From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #2807 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 Thursday, August 15 2002 Volume 02 : Number 2807 In this issue: [CANSLIM] hummmm??? Fw: [CANSLIM] UCBH Re: [CANSLIM] UCBH Re: [CANSLIM] UCBH Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR upward wedging handle Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR upward wedging handle RE: [CANSLIM] hummmm??? Re: [CANSLIM] hummmm??? [CANSLIM] Market turning UP Re: [CANSLIM] Market turning UP Re: [CANSLIM] Market turning UP [CANSLIM] CSTR [CANSLIM] Inst Ownership ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 21:10:06 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] hummmm??? Well, we now have higher highs as well as higher lows in the DOW 30, NYSE Composite, and S&P500. Naz 100, Composite, and R2000 still have not delivered this, but still hold out possibilities if we get one or two more good days. Big caps, and some mid caps, seem to be ruling the markets these days. DJ Utilities, NYSE Financial, and S&P 400 Midcap have also given us higher highs and lows. DJ Transportation and S&P 600 have not. Curious if any members have done any examination of this being accomplished on light volume. Is this just the summer doldrums causing light volume, fear factor holding everyone back, or just a sucker rally waiting for the short traders to take charge again? Tom Worley stkguru@bellsouth.net AIM: TexWorley - - - -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, 15 Aug 2002 21:12:08 -0400 From: "Ann" Subject: Fw: [CANSLIM] UCBH I see now, what you mean about breaking out w/o a handle--on 7/29. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ann" To: Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 8:46 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] UCBH : Tom, : : Thanks for your thoughts on inst ownership. : : Re chart, I, too, thought it was a double-bottom, but with a handle. My : HTMMIS notes (or maybe I've added to them fr. other sources) say that when : the W does not have a handle, the pivot is .10 above the midpoint; but when : there *is* a handle, the pivot is .10 above the high of the handle. : That's how I got 42.19, since 42.09 was the high of the handle. : : Ann : : ----- Original Message ----- : From: "Tom Worley" : To: : Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 6:50 PM : Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] UCBH : : : : Ann, several comments, I already addressed "institutional ownership" in : : another email just posted, but would add to that I have never seen a stock : : with true institutional ownership of 91%, unless the float was a very : small : : percent of the total issue (and I would doubt it even then). Institutional : : investors want liquidity even more than us retail investors. If I see this : : ownership reported this high, I would immediately suspect wrong data, : either : : because of a split, new issue, duplicate counting, or some other cause. : : Mutual fund ownership is high (DGO says 31% of the float of 18.6 million : : shares), and nr of funds owning has been growing (reported at 143 for June : : 02, up from 140 the prior qtr and 119 a year ago). So institutional : : ownership is going to be high, but no where near 91%. : : : : Second, you don't mention the chart pattern that you see. What I get is a : : double bottom, with the pivot occurring 7/29 as it passed 10 cents higher : : than the mid point of the "W" at a price of 40.05. The more cautious might : : have wanted to wait for 7/30 to see if it followed thru. Ironically, that : : would have put you into the stock just in time to catch the nearly 8% : : correction (good example of why this "M" suggests only buying a partial : : position, if you insist on buying at all). : : : : As for the fraud lawsuit loss, I must assume any mental, emotional or : : financial factors are already priced into the stock. The only issue it : would : : have for me is what, if anything, it tells me about the ethics or honestly : : of management. DGO says Management owns 5% (vice Yahoo's 1%). : : : : ----- Original Message ----- : : From: "Ann" : : To: "CANSLIM Listserv" : : Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 8:59 AM : : Subject: [CANSLIM] UCBH : : : : : : I am trying to do DD, using Yahoo. : : : : Looking at chart, I believe that it broke out on 8/12 (pp 42.19). It is : now : : at 42.40, which is well within the 2-3% limit that WON advises using : (above : : breakout) in this M. : : : : On 8/14, it hit a new 52-wk high (42.73). : : : : I was trying to do my due diligence, and came across some puzzling pieces : of : : info: : : : : Insiders only own 1%, whereas institutions own 91%. Is that worrisome? : : : : Also, they just lost a big fraud lawsuit! : : : : Sales growth is down, but less so thatn the rest of the industry. : : EPS quarterly growth is up 28%; annual 23% (if I am doing this right!). : : Pretax profit margin is 30%; after tax 18%. : : : : ROE is 20%. : : : : To me the company looks good, the industry is doing well. : : : : How significant is that court case? : : : : (I'm going for a walk. Hopefully I won't miss my big chance!) : : : : Ann : : : : : : - : : -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" : : -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or : : -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. : : : : : : : : : : - : : -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" : : -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or : : -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. : : : - : -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" : -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or : -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. : - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 21:15:23 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] UCBH Ann, I agree if the handle somehow was forming below the midpoint. But since the midpoint was reached first, I go with using that as the trigger point. If a handle then forms higher, and I bought using the midpoint, I reevaluate the position to see if I want to continue holding thru a handle forming period or just take a short term profit. A lot of that decision then depends on the state of "M", and whether the handle is a sideways moving one (I usually would hold) or begins to decline back towards the mid point. In other words, looking back historically, it's easy to see that a handle formed (if you accept its steep decline, or just blame its steepness on "M"). But if you were watching it at the time, then the pivot using a centerpoint of the "W" was reached first, and would have triggered a buy. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ann" To: Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 8:46 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] UCBH Tom, Thanks for your thoughts on inst ownership. Re chart, I, too, thought it was a double-bottom, but with a handle. My HTMMIS notes (or maybe I've added to them fr. other sources) say that when the W does not have a handle, the pivot is .10 above the midpoint; but when there *is* a handle, the pivot is .10 above the high of the handle. That's how I got 42.19, since 42.09 was the high of the handle. Ann - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Worley" To: Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 6:50 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] UCBH : Ann, several comments, I already addressed "institutional ownership" in : another email just posted, but would add to that I have never seen a stock : with true institutional ownership of 91%, unless the float was a very small : percent of the total issue (and I would doubt it even then). Institutional : investors want liquidity even more than us retail investors. If I see this : ownership reported this high, I would immediately suspect wrong data, either : because of a split, new issue, duplicate counting, or some other cause. : Mutual fund ownership is high (DGO says 31% of the float of 18.6 million : shares), and nr of funds owning has been growing (reported at 143 for June : 02, up from 140 the prior qtr and 119 a year ago). So institutional : ownership is going to be high, but no where near 91%. : : Second, you don't mention the chart pattern that you see. What I get is a : double bottom, with the pivot occurring 7/29 as it passed 10 cents higher : than the mid point of the "W" at a price of 40.05. The more cautious might : have wanted to wait for 7/30 to see if it followed thru. Ironically, that : would have put you into the stock just in time to catch the nearly 8% : correction (good example of why this "M" suggests only buying a partial : position, if you insist on buying at all). : : As for the fraud lawsuit loss, I must assume any mental, emotional or : financial factors are already priced into the stock. The only issue it would : have for me is what, if anything, it tells me about the ethics or honestly : of management. DGO says Management owns 5% (vice Yahoo's 1%). : : ----- Original Message ----- : From: "Ann" : To: "CANSLIM Listserv" : Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 8:59 AM : Subject: [CANSLIM] UCBH : : : I am trying to do DD, using Yahoo. : : Looking at chart, I believe that it broke out on 8/12 (pp 42.19). It is now : at 42.40, which is well within the 2-3% limit that WON advises using (above : breakout) in this M. : : On 8/14, it hit a new 52-wk high (42.73). : : I was trying to do my due diligence, and came across some puzzling pieces of : info: : : Insiders only own 1%, whereas institutions own 91%. Is that worrisome? : : Also, they just lost a big fraud lawsuit! : : Sales growth is down, but less so thatn the rest of the industry. : EPS quarterly growth is up 28%; annual 23% (if I am doing this right!). : Pretax profit margin is 30%; after tax 18%. : : ROE is 20%. : : To me the company looks good, the industry is doing well. : : How significant is that court case? : : (I'm going for a walk. Hopefully I won't miss my big chance!) : : Ann : : : - : -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" : -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or : -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. : : : : : - : -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" : -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or : -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 21:17:08 -0400 From: "Ann" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] UCBH I see. Thank you. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Worley" To: Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 9:15 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] UCBH : Ann, I agree if the handle somehow was forming below the midpoint. But since : the midpoint was reached first, I go with using that as the trigger point. : If a handle then forms higher, and I bought using the midpoint, I reevaluate : the position to see if I want to continue holding thru a handle forming : period or just take a short term profit. A lot of that decision then depends : on the state of "M", and whether the handle is a sideways moving one (I : usually would hold) or begins to decline back towards the mid point. : : In other words, looking back historically, it's easy to see that a handle : formed (if you accept its steep decline, or just blame its steepness on : "M"). But if you were watching it at the time, then the pivot using a : centerpoint of the "W" was reached first, and would have triggered a buy. : : ----- Original Message ----- : From: "Ann" : To: : Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 8:46 PM : Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] UCBH : : : Tom, : : Thanks for your thoughts on inst ownership. : : Re chart, I, too, thought it was a double-bottom, but with a handle. My : HTMMIS notes (or maybe I've added to them fr. other sources) say that when : the W does not have a handle, the pivot is .10 above the midpoint; but when : there *is* a handle, the pivot is .10 above the high of the handle. : That's how I got 42.19, since 42.09 was the high of the handle. : : Ann : : ----- Original Message ----- : From: "Tom Worley" : To: : Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 6:50 PM : Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] UCBH : : : : Ann, several comments, I already addressed "institutional ownership" in : : another email just posted, but would add to that I have never seen a stock : : with true institutional ownership of 91%, unless the float was a