From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #2080 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, January 25 2002 Volume 02 : Number 2080 In this issue: RE: [CANSLIM] Mr. Greenspan Re: [CANSLIM] Accounting Shenanigans Re: [CANSLIM] Accounting Shenanigans Re: [CANSLIM] Accounting Shenanigans Re: [CANSLIM] Mr. Greenspan Re: [CANSLIM] DFXI vs. JEC--Faulty handle? AW: [CANSLIM] Intro: Ben Chilcote ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 19:30:18 -0600 From: "John Adair" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Mr. Greenspan It would be more productive over a lifetime to sing a lullaby to your child at 2 A. M. Perhaps find another time to think about Greenspan. - -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Dave Cameron Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 6:55 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Mr. Greenspan Greetings all, I have just recently checked out (from my local library) a book entitled Greenspan: The Man Behind Money (copyright in 2000). Author is Justin Martin. I'm finding it a fascinating read; and will purchase the book. It gives good insights into Alan Greenspan's life, background, beliefs, obfuscations, and helps to make sense of what he says. Some top economists who've worked with Greenspan are qouted. Martin Anderson and Murray Weidenbaum read and critiqued it. Former President Ford is quoted. etc. etc. A good example of a learning which can make one money is as follows: The "irrational exuberance" comments are talked about (a day in which I went to 100% cash and sacrificed several hundred dollars at the open - which bounced back the next day). Interestingly enough, the CANSLIM rules would have forced one to cash (as I was) if followed religiously on that day. I remember distinctly (that after I'd already sold), the evening of those comments, Tom Worley posted to the group that based on his extensive experience following Greenspan's comments, he recommended to hold fast to everyone. I'd not only sold, I'd posted that it would be a good day to cut your losses - and protect your gains. After this read, if I'd known then what I know now about Greenspan, I wouldn't have sold. Finally, as a postscript, I have more time for reading - less time for investing. My second child was born on Monday; my wife just got back from the hospital. I've been reading "Greenspan: The Man Behind Money" at 2 AM feedings... Maybe I understand it better that way. Dave - --- Tom Worley wrote: > In case anyone missed it, Mr. G speaks to Congress today at 10 AM > on the US economy, and is expected to be upbeat, clarifying his > comments from his Jan 11 speech in San Francisco. > > Best indications I can see are that there will not be a further cut > in the Fed rate on 1/30/02. Hopefully today will clarify that, and > prepare the market for that. A bullish perspective on a recovering > economy is likely, IMO, to more than offset any disappointment at > not getting another 25 BP cut. > > Tom Worley > stkguru@netside.net > AIM: TexWorley > ===== Dave Cameron dfcameron@yahoo.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! http://auctions.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: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 19:31:40 -0600 From: "Katherine Malm" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Accounting Shenanigans This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0229_01C1A50D.BF327F00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Tom, I don't think we're really all that far apart here. I don't mean to = imply that I'm doing enough financial homework in the 10K's and 10Q's to = build an EPS estimate from the ground up. I can think of at least 100 = other things I'd rather do in my spare time. So far, I haven't talked = anyone into doing this *for* me for free, either! What I am doing when I = take a peek at the SEC filings is a "test of reasonableness." What are = the past trends in EPS/Rev? How do they recognize income? What do they = have in the works that would blow holes in the estimates? Is there = anything like financial litigation pending that could adversely impact = the estimates? Is management forthright about what is working and not = working right now or are they unreasonably rosy in their assessment? (I = really hate that) Do they have significant reserves or receivables that = seem out of line? etc. These are quick peeks and I devote limited time = unless there's something that jumps off the page and hollers "pay = attention"! All in all, even if this quick review lasted 4 minutes, I'd = say it's worth it. That said, stocks have to pass a lot of hurdles for = me to get this far, so the number of stocks requiring financial review = are actually quite small. I'd say I do five for every one I end up = buying. Katherine ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Tom Worley=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 6:41 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Accounting Shenanigans Katherine, up to a point I agree with you. But I pay a respectable = amount of money for the services (and data) of DGO. If I find that data = is wrong, I complain. I am paying them this money to collect in one = place a lot of data, and I expect it to be correct. It would be different if I was using some free service on the net, = then it's worth just what I am paying, and my responsibility to check = the data. When I look at a DGO chart, and there is no earnings estimates given, = I understand it's going to be my job to do that. But when I see a = forecast there from one or more analysts, I also have the right, IMO, to = presume they (the analysts) did their job correctly, at least in terms = of reading factual material like 10Q/K reports, and news releases. Where = I accept their error is in trying to forecast the future. But the = presence of a forecast, even if it appears too high, should give me = assurance I don't have to go read a stack of historical reports unless I = have questions. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Katherine Malm=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 7:17 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] PSFT: Accounting Shenanigans Tom, I have accidentally deleted your last comment on this issue, so = this is a continuation of the discussion. After reading your comments about analysts doing what is expected of = them, trusting the DGO to use diligent researchers, etc, a few thoughts = came to mind. First regards earnings estimates. This is where the analysts are = supposed to do the leg work for us by pouring through the financials, = interviewing the company, etc etc. But this is only *one* piece of = information in the DGO charts and only *one* of many hurdles that a = stock candidate must pass to be considered a buyable candidate under = CANSLIM guidelines. I use the forward growth rate as the single most = important hurdle when considering a candidate. If it doesn't pass = minimum standards, I don't even look at the stock. So far, I've not met = many forecasters who *under* forecast anything, so meeting a minimum = hurdle doesn't lose any candidates. But what it *does* do is let = marginal companies with marginal businesses and high expectations by the = analyst community past the gate. This is the first reason that I think = due diligence is necessary. During this process, I am looking at the = business to see if the estimates pass the test of reasonableness. I = don't take anybody at their word when it comes to forecasting. I've = dealt with too many manufacturing businesses to know better. Second has to do with past fundamentals. When DGO reports, they use = the proforma numbers NOT the GAAP numbers. In other words, they delete = all the one time and extraordinary charges just like everybody else = before they report and calculate the resultant QoQ and YoY growth rates. = Every once in a while, they can't take the extraordinary items out per = their procedure, so they put a little mark next to the numbers to let = you know this. BUT, they don't adjust any of the growth rates as a = result. So here we already have a big discrepancy. I first became keenly = aware of this when I owned JDSU in '99-'00. I'm looking at the GAAP = numbers and seeing red, looking at the proforma numbers and seeing = green. Not only that, but the difference was *huge.* So, again, due = diligence and digging through the 10K's and 10Q's to sniff out the = quality of earnings and revenues is a must in my mind. Also, any = shenanigans around balance sheets would only show up in the ROE numbers = reported in DGO and/or in the cashflow vs. EPS comparisons. When these = numbers don't jibe...I'm off to the 10K's with red pen in hand. In all, = this is the very reason that I do not mine for candidates based on DGO = data. I *especially* don't trust the EPS rankings and I pretty much = ignore the SMR in favor of doing my own assessment of revenues, margins, = earnings, ROE and cashflow. It takes time, but I think in the end it's = worth it. It certainly doesn't mean I'm an expert at it, but at least = I've put forth the effort. In the end, I have only myself to blame and = not some 27 year old kid getting paid $1m/year to have lunch with CEO's. Speaking of which....here's the due diligence blunder of the year... = MCAF...will its lessons never end? After some follow-up discussions here on my MCAF selling blunder, I = wrote to MCAF's IR department asking them exactly how they generated = income from the "Windows XP tie-in" that was so heavily touted about the = time MCAF started its run. This I should have done *while* I was doing = my DD, not in post analysis. Here is the IR reply to my inquiry: My question: It was my understanding that MCAF was the security service of choice = under the Microsoft Windows XP OS, yet a friend of mine recently = purchased a Dell with XP and it came with Symantec's product installed. = How, specifically does the tie in work and how does it generate revenues = for MCAF? Dear Ms Malm: McAfee.com is a tab in the XP version of Windows Instant Messenger. = Windows Messenger has a large community of users and by putting our = services in front of so many users; it will translate to subscribers, = which will translate to revenue. Dell has chosen the Symantec product to bundle on its computers. Regards, Marisa Lewis, Investor Relations Manager Well...I'll mark this one for the "journal of duh", as one of my = friends likes to call it. --Katherine - ------=_NextPart_000_0229_01C1A50D.BF327F00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Tom,
 
