From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #2899 Reply-To: canslim Sender: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-No-Archive: yes canslim-digest Tuesday, September 3 2002 Volume 02 : Number 2899 In this issue: RE: [CANSLIM] Why Professionals go astray Re: [CANSLIM] WORLEY'S WATCHLIST WANNABES, timesaving Re: [CANSLIM] Worley's Weekend Weeview Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR CVH Failed breakouts Post Analysis Re: [CANSLIM] Why Professionals go astray ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 18:54:10 -0500 From: "Fred Richards" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Why Professionals go astray This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0044_01C2537B.49FA04C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Heavens to Betsie . . . I have even shown actual brokerage house statements to people and they still don't believe the results. In fact, one newspaper reporter had the gall to suggest that the statements were obviously forgeries. You are right . . . It's a "no-win" situation. -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Katherine Malm Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 6:36 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Why Professionals go astray Hi Wyndy, My comment about chucking CANSLIM was tongue-in-cheek. You can't measure a system unless there are firm recommendations and/or nonsubjective components for entry/exit.* CANSLIM is not about telling you specifically which stocks you should and shouldn't buy, it doesn't recommend stocks---it's a process of investing long in fundamentally sound high-growth stocks using an intermediate term entry/exit strategy based on technicals. It's a long strategy intended for uptrending markets rather than an "all weather" strategy. My intended point was that if someone prefers a system that has no subjective components, is mechanically based and/or requires statistical evidence before following it, then CANSLIM is not the right strategy for them. If they are instead sufficiently confident in anecdotal evidence of success and are comfortable with interpreting subjective criteria, then CANSLIM will "fit" the person. Katherine * What can and has been done is to take a rule-based interpretation of CANSLIM and then enter/exit only on quantifiable elements. When this is done, one can measure the performance (and it's quite good, by the way). However, every time I show a study that did this to someone, they find some reason to doubt the results. There's just no pleasing some people. They don't believe it if you *don't* show statistics, and when you *do* show them statistics, they say that "statistics lie." Sounds no-win to me. ----- Original Message ----- From: Cwyndham@aol.com To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 5:48 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Why Professionals go astray In a message dated 9/3/2002 5:14:16 PM Central Daylight Time, kmalm@earthlink.net writes: If track record is a prerequisite for judging content, then you may as well chuck CANSLIM out the window....as there is no official record of WON's yearly results since 1960-something when he began. Guess that means that CANSLIM has no value because WON and/or the IBD doesn't even *have* a Hulbert rating. Katherine From the loss in subscribers to the newspaper and other offerings I think that many people are chucking CANSLIM. Folks didn't care about performance with a bull markets wind at their back but now it's a different story. I for one want to know "where's the beef." I am sad to say I couldn't find any data. Wyndy - ------=_NextPart_000_0044_01C2537B.49FA04C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Heavens to Betsie . . .
 
I have=20 even shown actual brokerage house statements to people and they still = don't=20 believe the results.
 
In=20 fact, one newspaper reporter had the gall to suggest that the statements = were=20 obviously forgeries.
 
You=20 are right . . . It's a "no-win" situation.
-----Original Message-----
From:=20 owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Katherine = Malm
Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 6:36 PM
To: = canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Why = Professionals=20 go astray

Hi Wyndy,
 
My comment about chucking CANSLIM was tongue-in-cheek. You can't = measure=20 a system unless there are firm recommendations and/or nonsubjective = components=20 for entry/exit.* CANSLIM is not about telling you specifically which = stocks=20 you should and shouldn't buy, it doesn't recommend stocks---it's a = process of=20 investing long in fundamentally sound high-growth stocks using an = intermediate=20 term entry/exit strategy based on technicals. It's a long strategy = intended=20 for uptrending markets rather than an "all weather" strategy.
 
My intended point was that if someone prefers a system that = has no=20 subjective components, is mechanically based and/or requires = statistical=20 evidence before following it, then CANSLIM is not the right strategy = for them.=20 If they are instead sufficiently confident in anecdotal evidence of = success=20 and are comfortable with interpreting subjective criteria, then = CANSLIM will=20 "fit" the person.
 