very : small : : percent of the total issue (and I would doubt it even then). Institutional : : investors want liquidity even more than us retail investors. If I see this : : ownership reported this high, I would immediately suspect wrong data, : either : : because of a split, new issue, duplicate counting, or some other cause. : : Mutual fund ownership is high (DGO says 31% of the float of 18.6 million : : shares), and nr of funds owning has been growing (reported at 143 for June : : 02, up from 140 the prior qtr and 119 a year ago). So institutional : : ownership is going to be high, but no where near 91%. : : : : Second, you don't mention the chart pattern that you see. What I get is a : : double bottom, with the pivot occurring 7/29 as it passed 10 cents higher : : than the mid point of the "W" at a price of 40.05. The more cautious might : : have wanted to wait for 7/30 to see if it followed thru. Ironically, that : : would have put you into the stock just in time to catch the nearly 8% : : correction (good example of why this "M" suggests only buying a partial : : position, if you insist on buying at all). : : : : As for the fraud lawsuit loss, I must assume any mental, emotional or : : financial factors are already priced into the stock. The only issue it : would : : have for me is what, if anything, it tells me about the ethics or honestly : : of management. DGO says Management owns 5% (vice Yahoo's 1%). : : : : ----- Original Message ----- : : From: "Ann" : : To: "CANSLIM Listserv" : : Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 8:59 AM : : Subject: [CANSLIM] UCBH : : : : : : I am trying to do DD, using Yahoo. : : : : Looking at chart, I believe that it broke out on 8/12 (pp 42.19). It is : now : : at 42.40, which is well within the 2-3% limit that WON advises using : (above : : breakout) in this M. : : : : On 8/14, it hit a new 52-wk high (42.73). : : : : I was trying to do my due diligence, and came across some puzzling pieces : of : : info: : : : : Insiders only own 1%, whereas institutions own 91%. Is that worrisome? : : : : Also, they just lost a big fraud lawsuit! : : : : Sales growth is down, but less so thatn the rest of the industry. : : EPS quarterly growth is up 28%; annual 23% (if I am doing this right!). : : Pretax profit margin is 30%; after tax 18%. : : : : ROE is 20%. : : : : To me the company looks good, the industry is doing well. : : : : How significant is that court case? : : : : (I'm going for a walk. Hopefully I won't miss my big chance!) : : : : Ann : : : : : : - : : -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" : : -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or : : -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. : : : : : : : : : : - : : -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" : : -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or : : -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. : : : - : -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" : -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or : -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. : : : : - : -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" : -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or : -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - - - -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, 15 Aug 2002 20:38:28 -0500 From: "david frank" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR upward wedging handle Tom, i am curious why you prefer a straight or wedging handle over a downward drifting handle. thank you for your answer. david - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Worley" To: Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 11:54 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR upward wedging handle > John, personally I prefer a wedging handle like this to a declining one > (which WON prefers). I note it did something similar with the c&h formed > from early Sept '01 to early Jan '02. > > Nice pick, with very nice earnings forecasts > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John Calkins" > To: > Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 12:34 AM > Subject: [CANSLIM] CSTR upward wedging handle > > > Hay you guys! Get a handle on this one for me. > > Coinstar (CSTR) turned up as a cup with handle. Does there need to be a > downward slant to the bottom lows in the handle to make a better handle? I > see that the upper daily prices are slanting downward, but the lower daily > prices creates a bit of a wedging pattern, any thought on this? Also I > don't really see much of a dry up in volume in the bottom of the ups base. > > (JC) > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Katherine Malm" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 9:19 PM > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Mandatory CEO/CFO certifications deadline > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > Not sure where the discrepancies coming from, but Briefing.com was > tracking > > the progress on this all day. Here is the day's final report: > > > > 20:19 ET The final 6 > > We count only 6 companies that did not appear to make the deadline > for > > certifying results: RKY, GMST, HUBG, BPOP, PRU, and ZION (USAI, SRP, SON, > > and ALK were removed from this list). We would caution against > overreacting > > to this list, as it is possible that certifications did arrive at the SEC > > but did not get filed at this time, or that the companies might have asked > > for a 5 day extension. > > > > > > Note that they were counting only non-bankrupt companies. > > > > Katherine > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Tom Worley" > > To: "CANSLIM" > > Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 11:12 PM > > Subject: [CANSLIM] Mandatory CEO/CFO certifications deadline > > > > > > | The SEC website at http://www.sec.gov/rules/extra/ceocfo.htm makes for > > | interesting reading tonight, for what is not there. While there are > about > > | 200 companies whose fiscal year means they did not have to report by > this > > | evening, the website still shows (updated at 10 PM) a lot of big names > > that > > | were expected to report by now, and haven't. I am not even thru the > "A"s > > | yet, and already see Abbot Labs and