From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #257 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 Wednesday, May 27 1998 Volume 02 : Number 257 In this issue: [CANSLIM] Tom and Jerry [CANSLIM] Re: M and Support [CANSLIM] Message from Daily Graphs Online [CANSLIM] Cycles. [CANSLIM] NASDAQ Stocks with Greatest % Rise in Volume [CANSLIM] "M" [CANSLIM] Market Close Re: [CANSLIM] "M" Re: [CANSLIM] "M" Re: EDAC (was Re: [CANSLIM] My current watch list) Re: [CANSLIM] Market Close Re: [CANSLIM] Market Close Re: [CANSLIM] Market Close [CANSLIM] Current Economics and "M" (noise) [CANSLIM] NASDAQ Litigation Re: [CANSLIM] NASDAQ Litigation Re: [CANSLIM] Market Close Re: [CANSLIM] Market Close Re: [CANSLIM] TC2000 Intraday [CANSLIM] Asia Re: [CANSLIM] Market Close Re: [CANSLIM] NASDAQ Litigation Re: EDAC (was Re: [CANSLIM] My current watch list) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 17:27:11 -0400 From: Jeffry White <"postwhit@sover.net"@sover.net> Subject: [CANSLIM] Tom and Jerry I responded to Tom privately just a minute ago, then I thought I'd post the response to the group and give this hoorah a well deserved rest. Hope not to offend anyone, and please note that I proofed it and modestly revised it from pure train of thought before posting to the group. I also deleted a few back and forths, including an agreement to try and eliminate the fire of my tongue, among some other requests of Tom. Now, on with the show: > Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 11:38:46 -0400 > From: Tom Worley > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Farmer > > I guess discussion isn't ended until both parties agree it's ended, > and you had made some comments on how I viewed your approach to > CANSLIM picks. I simply wanted to point out I can only "presume" based > on what you post. I'm not sure how you've overlooked the stocks I posted as examples of my work with Connie Mack's 3/7/10 EMA and Slow Stochastic crossovers during February, but no big deal. > To disagree, I have gone thru periods of actively trading options, > altho I never did end up playing index futures. Made a lot of money at > it, nice way to leverage capital, but won't go back to it until the > market is in a clear bull trend again. I do hold the Series 4 license > (Options Principal), so I do know something about trading options > since this is a difficult license to get and few brokers have it. Disagree? I don't know to which comment this refers. > One lesson I learned over the past 10 years as a licensed broker is > that options traders, when that is the bulk or entirety of their > portfolio, are much more speculators than investors. What you wrote in > this response is the first comment I can recall on your methodology of > picking stocks. I have many times indicated that new highs are my > primary source, others in the group use Telescan, Quotes Plus, etc. > But even what you wrote still does not clarify very much how you find > winners. And I don't recall you sharing your "winners" with the group, > thus I can't even judge your "picking" quality from past results. New highs, BigCharts Momentum scans, IBD. Not looking to have you "judge" my "picking quality", I would consider anyone's feedback on my stock selection the rudest, most disquieting form of "noise". That's why I don't read others picks beyond a simple punch in of the chart. If I find it, it passes my review, I find a good entry point, I need no comment or feedback. The market will tell me all I need to know, whether right or wrong. I track my past trades and study them, win or lose. That way, I find my mistakes, and try to avoid them in the future. > You mention using price and volume indicators along with "sentiment". > But in my opinion, sentiment is often, if not virtually almost always, > a composite of all that "noise" you so condemn. And the purest form, > that of the bullish/bearish indicators, is only one of the many > factors that WON includes in his interpretation of "M". In Chapter 7 > of HTMMIS, he also covers "Congress lacks real economic knowledge; FRB > Discount Rate changes are influential; The Feds kill the 1981 economy; > Washington causes the 1962 Breakout; The effects of news events on the > market; and The best Monetary (money) Indicators". All of these you > seem to dismiss as "noise", yet WON considers them important enough to > talk about them, along with many other parts of "M". He also gives > enough importance to economics in today's market (as opposed to ten > years ago when he wrote HTMMIS) to dedicate a full page plus in IBD > every day. Without a doubt sentiment is the result of "noise" and as you know, historically, at extremes, a reliable contrarian indicator. Thus, the "noise", when at it's extreme, is WRONG. Need I say more? None of the other "factors" you list from HTMMIS are capable of objective utilization in conjunction with price and volume, so one then has to "decide" whether Monica or Saddam will be "noise" worth listening to. I'm not that smart, don't have interest or time to study every passing glance between Bubba and his aids. And, frankly, I am comfortable with my "M" focused on those components (coupled with failing leadership). Why would I want to clutter it up trying to figure out whether "Congress lacks real economic knowlege"? I'd rather play with my kids or tend my animals and gardens, or work/job for that matter. Just not interested in it, don't think it is necessary and find it a distraction. > One reason I didn't respond to some of your questions is that I have > fully answered them at least once before while you were a member (e.g. > why I sold EPIQ when I did, and stated at the time I thought it would > go even higher, which it did). A second reason is simply your > sarcastic and confrontational manner. Your questions were more often > stated as an accusation, rather than a thirst for knowledge and > understanding. And had you bothered checking my picks for my watch > list (which is a watch list, not a buy now list), you would have seen > they consistently meet most if not all of CANSLI, and you and I are > not likely to ever agree on whether they met the "M". The fact that I > only looked at stocks under $20 doesn't, even by WON standards, make > them "cheap" or non-CANSLIM. Even the ones under $12, which is the > threshold that WON professes but also violates, still showed excellent > CANSLIM characteristics, and many made me money. I have thrice lauded you for your screening prowess on CANSLI- stocks, based upon some secretive checking of your picks. > You are correct, altho I made some nice money on both SOCR and MSON, I > should not have held a partial position. That was a classic reversion > to my fundamentalist nature developed over 40 years of long term > investing. These stocks were excellent CANSLIM candidates when I first > posted them, a number of group members also played them and made > money. A few made the same mistake I did and held them too long, and > is one of the causes that took me back to my version of "pure CANSLIM" > over six months ago. And if either were to suddenly jump over $20 next > week because of a cash buyout, it still wouldn't make my actions and > decisions justifiable by CANSLIM. But what's your point, I admitted > publicly in the group that I made this mistake a long time ago. This > isn't news. My point was: Why weren't you out of the market in late October 1997? JERRY - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 09:11:52 -0700 (PDT) From: dbphoenix Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: M and Support <> FWIW, there is considerable support for the NASDAQ at the 1700 level. There is support for the NYSE at 558, then again at 548. For the Dow, 8796 (after that, 8700). - --Db _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 15:05:14 -0700 From: Gail Lara Subject: [CANSLIM] Message from Daily Graphs Online This is in regards to a topic of discussion in your group on May 20th, 1998. We have acknowledged and understand your concerns about storing your registration information on your hard drive, and have remedied the situation. If you have downloaded the Daily Graphs software, and have ran the registration program prior to May 23rd, e-mail custserv@dailygraphs.com. You will receive an immediate reply stating which files need to be removed from your PC to ensure your privacy. Be careful to only remove the files stated, so your service is not interrupted. In addition, we have modified the registration program so that anyone who downloads the Daily Graphs software and runs the registration program on or after May 23rd, will not have their credit card or password information stored on their PC once they register. They will also be given the option before they submit their information, to decide whether or not they want to save personal information such as address, phone number etc. If they choose not to, they will be required to re-enter all of their information anytime they make a modification to their profile (i.e. changing an e-mail address). Feel free to e-mail custserv@dailygraphs.com anytime a future concern may arise. We hope you all are enjoying using our service. Daily Graphs Online Design Team - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 16:09:11 -0400 From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: [CANSLIM] Cycles. Members-- Several indices run in two-three and five day cycles. Stocks also are amenable to the same cycles. These are just some general observations. I have used the five day cycle to trade Diamonds [DIA] a few times this year. This is how it