Katherine
 
* What can and has been done is to take a rule-based = interpretation of=20 CANSLIM and then enter/exit only on quantifiable elements. When this = is done,=20 one can measure the performance (and it's quite good, by the way). = However,=20 every time I show a study that did this to someone, they find some = reason to=20 doubt the results. There's just no pleasing some people. They don't = believe it=20 if you *don't* show statistics, and when you *do* show them = statistics, they=20 say that "statistics lie." Sounds no-win to me.
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Cwyndham@aol.com
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com= =20
Sent: Tuesday, September 03, = 2002 5:48=20 PM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Why=20 Professionals go astray

In a message dated 9/3/2002 5:14:16 PM Central = Daylight=20 Time, kmalm@earthlink.net = writes:


If track record is a prerequisite for judging content, = then=20 you may as well
chuck CANSLIM out the window....as there is no = official=20 record of WON's
yearly results since 1960-something when he = began.=20 Guess that means that
CANSLIM has no value because WON and/or = the IBD=20 doesn't even *have* a
Hulbert=20 rating.

Katherine


From the loss in = subscribers to=20 the newspaper and other offerings I think that many people are = chucking=20 CANSLIM. Folks didn't care about performance with a bull markets = wind at=20 their back but now it's a different story. I for one want to know = "where's=20 the beef." I am sad to say I couldn't find any=20 = data.

Wyndy
 - ------=_NextPart_000_0044_01C2537B.49FA04C0-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 17:17:38 -0700 From: "NANCY POLCARO" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WORLEY'S WATCHLIST WANNABES, timesaving - ------=_NextPart_001_0003_01C2536D.CDB61C80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I cant seem to open toms watch list -is there a way for someone to open i= t into words and forward it to me at zillagirl@msn.com? Hope its possible= thanks nancy =20 =20 - ----- Original Message ----- From: Hermann Ertl Sent: Sunday, September 01, 2002 10:58 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: [CANSLIM] WORLEY'S WATCHLIST WANNABES, timesaving =20 - ------=_NextPart_001_0003_01C2536D.CDB61C80 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I cant seem to= open toms watch list -is there a way for someone to open it into words a= nd forward it to me at zillagirl@msn= .com? Hope its possible thanks nancy 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Hermann Ertl
Sent: Sunday, September 01, 2002= 10:58 PM
To: canslim@lists.= xmission.com
Subject: [CANSL= IM] WORLEY'S WATCHLIST WANNABES, timesaving
 