AOL, among others. > > | > > | A lot of energy companies still haven't reported, probably the next > > industry > > | sector to get racked by scandals, restatements, etc. (like it hasn't > > | already, but could get worse). > > | > > | Bank of NY leads off the "B"s, followed by Bristol Myers. Caterpillar > (in > > | the DOW 30) and Chas Schwab headline the "C"s, along with Coca Cola > (also > > in > > | the DOW). General Dynamics pops up in the "G"s, and has good company > with > > GM > > | (3rd one I saw in the DOW 30, 10% ain't good) and I don't know if I have > > the > > | stomach to keep reading. Knew I should have stopped, IBM pops up in the > > "I"s > > | (4 for the DOW), followed by Kellogg, and Metlife. TRW and UPS finally > > round > > | out the list. > > | > > | I just hope a lot of these "blue chip", reputable companies just filed > too > > | late to have it show on the site, but a 10 PM update seems late enough > to > > | pick up anyone filing by the 5:30 deadline. Any hope the SEC got their > > | deadlines wrong? Maybe they "just forgot"?? If the non-filers are > punished > > | tomorrow for not filing, it looks to be pretty bloody. Anyone trying to > > | understand an otherwise inexplicable drop tomorrow in a particular stock > > may > > | want to check on the filing status. I found that right clicking on the > > list > > | allowed me to export it to Excel, where I could sort on the deadline and > > | next columns, and find the non filers quite easily for review. > > | > > | In all, 238 companies (including, of course the "no surprise" no shows > > like > > | Enron and Conseco and Worldcom and Qwest and US Airways) that were > > expected > > | to file by today still do not show on the SEC list. > > | > > | Tom Worley > > | stkguru@bellsouth.net > > | AIM: TexWorley > > | > > | > > | > > | - > > | -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" > > | -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > > | -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. > > > > > > - > > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" > > -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > > -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. > > > > > - > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" > -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. > > > > > - > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" > -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - - - -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, 15 Aug 2002 21:34:28 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR upward wedging handle just always have. if you have a level handle, then the high point of the handle is clear, and buying just over that when volume kicks in is usually not that much higher than the average price of the handle itself. When the handle declines in price, and you have to wait for the high point to be exceeded, I (being a cheapskate and greedy both) tend to look back and say "well, if I had bought just as the handle's decline reversed and bought there, I would own it so much cheaper". I don't have this temptation in a flat handle. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "david frank" To: Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 9:38 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR upward wedging handle Tom, i am curious why you prefer a straight or wedging handle over a downward drifting handle. thank you for your answer. david - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Worley" To: Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 11:54 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR upward wedging handle > John, personally I prefer a wedging handle like this to a declining one > (which WON prefers). I note it did something similar with the c&h formed > from early Sept '01 to early Jan '02. > > Nice pick, with very nice earnings forecasts > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John Calkins" > To: > Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 12:34 AM > Subject: [CANSLIM] CSTR upward wedging handle > > > Hay you guys! Get a handle on this one for me. > > Coinstar (CSTR) turned up as a cup with handle. Does there need to be a > downward slant to the bottom lows in the handle to make a better handle? I > see that the upper daily prices are slanting downward, but the lower daily > prices creates a bit of a wedging pattern, any thought on this? Also I > don't really see much of a dry up in volume in the bottom of the ups base. > > (JC) > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Katherine Malm" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 9:19 PM > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Mandatory CEO/CFO certifications deadline > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > Not sure where the discrepancies coming from, but Briefing.com was > tracking > > the progress on this all day. Here is the day's final report: > > > > 20:19 ET The final 6 > > We count only 6 companies that did not appear to make the deadline > for > > certifying results: RKY, GMST, HUBG, BPOP, PRU, and ZION (USAI, SRP, SON, > > and ALK were removed from this list). We would caution against > overreacting > > to this list, as it is possible that certifications did arrive at the SEC > > but did not get filed at this time, or that the companies might have asked > > for a 5 day extension. > > > > > > Note that they were counting only non-bankrupt companies. > > > > Katherine > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Tom Worley" > > To: "CANSLIM" > > Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 11:12 PM > > Subject: [CANSLIM] Mandatory CEO/CFO certifications deadline > > > > > > | The SEC website at http://www.sec.gov/rules/extra/ceocfo.htm makes for > > | interesting reading tonight, for what is not there. While there are > about > > | 200 companies whose fiscal year means they did not have to report by > this > > | evening, the website still shows (updated at 10 PM) a lot of big names > > that > > | were expected to report by now, and haven't. I am not even thru the > "A"s > > | yet, and already see Abbot Labs and AOL, among others. > > | > > | A lot of energy companies still haven't reported, probably the next > > industry > > | sector to