works, and tomorrow [or at the close of today] would be the time to initiate a trade on DIA. Enter DIA into a 3-mos BigCharts with the SloSto in the bottom screen; print this. Print out a second chart with Volume+ in the bottom screen. Cut the top of this chart off so that the Volume+ is directly below the SloSto with the edges aligned. Draw a couple of trendlines across the tops of the SloSto; draw three or so across the bottoms. Notice how frequently after a top in the SloSto there follows five down days. Notice how frequently after a bottom there follows five up days. I don't have the bottom trendline for the SloSto to bounce from because the line was broken yesterday, but the five day cycle is a strong cycle. Tomorrow has a good probability of being an up day and therefore a day to initiate a trade. To be a bit aggressive, I may enter a trade near the market's close. As I write, the Dow is down only 17 points and the NASDAQ is less than a point down after being down 32. I would prefer that the Dow end down 50 or so. This very powerful recovery from over 160 down on the Dow will make me rethink the size of my trade. I have lost a lot of juice [$143 on a 100 shares of DIA: $160 minus $17]; but there is, I believe, some money still to be made. You can short DIA without having to wait for a down tick. You can trade the S&P 500 [SPY] as you can the Dow. Connie Mack - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 16:45:09 -0400 From: Larry Horn Subject: [CANSLIM] NASDAQ Stocks with Greatest % Rise in Volume I just collected some data from IBD's NASDAQ Stocks with Greatest % Rise in Volume. I entered the data between now and when my subscription started on 2/3/98 (It also includes 1/23/98). I included only those cos with EPS and RS at least 80. I was hoping that I could use it as a starting point to see what happened to the cos after they were listed there. I was planning on looking at them on BigCharts. I haven't yet been able to examine it but I hope it helps me see pivot points better. The spreadsheet includes EPS, RS, A/D, PE, Float, and % Rise in Volume. It is ranked by % Rise in Volume now but it might be handier if you rank it by co since many cos are listed frequently. I thought others might be interested in it also. I typed the data in myself so there it wouldn't surprise me if there are some typos. You can get it at www.duke.edu/~clhorn/canslim. Just save it as ANYNAME.csv and you can open it in your spreadsheet. Enjoy. Larry Horn - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 17:46:16 -0400 From: Jeffry White <"postwhit@sover.net"@sover.net> Subject: [CANSLIM] "M" > it wouldn't > surprise me to see the type of bottoming action which *can* precede an > intermediate move to the up side. A "gap" down open followed by a close > which is roughly unchanged to higher on increased volume will start me > counting from 3-10. This type of gap *can* signal kind of an "Oh sh*t" > panic by the "weak hands", and the reversal is a consequence of shaking > the last of the sellers out. Thar' she blows, the action in the Nasdaq is just the type of bottom from which to count for follow through. Haven't checked the other indices, but will do so and post. What a grand flush it was, huh? Hard to see it producing a late January style follow through with new leadership emergence, but I'm listening. BTW, Tom, welcome back. I was just teasing about the tenor of our discussions, although I stand by my other wordly comment!!! Jeffry - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 14:53:16 PDT From: "Charles Morgan" Subject: [CANSLIM] Market Close Everybody, It was nice to see the market make a comeback near the end of the day. But, I still think the bleeding isn't over. The decliners led advancers by quite a margin at the close and it has been that way for over a week. Definitely visible in the mutual funds. Makes me glad I'm in cash sitting on the sidelines :) What's that sound? Crash and burn! No, not my mutual funds, anything but my mutual funds. I guess I didn't miss out after all :( Chuck ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 18:57:25 -0400 From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] "M" Jeffry are you looking for any signal from the volume on a day like today? Just curious if price alone was enough in your experience or observations. By the way, I have no idea what volume was today. Frank Wolynski At 17:46 5/27/98 -0400, Jeffry White wrote: >> it wouldn't >> surprise me to see the type of bottoming action which *can* precede an >> intermediate move to the up side. A "gap" down open followed by a close >> which is roughly unchanged to higher on increased volume will start me >> counting from 3-10. This type of gap *can* signal kind of an "Oh sh*t" >> panic by the "weak hands", and the reversal is a