From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #202 Reply-To: canslim Sender: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes canslim-digest Tuesday, April 21 1998 Volume 02 : Number 202 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] Charting Software. [CANSLIM] hibb [CANSLIM] CTXS MTRS NDN breaking out. Re: [CANSLIM] hibb Re: [CANSLIM] hibb Re: [CANSLIM] NEWP Re: [CANSLIM] NEWP Re: [CANSLIM] hibb [CANSLIM] MDLK Shakeout [CANSLIM] Re: budfox2 [CANSLIM] NVAL RE: [CANSLIM] MDLK Shakeout Re: [CANSLIM] NVAL [CANSLIM] HYSW Re: [CANSLIM] MDLK Shakeout [CANSLIM] Re: Connie - Entry and Exit Points RE: [CANSLIM] institutional ownership [CANSLIM] DELL breaking out now Re: [CANSLIM] NVAL Re: [CANSLIM] hibb [CANSLIM] Graphs in HTMMIS [CANSLIM] Re: Dam Funny [CANSLIM] Screening, TMBS ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 10:29:13 -0400 From: "Tony Austin" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Charting Software. Check out TC2000, windows version is wonderful, and affordable. - ---------- > From: budfox2 > To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com > Subject: [CANSLIM] Charting Software. > Date: Tuesday, April 21, 1998 1:59 AM > > > > Hello, > > I interested in either SuperCharts 4.0 or MetaStock 6.5. Can anyone > tell me which one is better? Thanks. > > Vince > > > - > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 10:33:09 -0400 From: dougr@aloft.micro.lucent.com (Douglas_Rhodes) Subject: [CANSLIM] hibb Comments on Hibbett Sporting Goods (hibb)? EPS 96 Rel Str 91 Acc/Dist A Group Str A Float 6.3M Debt 0% - --Doug Rhodes - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 07:41:17 -0400 From: Kom Tukovinit Subject: [CANSLIM] CTXS MTRS NDN breaking out. - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 10:45:50 -0400 From: Craig Griffin Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] hibb Have not checked any additional CS elements - just a chart read follows. It is a real gone cat (way extended). Broke out last week (see weekly chart for clearer image of big volume). Pivot about 29 3/4. Tricky on the b/o - volume spread over about 4 days. Looks like it was concerted institutional buying that was trying to not be too obvious (and mostly succeeding). Would have been nice to catch. If you are in - congrats, otherwise, got to wait for the next train to pull out of the station. At 10:33 AM 4/21/98 -0400, you wrote: > >Comments on Hibbett Sporting Goods (hibb)? > >EPS 96 >Rel Str 91 >Acc/Dist A >Group Str A >Float 6.3M >Debt 0% > >--Doug Rhodes > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 10:45:12 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] hibb Nice 7 week base around 27, way too extended not at 35. I don't like non-standard fiscal years (this one ends Jan). Looks like they had a good Christmas season, and doesn't appear as seasonally cyclically as I would expect. GRS is 87, however this one not in top 5. Might be worth watching for some consolidation and new basing, and see how the volume and price action holds up. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: Douglas_Rhodes To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Tuesday, April 21, 1998 10:31 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] hibb > >Comments on Hibbett Sporting Goods (hibb)? > >EPS 96 >Rel Str 91 >Acc/Dist A >Group Str A >Float 6.3M >Debt 0% > >--Doug Rhodes > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 10:49:56 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] NEWP Volume currently (24K and change) does not yet suggest a breakout to me, esp with recent overhead resistance nearby. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: James Adams To: Canslim Date: Tuesday, April 21, 1998 10:37 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] NEWP >Anyone following NEWP (Newport Corporation)? >95/85/A >Reported good earnings and revenue yesterday. They appear to be attempting >to break out of a short base. At 10:20 EDT 20-20 1/8, up 1.00, vol 50% of >ADV > >James Adams......................Maysville, KY USA >http://www.cris.com/~jimadams/ >Internet Pager 1343361@pager.mirabilis.com > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 08:11:31 -0700 From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] NEWP Good earnings, but 46% institutions and 2% insiders - those numbers are reversed from where they need to be. If management isn't confident about= their stock, why should you be? At 07:20 AM 4/21/98 , you wrote: >Anyone following NEWP (Newport Corporation)? >95/85/A >Reported good earnings and revenue yesterday. They appear to be attempting >to break out of a short base. At 10:20 EDT=A0 20-20 1/8, up 1.00, vol 50%= of >ADV > >James Adams......................Maysville, KY=A0 USA >http://www.cris.com/~jimadams/ >Internet Pager=A0 1343361@pager.mirabilis.com > Tim Fisher / tfish@spiritone.com Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites: http://www.spiritone.com/~tfish See naked fish and rocks! - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 08:09:05 -0700 From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] hibb I see earnings deceleration the past 3 qtrs. No data on instit. & insiders= in Zacks database.