get racked by scandals, restatements, etc. (like it hasn't > > | already, but could get worse). > > | > > | Bank of NY leads off the "B"s, followed by Bristol Myers. Caterpillar > (in > > | the DOW 30) and Chas Schwab headline the "C"s, along with Coca Cola > (also > > in > > | the DOW). General Dynamics pops up in the "G"s, and has good company > with > > GM > > | (3rd one I saw in the DOW 30, 10% ain't good) and I don't know if I have > > the > > | stomach to keep reading. Knew I should have stopped, IBM pops up in the > > "I"s > > | (4 for the DOW), followed by Kellogg, and Metlife. TRW and UPS finally > > round > > | out the list. > > | > > | I just hope a lot of these "blue chip", reputable companies just filed > too > > | late to have it show on the site, but a 10 PM update seems late enough > to > > | pick up anyone filing by the 5:30 deadline. Any hope the SEC got their > > | deadlines wrong? Maybe they "just forgot"?? If the non-filers are > punished > > | tomorrow for not filing, it looks to be pretty bloody. Anyone trying to > > | understand an otherwise inexplicable drop tomorrow in a particular stock > > may > > | want to check on the filing status. I found that right clicking on the > > list > > | allowed me to export it to Excel, where I could sort on the deadline and > > | next columns, and find the non filers quite easily for review. > > | > > | In all, 238 companies (including, of course the "no surprise" no shows > > like > > | Enron and Conseco and Worldcom and Qwest and US Airways) that were > > expected > > | to file by today still do not show on the SEC list. > > | > > | Tom Worley > > | stkguru@bellsouth.net > > | AIM: TexWorley > > | > > | > > | > > | - > > | -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" > > | -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > > | -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. > > > > > > - > > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" > > -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > > -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. > > > > > - > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" > -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. > > > > > - > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" > -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - - - -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, 15 Aug 2002 21:54:53 -0400 From: "Duke Miller" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] hummmm??? Tom: All of the above? Duke - -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Tom Worley Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 9:10 PM To: CANSLIM Subject: [CANSLIM] hummmm??? Well, we now have higher highs as well as higher lows in the DOW 30, NYSE Composite, and S&P500. Naz 100, Composite, and R2000 still have not delivered this, but still hold out possibilities if we get one or two more good days. Big caps, and some mid caps, seem to be ruling the markets these days. DJ Utilities, NYSE Financial, and S&P 400 Midcap have also given us higher highs and lows. DJ Transportation and S&P 600 have not. Curious if any members have done any examination of this being accomplished on light volume. Is this just the summer doldrums causing light volume, fear factor holding everyone back, or just a sucker rally waiting for the short traders to take charge again? Tom Worley stkguru@bellsouth.net AIM: TexWorley - - - -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, 15 Aug 2002 21:55:34 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] hummmm??? I am trying to convince me the last one doesn't apply, but probably just wishful thinking on my part. I wish volume would kick in, trying to find an excuse to get bullish again besides DOCC - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Duke Miller" To: Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 9:54 PM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] hummmm??? Tom: All of the above? Duke - -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Tom Worley Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 9:10 PM To: CANSLIM Subject: [CANSLIM] hummmm??? Well, we now have higher highs as well as higher lows in the DOW 30, NYSE Composite, and S&P500. Naz 100, Composite, and R2000 still have not delivered this, but still hold out possibilities if we get one or two more good days. Big caps, and some mid caps, seem to be ruling the markets these days. DJ Utilities, NYSE Financial, and S&P 400 Midcap have also given us higher highs and lows. DJ Transportation and S&P 600 have not. Curious if any members have done any examination of this being accomplished on light volume. Is this just the summer doldrums causing light volume, fear factor holding everyone back, or just a sucker rally waiting for the short traders to take charge again? Tom Worley stkguru@bellsouth.net AIM: TexWorley - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 22:06:18 EDT From: Chazmoore@aol.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Market turning UP - --part1_106.16ada552.2a8db81a_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Tom: This is a bit off subject but I am sending it anyway so you can feel bullish again. Today, the NYSE Bullish Indicator shows that 36% of stocks on the NYSE are signaling buy, with Bull Confirmed. The NASDAQ 100 Bullish Indicator is now at 38% with Bull Confirmed, and the S&P 500 Bullish Indicator is at 44% with a Bull Alert. Granted, this may be a correction within a bear market, but for the short term it looks pretty good. (I suspect it will crash tomorrow after I have set myself up, but remember Tom, I am doing this for you.) Charley - --part1_106.16ada552.2a8db81a_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Tom: This is a bit off subject but I am sending it anyway so you can feel bullish again.
Today, the NYSE Bullish Indicator shows that 36% of stocks on the NYSE are signaling buy, with Bull Confirmed. The NASDAQ 100 Bullish Indicator is now at 38% with Bull Confirmed, and the S&P 500 Bullish Indicator is at 44% with a Bull Alert.
Granted, this may be a correction within a bear market, but for the short term it looks pretty good. (I suspect it will crash tomorrow after I have set myself up, but remember Tom, I am doing this for you.)