consequence of shaking >> the last of the sellers out. > > >Thar' she blows, the action in the Nasdaq is just the type of bottom >from which to count for follow through. Haven't checked the other >indices, but will do so and post. What a grand flush it was, huh? Hard >to see it producing a late January style follow through with new >leadership emergence, but I'm listening. > >BTW, Tom, welcome back. I was just teasing about the tenor of our >discussions, although I stand by my other wordly comment!!! > >Jeffry > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 18:57:25 -0400 From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] "M" Jeffry are you looking for any signal from the volume on a day like today? Just curious if price alone was enough in your experience or observations. By the way, I have no idea what volume was today. Frank Wolynski At 17:46 5/27/98 -0400, Jeffry White wrote: >> it wouldn't >> surprise me to see the type of bottoming action which *can* precede an >> intermediate move to the up side. A "gap" down open followed by a close >> which is roughly unchanged to higher on increased volume will start me >> counting from 3-10. This type of gap *can* signal kind of an "Oh sh*t" >> panic by the "weak hands", and the reversal is a consequence of shaking >> the last of the sellers out. > > >Thar' she blows, the action in the Nasdaq is just the type of bottom >from which to count for follow through. Haven't checked the other >indices, but will do so and post. What a grand flush it was, huh? Hard >to see it producing a late January style follow through with new >leadership emergence, but I'm listening. > >BTW, Tom, welcome back. I was just teasing about the tenor of our >discussions, although I stand by my other wordly comment!!! > >Jeffry > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 19:00:39 -0400 From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: Re: EDAC (was Re: [CANSLIM] My current watch list) Tom-- Damn, I'm late with my advice. Have a friend who, when he gets in your enviabale position, goes short the number of shares he has long. Then when the air clears, he decides what to do. My father told me that he once shorted against the box his whole portfolio. Connie Mack Tom Worley wrote: > Thanks, Connie, a couple of these are at the top of my watch list, > just waiting to pull the trigger. But the burning question for me is > when do I get off this gravy train I call EDAC??????? Blasted thing > just won't give me an excuse to take profits, probably getting too > greedy, but I'm still waiting for a signal (up another dollar and > change today for another new high, despite the mkt being down > sharply). I'm already up over 70% in under two months with no sign it > wants to quit. Opinions welcomed. > > Tom W > > -----Original Message----- > From: Connie Mack Rea > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Date: Tuesday, May 26, 1998 8:10 PM > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] My current watch list > > >Morning Tom-- > > > >Let's get back to the old salt lick and make some money. > > > >Four of your picks [INSUA, MDLK, TMBS, and VARL] have varying > degrees of > >OBV/MF characteristics. The more conjunction between CS and OBV/MF, > the > >better for members. > > > > - - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 19:05:01 -0400 From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Market Close The variety of opinion was interesting on CNBC today. One who said, buy this dip, it's a bull! One who said, it ain't over yet. And another who said, buy dem bonds! I also heard, "earnings will pick up", "we have decoupled" from the foreign freefalls and "scooping up the bargains!". When I refer to noise in my messages, this is the sort of thing I am referring to. Not the well crafted and to the point economic messages we grew accustomed to from Tom. Miss those Tom! What we think isn't as important as what is happening and our ability to withdraw the truth from the hype and the emotion. Frank Wolynski At 14:53 5/27/98 PDT, Charles Morgan wrote: >Everybody, >It was nice to see the market make a comeback near the end of the day. >But, I still think the bleeding isn't over. The decliners led advancers >by quite a margin at the close and it has been that way for over a week. >Definitely visible in the mutual funds. > >Makes me glad I'm in cash sitting on the sidelines :) > >What's that sound? Crash and burn! No, not my mutual funds, anything but >my mutual funds. I guess I didn't miss out after all :( > >Chuck > >______________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 19:05:01 -0400 From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Market Close The variety of opinion was interesting on CNBC today. One who said, buy this dip, it's a bull! One who said, it ain't