From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #3476 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 Wednesday, August 6 2003 Volume 02 : Number 3476 In this issue: RE: [CANSLIM] filter RE: [CANSLIM] filter ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 13:57:25 -0700 (PDT) From: Marc Deiter Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] filter Hi Jeff, Welcome to the group. I looked at your filter and I would suggest some modifications. EPS Qtr to Qtr growth - this is set at 70 in your screen. I would put this around 20-25. Sales Growth and ROE - I would add two criteria for Sales Growth Yr over Yr and Qtr over Qtr. I personally would set these around 20 - adjust to your own rules and preferences. For ROE criteria, WON recommends 17% but I like to do around 12%. One other modification I would suggest is to remove or lower the criteria you have put in for daily volume. You want to see volume on the breakout day be 50% above average. The objective of running the screen is to find stocks prior to break-out that are setting up. Ideally, the volume of a stock forming a handle will be much lower than 50% above the daily average. Marc - --- Jeff Henderson wrote: > Ok, for the sake of organization here is a link to my filter: > http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/invsub/finder/finderx.asp?Query=SV1 > QF153Z04L70ZF131Z04L24ZF3Z00F233Z05L25000000ZF307Z04L80ZF5Z04L1%2e5F116M > ZF116Z00F102Z04L10Z > 1QF153Z04L70ZF131Z04L24ZF3Z00F233Z05L25000000ZF307Z04L80ZF5Z04L1%2e5F116 > MZF116Z00F102Z04L10Z&Name=o%27neal&Tickers=25> > &Name=o%27neal&Tickers=25 > > As I mentioned earlier I am using the EXACT recommendations from > O'Neil's book but I am getting NO query results. Why is this? Are > WON's standards too high? What fundamentals should I be using? I > assume we all can agree on the CANSLIM methods but I guess there is > disagreement in the specific numbers to be used. > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Katherine > Malm > Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 2:46 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] filter > > Hi Gene, > > Please see my follow up clarification post on the comment on "the > prior > 52 weeks." > > I did not state nor intend to imply that MSN screeners weren't > effective, but that they would not produce the same results as > those you > would get when using DGO/IBD RSRanks. It's worth noting for those > that > are unaware that the RS values at free screening sites such as MSN > are > *not* the same as those from IBD/DGO. The same is true of industry > ranks, etc., as the methdologies are quite different. > > It does leave a particular question, however, as to why you would > find > it necessary to use free MSN screeners when you use several > different > subscription services (HGSI and Vectorvest) and also use Metastock > for > screening (though I realize you probably use the QP2 data from the > HGSI > feed). HGSI, in particular, closely mirrors the IBD/DGO RSranks and > includes EPS ranks as well. They also have a particularly > comprehensive > set of tools for performing analysis of a stock's technicals and > fundamentals. Why use so many different tools? > > Katherine > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Gene Ricci > Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 2:31 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] filter > Hi Katherine, I'm pretty sure that the RS ranks are not based over > the > prior 52 weeks. > And, I have found the MSN screener to be very effective. > > Gene > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Katherine Malm > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 2:21 PM > Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] filter > > Hi Jeff, > > I might add a note of caution on using the MSN screener. That is, > their > RS ranks are based on a flat change in price over the prior 52 > weeks. > This is significantly different than IBD's RS ranks, which are > weighted > so that the price action in the most recent quarter carries more > weight > (40%), while previous quarter's each carry 20% weight. The other > difference in RS ranks is that the database over which they are > determined is very different. RS ranks for the IBD are based on a > universe of stocks which includes *only* common stocks on the major > US > (NASDAQ, NYSE, AMEX) and Canadian exchanges, plus closed end bond > and > equity funds. From what I remember, MSN RS ranks are calculated > across > all equities in the US markets, including warrants and preferreds. > While > the RS ranks at MSN are indeed useful, you would not be emulating > the > IBD rankings for purposes of filtering your stocks. > > Katherine > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of DMC197807 > Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 2:08 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] filter > Jeff, > > If you're using a free scanner, why don't you use the one Gene > posted a > couple of days ago (I'll repost his post) and play with the > criteria > there. If I