Charley - --part1_106.16ada552.2a8db81a_boundary-- - - - -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, 15 Aug 2002 22:12:15 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Market turning UP This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_01A0_01C244A8.D05178F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable NO, NO Charley, I want bearish sentiment!!!! I want to be the only one = that feels bullish - ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Chazmoore@aol.com=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 10:06 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] Market turning UP Tom: This is a bit off subject but I am sending it anyway so you can = feel bullish again.=20 Today, the NYSE Bullish Indicator shows that 36% of stocks on the NYSE = are signaling buy, with Bull Confirmed. The NASDAQ 100 Bullish Indicator = is now at 38% with Bull Confirmed, and the S&P 500 Bullish Indicator is = at 44% with a Bull Alert.=20 Granted, this may be a correction within a bear market, but for the = short term it looks pretty good. (I suspect it will crash tomorrow after = I have set myself up, but remember Tom, I am doing this for you.)=20 Charley=20 - ------=_NextPart_000_01A0_01C244A8.D05178F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
NO, NO Charley, I want bearish sentiment!!!! I = want to be=20 the only one that feels bullish
 
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Chazmoore@aol.com=20
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 10:06 PM
Subject: [CANSLIM] Market turning UP

Tom: This is = a bit off=20 subject but I am sending it anyway so you can feel bullish again. =
Today, the=20 NYSE Bullish Indicator shows that 36% of stocks on the NYSE are = signaling buy,=20 with Bull Confirmed. The NASDAQ 100 Bullish Indicator is now at 38% with = Bull=20 Confirmed, and the S&P 500 Bullish Indicator is at 44% with a Bull = Alert.=20
Granted, this may be a correction within a bear market, but for the = short=20 term it looks pretty good. (I suspect it will crash tomorrow after I = have set=20 myself up, but remember Tom, I am doing this for you.) =