over yet. And another who said, buy dem bonds! I also heard, "earnings will pick up", "we have decoupled" from the foreign freefalls and "scooping up the bargains!". When I refer to noise in my messages, this is the sort of thing I am referring to. Not the well crafted and to the point economic messages we grew accustomed to from Tom. Miss those Tom! What we think isn't as important as what is happening and our ability to withdraw the truth from the hype and the emotion. Frank Wolynski At 14:53 5/27/98 PDT, Charles Morgan wrote: >Everybody, >It was nice to see the market make a comeback near the end of the day. >But, I still think the bleeding isn't over. The decliners led advancers >by quite a margin at the close and it has been that way for over a week. >Definitely visible in the mutual funds. > >Makes me glad I'm in cash sitting on the sidelines :) > >What's that sound? Crash and burn! No, not my mutual funds, anything but >my mutual funds. I guess I didn't miss out after all :( > >Chuck > >______________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 19:51:59 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Market Close What do you want from them, Frank? After all for the most part they are simply reading a script written by someone who has to sell a story every day. And rarely does good news sell as well as bad news. Keep your listening public confused, and they're more likely to keep tuning in in hopes of sorting out their confusion. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: Frank V. Wolynski To: canslim@lists.xmission.com ; canslim@xmission.com Date: Wednesday, May 27, 1998 7:01 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Market Close >The variety of opinion was interesting on CNBC today. >One who said, buy this dip, it's a bull! >One who said, it ain't over yet. >And another who said, buy dem bonds! > >I also heard, "earnings will pick up", "we have decoupled" from the foreign >freefalls and "scooping up the bargains!". > >When I refer to noise in my messages, this is the sort of thing I am >referring to. Not the well crafted and to the point economic messages we >grew accustomed to from Tom. Miss those Tom! > >What we think isn't as important as what is happening and our ability to >withdraw the truth from the hype and the emotion. > >Frank Wolynski > - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 20:36:32 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] Current Economics and "M" (noise) In response to Frank W's kind words (incidentally my older brother's name is Frank!) just wanted to say that at this moment, I ain't got a clue, but do have some thoughts. Yeah, I know, heresy, I ALWAYS got an opinion. The problem is, over the past several weeks, most indexes have deterioriated even further into serious oversold territory. All the logical indicators continue to point towards a correction such as the advance/decline, new highs/lows, etc. Offsetting this is the absence of strong downside volume while upside volume continues to chug along at its sedate pace. Short interest seems to be stable, which suggests some serious accumulation by the funds mgrs to cover all the new money continuing to flood the mkt, however I am not convinced these fresh purchases will stay in the portfolio if the mkt acts like it wants to break sharply upward. Today's reversal is most impressive, however I heard that it was almost entirely due to a single buy side computer program kicking in. If true, that diminishes its value and significance somewhat to me. I would prefer a "sentiment" change that we have finally "seen the bottom". I am growingly concerned about the situation in Asia and Latin America. One of the harder hit areas today were the financials (banks and brokerage houses), which I warned might happen if S. America deteriorates. This has been our fallback leadership group off and on for years, after the tech stocks, which continue to be battered by everything from Asian slumps in demand to MSFT's legal problems. And AMAT's news of voluntary layoffs and worker force cutbacks due to weakening demand in the chip sector doesn't bode well for those related groups either. The economic reports currently are giving mixed signals whether there is any real slowing in economic growth rates and/or employment. Mfr'ing activity continues to show high nrs, apparently responding to strong domestic consumer demand, which appears to me to be continuing the high level of employment, altho at the cost of profitability. We are where I feared, some months ago, we might be. In between earnings reporting cycles, approaching the usual summer slowdown, and with low expectations on what Q2 results will look like, much less what the usual summer doldrums will do to Q3. At the same time, the effects of the Asian economic distress