adjust relative strength to 80 or above it spits out > 15 > names. > > As for CANSLIM criteria, after M one supposes they are all > important, > and my descending order is no better (could be a lot worse) than > anyone > else's. However, you are asking a question that I answered 2 days > ago, > at least from my perspective. This is from my note on 8/4 to Yien: > > > < some > you > can. There are only 3 numbers which matter, when all the dust is > settled. > They are NOT p/e, d/e, current ratio, PEG, profit margin or > inventory > turnover. > > THEY ARE: Price paid for shares, Price received for shares, Time > held. > > Now, MILSCAN (Canslim to some of you) is a very interesting > approach, > and > can possibly, with strong position and money management systems, > help > you to > buy low and sell high in a timely timeframe. > > Here's how I think of these factors, in descending order of > importance: > > < inflection > point > here, so it's lookout below, or perhaps lookout above. > > N is for new highs in the stock, breaking out above the pivot point > > L is for an relative strength rating of 70 or better > > A is for annual earnings growth (this is for additional comfort) > > C is for current quarterly earnings (this is for additional > comfort) > > I is for institutional sponsorship (this is a timing issue--I > think I > trust > the chart over this, for some reason) > > S is for supply of stock (looking for a relatively low no. of > shares--here I > want to exclude the over-issued monsters like CSCO and INTC where > it > will > take a ton of momentum to move the billions of shares outstanding). > > In closing, using TA and FA together is a good idea, but when in > conflict, > trust the TA. Remember, out of 7000 stocks we are looking for 1 or > 2 > names > a week on which to carefully place our hopes. >> > > DMC > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Jeff Henderson > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 11:40 AM > Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] filter > > Sorry about the misunderstanding I was using the CANSLIM acronym. > I'll > explain my filter again. First off I use MSN as my filter source. > Here > is my filter that I use: current earnings per share (the same > quarter a > year ago)>=70%, annual earnings per share over the past 5 years, >= > 24% > compounded, shares outstanding<25,000,000, relative strength> 80%. > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of DMC197807 > === message truncated === - - - -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: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 16:09:34 -0500 From: "Katherine Malm" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] filter This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_009E_01C35C35.205CA370 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit HI Jeff, First, your EPS growth rate QoQ is too high. I think you might be mixing up QoQ growth rate with the EPS *ranking* that the IBD provides. The EPS ranking provided by IBD is a proprietary measure which looks at the growth rates over the prior 3 years, runs a calculation, then ranks all stocks one against the other from 1 to 99. If the IBD suggests EPS>=70, this is referring to an EPS ranking >=70, not to eps QoQ growth rate >= 70% per quarter. Second, if you use a volume filter of 150% average volume, you will only be finding stocks that have had a huge volume move on the prior day. While a stock is building a base, you generally want to see increasing volume on the right hand side of the base, but limiting your filter as you have is too restrictive. More likely, you'll find stocks that broke out on the prior day. Too late. Next, the RS filter you are using is not the same as IBD's RS rank. The one you have included is a *flat* 6 month RS, not the 12 month *weighted* RS that WON uses. Finally, the insitutional ownership listed in MSN is a percentage of the *outstanding* shares. WON uses a percentage that is the percentage of shares in *float*. In either case, WON does not give an absolute as to "how much" insitutional ownership is required, only that you want the stock to be owned by "at least a few" institutions. Katherine -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Jeff Henderson Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 3:41 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] filter Ok, for the sake of organization here is a link to my filter: http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/invsub/finder/finderx.asp?Query=SV1QF153Z04 L70ZF131Z04L24ZF3Z00F233Z05L25000000ZF307Z04L80ZF5Z04L1%2e5F116MZF116Z00F102Z04L 10Z&Name=o%27neal&Tickers=25 As I mentioned earlier I am using the EXACT recommendations from O'Neil's book but I am getting NO query results. Why is this? Are WON's standards too high? What fundamentals should I be using? I assume we all can agree on the CANSLIM methods but I guess there is disagreement in the specific numbers to be used. -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Katherine Malm Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 