Charley=20 - ------=_NextPart_000_01A0_01C244A8.D05178F0-- - - - -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, 15 Aug 2002 22:15:54 EDT From: Chazmoore@aol.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Market turning UP - --part1_165.11da0a50.2a8dba5a_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Tom: When the market craters tomorrow everyone will turn back to bears. Charley - --part1_165.11da0a50.2a8dba5a_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Tom: When the market craters tomorrow everyone will turn back to bears. Charley - --part1_165.11da0a50.2a8dba5a_boundary-- - - - -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, 15 Aug 2002 22:55:26 -0400 From: "Ann" Subject: [CANSLIM] CSTR From an article by David Saito-Chung, ibd: Consumer-oriented shares also led the market higher. Coinstar (CSTR) raced up 2.51 to 32.94, jumping out of a 16-week cup with short handle on nearly triple usual volume. Despite the big move, the maker of machines that trade change for dollar bills is still 5% off its high of 34.98. The stock may pull back on light trade to possibly form another handle, offering another buy point. - - - -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, 15 Aug 2002 22:50:01 -0500 From: Gene Ricci Subject: [CANSLIM] Inst Ownership This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0444_01C244AE.166FA910 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0445_01C244AE.166FA910" - ------=_NextPart_001_0445_01C244AE.166FA910 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Tom, I agree with you... unfortunately.... DGO/IBD only counts mutual = funds ! This explains the difference between DGO and other data sources. = DGO doesn't count them all. Here's what they said (today): "When you say "count" we count the amount of shares of the floating = supply of stock that Mutual Funds own as registered with the NYSE and = NASDAQ exchanges."=20 regards, Gene ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Tom Worley=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 5:39 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] UCBH Institutional ownership includes, in addition to mutual funds, pension = funds, insurance companies, some banks (buying for their own account), = venture capital funds, etc. There are also some individual investors = that usually get counted, a certain Saudi Arabian prince comes to mind, = who will buy $50 to $250 million worth of stock at a time, easily the = size of a mutual fund order. A bank is not always an "institutional investor" (unless buying for = its own account) as it is often used as custodian, or even agent, for = other institutional accounts as well as many retail accounts. My = employer is a bank, and also custodian for its securities clients. As = such, its collective holdings of some securities would easily be large = enough to count as "institutional" in size, yet they are not because the = end owner is a retail client of the bank, often making his or her own = investment decisions. WON does not count bank holdings for this reason, as it is difficult = to distinguish bank holdings as "proxy owner" from own holdings, same as = a broker dealer holding in street name for its clients. ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Gene Ricci=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 11:25 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] UCBH Ann, my data source shows growth at 18, not too shabby for a bank... Charley... I'm awaiting a definitive answer from IBD on institutional = ownership. I've asked them what they count and what they don't count = because of the significant differences in the 'numbers' from different = data suppliers. My second question to them is 'why aren't banks and = pension funds, etc. counted in their numbers.=20 In the Q&A below, IBD switches between calling it institutional = ownership and mutual funds... if a bank isn't an institution why doesn't = IBD just call it funds?=20 What is a level of institutional ownership you consider when = buying a stock? If too many shares are already owned by institutional = investors, can that hurt a stock's chances of rising?=20 =20 Answer=20 It is hard to tell how much institutional ownership is too = much. Therefore, you should place less weight on this factor. Rather, = focus on the quality of ownership. You want to see at least a few of the = better performing mutual funds owning the stock you are considering = buying. In some cases, however, if too many shares are owned by = institutional investors, this could be bad. That's because it represents = large potential selling if anything goes wrong with the company or the = general market. =20 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Chazmoore@aol.com=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 8:58 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] UCBH Ann: I will give you my thoughts to get you started.=20 Fundamentally, the stock looks sound. You say they lost a fraud suit = but for the time being the market has not reacted negatively. You didn't = say when, but if it wasn't yesterday, I wouldn't put much weight on it. = The market tends to respond very quickly to negative news.=20 You didn't state your investment goals, but in my opinion this is = not a growth stock. For one thing if institutions own 91% now, there = simply isn't enough stock available to new buyers to move the price = significantly. That does not mean they cannot enjoy good steady slow = growth. The funds own 31%; WON recommends staying below 25%.=20 The real positive for this stock is the Group RS rating, and the = Price RS.=20 The negative is the very weak market.=20 Charley - ------=_NextPart_001_0445_01C244AE.166FA910 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Tom, I agree with you... = unfortunately....=20 DGO/IBD only counts mutual funds ! This explains the difference between = DGO and=20 other data sources. DGO doesn't count them all.
 