=20 At 07:33 AM 4/21/98 , you wrote: > >Comments on Hibbett Sporting Goods (hibb)? > >EPS=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 96 >Rel Str=A0=A0 91 >Acc/Dist=A0 A >Group Str A >Float=A0=A0=A0=A0 6.3M >Debt=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 0% > >--Doug Rhodes > Tim Fisher / tfish@spiritone.com Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites: http://www.spiritone.com/~tfish See naked fish and rocks! - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 11:12:27 -0400 From: Craig Griffin Subject: [CANSLIM] MDLK Shakeout Looks like MDLK had a shakeout today. May be about to get it's feet under it now after a sloppy week. - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 08:14:04 -0700 (PDT) From: dbphoenix Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: budfox2 <> You'll have an easier time finding an answer to your question if you know what it is you want from whatever program you choose. For example, do you want fundamental as well as technical scans? Do you know how you're going to download data (if so, you also need to investigate data providers)? Are you going to want to write your own formulas? Customize the programs in any way? Have you downloaded demos from the websites? Do they each have free trial periods? Is disk space a consideration? Are you a beginner at charting? How much money do you have to spend? What's the quality and availability of tech support? Etc. - --Db _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 11:14:03 -0400 From: "James Adams" Subject: [CANSLIM] NVAL Filtered this one out, looking for high fliers that met most CANSLIM criteria as well as positive MF/OBV IBD #s =71/93/A 3 Insiders bought/filed to buy total of 75,000 shares since Mar 1 Latest News: April 21, 1998 07:59 AM LAWRENCEVILLE, Ga., April 21 /PRNewswire/ -- National Vision Associates, Ltd. NVAL today announced record results for the first quarter ended April 4, 1998. Net sales for the quarter increased by 23 percent to $54.4 million, compared with net sales of $44.4 million reported for the first quarter ended March 29, 1997. Operating income increased by 35 percent to $4.4 million versus $3.2 million for the first quarter a year ago. Net income for the first quarter was $2.5 million, or $0.12 per share, increases of 48 percent and 50 percent, respectively, compared with net income of $1.7 million, or $0.08 per share, reported for the first quarter last year. Comparable domestic store sales, excluding the Midwest Vision operations that the company acquired in the fourth quarter of 1997, increased by 5.5% percent. New Highs, April 15,16,17,21 Exceed estimates three quarters in a row. James Adams......................Maysville, KY USA http://www.cris.com/~jimadams/ Internet Pager 1343361@pager.mirabilis.com James Adams......................Maysville, KY USA http://www.cris.com/~jimadams/ Internet Pager 1343361@pager.mirabilis.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 11:39:23 -0400 From: Craig Griffin Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] MDLK Shakeout Derrick, At 05:15 PM 4/21/98 +0200, you wrote: >Craig > >could you please clarify why you think this is merely a shakeout (sure >down to 22 and now >back up to 23.5) but could this be the beginning of the end of a nice >short but blissful run?? > There is no way to know which it is. Closing price today will tell alot, but even that will not be conclusive. This is a tricky point in this stock's breakout. My sense that this is a shakeout is partly driven by the volume on up days vs the volume on down days. There really doesn't seem to be a lot of selling right now, just a lack of buying. Also, it seemed to spend very little time down in the 22 area as though maybe buying came in there. But one NEVER knows. It could well be the end of the run with a pullback into the base imminent. In some ways it would be better if the price had gotten down to 21 and was now back at 22 1/2 or 23 1/2. So, ..., it could go either way (which is the nature of a shakeout - they are hard to read / scary). It could end up being a failed breakout yet. My post was at worst - just a guess, at best an intuitive guess base on a couple of signs. Craig > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 11:40:30 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] NVAL Yeah, and those insiders were buying towards the end of an 8 week base at 5.50. The stock is now 8.50, 20% extended from the closest base, and it's only a 2 week base at that. Not my cup of tea, esp with the possibility of insiders trading on non-public info. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: James Adams To: Canslim Date: Tuesday, April 21, 1998 11:17 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] NVAL >Filtered this one out, looking for high fliers that met most CANSLIM >criteria as well as positive MF/OBV > >IBD #s =71/93/A >3 Insiders bought/filed to buy total of 75,000 shares since Mar 1 >Latest News: >April 21, 1998 07:59 AM > >LAWRENCEVILLE, Ga., April 21 /PRNewswire/ -- National Vision Associates, >Ltd. NVAL today announced record results for the first quarter ended April >4, 1998. Net sales for the quarter increased by 23 percent to $54.4 million, >compared with net sales of $44.4 million reported for the first quarter >ended March 29, 1997. Operating income increased by 35 percent to $4.4 >million versus $3.2 million for the first quarter a year ago. Net income for >the first quarter was $2.5 million, or $0.12 per share, increases of 48 >percent and 50 percent, respectively, compared with net income of $1.7 >million, or $0.08 per share, reported for the first quarter last year. >Comparable domestic store sales, excluding the Midwest Vision operations >that the company acquired in the fourth quarter of 1997, increased by 5.5% >percent. > >New Highs, April 15,16,17,21 >Exceed estimates three quarters in a row. > >James Adams......................Maysville, KY USA >http://www.cris.com/~jimadams/ >Internet Pager 1343361@pager.mirabilis.com > > > >James Adams......................Maysville, KY USA >http://www.cris.com/~jimadams/ >Internet Pager 1343361@pager.mirabilis.com > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 11:45:52 EDT From: DCSquires Subject: [CANSLIM] HYSW Hi all, Keep am eye on HYSW today. It's trying to push through 46 on heavy volume. dsquires - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 12:14:05 EDT From: DCSquires Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] MDLK Shakeout You might get a little comfort by looking at a weekly chart. See the HUGE volume breakout. That was a comformation of the 3/27 volume move. Also the stock came out of a nice long base. The past few days are likely nothing more than day traders and profit taking. Volume during the consolidation has been contrating as well. Remember, the stock went from about 20 to 28 in two days. A rule many traders follow is "take windfall profits when you have them", and that is likely what many did. As long as the general market continues to trend higher I wouldn't worry to much. If you concentrate on the market action and try to ignore the changes in market value of your postion you will stay on the right side of the trade. Good luck. DSquires - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 13:45:46 -0500 (CDT) From: mckeener@ix.netcom.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: Connie - Entry and Exit Points Per your instructions, I got into Big Charts and clicked on the indicators. At the top of the chart, the EMA numbers were different than what you stated. Is that a problem? Appreciate your patience here. Mary Keener McKeener@ix.netcom.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 12:09:10 -0700 From: Mike Lucero Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] institutional ownership I'm also trying to exclude companies with too much fund ownership. I just wish there were a way to scan for it with a tool like Quotes Plus. For Quotes Plus users, I'm testing the beta version, and checked the numbers for ACF, which Quotes Plus says has 70% float/outstanding and 89% institutional, so the institutional number must be a percentage of the float, since it's bigger than the float percentage. DGO says funds 16% and banks 9% = 25%. To equal Quotes Plus's 89%, insurance companies would have to own the other 64% of the float, which I think unlikely. So, the numbers just don't agree. My opinion of Quotes-Plus is that you can scan using fundamental data that seems about the same as everyone else's, except Daily Graphs'. Mike On Tuesday, April 21, 1998 5:04 AM, Tom Worley [SMTP:stkguru@netside.net] wrote: > Remember that DG counts institutional percentages differently than > most other sites. DG shows management as a percent of the total issue, > but funds, banks percent as a percent of the float. Most other sites > are likely to show these also as a percent of the total issue. That's > one of the difficulties in making