I don't think we're really all that far apart here. I don't mean to = imply=20 that I'm doing enough financial homework in the 10K's and 10Q's to build = an EPS=20 estimate from the ground up. I can think of at least 100 other = things I'd=20 rather do in my spare time. So far, I haven't talked anyone into doing = this=20 *for* me for free, either! What I am doing when I take a peek at the SEC = filings=20 is a "test of reasonableness." What are the past trends in EPS/Rev? How = do they=20 recognize income? What do they have in the works that would blow holes = in the=20 estimates? Is there anything like financial litigation pending that = could=20 adversely impact the estimates? Is management forthright about what is = working=20 and not working right now or are they unreasonably rosy in their = assessment? (I=20 really hate that) Do they have significant reserves or receivables that = seem out=20 of line? etc. These are quick peeks and I devote limited time unless = there's=20 something that jumps off the page and hollers "pay attention"! All in = all, even=20 if this quick review lasted 4 minutes, I'd say it's worth it. That said, = stocks=20 have to pass a lot of hurdles for me to get this far, so the number of = stocks=20 requiring financial review are actually quite small. I'd say I = do five for=20 every one I end up buying.
 
Katherine
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Tom = Worley=20
Sent: Thursday, January 24, = 2002 6:41=20 PM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] = Accounting=20 Shenanigans

Katherine, up to a point I agree with you. But = I pay a=20 respectable amount of money for the services (and data) of DGO. If I = find that=20 data is wrong, I complain. I am paying them this money to collect in = one place=20 a lot of data, and I expect it to be correct.
 
It would be different if I was using some free = service=20 on the net, then it's worth just what I am paying, and my = responsibility to=20 check the data.
 
When I look at a DGO chart, and there is no = earnings=20 estimates given, I understand it's going to be my job to do that. But = when I=20 see a forecast there from one or more analysts, I also have the right, = IMO, to=20 presume they (the analysts) did their job correctly, at least in terms = of=20 reading factual material like 10Q/K reports, and news releases. Where = I accept=20 their error is in trying to forecast the future. But the presence of a = forecast, even if it appears too high, should give me assurance I = don't have=20 to go read a stack of historical reports unless I have = questions.
 
Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 TexWorley
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Katherine=20 Malm
Sent: Thursday, January 24, = 2002 7:17=20 PM
Subject: [CANSLIM] PSFT: = Accounting=20 Shenanigans

Tom, I have accidentally deleted your last comment on this = issue, so=20 this is a continuation of the discussion.
 
After reading your comments about analysts doing what is = expected of=20 them, trusting the DGO to use diligent researchers, etc, a few = thoughts came=20 to mind.
 
First regards earnings estimates. This is where the analysts = are=20 supposed to do the leg work for us by pouring through the = financials,=20 interviewing the company, etc etc. But this is only *one* piece of=20 information in the DGO charts and only *one* of many hurdles that a = stock=20 candidate must pass to be considered a buyable candidate under = CANSLIM=20 guidelines. I use the forward growth rate as the single most = important=20 hurdle when considering a candidate. If it doesn't pass minimum = standards, I=20 don't even look at the stock. So far, I've not met many forecasters = who=20 *under* forecast anything, so meeting a minimum hurdle doesn't lose = any=20 candidates. But what it *does* do is let marginal companies with = marginal=20 businesses and high expectations by the analyst community past the = gate.=20 This is the first reason that I think due diligence is necessary. = During=20 this process, I am looking at the business to see if the estimates = pass the=20 test of reasonableness. I don't take anybody at their word when it = comes to=20 forecasting. I've dealt with too many manufacturing businesses to = know=20 better.
 
Second has to do with past fundamentals. When DGO reports, they = use the=20 proforma numbers NOT the GAAP numbers. In other words, they delete = all the=20 one time and extraordinary charges just like everybody else before = they=20 report and calculate the resultant QoQ and YoY growth rates. Every = once in a=20 while, they can't take the extraordinary items out per their = procedure, so=20 they put a little mark next to the numbers to let you know this. = BUT, they=20 don't adjust any of the growth rates as a result. So here we already = have a=20 big discrepancy. I first became keenly aware of this when I owned = JDSU in=20 '99-'00. I'm looking at the GAAP numbers and seeing red, looking at = the=20 proforma numbers and seeing green. Not only that, but the difference = was=20 *huge.* So, again, due diligence and digging through the 10K's and = 10Q's to=20 sniff out the quality of earnings and revenues is a must in my mind. = Also,=20 any shenanigans around balance sheets would only show up in the ROE = numbers=20 reported in DGO and/or in the cashflow vs. EPS comparisons. When = these=20 numbers don't jibe...I'm off to the 10K's with red pen in hand. In = all, this=20 is the very reason that I do not mine for candidates based on DGO = data. I=20 *especially* don't trust the EPS rankings and I pretty much ignore = the SMR=20 in favor of doing my own assessment of revenues, margins, earnings, = ROE and=20 cashflow. It takes time, but I think in the end it's worth it. It = certainly=20 doesn't mean I'm an expert at it, but at least I've put forth the = effort. In=20 the end, I have only myself to blame and not some 27 year old kid = getting=20 paid $1m/year to have lunch with CEO's.
 