- ------=_NextPart_001_0003_01C2536D.CDB61C80-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 17:26:08 -0700 From: "NANCY POLCARO" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Worley's Weekend Weeview - ------=_NextPart_001_0004_01C2536E.FDC74C40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable please disregard my previous email. I got this email ( which I believe co= ntains the info) and this one didnt have to be opened. sorry nancy =20 =20 - ----- Original Message ----- From: Tom Worley Sent: Sunday, September 01, 2002 12:06 PM To: CANSLIM Subject: [CANSLIM] Worley's Weekend Weeview =20 ECONOMICS Used home sales continued their strength, rising again 4.5% to 5.33 milli= on units, while new home sales hit another new record, rising 6.7% to a r= ecord 1.017 million unit annual level. New home sales also beat expectati= ons of a decline. Used home sales were in line with expectations. =20 Durable Goods Orders also increased sharply and ahead of expectations, up= 8.7% for July. Expectations were a rise of 1.4%. Even without the volati= le transportation portion, the index was still up 3.9%. Automotive sales = were the biggest single positive component. =20 Conference Board's consumer confidence index fell to 93.5 in August from = 97.4, while the Expectations index fell to 94.5 from 96.1. Survey was on = 5,000 households in the first weeks of August. =20 Revised 2nd Qtr GDP remains at 1.1%. =20 New claims for unemployment surged over 400,000 once again, worse than ex= pected. =20 Meanwhile, the revised reading of Univ. of Michigan's Consumer Sentiment = index for August slipped to 87.6 from 87.9, below expectations of 88. Cur= rent conditions index also declined, while the expectations index rose sl= ightly. =20 Chicago NAPM index rose nicely in August to 54.9 from 51.5 in July, even = tho the employment component fell. Expectation was for 52. This was the 7= th straight month of expansion. =20 Commerce Dept reports that personal spending in July jumped 1% while pers= onal income was unchanged. Expectations were for rises of 0.8% and 0.3% r= espectively. And Americans were saving 3.4% of their income, down from 4.= 2%. "M" August was the first month in five for the S&P500 to close positive, whil= e the DOW continued its five month decline, and NASDAQ made its seventh m= onth in a row to the negative. I am still operating on the assumption tha= t we are in a bull rally (and weakening) within a continuing bear market.= Volume has remained consistently below average on all major indexes for = 4-5 weeks now, and normally would be expected to return to normal levels = starting next week. However, with a number of important economic reports = due out every day next week, and the anniversary of the 9/11 attack the f= ollowing week, it will not surprise me to continue seeing light volume. T= he Q3 preannouncement season will be starting soon as well. The decline l= ast week put the NASDAQ back into a mild oversold condition, with the 10 = day average of both up/down volume and new highs/lows both negative. NYS= E continues to look better, where it remains in an overbought condition, = and the 10 day averages of up/down vol and new hi/low are positive. In bo= th cases, the recent rally since 7/24 appears to be continuing to weaken. WORLEY'S WATCHLIST WANNABES =20 This list is in no way intended to recommend any stocks to the group. It = is a part of my regular assessment of the health of CANSLIM's "M" and, as= the name implies, only intended to identify some stocks with constructiv= e chart patterns that may be worth WATCHING and learning from (and of cou= rse doing your own due diligence). I am employed in Operations by a US Br= oker Dealer, however everything presented by me is strictly my own ideas = and in no way should be taken to reflect the views or opinions of my empl= oyer. =20 I typically list stocks with both RS and EPS ranking of 80 or better, and= try to exclude stocks undergoing any merger / acquisition / buyout scena= rio. I no longer will actively consider earnings forecast for this year a= nd next due the confusing data presented by DGO. I do no other due dilige= nce, that is your responsibility. I will note any CANSLIM patterns I see,= such as c&h, double (or triple) bottoms, or flat bases (shown as Bx wher= e "x" is the # of weeks, IMO). I will also note LLUR (Lower Left Upper Ri= ght) even though it is not exactly a CANSLIM pattern. =20 The population of stocks I am reviewing this weekend remains small, but s= table. Unfortunately, I find very few decent charts to consider. =20 AF - c&h BLUD - B2 BMI - c&h CTSH - channeling EPIQ - possible c&h forming, sold my margin position, still in my VR fund ERES - poor double bottom GPT - B2 HBHC - LLUR HET - saucer IBKC - B4 NYCB - B3 OCFC - c&h SSNC - long sloppy base, in my VR Fund SWBT - B3 TRBS - B4 on a double bottom TTWO - c&h =20 Happy hunting, =20 Tom Worley stkguru@bellsouth.net AIM: TexWorley - ------=_NextPart_001_0004_01C2536E.FDC74C40 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
please disregard my previous email. I got= this email ( which I believe contains the info) and this one didnt have = to be opened. sorry nancy 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Tom Worley
Sent: Sunday, September 01, 2002 12:06 PM
To: CANSLIM
Subject: [CANSLIM] Worley's Weekend Weeview
 
= ECONOMICS
Used home= sales continued their strength, rising again 4.5% to 5.33 million units,= while new home sales hit another new record, rising 6.7% to a record 1.0= 17 million unit annual level. New home sales also beat expectations of a = decline. Used home sales were in line with expectations.
 
Durable = Goods Orders also increased sharply and ahead of expectations, up 8.7% fo= r July. Expectations were a rise of 1.4%. Even without the volatile trans= portation portion, the index was still up 3.9%. Automotive sales were the= biggest single positive component.
=  
Conference Board's consumer c= onfidence index fell to 93.5 in August from 97.4, while the Expectations = index fell to 94.5 from 96.1. Survey was on 5,000 households in the first= weeks of August.
 
Revised 2nd Qtr GDP remains at 1.1%.
 
Ne= w claims for unemployment surged over 400,000 once again, worse than expe= cted.
 