comparisons. In addition, because > the data is not reported frequently, a lot can also depend on how > quickly each site updates their database. Finally, there can be major > changes during the course of a single quarter. > > It is for all these reasons that I place little decision making weight > on institutional holdings. I have no problem buying a small cap with > zero institutional holdings and 60% management when the CS elements > are strong and the chart looks good. I figure sooner or later the > funds will discover it, typically starting with the small cap funds, > altho I would prefer that there be a couple percent ownership since > fund mgrs talk to each other. On the other hand, I will pass on a > stock with 35 or 40% fund ownership as I feel it's more likely to not > get sig increased institutional buying, but rather the risk is of > funds starting to either simply take profits, or bailing out if they > see a problem (which with their staff they will probably spot sooner > than I can). > Tom W > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Lucero > To: 'canslim@lists.xmission.com' > Date: Tuesday, April 21, 1998 2:09 AM > Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] institutional ownership > > > >Here's an example comparing Quotes Plus institutional ownership with > Daily > >Graphs Online fund%. I was trying to get fund ownership from > institutional > >ownership, but I don't see much of a correlation. (Note that total > >institutional ownership would be fund, banks, and insurance > companies. If > >you try to add up the numbers available in DGO, you'd have to guess > at > >insurance company ownership, and still the numbers wouldn't match. > DGO just > >says they think their numbers are best.) > > > >Mike > > > > > > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 21:17:58 +0200 From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: [CANSLIM] DELL breaking out now 72 3/8 x 72 1/2 I'm in. Johan Van Houtven CLICK! N.V. / Wilrijk, Belgium - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 15:24:29 -0400 From: "James Adams" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] NVAL From: Tom Worley >Yeah, and those insiders were buying towards the end of an 8 week base >at 5.50. The stock is now 8.50, 20% extended from the closest base, >and it's only a 2 week base at that. Not my cup of tea, esp with the >possibility of insiders trading on non-public info. Tom, tell more about why this "insiders trading on non-public info" is particularly bad. I might put too much emphasis on insider buying as well as not understand the nuances such as you've mentioned. James Adams......................Maysville, KY USA http://www.cris.com/~jimadams/ Internet Pager 1343361@pager.mirabilis.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 13:09:52 -0800 From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] hibb > From: "Tom Worley" > To: > Nice 7 week base around 27, way too extended not at 35. I don't like > non-standard fiscal years (this one ends Jan). Looks like they had a I don't see how when the fiscal year ends has any pertinence to whether or not a stock might be a good buy. Cisco has some oddball earnings schedule, that stock has done quite well. - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 13:29:52 -0500 From: "Eric Boller" Subject: [CANSLIM] Graphs in HTMMIS Has anyone noticed that most of the stocks shown in O'Neils book on those three or four pages of stock market winners (The graphs of past winners) had pretty poor annual growth rates and quarterly growth rates. If you look closely you can see that alot of them had very little growth at the point those charts were shown. I didn't do a full count so I'm not sure if the majority of those didn't exaclty qualify for the C and A part of CANSLIM. Maybe I'll check tonight. Just a thought. Eric - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 17:46:43 -0400 From: "Frank Ferris" Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: Dam Funny This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_01BD6D4D.727AC600 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit to anybody and everybody this is funny - ---------- > > > > > ---------- > > > > > > (I can't verify the authenticity of this, but IMHO, it seems like > something > > that might happen in the real life of a bureaucracy.) > > > > This was an actual letter from and reply to the Michigan Department of > > Environmental Quality. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > State of Michigan > > Reply To: Grand Rapids District Office > > State Office Building 6th Floor > > 350 Ottawa NW > > Grand Rapids MI 49503-2341 > > > > John Engler, Governor > > Department Of Environmental Quality > > Hollister Building, PO Box 30473, > > Lansing MI 48909-7973 > > > > Russell J. Harding, Director > > December 17, 1997 > > CERTIFIED > > > > Mr. Ryan DeVries > > 2088 Dagget > > Pierson, MI 49339 > > > > Dear Mr. DeVries: > > > > SUBJECT: DEQ File No. 97-59-0023-1 T11N, R10W, > > Sec. 20, Montcalm County > > > > It has come to the attention of the Department of Environmental Quality > > that there has been recent unauthorized activity on the above referenced > > parcel of property. You have been certified as the legal landowner and/or > > contractor who did the following unauthorized activity: Construction and > > maintenance of two wood debris dams across the outlet stream of Spring > Pond. > > > > A permit must be issued prior to the start of this type of activity. A > > review of the Department's files shows that no permits have been issued. > > Therefore, the Department has determined that this activity is in > violation > > of Part 301, Inland Lakes and Streams, of the Natural Resource and > > Environmental Protection Act, Act 451 of the Public Acts of 1994, being > > sections 324.30101 to 324.30113 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, annotated. > > The Department has been informed that one or both of the dams partially > > failed during a recent rain event, causing debris and flooding at > > downstream locations. We find that dams of this nature are inherently > > hazardous and cannot be permitted. > > > > The Department therefore orders you to cease and desist all unauthorized > > activities at this location, and to restore the stream to a free-flow > > condition by removing all wood and brush forming the dams from the strewn > > channel. All restoration work shall be completed no later than January > 31, > > 1998. > > > > Please notify this office when the restoration has been completed so that > a > > follow-up site inspection may be scheduled by our staff. Failure to > comply > > with this request or any further unauthorized activity on the site may > > result in this case being referred for elevated enforcement action. We > > anticipate and would appreciate your full cooperation in this matter. > > > > Please feel free to contact me at this office if you have any questions. > > > > Sincerely, > > David L. Price > > District Representative > > Land and Water Management Division > > > > ----Reply Letter---- > > > > Dear Mr. Price: > > > > Re: DEQ File No. 97-59-0023; T11N, R10W, Sec 20; Montcalm County > > > > Your certified letter dated 12/17/97 has been handed to me to respond to. > > You sent out a great deal of carbon copies to a lot of people, but you > > neglected to include their addresses. You will, therefore, have to send > > them a copy of my response. > > > > First of all, Mr. Ryan DeVries is not the legal landowner and/or > contractor > > at 2088 Dagget, Pierson, Michigan - I am the legal owner and a couple of > > beavers are in the (State unauthorized) process of constructing and > > maintaining two wood "debris" dams across the outlet stream of my Spring > > Pond. While I did not pay for, nor authorize their dam project, I think > > they would be highly offended you call their skillful use of natural > > building materials "debris." I would like to challenge you to attempt to > > emulate their dam project any dam time and/or any dam place you choose. I > > believe I can safely state there is no dam way you could ever match their > > dam skills, their dam resourcefulness, their dam ingenuity, their dam > > persistence, their dam determination and/or their dam work ethic. > > > > As to your dam request the beavers first must fill out a dam permit prior > > to the start of this type of dam activity, my first dam question to you > is: > > are you trying to discriminate against my Spring Pond Beavers or do you > > require all dam beavers throughout this State to conform to said dam > > request? If you are not discriminating against these particular beavers, > > please send me completed copies of all those other applicable beaver dam > > permits. Perhaps we will see if there really is a dam violation of Part > > 301, Inland Lakes and Streams, of the Natural Resource and Environmental > > Protection Act, Act 451 of the Public Acts of 1994, being sections > > 324.30101 to 324.30113 of the Michigan Compiled Laws annotated. > > > > My first concern is - aren't the dam beavers entitled to dam legal > > representation? The Spring Pond Beavers are financially destitute and are > > unable to pay for said dam representation - so the State will have to > > provide them with a dam lawyer. The Department's dam concern that either > > one or both of the dams failed during a recent rain event causing dam > > flooding is proof we should