not only continues to haunt us, it seems to have a growing effect, instead of already showing signs of easing as expected. And we are now approaching the "preannouncements" season, when the major corps will start warning analysts and their shareholders of just how bad Q2 results may be. So long as consumer demand remains high resulting from high employment and sentiment, and inflation and interest rates remain low, the currently still high PE ratios (by historic standards at least) can be intellectually justified. But let any of these three factors deterioriate, then stand by for a return to more historically supportable PE ratios. Even now, with all the cuts in forecasted earnings made by analysts in the most widely followed stocks, we remain on the edge of a cliff with projected PEs. I remain cautious, and am sitting on cash for the most part. Tom W - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 20:50:46 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] NASDAQ Litigation In case some of you missed the ads, the settlement of claims against various NASDAQ market makers is continuing. If you want to see if any of your trades will qualify you as a member of the class action, and thus entitled to some share of the estimated "settlement jackpot" of $1.027 billion, go to www.nasdaqlitigation.com. You can pull up an alpha list of those stocks, and the pertinent time frames, that are included in the overall total of 1,659 stocks and a time frame of May 1, 1989 thru July 17, 1996. The simpliest method for me is to use my tax returns and check each stock I traded during this period against the list. Supposedly, all major houses that were a party to the settlement are supposed to use their "best efforts" to determine those clients (or clients of correspondent firms) that are eligible. But I'm not going to rely on that, and will do my own homework to ensure I am represented. Tom W - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 19:28:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] NASDAQ Litigation You should have received the notice from your broker in the mail if you are eligible. I got mine yesterday... At 08:50 PM 5/27/98 -0400, you wrote: >In case some of you missed the ads, the settlement of claims against >various NASDAQ market makers is continuing. If you want to see if any >of your trades will qualify you as a member of the class action, and >thus entitled to some share of the estimated "settlement jackpot" of >$1.027 billion, go to www.nasdaqlitigation.com. You can pull up an >alpha list of those stocks, and the pertinent time frames, that are >included in the overall total of 1,659 stocks and a time frame of May >1, 1989 thru July 17, 1996. The simpliest method for me is to use my >tax returns and check each stock I traded during this period against >the list. > >Supposedly, all major houses that were a party to the settlement are >supposed to use their "best efforts" to determine those clients (or >clients of correspondent firms) that are eligible. But I'm not going >to rely on that, and will do my own homework to ensure I am >represented. > >Tom W > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 19:42:50 -0800 From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Market Close > Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 19:05:01 -0400 > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com, canslim@xmission.com > From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Frank, I am getting two copies of all your messages. Looks like you are sending them to two addresses for some reason. I don't think you need to do that. - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 19:51:11 -0800 From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Market Close > Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 19:05:01 -0400 > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com, canslim@xmission.com > From: "Frank V. Wolynski" > The variety of opinion was interesting on CNBC today. > One who said, buy this dip, it's a bull! > One who said, it ain't over yet. > And another who said, buy dem bonds! This is why I never turn CNBC on until noon my time, (3 PM Eastern), I don't want all those voices getting into my head. Even when I try to screen them out, somehow those opinions leak into my brain. I think you are better off just trying to watch the charts. They tell all (nearly). - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 23:05:57 -0400 From: Al French Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] TC2000 Intraday Craig Griffin wrote: > > Al French, > or any others using TC2000 Intraday, > > Do you like it? What are the advantages/drawbacks? And how fast are > the downloads and scans? > > Regards, > Craig > > - I am well pleased with with TC2000 V4 and have decided