Speaking of which....here's the due diligence blunder of the = year...=20 MCAF...will its lessons never end?
 
After some follow-up discussions here on my MCAF selling = blunder, I=20 wrote to MCAF's IR department asking them exactly how they generated = income=20 from the "Windows XP tie-in" that was so heavily touted about the = time MCAF=20 started its run. This I should have done *while* I was doing my DD, = not in=20 post analysis. Here is the IR reply to my inquiry:
 
My question:

It was my understanding = that MCAF was=20 the security service of choice under the Microsoft Windows XP OS, = yet a=20 friend of mine recently purchased a Dell with XP and it came with = Symantec's=20 product installed. How, specifically does the tie in work and how = does it=20 generate revenues for MCAF?

 
Dear Ms=20 Malm:

McAfee.com is a tab=20 in the XP version of Windows Instant Messenger. Windows Messenger = has a=20 large community of users and by putting our services in front of so = many=20 users; it will translate to subscribers, which will translate to=20 revenue.

 Dell has = chosen the=20 Symantec product to bundle on its = computers.

Regards,

Marisa=20 Lewis, Investor=20 Relations Manager

Well...I'll=20 mark this one for the "journal of duh", as one of my friends likes = to call=20 it. =20 - --Katherine

- ------=_NextPart_000_0229_01C1A50D.BF327F00-- - - - -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: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 21:49:26 EST From: Spencer48@aol.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Accounting Shenanigans Tom or Katherine: I understand-as you state-that "pro forma" numbers do not include one time charges. But do they include one time transactions that generate income? For example, DGO uses pro forma numbers in identifying the earnings of each company whose stock DGO displays. So, then, if the company (for instance, an Internet Company) sold extra land (for example) at a loss, this would not be included in earnings, as I understand the term"pro forma"-as used in accounting . But how about if it sold the land at a gain? Would it be included in the earnings reported as pro forma earnings, even though the gain was not associated with its business, and it was a one time gain? jans In a message dated 1/24/2002 7:43:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, stkguru@netside.net writes: << When DGO reports, they use the proforma numbers NOT the GAAP numbers. In other words, they delete all the one time and extraordinary charges just like everybody else... >> - - - -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: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 20:54:56 -0600 From: "Katherine Malm" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Accounting Shenanigans This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_026F_01C1A519.60E57360 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi jans, Here's the answer to your question straight from DGO customer support: "When stocks have non-recurring gains/losses, our research departments normalize earnings by excluding these items." I've saved this one in my investing folder for quite some time, so glad = it came in handy! In all, whether it's a revenue or expense, if it is an = extraordinary or one time event, it gets excluded from the pro-forma = calculations. Katherine ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Spencer48@aol.com=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 8:49 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Accounting Shenanigans Tom or Katherine: I understand-as you state-that "pro forma" numbers do not include = one=20 time charges. But do they include one time transactions that generate = income? =20 For example, DGO uses pro forma numbers in identifying the = earnings of=20 each company whose stock DGO displays. So, then, if the company (for=20 instance, an Internet Company) sold extra land (for example) at a = loss, this=20 would not be included in earnings, as I understand the term"pro = forma"-as=20 used in accounting . But how about if it sold the land at a gain? = Would it=20 be included in the earnings reported as pro forma earnings, even = though the=20 gain was not associated with its business, and it was a one time gain? jans In a message dated 1/24/2002 7:43:13 PM Eastern Standard Time,=20 stkguru@netside.net writes: << When DGO reports, they use the proforma numbers NOT the GAAP = numbers. In=20 other words, they delete all the one time and extraordinary charges = just like=20 everybody else... >> - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - ------=_NextPart_000_026F_01C1A519.60E57360 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi jans,
 
Here's the answer to your question straight from DGO customer=20 support:
 
"When stocks have non-recurring gains/losses, our research=20 departments
normalize earnings by excluding these items."
I've saved this one in my investing folder for quite some time, so = glad it=20 came in handy! In all, whether it's a revenue or expense, if it is an=20 extraordinary or one time event, it gets excluded from the pro-forma=20 calculations.
 
