From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #1786 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 Tuesday, November 6 2001 Volume 02 : Number 1786 In this issue: [CANSLIM] SDIX Re: [CANSLIM] bottom fishing Re: [CANSLIM] SRCL Re: [CANSLIM] bottom fishing Re: [CANSLIM] PECS Re: [CANSLIM] bottom fishing Re: [CANSLIM] EPIQ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 12:02:55 +0800 From: Dennis Chia Subject: [CANSLIM] SDIX Hi Canslimmers, will like to know your views of Strategic Diagnostics (SDIX) Its showing really strong interest on the Quicken Screens http://www.quicken.com/investments/strategies/?symbol=SDIX Thanks and good luck! :) Dennis - - - -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: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 21:16:12 -0700 From: esetser Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] bottom fishing And short of WON's statements, what do you base your probabilities on? WON's investment technique is based on the characteristics of the best performing stocks over many years, but I'm not sure what the success rate in picking these is, since the characteristics were chosen AFTER the stocks were successuful. My real problem right now is we have had 5-7 "FT days" that haven't led to profits for me or for most of the group. The FT day approach seems quite suspect right now. At 07:02 AM 11/6/01 -0600, you wrote: >Seems that the discussion here is more about probabilities than anything >else. If you bottom fish, the probability of the stock you chose going up at >a rate faster than the best stocks, despite its market and particular market >strength (e.g. CSCO), is LESS than if you chose a stock with a particular >market strength that has already passed any significant resistance (CANSLIM >stocks, pick one). When you trade/invest, you want the odds in your favor or >what you are doing is no better than casino odds. And you know that the >casino, on average, wins. Once the odds are stacked in our favor, then we >should *act* consistently on those odds. Jumping around from style to style >without a predefined strategy is a lesson in losing money. Expensive lessons >in the end. > >Katherine >kmalm@earthlink.net > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: >To: >Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2001 6:46 AM >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] bottom fishing > > >> Sorry Gene, couldn't resist this after reading Tom's post. Let me remind >> you of your "predictions" made in August. yesterday's prices on the right. >> Not exactly stellar returns so far, eh? I bet Money Market beats these >> returns over the past over the past 50 days or so...cash looks like the >> best Mattress Stuffer around, eh? >> >> >BEAS $17.40 $13.18 >> >CSCO $17.48 $17.90 >> >SEBL $26.72 $20.81 >> >> >> At 04:28 PM 8/17/2001 -0500, you wrote: >> >Tim, how's this for a deal... the winner declared the 2001 stock picker >and >> >the loser the keeper of swamp land in West Texas? >> > >> >Gene's Picks >> >-------------- >> >Yesterday's Closing Price Closing Price in less than 12 months >> >---------------------- -------------------------------------- >> >BEAS $17.40 $34.80 >> >CSCO $17.48 $34.96 >> >SEBL $26.72 $52.44 >> > >> >Notice, I 'gave' you yesterday's close which was higher than >> >todays......???? >> > >> >Now if you had 3 CANSLIM picks it would make this more interesting. But, >> >I'll accept the wager just going with my three (value) picks to double - >all >> >three or I lose the bet and you become the stock picker and me the swamp >> >land care taker.... course the reverse will likely happen and you might >not >> >be a keeper of a swamp???? >> > >> >Is it a deal? >> >Gene >> > >> > >> > >> >----- Original Message ----- >> >From: Tim Fisher >> >To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >> >Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 4:00 PM >> >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Hi - low priced stocks >> > >> > >> >My point exactly. The property in question was not mine but I had assumed >> >the news of the glacier that calved into the Nisqually and caused a >debris >> >torrent reached outside the NW. I.e. I was comparing the beautiful scenic >> >property to CSCO. THeir technology could be supplanted by someone else's >> >(i.e. JNPR, among dozens of others) tomorrow and CSCO would fade away >just >> >like the railroads did when the interstate highway system was built. Of >> >course IT is and will continue to be a fast growing business. But CSCO >> >isn't all of IT, their products are not necessarily the best, the >cheapest, >> >fastest, etc, nor is there no guarantee they will be so tomorrow. Don't >you >> >follow LU? Did you think it could have happened to them 2 years ago? Then >> >again, I did not buy LU when they became a "value stock" either. I would >> >put up real money that one or more of the stocks on your list will >_never_ >> >recover from their current prices. >> > >> >On 11:16 AM 8/17/01, Ernie Hill Said: >> > >I obviously don't know or I would be rich by now. I agree with you >about >> > >sticking >> > >to the subject matter (canslim, but I could not resist commenting on >> > >Cisco). I am >> > >not interested in your property, but I have done research into CSCO's >> > >markets they >> > >are huge and they are not saturated. Businesses are simple not >investing in >> >IT >> > >infrastructure right now due to the fall-off in profits. But if you >> > >believe that >> > >they won't be investing again in IT infrastructure, then you must >believe >> >that >> > >technological progress in the business world has peaked. I cannot >accept >> > >that view. >> > >In three years I'll bet and investment in Cisco will have appreciated >much >> > >more >> > >than your property, but less than high quality canslim stocks. >> > > >> > >Tim Fisher wrote: >> > > >> > > > How do you know? Are you traveling into the future? Sure it won't be >> >bought >> > > > out at so cheap a price? CANSLIM relies on a stock's past >performance, >> >not >> > > > predications on what it "will do" in the future. CSCO's past >performance >> >is >> > > > abysmal. Let's stick to the subject matter, which is CANSLIM stocks. >> >Should >> > > > have said that in my last post. I still have that property for >sale... >> > > > >> > > > On 09:16 AM 8/17/01, Ernie Hill Said: >> > > > >CSCO is definitely not a canslim stock, but it will certainly >survive >> >the >> > > > >current telecom downturn. And yes it's next earnings report will >> > > likely not >> > > > >show improvement. However, CSCO will recover in price before it is >> > > evident in >> > > > >its quarterly reports. This stock is to widely covered for large >fund >> > > managers >> > > > >to not be aware that the companies business has recovered before >its >> > > earnings >> > > > >reports reflect that reality. CSCO is also the dominate company in >a >> > > business >> > > > >sector that will again experience strong growth when the economy >> >recovers >> > > > >which it eventually will. Bottom line if you have a long term >> > > perspective CSCO >> > > > >will likely provide you with some impressive returns over the next >few >> > > years, >> > > > >but its price may indeed go much lower than 8% below where it is >now >> > > before it >> > > > >moves higher. >> > > > > >> > > > >It's not often you find a VALUE stock with CSCO's long term growth >> > > potential! >> > > > > >> > > > >E >> > > > > >> > > > >Tim Fisher wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > Tell that to the guy in my office who thought those beaten down >> >techs >> > > > > > couldn't get any cheaper. He now has two under threat of >delisting, >> >one >> > > > > > that was bought out for less than the current price (something >like >> >92 >> > > > > > cents, it was $150, OMKT I believe). As someone has said many >> > > times, cheap >> > > > > > stocks tend to get cheaper. What do you think will happen to >CSCO >> > > the next >> > > > > > earnings report? Think it will shoot up? If you do, call me, I >have >> > > some >> > > > > > property for sale, it's ideally located on the Nisqually River >on >> >the >> > > > > > border of Mt Ranier NP! >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On 06:41 AM 8/17/01, Dennis Chia Said: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >Thanks for the all replies, insights and advice :) Actually >i'm >> > > now in >> > > > > > >the stage of learning and researching, no hurry to get *into* >it >> > > and end >> > > > > > >up making the wrong decisions, the *down* market seems >attractive >> > > > > > >now though for tech stocks like CSCO, LU, NOK, etc that have >been >> > > beaten >> > > > > > >down quite badly ... if you intend to buy and hold on the long >> > > term .... >> > > > > > >In slow times such as these, would Value investing be more >> >appropriate >> > > > > > >instead of the CANSLIM method? >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >Regards, >> > > > > > >Dennis >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >- >> > > > > > >-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. >> > > > >> > > > 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. >> > >> >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. >> >> Tim Fisher >> Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site >> Pacific Fishery Biologists Information >> mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com >> WWW http://OreRockOn.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. > > - - - -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: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 21:19:27 -0700 From: esetser Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] SRCL I'm staying out of new purchases right now, due to the doubts in M based on all of the distribution days. Overall, this chart looks pretty good, and the fundies look pretty solid. The handle doesn't have the kind of volume decrease you would like to see, so that is one issue. At 06:17 AM 11/6/01 -0800, you wrote: >I'd be interested in thoughts on SRCL. The daily chart shows a short >handle; good earnings and sales growth; and EPS of 98 and RS of 94. > >Marc > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Find a job, post your resume. >http://careers.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. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 21:21:16 -0700 From: esetser Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] bottom fishing Hmm, I don't agree. Maybe if everyone played blackjack WELL that would be true. I think blackjack is one of the casino's largest money-makers based on people who don't learn how to play correctly. At 11:47 AM 11/6/01 -0500, you wrote: >The exception in Casino gambling is if everyone just played craps and >blackjack, the Casino would fold. > >DanF >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Katherine Malm" >To: >Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2001 8:02 AM >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] bottom fishing > > >> Seems that the discussion here is more about probabilities than anything >> else. If you bottom fish, the probability of the stock you chose going up >at >> a rate faster than the best stocks, despite its market and particular >market >> strength (e.g. CSCO), is LESS than if you chose a stock with a particular >> market strength that has already passed any significant resistance >(CANSLIM >> stocks, pick one). When you trade/invest, you want the odds in your favor >or >> what you are doing is no better than casino odds. And you know that the >> casino, on average, wins. Once the odds are stacked in our favor, then we >> should *act* consistently on those odds. Jumping around from style to >style >> without a predefined strategy is a lesson in losing money. Expensive >lessons >> in the end. >> >> Katherine >> kmalm@earthlink.net >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: >> To: >> Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2001 6:46 AM >> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] bottom fishing >> >> >> > Sorry Gene, couldn't resist this after reading Tom's post. Let me remind >> > you of your "predictions" made in August. yesterday's prices on the >right. >> > Not exactly stellar returns so far, eh? I bet Money Market beats these >> > returns over the past over the past 50 days or so...cash looks like the >> > best Mattress Stuffer around, eh? >> > >> > >BEAS $17.40 $13.18 >> > >CSCO $17.48 $17.90 >> > >SEBL $26.72 $20.81 >> > >> > >> > At 04:28 PM 8/17/2001 -0500, you wrote: >> > >Tim, how's this for a deal... the winner declared the 2001 stock picker >> and >> > >the loser the keeper of swamp land in West Texas? >> > > >> > >Gene's Picks >> > >-------------- >> > >Yesterday's Closing Price Closing Price in less than 12 months >> > >---------------------- -------------------------------------- >> > >BEAS $17.40 $34.80 >> > >CSCO $17.48 $34.96 >> > >SEBL $26.72 $52.44 >> > > >> > >Notice, I 'gave' you yesterday's close which was higher than >> > >todays......???? >> > > >> > >Now if you had 3 CANSLIM picks it would make this more interesting. >But, >> > >I'll accept the wager just going with my three (value) picks to >double - >> all >> > >three or I lose the bet and you become the stock picker and me the >swamp >> > >land care taker.... course the reverse will likely happen and you might >> not >> > >be a keeper of a swamp???? >> > > >> > >Is it a deal? >> > >Gene >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >----- Original Message ----- >> > >From: Tim Fisher >> > >To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >> > >Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 4:00 PM >> > >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Hi - low priced stocks >> > > >> > > >> > >My point exactly. The property in question was not mine but I had >assumed >> > >the news of the glacier that calved into the Nisqually and caused a >> debris >> > >torrent reached outside the NW. I.e. I was comparing the beautiful >scenic >> > >property to CSCO. THeir technology could be supplanted by someone >else's >> > >(i.e. JNPR, among dozens of others) tomorrow and CSCO would fade away >> just >> > >like the railroads did when the interstate highway system was built. Of >> > >course IT is and will continue to be a fast growing business. But CSCO >> > >isn't all of IT, their products are not necessarily the best, the >> cheapest, >> > >fastest, etc, nor is there no guarantee they will be so tomorrow. Don't >> you >> > >follow LU? Did you think it could have happened to them 2 years ago? >Then >> > >again, I did not buy LU when they became a "value stock" either. I >would >> > >put up real money that one or more of the stocks on your list will >> _never_ >> > >recover from their current prices. >> > > >> > >On 11:16 AM 8/17/01, Ernie Hill Said: >> > > >I obviously don't know or I would be rich by now. I agree with you >> about >> > > >sticking >> > > >to the subject matter (canslim, but I could not resist commenting on >> > > >Cisco). I am >> > > >not interested in your property, but I have done research into CSCO's >> > > >markets they >> > > >are huge and they are not saturated. Businesses are simple not >> investing in >> > >IT >> > > >infrastructure right now due to the fall-off in profits. But if you >> > > >believe that >> > > >they won't be investing again in IT infrastructure, then you must >> believe >> > >that >> > > >technological progress in the business world has peaked. I cannot >> accept >> > > >that view. >> > > >In three years I'll bet and investment in Cisco will have appreciated >> much >> > > >more >> > > >than your property, but less than high quality canslim stocks. >> > > > >> > > >Tim Fisher wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > How do you know? Are you traveling into the future? Sure it won't >be >> > >bought >> > > > > out at so cheap a price? CANSLIM relies on a stock's past >> performance, >> > >not >> > > > > predications on what it "will do" in the future. CSCO's past >> performance >> > >is >> > > > > abysmal. Let's stick to the subject matter, which is CANSLIM >stocks. >> > >Should >> > > > > have said that in my last post. I still have that property for >> sale... >> > > > > >> > > > > On 09:16 AM 8/17/01, Ernie Hill Said: >> > > > > >CSCO is definitely not a canslim stock, but it will certainly >> survive >> > >the >> > > > > >current telecom downturn. And yes it's next earnings report will >> > > > likely not >> > > > > >show improvement. However, CSCO will recover in price before it >is >> > > > evident in >> > > > > >its quarterly reports. This stock is to widely covered for large >> fund >> > > > managers >> > > > > >to not be aware that the companies business has recovered before >> its >> > > > earnings >> > > > > >reports reflect that reality. CSCO is also the dominate company >in >> a >> > > > business >> > > > > >sector that will again experience strong growth when the economy >> > >recovers >> > > > > >which it eventually will. Bottom line if you have a long term >> > > > perspective CSCO >> > > > > >will likely provide you with some impressive returns over the >next >> few >> > > > years, >> > > > > >but its price may indeed go much lower than 8% below where it is >> now >> > > > before it >> > > > > >moves higher. >> > > > > > >> > > > > >It's not often you find a VALUE stock with CSCO's long term >growth >> > > > potential! >> > > > > > >> > > > > >E >> > > > > > >> > > > > >Tim Fisher wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Tell that to the guy in my office who thought those beaten >down >> > >techs >> > > > > > > couldn't get any cheaper. He now has two under threat of >> delisting, >> > >one >> > > > > > > that was bought out for less than the current price (something >> like >> > >92 >> > > > > > > cents, it was $150, OMKT I believe). As someone has said many >> > > > times, cheap >> > > > > > > stocks tend to get cheaper. What do you think will happen to >> CSCO >> > > > the next >> > > > > > > earnings report? Think it will shoot up? If you do, call me, I >> have >> > > > some >> > > > > > > property for sale, it's ideally located on the Nisqually River >> on >> > >the >> > > > > > > border of Mt Ranier NP! >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On 06:41 AM 8/17/01, Dennis Chia Said: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >Thanks for the all replies, insights and advice :) Actually >> i'm >> > > > now in >> > > > > > > >the stage of learning and researching, no hurry to get *into* >> it >> > > > and end >> > > > > > > >up making the wrong decisions, the *down* market seems >> attractive >> > > > > > > >now though for tech stocks like CSCO, LU, NOK, etc that have >> been >> > > > beaten >> > > > > > > >down quite badly ... if you intend to buy and hold on the >long >> > > > term .... >> > > > > > > >In slow times such as these, would Value investing be more >> > >appropriate >> > > > > > > >instead of the CANSLIM method? >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >Regards, >> > > > > > > >Dennis >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >- >> > > > > > > >-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. >> > > > > >> > > > > 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. >> > > >> > >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. >> > >> > Tim Fisher >> > Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site >> > Pacific Fishery Biologists Information >> > mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com >> > WWW http://OreRockOn.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. > > >- >-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: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 21:28:13 -0700 From: esetser Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] PECS Boy, today would certainly put me on alert. This isn't an orderly fallback with few sellers, and probably is the worst thing you could see in a handle. I would want to see some good volume support before buying now, and that makes for a high volume handle. At 08:21 PM 11/6/01 -0600, you wrote: > If volume dries up and a handle is formed would this stock be a buy >or would today's action be a cause for concern? Thanks, Matt - - - -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: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 22:22:31 -0600 From: "Katherine Malm" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] bottom fishing Regarding the FT days. I believe that a FT day in and of itself is insufficient to create a green light for whole hog investing. There's no confirming breadth at work here either in up volume consistently swamping down volume or in quality new highs expanding. Recent action is concentrated in tech coming off the bottom or in "safe" big cap stocks. Stocks that have been doing well but have become "fairly valued" are pausing or breaking down. I don't see consistent up moves in cyclicals. There *is* some confirming action in some of the right industries like brokers and transports. We've primed the pump with monetary fuel, but there doesn't yet seem to be anything compelling starting the car