Here's what they said = (today):
 
"When you say "count" we count the amount of shares of the floating = supply=20 of stock that Mutual Funds own as registered with the NYSE and NASDAQ=20 exchanges."
 
regards,
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Tom=20 Worley
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 = 5:39=20 PM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] = UCBH

Institutional ownership includes, in addition = to mutual=20 funds, pension funds, insurance companies, some banks (buying for = their own=20 account), venture capital funds, etc.  There are also some = individual=20 investors that usually get counted, a certain Saudi Arabian prince = comes to=20 mind, who will buy $50 to $250 million worth of stock at a time, = easily the=20 size of a mutual fund order.
 
A bank is not always an "institutional = investor" (unless=20 buying for its own account) as it is often used as custodian, or even = agent,=20 for other institutional accounts as well as many retail accounts. My = employer=20 is a bank, and also custodian for its securities clients. As such, its = collective holdings of some securities would easily be large enough to = count=20 as "institutional" in size, yet they are not because the end owner is = a retail=20 client of the bank, often making his or her own investment=20 decisions.
 
WON does not count bank holdings for this = reason, as it=20 is difficult to distinguish bank holdings as "proxy owner" from own = holdings,=20 same as a broker dealer holding in street name for its = clients.
 
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Gene Ricci =
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 11:25 AM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] UCBH

Ann, my data source shows growth at = 18, not=20 too shabby for a bank...
 
Charley... I'm awaiting a definitive = answer=20 from IBD on institutional ownership. I've asked them what they count = and what=20 they don't count because of the significant differences in the = 'numbers' from=20 different data suppliers.  My second question to them is = 'why aren't=20 banks and pension funds, etc. counted in their numbers.
 
In the Q&A below, IBD switches = between=20 calling it institutional ownership and mutual funds... if a bank isn't = an=20 institution why doesn't IBD just call it funds?
 
 
What is a level of institutional ownership = you=20 consider when buying a stock? If too many shares are already = owned by=20 institutional investors, can that hurt a stock's chances of=20 rising?
3D""=20
  Answer
  It is hard to tell how much institutional = ownership=20 is too much. Therefore, you should place less weight on this = factor.=20 Rather, focus on the quality of ownership. You want to see at = least a=20 few of the better performing mutual funds owning the stock you = are=20 considering buying. In some cases, however, if too many shares = are owned=20 by institutional investors, this could be bad. That's because it = represents large potential selling if anything goes wrong with = the=20 company or the general = market.
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Chazmoore@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, August 15, = 2002 8:58=20 AM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] = UCBH

Ann: I = will give you=20 my thoughts to get you started.
Fundamentally, the stock looks = sound.=20 You say they lost a fraud suit but for the time being the market has = not=20 reacted negatively. You didn't say when, but if it wasn't yesterday, = I=20 wouldn't put much weight on it. The market tends to respond very = quickly to=20 negative news.
You didn't state your investment goals, but in my = opinion=20 this is not a growth stock. For one thing if institutions own 91% = now, there=20 simply isn't enough stock available to new buyers to move the price=20 significantly. That does not mean they cannot enjoy good steady slow = growth.=20 The funds own 31%; WON recommends staying below 25%.
The real = positive=20 for this stock is the Group RS rating, and the Price RS.
The = negative is=20 the very weak market.

Charley=20
- ------=_NextPart_001_0445_01C244AE.166FA910-- - ------=_NextPart_000_0444_01C244AE.166FA910 Content-Type: image/gif; name="trnsp.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://investdaily.custhelp.com/rnt/rnw/img/trnsp.gif R0lGODlhAQABAJH/AP///wAAAP///wAAACH/C0FET0JFOklSMS4wAt7tACH5BAEAAAIALAAAAAAB AAEAAAICVAEAOw== - ------=_NextPart_000_0444_01C244AE.166FA910-- - - - -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 #2807 ****************************** 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.