Meanwhile, the revised reading of Univ. of Michigan's Consu= mer Sentiment index for August slipped to 87.6 from 87.9, below expectati= ons of 88. Current conditions index also declined, while the expectations= index rose slightly.
 <= /DIV>
Chicago NAPM index rose nicely in August to= 54.9 from 51.5 in July, even tho the employment component fell. Expectat= ion was for 52. This was the 7th straight month of expansion.
 
Com= merce Dept reports that personal spending in July jumped 1% while persona= l income was unchanged. Expectations were for rises of 0.8% and 0.3% resp= ectively. And Americans were saving 3.4% of their income, down from 4.2%.=
"M"
August was = the first month in five for the S&P500 to close positive, while the D= OW continued its five month decline, and NASDAQ made its seventh month in= a row to the negative. I am still operating on the assumption that we ar= e in a bull rally (and weakening) within a continuing bear market. Volume= has remained consistently below average on all major indexes for 4-5 wee= ks now, and normally would be expected to return to normal levels startin= g next week. However, with a number of important economic reports due out= every day next week, and the anniversary of the 9/11 attack the followin= g week, it will not surprise me to continue seeing light volume. The Q3 p= reannouncement season will be starting soon as well. The decline last wee= k put the NASDAQ back into a mild oversold condition, with the 10 day ave= rage of both up/down volume and new highs/lows both negative.  NYSE = continues to look better, where it remains in an overbought condition, an= d the 10 day averages of up/down vol and new hi/low are positive. In both= cases, the recent rally since 7/24 appears to be continuing to weaken.
WORLEY'S WA= TCHLIST WANNABES
This list is in no way= intended to recommend any stocks to the group. It is a part of my regula= r assessment of the health of CANSLIM's "M" and, as the name implies, onl= y intended to identify some stocks with constructive chart patterns that = may be worth WATCHING and learning f= rom (and of course doing your own due diligence). I am employed in Operations by a US Broker Dealer, ho= wever everything presented by me is strictly my own ideas and in no way s= hould be taken to reflect the views or opinions of my employer.
 
I typically list stocks with both RS and EPS ranking = of 80 or better, and try to exclude stocks undergoing any merger / acquis= ition / buyout scenario. I no longer will actively consider&nbs= p;earnings forecast for this year and next due the confusing data present= ed by DGO. I do no other due diligence, that is your responsibility. I wi= ll note any CANSLIM patterns I see, such as c&h, double (or triple) b= ottoms, or flat bases (shown as Bx where "x" is the # of weeks, IMO). I w= ill also note LLUR (Lower Left Upper Right) even though it is not exactly= a CANSLIM pattern.
 
The population of stocks I am reviewing this = weekend remains small, but stable. Unfortunately, I find very few decent = charts to consider.
 
AF - c&h
<= FONT face=3DArial>BLUD - B2
BMI - c&= amp;h
CTSH - channeling
=
EPIQ - possible c&h forming, sold my margin = position, still in my VR fund
ERES -= poor double bottom
GPT - B2<= /DIV>
HBHC - LLUR
HET - saucer
IBKC - B4<= /DIV>
NYCB - B3
OCFC - c&h
SSNC - long slopp= y base, in my VR Fund
SWBT - B3
TRBS - B4 on a double bottom
TTWO - c&h
 