leave the dam Spring Pond Beavers alone > rather > > than harassing them and calling their dam names. > > > > If you want the dam stream "restored" to a dam free-flow condition - > > contact the dam beavers - but if you are going to arrest them (they > > obviously did not pay any dam attention to your dam letter-being unable > to > > read English) - be sure you read them their dam Miranda rights first. As > > for me, I am not going to cause more dam flooding or dam debris jams by > > interfering with these dam builders. If you want to hurt these dam > beavers > > - be aware I am sending a copy of your dam letter and this response to > > PETA. If your dam Department seriously finds all dams of this nature > > inherently hazardous and truly will not permit their existence in this > dam > > State - I seriously hope you are not selectively enforcing this dam > policy > > - or once again both I and the Spring Pond Beavers will scream prejudice! > > > > In my humble opinion, the Spring Pond Beavers have a right to build their > > dam unauthorized dams as long as the sky is blue, the grass is green and > > water flows downstream. They have more dam right than I to live and enjoy > > Spring Pond. So, as far as the beavers and I are concerned, this dam case > > can be referred for more dam elevated enforcement action now. Why wait > > until 1/31/98? The Spring Pond Beavers may be under the dam ice then and > > there will be no dam way for you or your dam staff to contact/harass them > > then. > > > > In conclusion, I would like to bring to your attention a real > environmental > > quality (health) problem; bears are actually defecating in our woods. I > > definitely believe you should be persecuting the defecating bears and > leave > > the dam beavers alone. If you are going to investigate the beaver dam, > > watch your step! (The bears are not careful where they dump!) > > > > Being unable to comply with your dam request, and being unable to contact > > you on your dam answering machine, I am sending this response to your dam > > office. > > > > Sincerely, > > Stephen L. Tvedten > > > > xc: PETA > > > > > > > > > > > > Rattso del Flatulato - ------=_NextPart_000_01BD6D4D.727AC600 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


to anybody and everybody =   this is funny
----------
>
>
> =
>
> ----------
> >
> >
> > (I = can't verify the authenticity of this, but IMHO, it seems like
> = something
> > that might happen in the real life of a = bureaucracy.)
> >
> >  This was an actual letter = from and reply to the Michigan Department of
> > =   Environmental Quality.
> >
> > =   -----Original Message-----
> >   State of = Michigan
> >   Reply To: Grand Rapids District = Office
> >   State Office Building 6th Floor
> = >   350 Ottawa NW
> >   Grand Rapids MI = 49503-2341
> >
> >   John Engler, = Governor
> >   Department Of Environmental = Quality
> >   Hollister Building, PO Box = 30473,
> >   Lansing MI 48909-7973
> > =
> >   Russell J. Harding, Director
> > =   December 17, 1997
> >   CERTIFIED
> = >
> >   Mr. Ryan DeVries
> > =   2088 Dagget
> >   Pierson, MI = 49339
> >
> >   Dear Mr. DeVries:
> = >
> >   SUBJECT: =        DEQ File No. 97-59-0023-1 = T11N, R10W,
> >   Sec. 20, Montcalm County
> = >
> > It has come to the attention of the Department of = Environmental   Quality
> > that there has been = recent unauthorized activity on the above referenced
> > parcel = of property. You have been certified as the legal landowner = and/or
> > contractor who did the following unauthorized = activity: Construction and
> > maintenance of two wood debris = dams across the outlet stream of Spring
> Pond.
> > =
> > A permit must be issued prior to the start of this type of = activity. A
> > review of the Department's files shows that no = permits have been issued.
> > Therefore, the Department has = determined that this activity is in
> violation
> > of = Part 301, Inland Lakes and Streams, of the Natural Resource and
> = > Environmental Protection Act, Act 451 of the Public Acts of 1994, =   being
> > sections 324.30101 to 324.30113 of the = Michigan Compiled Laws, annotated.
> > The Department has been = informed that one or both of the dams   partially
> > = failed during a recent rain event, causing debris and flooding = at
> > downstream locations. We find that dams of this nature = are inherently
> > hazardous and cannot be permitted.
> = >
> > The Department therefore orders you to cease and = desist all unauthorized
> > activities at this location, and to = restore the stream to a free-flow
> > condition by removing all = wood and brush forming the dams from the strewn
> > channel. = All restoration work shall be completed no later than January
> = 31,
> > 1998.