2:46 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] filter Hi Gene, Please see my follow up clarification post on the comment on "the prior 52 weeks." I did not state nor intend to imply that MSN screeners weren't effective, but that they would not produce the same results as those you would get when using DGO/IBD RSRanks. It's worth noting for those that are unaware that the RS values at free screening sites such as MSN are *not* the same as those from IBD/DGO. The same is true of industry ranks, etc., as the methdologies are quite different. It does leave a particular question, however, as to why you would find it necessary to use free MSN screeners when you use several different subscription services (HGSI and Vectorvest) and also use Metastock for screening (though I realize you probably use the QP2 data from the HGSI feed). HGSI, in particular, closely mirrors the IBD/DGO RSranks and includes EPS ranks as well. They also have a particularly comprehensive set of tools for performing analysis of a stock's technicals and fundamentals. Why use so many different tools? Katherine -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Gene Ricci Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 2:31 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] filter Hi Katherine, I'm pretty sure that the RS ranks are not based over the prior 52 weeks. And, I have found the MSN screener to be very effective. Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: Katherine Malm To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 2:21 PM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] filter Hi Jeff, I might add a note of caution on using the MSN screener. That is, their RS ranks are based on a flat change in price over the prior 52 weeks. This is significantly different than IBD's RS ranks, which are weighted so that the price action in the most recent quarter carries more weight (40%), while previous quarter's each carry 20% weight. The other difference in RS ranks is that the database over which they are determined is very different. RS ranks for the IBD are based on a universe of stocks which includes *only* common stocks on the major US (NASDAQ, NYSE, AMEX) and Canadian exchanges, plus closed end bond and equity funds. From what I remember, MSN RS ranks are calculated across all equities in the US markets, including warrants and preferreds. While the RS ranks at MSN are indeed useful, you would not be emulating the IBD rankings for purposes of filtering your stocks. Katherine -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of DMC197807 Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 2:08 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] filter Jeff, If you're using a free scanner, why don't you use the one Gene posted a couple of days ago (I'll repost his post) and play with the criteria there. If I adjust relative strength to 80 or above it spits out 15 names. As for CANSLIM criteria, after M one supposes they are all important, and my descending order is no better (could be a lot worse) than anyone else's. However, you are asking a question that I answered 2 days ago, at least from my perspective. This is from my note on 8/4 to Yien: <> DMC ----- Original Message ----- From: Jeff Henderson To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 11:40 AM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] filter Sorry about the misunderstanding I was using the CANSLIM acronym. I' ll explain my filter again. First off I use MSN as my filter source. Here is my filter that I use: current earnings per share (the same quarter a year ago)>=70%, annual earnings per share over the past 5 years, >= 24% compounded, shares outstanding<25,000,000, relative strength> 80%. -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of DMC197807 Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 11:23 AM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] filter Jeff, I don't understand which filter/scan you are using, or what all your variables mean. If you're using a public scan or stockcharts, maybe you can put in a link here? If C = capitalization and you are using only the top 30% of stocks you've filtered out way too many stocks already. In capitalization I only filter out the very top stocks, but that's just me. I don't know what your S is. For relative strength I use the top 40% of the market, that is, stocks outperforming 60%. I'm willing to let some other names in because after this scan gives me names, I'm happy to look through charts to find appropriate patterns. DMC ----- Original Message ----- From: Jeff Henderson To: Canslim Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 9:02 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] filter After reading O'Neil's book I decided to use the filter C>=70, A>=5, S<25,000,000, relative strength>80 and last volume 1.5 average quarterly volume. To my dismay, no stocks popped up. How would you alter this filter? - ------=_NextPart_000_009E_01C35C35.205CA370 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
HI Jeff,
 