Happy hunting,
 
3D""
Tom Worley
stkguru@bellsouth.net
AIM: TexWorley
- ------=_NextPart_001_0004_01C2536E.FDC74C40-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 20:24:17 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR CVH Failed breakouts Post Analysis This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0038_01C25387.E0729050 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable on the contrary, Sol, when the right side of the cup is higher than the = left, the handle also tends to be higher than the left rim. While a = "high handle" can succeed, they are more prone to failure, either before = or after a b/o, than when the handle forms in the upper half of the cup = (with preference towards the upper quarter of the cup). - ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Sol Mayer=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 12:27 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR CVH Failed breakouts Post Analysis Ian:=20 Aren't all cw/h a situation where the right side of cup is higher than = left side which means that there is overhead resistance at the price of = the right side of cup?=20 Ian wrote:=20 John: One thing you might want to revisit is your selection of breakout = points for CSTR. As early as APril, CSTR had traded over $34 for a week, on = higher volume. It flies in the face of what a breakout point is meant to be = (a removal of significant known overhead resistance) to buy a stock just = $1.50 below where a lot of shares have changed hands in recent days. IMHO, a break through $35.50, on a large volume increase, on a third = attempt would have been much safer, from a historical perspective. Ian ----- Original Message ----- From: John Calkins=20 To:=20 Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 4:52 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] CSTR CVH Failed breakouts Post Analysis > Ok, now that I have admitted that I didn't make a huge blunder = buying CSTR > and CVH on their breakouts. I need advice on how I can improve after > loosing a large percentage on these two stocks. > > I'm unable to be at a computer during the day, so I check the volume = and > price with TD Waterhouse Phone Trade Direct. My first pick like many = was > CSTR. On August 15th it brokeout and I purchased it at $32.50. I set = my > Sell Stop at 8% below my purchase price at $29.90. My stop order was > executed at $26.61 after the gap down. I guess I consider myself = lucky it > didn't execute at $24 what ever because of the price action for the = day. My > second trade was with CVH. It broke out on August 19th and was able = to > purchase it at $33.83. The sell stop order was again placed at 8% = below at > $31.12. My sell stop was executed at $28.75. > > This is the most difficult time I have had with my orders yet. I = have > usually been able to get much closer to my stop price. I can't = afford to > loose and average of 16% or double the CANSLIM method. I have heard = that it > is unwise to "Tip you hand" by having a stop order out there for the market > makers to grab. But if I'm such a small fish out there, then how on = earth > could my little stop order influence anyone? Is there a trading = platform > that is better at setting up unattended orders. I've heard of = trailing > stops etc. but aren't these just ideas or soft stops that you have = to watch > the intra-day action of the market to take advantage of? > > I just can't seem to get out of the shoot...I suppose along with = everyone > else. I understand that Due Diligence might have helped on these two > stocks, but who would have ever thought both of these would have = gapped over > my stop orders like this! > > I sure would like to know how you buy and sell when you can't glue yourself > to a monitor all day long. I hope that the digital cell tower shows = up > close to where I work so I can at least get price and volume alerts = sent to > me. I had this before and it worked better than this stop order = crapola. > > (JC) > > > - > -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. - -------------------------------------------------------------------------= - ------- Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes - ------=_NextPart_000_0038_01C25387.E0729050 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
on the contrary, Sol, when the right side of the = cup is=20 higher than the left, the handle also tends to be higher than the left = rim.=20 While a "high handle" can succeed, they are more prone to failure, = either before=20 or after a b/o, than when the handle forms in the upper half of the cup = (with=20 preference towards the upper quarter of the cup).
 
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Sol = Mayer
Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 12:27 PM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CSTR CVH Failed breakouts Post=20 Analysis

Ian:=20

Aren't all cw/h a situation where the right side of cup is higher = than left=20 side which means that there is overhead resistance at the price of the = right=20 side of cup?=20

 Ian wrote:=20 John:

One=20 thing you might want to revisit is your selection of breakout points=20 for
CSTR. As early as APril, CSTR had traded over $34 for a week, = on=20 higher
volume. It flies in the face of what a breakout point is = meant to be=20 (a
removal of significant known overhead resistance) to buy a stock = just=20 $1.50
below where a lot of shares have changed hands in recent=20 days.

IMHO, a break through $35.50, on a large volume increase, = on a=20 third attempt
would have been much safer, from a historical=20 perspective.