to keep it and drop Daily Graphs. Although at $2 per day it is a bit pricey, you get unlimited downloads during the day and I have no doubt it will more than pay for itself. Downloading the data for 9000 stocks and indexes takes about 5 minutes with a 28.8 modem. Scanning the entire database takes only about 10 seconds. They supply a number of scans, and it is easy to design your own. I can get a very close approximation of CANSLIM criteria (except for "I"); scan for price and/or volume surge intraday; breakouts from consolidation; can include criteria for money stream, stochastics, momentum, minimum RS and EPS, etc.; scan for short prospects; almost anything you can think of. And you can combine any or all of the criteria in any scan. Each screen has three frames and you can put a couple of the 14 indicators in each frame. Zoom in and out from 3 months to 5 years. And you can design 12 different screens and switch between them in a second. Switching between stocks on your lists takes about 1 second, while getting up a new stock chart from the CD takes about 5 seconds. Once you get used to that, you'll never want to go back to looking stocks up at an Internet site. Fundamental data, an example below, is not presented in a traditional manner. This was a turnoff to me at first, but I like it better after getting used to it. I like the way they give percentile rank for each data point. I still go to DG to check quarterly sales, "I," A/D, "N," debt, management, and short interest. But I only have to do that now for the few stocks that I am getting really serious about. If you have any interest in TC2000, take them up on their trial offer. You pay $39, which includes $25 worth of data downloads, and after 30 days, if you don't want it, they will refund your money no questions asked. I don't see any downside to doing that except that you'll probably get hooked on it in the 30 days--that's why they make the offer. Al French Sample fundamental data sheet: National Rv Holdings Inc (NRVH) RECREATION LUXURY - Sport Vehicles Data through 05/27/1998 OTC Performance Approximate Percentile Criteria Value Rank Today's Price Data Beta 0.25 31 Capitalization 245 60 Open 37.50 Dividend Growth Rate 5-Yr N/A N/A High 39.50 Dividend Yield 0.00 40 Low 37.50 Earnings ($Millions) 1-Yr 17.55 71 Close 39.44 Volume 1289 Earnings as Percent of Sales 1-Yr 6.00 66 Net Change 1.19 Earnings Growth Rate 5-Yr N/A N/A % Change 3.11 EPS Percent Change 1 (Latest Qtr) 84.00 87 EPS Percent Change 2nd Qtr back 171 92 EPS Percent Change 3rd Qtr back 119 89 WatchList Tracking EPS Percent Change 4th Qtr back 34.50 72 Entry Price 40.50 EPS Percent Change Latest Yr 110 84 Net Change -1.06 P/E Ratio 15.30 26 % Change -2.62% P/E Ratio vs. 5-Yr-Avg P/E 142 67 Annual % -43.42% Price as Percent of 30-Day High 94.96 74 Days In List 22 Price as Percent of 30-Day Low 122 93 Price as Percent of 52 Week High 82.00 51 Price as Percent of 52 Week Low 244 92 Price as Percent of 90-Day High 92.47 74 Price as Percent of 90-Day Low 141 85 Price Growth Rate 1-Yr 201 to 285 98 Price Growth Rate 2-Yr 86.50 95 Price Growth Rate 3-Yr 83.50 97 Price Growth Rate 5-Yr N/A N/A Price Per Share- H 38.88 86 Price Percent Change 26-Week 51.35 92 Price Percent Change 30-Day 10.37 85 Price Percent Change 5-Day- H 7.47 97 Price Percent Change Today- H 3.11 94 Price vs. 200 Day Moving Avg 126 88 Price vs. 40 Day Moving Avg 99.00 58 Sales ($Millions) 1-Yr 307 69 Sales Growth Rate 5-Yr N/A N/A Stochastic Short Term- H 33.95 57 Volatility 59.50 73 Volume (Dollars) 1-Day 507 84 Volume (Dollars) 5-Day- H 256 81 Volume (Dollars) 90-Day 300 85 Volume 1-Day- H 1264 76 Volume 5-Day- H 3480 72 Volume 90-Day 1405 75 Volume Surge 5-Day- H 59.78 62 Volume Surge Today- H 0.39 56 - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 21:44:00 -0600 From: "Kent Horne" Subject: [CANSLIM] Asia For you information From my view : SW Asia NUKE politics; small company problems, and finance sector consolidations in PacRim are still problems for them and forthe US. I've spent too much time watching Asia for small and mid cap breakouts and may have missed something in the BOVESPA. I have done no screening in South America. The next three business days in Asian markets are of interest to me. kent US S&P futures(globex) 5/27 22:53eastern 1098.10 up1.60 were up 2.0 an hour ago and up 2.3 a couple of times earlier ASIA Reports are 5/27/98 close and 5/28/98 11 am or Noon reports from Asia - their clocks AUS Group Current Var % Change ASX100 2146.0 +5.9 0.3 All Ordinaries 2693.2 +6.2 0.2 Trans Tasman 100 2138.5 +4.1 0.2 Asian Index 757.2 -1.6 0.2 HongKong 5/27/98 Number of Designated Securities recording Short Selling : 47 Number of shares short sold : 30,137,400 Value of Short Sell Transactions : $667,290,661 27/05/98 EXCHANGE NEWS 5/28/98 