First, your EPS growth rate QoQ is = too high.=20 I think you might be mixing up QoQ growth rate with the EPS *ranking* = that the=20 IBD provides. The EPS ranking provided by IBD is a proprietary measure = which=20 looks at the growth rates over the prior 3 years, runs a calculation, = then ranks=20 all stocks one against the other from 1 to 99. If the IBD suggests = EPS>=3D70,=20 this is referring to an EPS ranking >=3D70, not to eps QoQ growth = rate >=3D=20 70% per quarter.
 
Second, if you use a volume filter = of 150%=20 average volume, you will only be finding stocks that have had a huge = volume move=20 on the prior day. While a stock is building a base, you generally want = to see=20 increasing volume on the right hand side of the base, but limiting your = filter=20 as you have is too restrictive. More likely, you'll find stocks that = broke out=20 on the prior day. Too late.
 
Next, the RS filter you are using = is not the=20 same as IBD's RS rank. The one you have included is a *flat* 6 month RS, = not the=20 12 month *weighted* RS that WON uses.
 
Finally, the insitutional = ownership listed=20 in MSN is a percentage of the *outstanding* shares. WON uses a = percentage that=20 is the percentage of shares in *float*. In either case, WON does not = give an=20 absolute as to "how much" insitutional ownership is required, only that = you want=20 the stock to be owned by "at least a few" institutions.
 
Katherine
-----Original Message-----
From:=20 owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Jeff=20 Henderson
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 3:41 = PM
To:=20 canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM]=20 filter

Ok, for the = sake of=20 organization here is a link to my filter: http://= moneycentral.msn.com/investor/invsub/finder/finderx.asp?Query=3DSV1QF153Z= 04L70ZF131Z04L24ZF3Z00F233Z05L25000000ZF307Z04L80ZF5Z04L1%2e5F116MZF116Z0= 0F102Z04L10Z&Name=3Do%27neal&Tickers=3D25

 

As I mentioned earlier I = am using=20 the EXACT recommendations from O’Neil’s book but I am = getting NO query=20 results.  Why is = this?  Are WON’s=20 standards too high?  = What=20 fundamentals should I be using?  I=20 assume we all can agree on the CANSLIM methods but I guess there is=20 disagreement in the specific numbers to be used.

 

-----Original=20 Message-----
From:=20 owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com = [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]=20 On Behalf Of Katherine = Malm
Sent:=20 Wednesday, August=20 06, 2003 = 2:46=20 PM
To:=20 canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM]=20 filter

 

Hi=20 Gene,

 

Please see my follow up = clarification post on the comment on "the prior 52=20 weeks."

 

I did not state nor = intend to=20 imply that MSN screeners weren't effective, but that they would not = produce=20 the same results as those you would get when using DGO/IBD RSRanks. = It's worth=20 noting for those that are unaware that the RS values at free screening = sites=20 such as MSN are *not* the same as those from IBD/DGO. The same is true = of=20 industry ranks, etc., as the methdologies are quite=20 different.

 

It does leave a = particular=20 question, however, as to why you would find it necessary to use free = MSN=20 screeners when you use several different subscription services (HGSI = and=20 Vectorvest) and also use Metastock for screening (though I realize you = probably use the QP2 data from the HGSI feed). HGSI, in particular, = closely=20 mirrors the IBD/DGO RSranks and includes EPS ranks as well. They also = have a=20 particularly comprehensive set of tools for performing analysis of a = stock's=20 technicals and fundamentals. Why use so many different tools?=20

 

Katherine

 

 

 -----Original=20 Message-----
From:=20 owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On=20 Behalf Of Gene Ricci
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, = 2003 2:31=20 PM
To:=20 canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]=20 filter

Hi=20 Katherine, I'm pretty sure that the RS ranks are not based over the = prior 52=20 weeks.

And, I=20 have found the MSN screener to be very effective.=20

 

Gene

----- = Original=20 Message -----

From: Katherine=20 Malm

To: canslim@lists.xmission.com= =20

Sent:=20 Wednesday, August 06, 2003 2:21 = PM

Subject: RE:=20 [CANSLIM] filter

 

Hi=20 Jeff,

 

I might add a note of = caution on=20 using the MSN screener. That is, their RS ranks are based on a = flat change=20 in price over the prior 52 weeks. This is significantly different = than=20 IBD's RS ranks, which are weighted so that the price action in the = most=20 recent quarter carries more weight (40%), while previous quarter's = each=20 carry 20% weight. The other difference in RS ranks is that the = database=20 over which they are determined is very different. RS ranks for the = IBD are=20 based on a universe of stocks which includes *only* common stocks = on the=20 major US (NASDAQ, NYSE, AMEX) and Canadian exchanges, = plus=20 closed end bond and equity funds. From what I remember, MSN RS = ranks are=20 calculated across all equities in the US markets, including = warrants and=20 preferreds. While the RS ranks at MSN are indeed useful, you would = not be=20 emulating the IBD rankings for purposes of filtering your=20 stocks.