Ian


----- Original Message = - -----
From: John=20 Calkins
To: =
Sent:=20 Tuesday, September 03, 2002 4:52 AM
Subject: [CANSLIM] CSTR CVH = Failed=20 breakouts Post Analysis


> Ok, now that I have admitted = that I=20 didn't make a huge blunder buying CSTR
> and CVH on their = breakouts. I=20 need advice on how I can improve after
> loosing a large = percentage on=20 these two stocks.
>
> I'm unable to be at a computer = during the=20 day, so I check the volume and
> price with TD Waterhouse Phone = Trade=20 Direct. My first pick like many was
> CSTR. On August 15th it = brokeout=20 and I purchased it at $32.50. I set my
> Sell Stop at 8% below = my=20 purchase price at $29.90. My stop order was
> executed at $26.61 = after=20 the gap down. I guess I consider myself lucky it
> didn't = execute at $24=20 what ever because of the price action for the day.
My
> = second trade=20 was with CVH. It broke out on August 19th and was able to
> = purchase it=20 at $33.83. The sell stop order was again placed at 8% = below
at
>=20 $31.12. My sell stop was executed at $28.75.
>
> This is = the most=20 difficult time I have had with my orders yet. I have
> usually = been able=20 to get much closer to my stop price. I can't afford to
> loose = and=20 average of 16% or double the CANSLIM method. I have heard = that
it
>=20 is unwise to "Tip you hand" by having a stop order out there for=20 the
market
> makers to grab. But if I'm such a small fish out = there,=20 then how on earth
> could my little stop order influence anyone? = Is=20 there a trading platform
> that is better at setting up = unattended=20 orders. I've heard of trailing
> stops etc. but aren't these = just ideas=20 or soft stops that you have to
watch
> the intra-day action = of the=20 market to take advantage of?
>
> I just can't seem to get = out of=20 the shoot...I suppose along with everyone
> else. I understand = that Due=20 Diligence might have helped on these two
> stocks, but who would = have=20 ever thought both of these would have gapped
over
> my stop = orders=20 like this!
>
> I sure would like to know how you buy and = sell when=20 you can't glue
yourself
> to a monitor all day long. I hope = that the=20 digital cell tower shows up
> close to where I work so I can at = least=20 get price and volume alerts sent
to
> me. I had this before = and it=20 worked better than this stop order crapola.
>
>=20 (JC)
>
>
> -
> -To subscribe/unsubscribe, = email=20 "majordomo@xmission.com"
> -In the email body, write "subscribe = canslim"=20 or
> -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your=20 email.


-
-To subscribe/unsubscribe, email=20 "majordomo@xmission.com"
-In the email body, write "subscribe = canslim"=20 or
-"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your = email.


Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo!=20 Finance - Get real-time stock quotes - ------=_NextPart_000_0038_01C25387.E0729050-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 19:36:08 -0500 From: "david frank" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Why Professionals go astray This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_00C0_01C25381.26D009D0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To really have proof, how about the old end of year tax statement. = Around 6 months ago, I had extra money to invest, so i ask a few CANSLIM = masters, there names occasionally pop here, to invest in their = partnerships. I wanted to know their track record, which are audited. I = found that their track records not only for 2000s but 1990s, not that = impressive. David ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Fred Richards=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 6:54 PM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Why Professionals go astray Heavens to Betsie . . .=20 I have even shown actual brokerage house statements to people and they = still don't believe the results. In fact, one newspaper reporter had the gall to suggest that the = statements were obviously forgeries. You are right . . . It's a "no-win" situation. -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com = [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Katherine Malm Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 6:36 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Why Professionals go astray Hi Wyndy, My comment about chucking CANSLIM was tongue-in-cheek. You can't = measure a system unless there are firm recommendations and/or = nonsubjective components for entry/exit.* CANSLIM is not about telling = you specifically which stocks you should and shouldn't buy, it doesn't = recommend stocks---it's a process of investing long in fundamentally = sound high-growth stocks using an intermediate term entry/exit strategy = based on technicals. It's a long strategy intended for uptrending = markets rather than an "all weather" strategy. My intended point was that if someone prefers a system that has no = subjective components, is mechanically based and/or requires statistical = evidence before following it, then CANSLIM is not the right strategy for = them. If they are instead sufficiently confident in anecdotal evidence = of success and are comfortable with interpreting subjective criteria, = then CANSLIM will "fit" the person. Katherine * What can and has been done is to take a rule-based interpretation = of CANSLIM and then enter/exit only on quantifiable elements. When this = is done, one can measure the performance (and it's quite good, by the = way). However, every time I show a study that did this to someone, they = find some reason to doubt the results. There's just no pleasing some = people. They don't believe it if you *don't* show statistics, and when = you *do* show them statistics, they say that "statistics lie." Sounds = no-win to me. ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Cwyndham@aol.com=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 5:48 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Why Professionals go astray In a message dated 9/3/2002 5:14:16 PM Central Daylight Time, = kmalm@earthlink.net writes: If track record is a prerequisite for judging content, then you = may as well chuck CANSLIM out the window....as there is no official record = of WON's yearly results since 1960-something when he began. Guess that = means that CANSLIM has no value because WON and/or the IBD doesn't even = *have* a Hulbert rating. Katherine From the loss in subscribers to the newspaper and other offerings = I think that many people are chucking CANSLIM. Folks didn't care about = performance with a bull markets wind at their back but now it's a = different story. I for one want to know "where's the beef." I am sad to = say I couldn't find any data. Wyndy - ------=_NextPart_000_00C0_01C25381.26D009D0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To really have proof, how about = the old end of=20 year tax statement. Around 6 months ago, I had extra money to invest, so = i ask a=20 few CANSLIM masters, there names occasionally pop here, to invest in = their=20 partnerships. I wanted to know their track record, which are audited. I = found=20 that their track records not only for 2000s but 1990s, not that = impressive.=20 David
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Fred=20 Richards
Sent: Tuesday, September 03, = 2002 6:54=20 PM
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Why = Professionals=20 go astray