> >
> > Please notify this = office when the restoration has been completed so that
> a
> = > follow-up site inspection may be scheduled by our staff. Failure = to
> comply
> > with this request or any further = unauthorized activity on the site may
> > result in this case = being referred for elevated enforcement action. We
> > = anticipate and would appreciate your full cooperation in this = matter.
> >
> > Please feel free to contact me at = this office if you have any questions.
> >
> > =   Sincerely,
> >   David L. Price
> = >   District Representative
> >   Land = and Water Management Division
> >
> > =   ----Reply Letter----
> >
> > Dear Mr. = Price:
> >
> > Re:     DEQ File = No. 97-59-0023; T11N, R10W, Sec 20; Montcalm County
> > =
> > Your certified letter dated 12/17/97 has been handed to me = to respond to.
> > You sent out a great deal of carbon copies = to a lot of people, but you
> > neglected to include their = addresses. You will, therefore, have to send
> > them a copy of = my response.
> >
> > First of all, Mr. Ryan DeVries = is not the legal landowner and/or
> contractor
> > at = 2088 Dagget, Pierson, Michigan - I am the legal owner and a couple = of
> > beavers are in the (State unauthorized) process of = constructing and
> > maintaining two wood "debris" = dams across the outlet stream of my Spring
> > Pond. While I = did not pay for, nor authorize their dam project, I =   think
> > they would be highly offended you call = their skillful use of natural
> > building materials = "debris." I would like to challenge you to attempt to
> = > emulate their dam project any dam time and/or any dam place you = choose. I
> > believe I can safely state there is no dam way = you could ever match their
> > dam skills, their dam = resourcefulness, their dam ingenuity, their dam
> > = persistence, their dam determination and/or their dam work = ethic.
> >
> > As to your dam request the beavers = first must fill out a dam permit prior
> > to the start of this = type of dam activity, my first dam question to you
> is:
> = > are you trying to discriminate against my Spring Pond Beavers or do = you
> > require all dam beavers throughout this State to = conform to said dam
> > request? If you are not discriminating = against these particular beavers,
> > please send me completed = copies of all those other applicable beaver dam
> > permits. = Perhaps we will see if there really is a dam violation of Part
> = > 301, Inland Lakes and Streams, of the Natural Resource and = Environmental
> > Protection Act, Act 451 of the Public Acts of = 1994, being sections
> > 324.30101 to 324.30113 of the Michigan = Compiled Laws annotated.
> >
> > My first concern is = - - aren't the dam beavers entitled to dam legal
> > = representation? The Spring Pond Beavers are financially destitute and = are
> > unable to pay for said dam representation - so the = State will have to
> > provide them with a dam lawyer. The = Department's dam concern that either
> > one or both of the = dams failed during a recent rain event causing dam
> > flooding = is proof we should leave the dam Spring Pond Beavers alone
> = rather
> > than harassing them and calling their dam = names.
> >
> > If you want the dam stream = "restored" to a dam free-flow condition -
> > contact = the dam beavers - but if you are going to arrest them (they
> > = obviously did not pay any dam attention to your dam letter-being = unable
> to
> > read English) - be sure you read them = their dam Miranda rights first.  As
> > for me, I am not = going to cause more dam flooding or dam debris jams by
> > = interfering with these dam builders. If you want to hurt these = dam
> beavers
> > - be aware I am sending a copy of your = dam letter and this response to
> > PETA. If your dam = Department seriously finds all dams of this nature
> > = inherently hazardous and truly will not permit their existence in = this
> dam
> > State - I seriously hope you are not = selectively enforcing this dam
> policy
> > - or once = again both I and the Spring Pond Beavers will scream prejudice!
> = >
> > In my humble opinion, the Spring Pond Beavers have a = right to build their
> > dam unauthorized dams as long as the = sky is blue, the grass is green and
> > water flows downstream. = They have more dam right than I to live and enjoy
> > Spring = Pond. So, as far as the beavers and I are concerned, this dam = case
> > can be referred for more dam elevated enforcement = action now. Why wait
> > until 1/31/98? The Spring Pond Beavers = may be under the dam ice then and
> > there will be no dam way = for you or your dam staff to contact/harass them
> > = then.