 

Katherine

-----Original=20 Message-----
From:=20 owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of = DMC197807
Sent: Wednesday, August = 06, 2003=20 2:08 PM
To:=20 canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]=20 filter

Jeff,

 

If = you're using=20 a free scanner, why don't you use the one Gene posted a couple = of days=20 ago (I'll repost his post) and play with the criteria = there.  If I=20 adjust relative strength to 80 or above it spits out 15=20 names.

 

As = for CANSLIM=20 criteria, after M one supposes they are all important, and my = descending=20 order is no better (could be a lot worse) than anyone = else's. =20 However, you are asking a question that I answered 2 days ago, = at least=20 from my perspective.  This is from my note on 8/4 to=20 Yien:

 

 

<<Good, that's a bunch of = information that=20 you can't use.  Now, for some you
can.  There are = only 3=20 numbers which matter, when all the dust is settled.
They are = NOT p/e,=20 d/e, current ratio, PEG, profit margin or=20 inventory
turnover.

THEY ARE:  Price paid for = shares,=20 Price received for shares, Time held.

Now, MILSCAN = (Canslim to=20 some of you) is a very interesting approach, and
can = possibly, with=20 strong position and money management systems, help you to
buy = low and=20 sell high in a timely timeframe.

Here's how I think of = these=20 factors, in descending order of importance:

<<M is = for the=20 market and the market trend.  We are at an inflection=20 point
here, so it's lookout below, or perhaps lookout = above.

N=20 is for new highs in the stock, breaking out above the pivot=20 point

L is for an relative strength rating of 70 or=20 better

A is for annual earnings growth (this is for = additional=20 comfort)

C is for current quarterly earnings (this is for = additional comfort)

I is for institutional = sponsorship =20 (this is a timing issue--I think I trust
the chart over this, = for=20 some reason)

S is for supply of stock (looking for a = relatively=20 low no. of shares--here I
want to exclude the over-issued = monsters=20 like CSCO and INTC where it will
take a ton of momentum to = move the=20 billions of shares outstanding).

In closing, using TA and = FA=20 together is a good idea, but when in conflict,
trust the = TA. =20 Remember, out of 7000 stocks we are looking for 1 or 2 = names
a week=20 on which to carefully place our=20 hopes. >>

 

DMC

-----=20 Original Message -----

Sent:=20 Wednesday, August 06, 2003 11:40 = AM

Subject:=20 RE: [CANSLIM] filter

 

Sorry about=20 the misunderstanding I was using the CANSLIM acronym.  I’ll explain = my filter=20 again.  First = off I use=20 MSN as my filter source. =20 Here is my filter that I use: current earnings per = share (the=20 same quarter a year ago)>=3D70%, annual earnings per share = over the=20 past 5 years, >=3D 24% compounded, shares = outstanding<25,000,000,=20 relative strength> 80%.

 

-----Original=20 Message-----
From:=20 owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of=20 DMC197807
Sent: = Wednesday, = August 06,=20 2003 = 11:23=20 AM
To:=20 canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]=20 filter

 

Jeff,

 

I = don't=20 understand which filter/scan you are using, or what all your = variables=20 mean.  If you're using a public scan or stockcharts, = maybe you=20 can put in a link here?

 

If C =3D=20 capitalization and you are using only the top 30% of stocks = you've=20 filtered out way too many stocks already.  In = capitalization I=20 only filter out the very top stocks, but that's just me.  = I don't=20 know what your S is.  For relative strength I use the top = 40% of=20 the market, that is, stocks outperforming=20 60%.

 

I'm willing=20 to let some other names in because after this scan gives me = names, I'm=20 happy to look through charts to find appropriate=20 patterns.

 

DMC

 

 

-----=20 Original Message -----

To:=20 Canslim=20

Sent:=20 Wednesday, = August 06,=20 2003 = 9:02=20 AM

Subject:=20 [CANSLIM] filter

 

After=20 reading O’Neil’s book I decided to use the = filter C>=3D70, A>=3D5,=20 S<25,000,000, relative strength>80 and last volume 1.5 = average=20 quarterly volume.  = To my=20 dismay, no stocks popped up. =20 How would you alter this=20 = filter?

- ------=_NextPart_000_009E_01C35C35.205CA370-- - - - -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 #3476 ****************************** 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.