Heavens to Betsie . . .
 
I=20 have even shown actual brokerage house statements to people and they = still=20 don't believe the results.
 
In=20 fact, one newspaper reporter had the gall to suggest that the = statements were=20 obviously forgeries.
 
You=20 are right . . . It's a "no-win" situation.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-canslim@lists.xmis= sion.com=20 [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of = Katherine=20 Malm
Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 6:36 = PM
To:=20 canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Why=20 Professionals go astray

Hi Wyndy,
 
My comment about chucking CANSLIM was tongue-in-cheek. You = can't=20 measure a system unless there are firm recommendations and/or = nonsubjective=20 components for entry/exit.* CANSLIM is not about telling you = specifically=20 which stocks you should and shouldn't buy, it doesn't recommend=20 stocks---it's a process of investing long in fundamentally sound = high-growth=20 stocks using an intermediate term entry/exit strategy based on = technicals.=20 It's a long strategy intended for uptrending markets rather than an = "all=20 weather" strategy.
 
My intended point was that if someone prefers a system = that has no=20 subjective components, is mechanically based and/or requires = statistical=20 evidence before following it, then CANSLIM is not the right strategy = for=20 them. If they are instead sufficiently confident in anecdotal = evidence of=20 success and are comfortable with interpreting subjective criteria, = then=20 CANSLIM will "fit" the person.
 
Katherine
 
* What can and has been done is to take a rule-based = interpretation of=20 CANSLIM and then enter/exit only on quantifiable elements. When this = is=20 done, one can measure the performance (and it's quite good, by the = way).=20 However, every time I show a study that did this to someone, they = find some=20 reason to doubt the results. There's just no pleasing some people. = They=20 don't believe it if you *don't* show statistics, and when you *do* = show them=20 statistics, they say that "statistics lie." Sounds no-win to = me.
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Cwyndham@aol.com
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com= =20
Sent: Tuesday, September = 03, 2002=20 5:48 PM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Why=20 Professionals go astray

In a message dated 9/3/2002 5:14:16 PM = Central Daylight=20 Time, kmalm@earthlink.net=20 writes:


If track record is a prerequisite for judging = content, then=20 you may as well
chuck CANSLIM out the window....as there is = no=20 official record of WON's
yearly results since 1960-something = when he=20 began. Guess that means that
CANSLIM has no value because WON = and/or=20 the IBD doesn't even *have* a
Hulbert=20 rating.

Katherine


From the loss in = subscribers=20 to the newspaper and other offerings I think that many people are = chucking=20 CANSLIM. Folks didn't care about performance with a bull markets = wind at=20 their back but now it's a different story. I for one want to know = "where's=20 the beef." I am sad to say I couldn't find any=20 = data.

Wyndy
 - ------=_NextPart_000_00C0_01C25381.26D009D0-- - - - -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 #2899 ****************************** 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.