and pushing the gas pedal. All in all, a big mixed bag. Given that scenario, I still believe that there is a greater probability of tech off the bottom failing or running sideways for quite some time than there is in waiting for quality stocks in industries that are currently accelerating sales and earnings to set up. I wouldn't confuse patience with probability here. Katherine kmalm@earthlink.net - ----- Original Message ----- From: "esetser" To: Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2001 10:16 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] bottom fishing > And short of WON's statements, what do you base your probabilities on? > WON's investment technique is based on the characteristics of the best > performing stocks over many years, but I'm not sure what the success rate > in picking these is, since the characteristics were chosen AFTER the stocks > were successuful. My real problem right now is we have had 5-7 "FT days" > that haven't led to profits for me or for most of the group. The FT day > approach seems quite suspect right now. > > > At 07:02 AM 11/6/01 -0600, you wrote: > >Seems that the discussion here is more about probabilities than anything > >else. If you bottom fish, the probability of the stock you chose going up at > >a rate faster than the best stocks, despite its market and particular market > >strength (e.g. CSCO), is LESS than if you chose a stock with a particular > >market strength that has already passed any significant resistance (CANSLIM > >stocks, pick one). When you trade/invest, you want the odds in your favor or > >what you are doing is no better than casino odds. And you know that the > >casino, on average, wins. Once the odds are stacked in our favor, then we > >should *act* consistently on those odds. Jumping around from style to style > >without a predefined strategy is a lesson in losing money. Expensive lessons > >in the end. > > > >Katherine > >kmalm@earthlink.net > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: > >To: > >Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2001 6:46 AM > >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] bottom fishing > > > > > >> Sorry Gene, couldn't resist this after reading Tom's post. Let me remind > >> you of your "predictions" made in August. yesterday's prices on the right. > >> Not exactly stellar returns so far, eh? I bet Money Market beats these > >> returns over the past over the past 50 days or so...cash looks like the > >> best Mattress Stuffer around, eh? > >> > >> >BEAS $17.40 $13.18 > >> >CSCO $17.48 $17.90 > >> >SEBL $26.72 $20.81 > >> > >> > >> At 04:28 PM 8/17/2001 -0500, you wrote: > >> >Tim, how's this for a deal... the winner declared the 2001 stock picker > >and > >> >the loser the keeper of swamp land in West Texas? > >> > > >> >Gene's Picks > >> >-------------- > >> >Yesterday's Closing Price Closing Price in less than 12 months > >> >---------------------- -------------------------------------- > >> >BEAS $17.40 $34.80 > >> >CSCO $17.48 $34.96 > >> >SEBL $26.72 $52.44 > >> > > >> >Notice, I 'gave' you yesterday's close which was higher than > >> >todays......???? > >> > > >> >Now if you had 3 CANSLIM picks it would make this more interesting. But, > >> >I'll accept the wager just going with my three (value) picks to double - > >all > >> >three or I lose the bet and you become the stock picker and me the swamp > >> >land care taker.... course the reverse will likely happen and you might > >not > >> >be a keeper of a swamp???? > >> > > >> >Is it a deal? > >> >Gene > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> >----- Original Message ----- > >> >From: Tim Fisher > >> >To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > >> >Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 4:00 PM > >> >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Hi - low priced stocks > >> > > >> > > >> >My point exactly. The property in question was not mine but I had assumed > >> >the news of the glacier that calved into the Nisqually and caused a > >debris > >> >torrent reached outside the NW. I.e. I was comparing the beautiful scenic > >> >property to CSCO. THeir technology could be supplanted by someone else's > >> >(i.e. JNPR, among dozens of others) tomorrow and CSCO would fade away > >just > >> >like the railroads did when the interstate highway system was built. Of > >> >course IT is and will continue to be a fast growing business. But CSCO > >> >isn't all of IT, their products are not necessarily the best, the > >cheapest, > >> >fastest, etc, nor is there no guarantee they will be so tomorrow. Don't > >you > >> >follow LU? Did you think it could have happened to them 2 years ago? Then > >> >again, I did not buy LU when they became a "value stock" either. I would > >> >put up real money that one or more of the stocks on your list will > >_never_ > >> >recover from their current prices. > >> > > >> >On 11:16 AM 8/17/01, Ernie Hill Said: > >> > >I obviously don't know or I would be rich by now. I agree with you > >about > >> > >sticking > >> > >to the subject matter (canslim, but I could not resist commenting on > >> > >Cisco). I am > >> > >not interested in your property, but I have done research into CSCO's > >> > >markets they > >> > >are huge and they are not saturated. Businesses are simple not > >investing in > >> >IT > >> > >infrastructure right now due to the fall-off in profits. But if you > >> > >believe that > >> > >they won't be investing again in IT infrastructure, then you must > >believe > >> >that > >> > >technological progress in the business world has peaked. I cannot > >accept > >> > >that view. > >> > >In three years I'll bet and investment in Cisco will have appreciated > >much > >> > >more > >> > >than your property, but less than high quality canslim stocks. > >> > > > >> > >Tim Fisher wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > How do you know? Are you traveling into the future? Sure it won't be > >> >bought > >> > > > out at so cheap a price? CANSLIM relies on a stock's past > >performance, > >> >not > >> > > > predications on what it "will do" in the future. CSCO's past > >performance > >> >is > >> > > > abysmal. Let's stick to the subject matter, which is CANSLIM stocks. > >> >Should > >> > > > have said that in my last post. I still have that property for > >sale... > >> > > > > >> > > > On 09:16 AM 8/17/01, Ernie Hill Said: > >> > > > >CSCO is definitely not a canslim stock, but it will certainly > >survive > >> >the > >> > > > >current telecom downturn. And yes it's next earnings report will > >> > > likely not > >> > > > >show improvement. However, CSCO will recover in price before it is > >> > > evident in > >> > > > >its quarterly reports. This stock is to widely covered for large > >fund > >> > > managers > >> > > > >to not be aware that the companies business has recovered before > >its > >> > > earnings > >> > > > >reports reflect that reality. CSCO is also the dominate company in > >a > >> > > business > >> > > > >sector that will again experience strong growth when the economy > >> >recovers > >> > > > >which it eventually will. Bottom line if you have a long term > >> > > perspective CSCO > >> > > > >will likely provide you with some impressive returns over the next > >few > >> > > years, > >> > > > >but its price may indeed go much lower than 8% below where it is > >now > >> > > before it > >> > > > >moves higher. > >> > > > > > >> > > > >It's not often you find a VALUE stock with CSCO's long term growth > >> > > potential! > >> > > > > > >> > > > >E > >> > > > > > >> > > > >Tim Fisher wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Tell that to the guy in my office who thought those beaten down > >> >techs > >> > > > > > couldn't get any cheaper. He now has two under threat of > >delisting, > >> >one > >> > > > > > that was bought out for less than the current price (something > >like > >> >92 > >> > > > > > cents, it was $150, OMKT I believe). As someone has said many > >> > > times, cheap > >> > > > > > stocks tend to get cheaper. What do you think will happen to > >CSCO > >> > > the next > >> > > > > > earnings report? Think it will shoot up? If you do, call me, I > >have > >> > > some > >> > > > > > property for sale, it's ideally located on the Nisqually River > >on > >> >the > >> > > > > > border of Mt Ranier NP! > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > On 06:41 AM 8/17/01, Dennis Chia Said: > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >Thanks for the all replies, insights and advice :) Actually > >i'm > >> > > now in > >> > > > > > >the stage of learning and researching, no hurry to get *into* > >it > >> > > and end > >> > > > > > >up making the wrong decisions, the *down* market seems > >attractive > >> > > > > > >now though for tech stocks like CSCO, LU, NOK, etc that have > >been > >> > > beaten > >> > > > > > >down quite badly ... if you intend to buy and hold on the long > >> > > term .... > >> > > > > > >In slow times such as these, would Value investing be more > >> >appropriate > >> > > > > > >instead of the CANSLIM method? > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >Regards, > >> > > > > > >Dennis > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >- > >> > > > > > >-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. > >> > > > > >> > > > 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. > >> > > >> >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. > >> > >> Tim Fisher > >> Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site > >> Pacific Fishery Biologists Information > >> mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com > >> WWW http://OreRockOn.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. > > > > > > - > -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: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 21:31:56 -0700 From: esetser Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EPIQ At 07:40 PM 11/6/01 -0500, you wrote: >I rarely initiate posts on individual stocks, and especially ones I still own, but thought I would mention that this one is shaping up into a decent c&h, handle now 2 weeks long and volume showing signs of drying up. Also today they announced a 3:2 stock split. Tom Worley >stkguru@netside.net >AIM: TexWorley > Umm, really? I would have guessed you have posted on EPIQ 6, no, probably more times in the last month or two. I certainly know about this one and that is had been a good stock for you!! - - - -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 #1786 ****************************** 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.