Tokyo Thursday noon TOPIX was up about 7, then settled back -- at noon was around 1223 - - sideways movement 5/27/98 Tokyo Wednesday close Index Stock Price Index %Change Change TOPIX Core30 1000.22 -0.57% -5.77 TOPIX Large70 989.89 -0.91% -9.11 TOPIX 100 996.11 -0.71% -7.10 TOPIX Mid400 990.85 -0.84% -8.40 TOPIX 500 994.32 -0.75% -7.54 TOPIX Small 966.64 -1.22% -11.92 Singapore Thursday noon 5/28/98 BT-SRI 530.7 -2.4 STI 1,295.5 -13.0 Indices February 1998 Change from previous month March 1998 Change from previous month April 1998 Change from previous month Straits Times Industrial 1,615.38 28.21% 1,629.18 0.85% 1,493.40 -8.33% SES All-Singapore 430.13 14.47% 419.14 -2.56% 385.80 -7.95% BT-SRI 693.64 21.20% 673.41 -2.92% 628.65 -6.65% Thai 5/27/98 Wednesday close SET -4.07% mainly foreign selling of blue-chips SOUTH AMERICA Sao Paulo May 27, 1998 close BOVESPA 9748 +312 - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 23:59:41 EDT From: Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Market Close It doesn't surprise me that several stocks ended lower today. Many quality, CS stocks took a major beating early and simply couldn't rebound. They did however (for the most part) make substantial bounces off of their lows of the day. I personnally saw the action as a buying opportunity on a couple from my watch list, (MINI and CLST) bought, and ended the day up. I will watch the market closely the next few days and be prepared to "pull the trigger" should I "feel" the M turning sour. Hopefully today's late recovery will carry over into tommorrows early hours. Greg - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 01:11:04 EDT From: Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] NASDAQ Litigation Time frame of May 1, 1989 thru July 17, 1996: I never traded prior to January 97... Too late to start for me. Missed the *Golden days* Surindra In a message dated 98-05-27 20:58:46 EDT, you write: << Subj: [CANSLIM] NASDAQ Litigation Date: 98-05-27 20:58:46 EDT From: stkguru@netside.net (Tom Worley) Sender: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com Reply-to: canslim@lists.xmission.com To: canslim@xmission.com (CANSLIM) In case some of you missed the ads, the settlement of claims against various NASDAQ market makers is continuing. If you want to see if any of your trades will qualify you as a member of the class action, and thus entitled to some share of the estimated "settlement jackpot" of $1.027 billion, go to www.nasdaqlitigation.com. You can pull up an alpha list of those stocks, and the pertinent time frames, that are included in the overall total of 1,659 stocks and a time frame of May 1, 1989 thru July 17, 1996. The simpliest method for me is to use my tax returns and check each stock I traded during this period against the list. Supposedly, all major houses that were a party to the settlement are supposed to use their "best efforts" to determine those clients (or clients of correspondent firms) that are eligible. But I'm not going to rely on that, and will do my own homework to ensure I am represented. Tom W - - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 19:49:08 -0400 From: Tom Worley Subject: Re: EDAC (was Re: [CANSLIM] My current watch list) Wouldn't have helped anyway, Connie. It's in my IRA, so can't short against the box. If it had options, would have written calls in the IRA and bot calls long in my margin acct, but altho added to NMS, no one has started options on it yet far as I know. I did enter a day order to sell at 20.375 just in case it decided to repeat yesterday's performance and buck the mkt trend. Knew I was being overly optimistic, but didn't cost me anything to try. And, of course, watched it throughout the day, ready to run across the street to Schwab if I had to. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: Connie Mack Rea To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Wednesday, May 27, 1998 6:59 PM Subject: Re: EDAC (was Re: [CANSLIM] My current watch list) >Tom-- > >Damn, I'm late with my advice. Have a friend who, when he gets in your >enviabale position, goes short the number of shares he has long. Then >when the air clears, he decides what to do. > >My father told me that he once shorted against the box his whole >portfolio. > >Connie Mack > > > > >Tom Worley wrote: > >> Thanks, Connie, a couple of these are at the top of my watch list, >> just waiting to pull the trigger. But the burning question for me is >> when do I get off this gravy train I call EDAC??????? Blasted thing >> just won't give me an excuse to take profits, probably getting too >> greedy, but I'm still waiting for a signal (up another dollar and - - ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #257 ***************************** 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.