> >
> > In conclusion, I would like to bring to = your attention a real
> environmental
> > quality = (health) problem; bears are actually defecating in our woods. =  I
> > definitely believe you should be persecuting the = defecating bears and
> leave
> > the dam beavers alone. = If you are going to investigate the beaver dam,
> > watch your = step! (The bears are not careful where they dump!)
> >
> = > Being unable to comply with your dam request, and being unable to = contact
> > you on your dam answering machine, I am sending = this response to your dam
> > office.
> >
> = >   Sincerely,
> >   Stephen L. = Tvedten
> >
> >   xc: PETA
> > =
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > = Rattso del Flatulato

- ------=_NextPart_000_01BD6D4D.727AC600-- - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 19:14:36 -0400 From: Larry Horn Subject: [CANSLIM] Screening, TMBS Thanks for the welcome messages. Db, You wrote: Some questions, Larry. Why do you think your criteria are too restrictive? How many stocks do you prefer holding at a given time? How many stocks do you like to have waiting in the wings? Why would you sell TMBS if the 7e crossed the 10e? Thanks for the questions. Answering them helps me answer my question. = The reason I think I'm being too restrictive is that I fear I'm missing = better opportunities by having all of the absolute criteria. Most of the = charts that end up on my list aren't in a base pattern. I think if I = was looser in my criteria, I would find technically better charts. I = prefer to hold less than 5 stocks as I believe WON suggests. That same = audio tape I mentioned suggested getting it down to 1 or 2. I don't = believe I'm confident enough yet to own just 1 or 2. I was thinking I = would increase my odds of finding companies with better charts if I had = 15-20 "waiting in the wings" instead of the 2-5 I have now. I want to sell TMBS when the 7e crosses the 10e primarily because I = watched go from 14 to 18 to 15, up to 17 and back down to 15 again and = I'd like to avoid the going down part. Hopefully it will hold above 18 = as mentioned by Kirby Benson and others I believe. I think your question = more likely meant how did I come up with that sell criterion rather than = why do I want to protect my profits. I hope this is a reasonable sell = criterion and I got it from Connie's recent descriptions of stocks with = OBV that tracks price or is positively divergent and has a MF which is = negatively divergent. He said he would sell half when 3e crossed 7e and = sell all by the time 7e crossed 10e. This could easily be an error on my = part with a little knowledge being a dangerous thing but I'm learning. Frank Wolynski, You wrote: He states, "For purposes of investment, the ROE has been regarded as the = single best measure of a firm's ability to generate a flow of income for = dividends. ROE, sometimes called earnings power, indicates how well a = company is being managed to allow a profit on its equity or net worth." I would love to see your table on a Web site, or simply email a template = you use for tracking the data, if that is not too bold of me to request. = I assume you use a spreadsheet of some sort. I've used a spreadsheet for = tracking canslim stocks before, but have converted all my data = collection over to a database for easy sorting/ranking/filtering and = searching. Thanks for reinforcing ROE. I'm not really concerned with management's = ability to produce dividends but the rest of what ROE means sounds = beneficial. I'll try to throw together a primitive site to post my = screening data tonight. I'll probably put it at = www.duke.edu/~clhorn/canslim.htm. You'll probably be able to copy and = paste it into a spreadsheet or database. Dan, You wrote: I think you should be more open minded about your float percentages. = Even 5% insider holdings (though small) doesn't mean a stock won't = perform. I'm holding LEN right now, which has been a big mover and has = less than 2.5% insider holdings, if I can believe what I see at DG = Online. I think your methodology is to take a lot of stocks and pare = them down with restrictive criteria. You have to do this somewhat, but = if you wind up with a dozen stocks you don't have a lot to choose from = unless you like to hold promising stocks instead of buying off a base at = a pivot point in a breakout (which is CANSLIM buying).=20 I don't understand "negative divergence" (is this a pick up of volume = when the price drops?), but I feel that TMBS is hard to read. Thanks for the thoughts on %Management and float. You see my exact = dilemma. The stocks I'm left with usually don't have good basing = patterns. Maybe it will help to loosen %Management. By negative = divergence, I was referring to MF going down while price was going up = (my fault for not mentioning MF in that sentence). Larry - - ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #202 ***************************** 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.