoms several times in the past year, followed by decent = rallies, only to soon head even lower.=20 While undoubtedly there were a lot of stocks sold for losses in the = second half of 2000, and 1st qtr of 2001 (including to pay taxes), I am = equally sure there are still a lot of stocks being held that were bot a = year or more ago, and have substantial losses at present prices. A lot = of this is likely in tax sheltered accts, where there was no tax = advantage to taking the loss by year's end. So yes, there will be = sellers that are just trying to break even. But there will also be = sellers who bot at or near the lows, and are taking profits. So there = will be two different sources of resistance all the way back up. I admit to being tempted to take some money and buy half a dozen of = the biggest tech names, and just put them away for a year or two. So = far, I have not seriously considered doing so, in part because I don't = want to tie up capital for what is likely to be long term. It's = definitely not CANSLIM, but you can still apply some of the rules by = looking for earnings growth, and comparing the stock to others in its = group. But I would also recommend waiting until after they report the = latest quarterly earnings, and review what the company says about the = future. =20 Finally, one thing you did not mention is reviewing the chart for a = base of some kind. If we have really started a new bull, and we won't = know for sure for many months, then I doubt you will get much more than = a one or two week base, unless it bottomed quite early.=20 Good luck, Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Norman=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 1:12 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] 52 wk highs vs 26 wk highs Now that we have had a few days of 'upward mobility' I am seriously = considering dipping my toes in the pool. During my weekly scan I = noticed some techs either approaching or passing significant resistance = levels. Note that I didn't say reaching new highs. Since their highs, = set last spring/early summer, were considered 'overvalued' many may not = return to those levels anytime soon (CSCO, MOT), if ever (LU). =20 In light of this, I am in a quandary. Should I ignore the techs = that are below their 52 week highs? Or, consider it a breakout when = they hit, say a 26 week high, and surpass a significant resistance level = (i.e. VSEA, BRKS, LTXX)? Will those who bought in early 2000 or Summer = 2000 still be waiting in the wings to supply the 'selling pressure' = above these resistance levels? That doesn't seem reasonable. If there = are some folks out there who are the type that will hold so that they = can sell and 'break even' then I suspect that most would have already = given up and dumped the techs; it's been a long Winter. Could someone = with bear market experience shed some light on this? The semis seem to again be leading the tech rally. They have a low = GRS but that could quickly change and many 26 week-pivots be passed in = the meantime. Norman Boyd Port Lavaca (Port of the Cow), TX theboyd@tisd.net - ------=_NextPart_000_0237_01C0C45C.97B7BBD0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hey Tom,
 
Thanks for the good discussion. 
 
About the base thing, that's what I was getting at when I mentioned = stocks=20 passing a pivot point at resistance levels.  You're right, = there=20 aren't many well formed bases in "MANSLIC" stocks, but a few have formed = 'trends'.  For example look a chart of VSEA.  It appears to be = in an=20 upward channel.  If it breaks above the upper channel line is this = the=20 equivalent of breaking above the pivot in a cup-n-handle base?  I = realize=20 this isn't a strong base formation but it may strengthen if the rally = continues=20 making these stocks the first techs to come out of any type of = base. =20 Doesn't mean this will be the best sector to grab though.
 
I don't know; just stumbling in the dark here.
 
Norman Boyd
Port Lavaca (Port of the Cow), TX
theboyd@tisd.net
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Tom = Worley=20
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 = 4:51=20 AM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 52 wk = highs vs 26=20 wk highs

Nothing in CANSLIM requires you to buy a stock at = a new=20 high, it's just a good practice because then there is no overhead = resistance=20 for at least the past 12 months. And the "N"ew high fulfills the = requirement=20 for something new in caNslim.
 
I have said it many times before, there is a lot = of=20 institutional money that wants to be in the biggest, best big cap tech = stocks.=20 Even MOT held up well, esp for having its first loss in many years, = and=20 missing estimates to the downside at that.
 
I don't think the key to any buying decision on = the beaten=20 down techs depends on either the 26 or 52 week high. Rather it depends = on the=20 trend of the RS, up/down ratio, EPS, and earnings forecasts. Also = critical is=20 what the company says about its expectations for the rest of the=20 year.
 
Assuming the bottom was truly reached either March = 22 or=20 April 4, I would look for stocks that bottomed earlier, showed = strength at the=20 end, and potential leadership in the future. On the other hand, we = have seen=20 apparent bottoms several times in the past year, followed by decent = rallies,=20 only to soon head even lower.
 
While undoubtedly there were a lot of stocks sold = for losses=20 in the second half of 2000, and 1st qtr of 2001 (including to pay = taxes), I am=20 equally sure there are still a lot of stocks being held that were bot = a year=20 or more ago, and have substantial losses at present prices. A lot of = this is=20 likely in tax sheltered accts, where there was no tax advantage to = taking the=20 loss by year's end. So yes, there will be sellers that are just trying = to=20 break even. But there will also be sellers who bot at or near the = lows, and=20 are taking profits. So there will be two different sources of = resistance all=20 the way back up.
 
I admit to being tempted to take some money and = buy half a=20 dozen of the biggest tech names, and just put them away for a year or=20 two.  So far, I have not seriously considered doing so, in part = because I=20 don't want to tie up capital for what is likely to be long term. It's=20 definitely not CANSLIM, but you can still apply some of the rules by = looking=20 for earnings growth, and comparing the stock to others in its = group.  But=20 I would also recommend waiting until after they report the latest = quarterly=20 earnings, and review what the company says about the future. =20
 
Finally, one thing you did not mention is = reviewing the=20 chart for a base of some kind.  If we have really started a new = bull, and=20 we won't know for sure for many months, then I doubt you will get much = more=20 than a one or two week base, unless it bottomed quite early. =
 
Good luck,
 
Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Norman
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 = 1:12=20 AM
Subject: [CANSLIM] 52 wk = highs vs 26 wk=20 highs

Now that we have had a few days of 'upward mobility' I am = seriously=20 considering dipping my toes in the pool.   During my = weekly scan I=20 noticed some techs either approaching or passing significant = resistance=20 levels.  Note that I didn't say reaching new highs.  Since = their=20 highs, set last spring/early summer, were considered 'overvalued' = many may=20 not return to those levels anytime soon (CSCO, MOT), if ever = (LU). =20
 
In light of this, I am in a quandary.  Should I ignore the = techs=20 that are below their 52 week highs?  Or, consider it a breakout = when=20 they hit, say a 26 week high, and surpass a significant resistance = level=20 (i.e. VSEA, BRKS, LTXX)?  Will those who bought in early 2000 = or Summer=20 2000 still be waiting in the wings to supply the 'selling pressure' = above=20 these resistance levels?  That doesn't seem reasonable.  = If there=20 are some folks out there who are the type that will hold so that = they can=20 sell and 'break even' then I suspect that most would have already = given up=20 and dumped the techs; it's been a long Winter.  Could someone = with bear=20 market experience shed some light on this?
 
The semis seem to again be leading the tech rally.  They = have a=20 low GRS but that could quickly change and many 26 week-pivots be = passed in=20 the meantime.
 
Norman Boyd
Port Lavaca (Port of the Cow), TX
theboyd@tisd.net
<= /BLOCKQUOTE> - ------=_NextPart_000_0237_01C0C45C.97B7BBD0-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #1276 ****************************** 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.