Katherine
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Spencer48@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, January 24, = 2002 8:49=20 PM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] = Accounting=20 Shenanigans

Tom or Katherine:

     I=20 understand-as you state-that "pro forma" numbers do not include one =
time=20 charges.  But do they include one time transactions that generate =
income? 

     For example, DGO = uses pro=20 forma numbers in identifying the earnings of
each company whose = stock DGO=20 displays.  So, then, if the company (for
instance, an = Internet=20 Company) sold extra land (for example) at a loss, this
would not = be=20 included in earnings, as I understand the term"pro forma"-as
used = in=20 accounting .  But how about if it sold the land at a gain?  = Would it=20
be included in the earnings reported as pro forma earnings, even = though=20 the
gain was not associated with its business, and it was a one = time=20 gain?

jans


In a message dated 1/24/2002 7:43:13 PM = Eastern=20 Standard Time,
stkguru@netside.net=20 writes:

<<  When DGO reports, they use the proforma = numbers=20 NOT the GAAP numbers. In
other words, they delete all the one time = and=20 extraordinary charges just like
everybody else... =20 >>

-
-To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
-In= the=20 email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
-"unsubscribe = canslim".  Do=20 not use quotes in your email.
- ------=_NextPart_000_026F_01C1A519.60E57360-- - - - -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, 25 Jan 2002 01:57:22 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Mr. Greenspan Dave, sounds like a book I need to read. As I know you realize, I have long advocated some understanding of the "big picture" when assessing "M". IMO, that includes things like economics and how certain reports can influence the market, what's happening in the world, and the impact and significance of individual events and individuals like Mr. G. The danger of this, and the difficulty, is that the markets don't work in a vacuum. It's no longer earnings alone (actually earnings expectations for the future). Nor is it just investor or consumer sentiment. Whether you buy individual stocks, or mutual funds, they can be affected by the most perverse and diverse reasons, including the spin put on things by the media airheads. I still regularly think I am smarter than the "market", and get taught some humility. So far, my ego is still surviving. Whether you read Mr. G's book to your new and precious son, or HTMMIS, or sing lullabies, just enjoy the quiet time. It won't last!! Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Cameron" To: Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 7:55 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Mr. Greenspan > Greetings all, > > I have just recently checked out (from my local library) a book > entitled Greenspan: The Man Behind Money (copyright in 2000). > Author is Justin Martin. > > I'm finding it a fascinating read; and will purchase the book. It > gives good insights into Alan Greenspan's life, background, beliefs, > obfuscations, and helps to make sense of what he says. > > Some top economists who've worked with Greenspan are qouted. Martin > Anderson and Murray Weidenbaum read and critiqued it. Former > President Ford is quoted. etc. etc. > > A good example of a learning which can make one money is as follows: > The "irrational exuberance" comments are talked about (a day in > which I went to 100% cash and sacrificed several hundred dollars at > the open - which bounced back the next day). Interestingly enough, > the CANSLIM rules would have forced one to cash (as I was) if > followed religiously on that day. I remember distinctly (that after > I'd already sold), the evening of those comments, Tom Worley posted > to the group that based on his extensive experience following > Greenspan's comments, he recommended to hold fast to everyone. I'd > not only sold, I'd posted that it would be a good day to cut your > losses - and protect your gains. After this read, if I'd known then > what I know now about Greenspan, I wouldn't have sold. > > Finally, as a postscript, I have more time for reading - less time > for investing. My second child was born on Monday; my wife just got > back from the hospital. I've been reading "Greenspan: The Man > Behind Money" at 2 AM feedings... Maybe I understand it better that > way. > > Dave > > --- Tom Worley wrote: > > In case anyone missed it, Mr. G speaks to Congress today at 10 AM > > on the US economy, and is expected to be upbeat, clarifying his > > comments from his Jan 11 speech in San Francisco. > > > > Best indications I can see are that there will not be a further cut > > in the Fed rate on 1/30/02. Hopefully today will clarify that, and > > prepare the market for that. A bullish perspective on a recovering > > economy is likely, IMO, to more than offset any disappointment at > > not getting another 25 BP cut. > > > > Tom Worley > > stkguru@netside.net > > AIM: TexWorley > > > > > ===== > Dave Cameron > dfcameron@yahoo.com > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! > http://auctions.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: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 07:34:22 +0000 From: "stock oper8or" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DFXI vs. JEC--Faulty handle? Never heard a reversal called a tail before but I like it. The loose action of this stock's price and volume in addition to today's high volume minor reversal is a bit of a negative. It almost had an outside day (higher high and lower low than prior day) as well, but at least it did not close near its low. If it had, it would have been a signal to sell at least part of one's position. But as you say, as long as it holds that $32 support area... >From: "Katherine Malm" >Reply-To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >To: >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DFXI vs. JEC--Faulty handle? >Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 12:58:19 -0600 > >Thanks stockoper8or and Tom for your input. > >I am watching DFXI with great interest as a "case study." The last couple >of days seemed to indicate strength as the stock bounced again off the >pivot. Today, however, the action is forming the dreaded tail on fairly >high volume. Will be interesting to see how it plays out. > >Katherine > ----- Original Message ----- > From: stock oper8or > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 6:34 PM > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DFXI vs. JEC--Faulty handle? > > > I thought DFXI looked somewhat sloppy in the handle but not enough to > preculde its purchase: There were 5 down days on above average volume, >the > pattern was wide and loose, never really formed a downward wedge and the > volume did not really "dry up". One of the best indicators of a chart's > quality is its weekly chart. I believe you want to see what looks like >a > real handle in the weekly chart. On the weekly of DFXI you can see the >wide > action of the handle and it never really looked like a classic handle, >but > more like a pennant or triangle. > > Neverthess the breakout was very strong, gapping out on more than double > average daily volume. It could be argued that the strength of the >breakout > outweighed the imperfect action in the handle. All in all, this was not >a > perfect chart but was probably worth buying as it had such strong >qualities > other than the non-ideal price-volume action in the handle. While it >has > given back all its gains plus a little bit, it is still holding right in >the > pivot area. If it holds at the lows of the past 2 days, I would say it >is > worth holding. If I owned it (which I don't), I would put my stop >pretty > close to those intraday lows. > > By comparison JEC (during October) was so wide and loose that even >though > it's "handle?" was downward sloping and the volume did dry up from Oct > 18-20, the action was just not constructive whatsoever. There was as >much > or more down volume as up volume coming up the right side and the stock >had > multiple intraday reversals on above average volume. When it did try to > "break out" the volume barely exceeded average. This was definitely not >a > buy by any stretch of the imagination. > > > >From: "Katherine Malm" > >Reply-To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > >To: > >Subject: [CANSLIM] DFXI vs. JEC--Faulty handle? > >Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 07:50:53 -0600 > > > >DFXI's chart has been bothering me for some time. An Investor's Corner > >article dated 12/17/01 used JEC as an example of a "zig-zag" faulty >handle. > >What do you think, could DFXI have the same faulty handle? > > > >http://WallStreet-LLC.com/pub/DFXI_011802.jpg > >http://WallStreet-LLC.com/pub/JEC_011802.jpg > > > >Katherine > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.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. _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx - - - -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, 25 Jan 2002 14:14:53 +0100 From: Andreas Himmelreich Subject: AW: [CANSLIM] Intro: Ben Chilcote Welcome Ben, I just joined the group some months ago and I learn a ton ... Do not be shy, ask questions and give your opinion. I always did that and nobody through me out so far ;-) Andreas Just let you know: I am German, so my spelling is not the best ... > -----Ursprungliche Nachricht----- > Von: Ben Chilcote [SMTP:cbenj@pennswoods.net] > Gesendet am: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:25 PM > An: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Betreff: [CANSLIM] Intro: Ben Chilcote > > Hello everyone, > > My name is Ben and I live in rural central Pennsylvania about 30 miles west of State College, home of Penn State. > I am an engineering specialist (CAD operator) working out of my home. I have been investing online since December of 1999. I only became aware of IBD about 6 months ago and now am a subscriber to the IBD newspaper. I have read both of Bill O'neil's books and am still learning about CANSLIM investing. > > Looking forward to my time in the CANSLIM discussion group. > > > Ben > << Datei: ATT00008.htm >> - - - -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 #2080 ****************************** 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.