From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #617 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, June 2 1999 Volume 02 : Number 617 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] MACD, trading, and Tom. [Connie Mack] Re: [CANSLIM] Re: DGO Re: [CANSLIM] Market direction, basing, breaking, trending stocks etc Re: [CANSLIM] Market direction, basing, breaking, trending stocks etc Re: [CANSLIM] Re: DGO [CANSLIM] Changing your canslim subscription Re: [CANSLIM] Re: DGO [CANSLIM] Trading SMOD [Connie Mack] [CANSLIM] Intro: Earl Setser [CANSLIM] Institutions RE: [CANSLIM] Institutions Re: [CANSLIM] Institutions [CANSLIM] ACC/Dis Numbers Re: [CANSLIM] Re: DGO Re: [CANSLIM] Re: DGO Re: [CANSLIM] Intro: Earl Setser Re: [CANSLIM] Institutions [CANSLIM] Sending large files to the canslim group ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 23:23:09 -0700 From: Dan Cash Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] MACD, trading, and Tom. [Connie Mack] To Print text: Left click, scroll text, Control C, open new message, Control V, Print. Connie Mack Rea wrote: > While you're looking at the Decision Point site > [http://decisionpoint.com/TraderNick/NickTechCIEN.html], be sure to read > this essay on the MACD. Short of buying a text, this short piece is > well done and immediately useful. > > The writer uses his MACD much as I do. I use some other settings to > contrast with his 12/26/9. I use a faster 8/17/9. Some traders use the > latter to enter and the author's to exit. I know a couple of traders > who do the reverse. > > I also use 12/6/8 and 12/3/6. Along with these I use my 3/7/11 EMA, > several stochastic settings, and some linear regression lines. I > especially like MoneyFlow and OBV as gross indicators. > > I was unable to print this essay. Apparently, DecisionPoint or the > author didn't want it printed or didn't want to set up so you could > print a black on white. You would use a can of ink to print the white > on blue. > > I'm hoping to trade SMOD tomorrow. > > Will probably buy some KM between 15 and 15.25. > > I am holding some DELL at 35.25. Here you can safely enter market > orders because there is so much volume, and the spread is a 1/16th. > > I've been taking a little more than spending money out of DJT. I hope > to buy at 5.12 and try to take away an 1/8th to 3/8ths. To make this > trade worthwhile, you'll need to buy a minimum of 1000 shares; and more > is preferable. The spread has been an 1/8th, and you usually can buy > and sell on the 1/16th. > > Tom is one of the better sources for combining trading with Canslim. He > holds the rules of Canslim strongly, but not inviolate. He likes to > trade a bit and can give advice on a nice combination of the two. > > Connie Mack > > - - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 06:42:58 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: DGO Edward, You ask two basic questions: do you need Daily Graphs in either form to be successful? and Which is better, DG (printed) or DGO (online)? The first question can only be answered by you. There is now a wealth of info free on the internet, and this group is regularly mentioning new sites they have found. Sometimes that takes addl time to gather up all the info compared to having it in one place with DG/DGO. And with the latter, you know you are getting original CANSLIM data directly from Wm O'Neil. But many members of this group do not subscribe to DG/DGO, or even IBD, and likely consider themselves successful. I have used Daily Graphs and other WON pubs for nearly a decade. I wouldn't be without it, esp now with my time very limited. As for choosing between DG and DGO, I actually subscribe to both. I don't use the book, however I just renewed my subscription for one book/month (that's the cheapest annual subscription) so that I get the discount for DGO. That gives me a total cost of $535/annually for both, saving almost $200 on the cost of DGO alone, which is what I want. The books give you about 2000 charts weekly. DGO gives you a chart on every stock, updated daily. My book typically arrives on Sunday morning. I had the same charts by late Friday nite on DGO. I can scroll thru the DGO lists seeing only the stocks on that list, with the book I would have to look up page nrs and flip pages, taking far greater time. When I am watching a stock closely, I need daily updates of the RS and up/down vol ratio. I get that with DGO, couldn't with DG and would have to take out a subscription to IBD otherwise. How long does it take? During the past year of paid subscription, I can't point to any major winners that I couldn't have gotten from DG, or possibly other sources if I was using them. However, I probably avoided (or could have avoided) some mistakes by using DGO. And in the prior year as a beta tester of DGO, I made enough on stocks I found that were not yet in DG that it paid for at least five years of subscriptions. So I consider myself way ahead still. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net chat with me at ICQ # 5568838 get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html - -----Original Message----- From: Edward P. Bullock To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Monday, May 31, 1999 11:25 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: DGO Any advice out there would be greatly appreciated. It's time for me to renew my DG's. Am I better off subscribing to DGO instead of the hardcopy Dg. Also, do I really need either to be successful? Has anyone read the book by Dhun Sethna, HTPWSWIBD? Apparently, he only uses IBD. I've subscribed to DG for a year now and it doesn't seem that there have been many opportunities; which makes me unsure about how patient I must be before I can make CANSLIM work? I'd appreciate hearing from some veterans who can tell me how long they've been at it and have you really been very successful? How long have your dry periods been before you get the M you need as well as the other CANSLIM factors. I went to an O'neil seminar several years ago & saw him and David Ryan speak about canslim for a full day. They basically made it seem that there were always opportunities to buy stocks. At that time, I read DG's for a year but it appeared to be a poor year for canslim characteristics and I didn't start again til last year. Any comments? Also, where is David R? - - - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 06:54:21 -0400 From: Hugh Fader Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Market direction, basing, breaking, trending stocks etc Thanks Tom. It sounds like the $15 cutoff is a filter to keep neophytes (like me) from getting themselves into trouble. Are there other CANSLIM guidelines that O'Neil violates in his institutional recommendations? Buying stocks with weak EPS but strong group strength for example. Tom Worley wrote: > Hugh, > > It's important to distinguish between what WON says for > general consumption (e.g. the uninformed, uneducated to > CANSLIM and investing "public") and what he says to > experienced investors and institutionals. During the period > that I was a receipient of his faxed institutional > recommendations, I saw many stocks on the list below $12 > (usually his threshold for the general public). > > Had I bot MSS like I planned, it would have been in or close > to the base at $8. The same holds true for my plans on > TTIL. I don't have a problem with low priced stocks so long > as they have enough CANSLIM characteristics. I am a patient > and generally long term investor. > > If I wait for a breakout to 10, the stock is already up 25% > from a strong base, and too extended to buy unless it > returns to the base, or builds a new one. > > Tom Worley > stkguru@netside.net > chat with me at ICQ # 5568838 > get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hugh Fader > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Date: Monday, May 31, 1999 11:19 AM > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Market direction, basing, breaking, > trending stocks etc > > Tom, > > TTIL is priced around 8. O'Neil says don't buy a stock below > 15. > Would you buy if this stock broke out to say 10? How do you > decide when it is OK to violate this rule? > > Thanks. > > Tom Worley wrote: > > > Marc, > > > > TTIL - on my watch list for nearly two months, just > waiting > > > > - - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 07:10:02 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Market direction, basing, breaking, trending stocks etc The only guidance from WON that seems to apply universally is that regarding "M". He has always had big cap stocks on his institutional buy list, but over the past five years his focus on small caps has steadily diminished. I have seen "picks" where either the RS or the EPS was under 80, in a few cases well under. I have seen thinly traded stocks on the list, as well as many under $12. I have seen a few with no reported holdings by funds. Bear in mind that his institutional list is made up by a team effort. He has many "account executives" who serve as field representatives in getting clients for his services. These acct execs travel around the country, visiting their accounts, doing training, maybe selling addl services, etc. In the course of this, they also hear about a lot of cos, as well as visiting many, and carry these ideas back to LA. The insight and observations of these reps can often bring a company to Wm O'Neil's attention when it otherwise might have remained in the shadows for months or years. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net chat with me at ICQ # 5568838 get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html - -----Original Message----- From: Hugh Fader To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Tuesday, June 01, 1999 6:54 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Market direction, basing, breaking, trending stocks etc Thanks Tom. It sounds like the $15 cutoff is a filter to keep neophytes (like me) from getting themselves into trouble. Are there other CANSLIM guidelines that O'Neil violates in his institutional recommendations? Buying stocks with weak EPS but strong group strength for example. Tom Worley wrote: > Hugh, > > It's important to distinguish between what WON says for > general consumption (e.g. the uninformed, uneducated to > CANSLIM and investing "public") and what he says to > experienced investors and institutionals. During the period > that I was a receipient of his faxed institutional > recommendations, I saw many stocks on the list below $12 > (usually his threshold for the general public). > > Had I bot MSS like I planned, it would have been in or close > to the base at $8. The same holds true for my plans on > TTIL. I don't have a problem with low priced stocks so long > as they have enough CANSLIM characteristics. I am a patient > and generally long term investor. > > If I wait for a breakout to 10, the stock is already up 25% > from a strong base, and too extended to buy unless it > returns to the base, or builds a new one. > > Tom Worley > stkguru@netside.net > chat with me at ICQ # 5568838 > get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hugh Fader > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Date: Monday, May 31, 1999 11:19 AM > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Market direction, basing, breaking, > trending stocks etc > > Tom, > > TTIL is priced around 8. O'Neil says don't buy a stock below > 15. > Would you buy if this stock broke out to say 10? How do you > decide when it is OK to violate this rule? > > Thanks. > > Tom Worley wrote: > > > Marc, > > > > TTIL - on my watch list for nearly two months, just > waiting > > > > - - - - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 08:41:38 -0400 From: Sam Funchess Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: DGO > I subscribed to DG and was a beta tester on DGO, I found DGO to be better. However, DG was nice because I could look at it when I didn't have access to a computer. (Tom, I am interested in getting DGO again am I am interested in the offer you received. Last time I looked it cost more to have DGO and DG even on a monthly basis. Where can I get the offer you get?) I was also an avid reader of IBD as well. My portfolio has suffered since my lapses in all of my subscriptions. I have not had the time to research and thus have not traded much lately. So, after babbling, my recommendation is to subscribe to IBD and sign up for Toms plan af 535 a year for DGO and DG monthly. I plan on re-subscribing to DGO and IBD in the near future. As for patience; I would recommend that you wait until you find something you really like. It is worth the wait and there are not opportunities in the market all the time (IMHO). My first year returns prove this. However, I waited for the market to show me something and picked up YHOO at a split price of 19.25 some time ago and QWST (split adjusted) at 19.00. Then I had to wait again to realize my profits (and have not realized all of them yet.) Hope all this helps. Sam > Am I better off subscribing to DGO instead of the hardcopy Dg. > I've subscribed to DG > for a year now and it doesn't seem that there have been many opportunities; > which makes me unsure about how patient I must be before I can make CANSLIM > work? I too went t a WON seminar a little over a year or so ago. I found it quite entertaining. I would like to go back in the next year or two because it was just information overload and began purging information about 3pm. > I went to an O'neil seminar several years ago & saw him and > David Ryan speak about canslim for a full day. > > - - - ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jun 1999 08:00:02 -0600 From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com (Jeff Salisbury) Subject: [CANSLIM] Changing your canslim subscription This is a monthly posting to the CANLSLIM group. Frequently, people sign up for the canslim list and then are overwhelmed by the volume of the email. There are two remedies for this problem: 1) You can leave our group, or 2) you can switch to the digest version which "conglomerates" many canslim messages into one large message. To change your configuration, email a message to: majordomo@xmission.com The remove yourself from the canslim list, write in the body of the email: unsubscribe canslim To add yourself to the digest version of the canslim list, write in the body of the email: subscribe canslim-digest For general help with majordomo commands, write in the body of the email: help If you need further clarification, write me directly at: canslim-owner@lists.xmission.com Best Regards, Jeff Salisbury - CANSLIM list admin / owner - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 14:49:53 -0500 From: "John Adair" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: DGO Hi Ed. I am not a pro but fwiw I am in the same place as you . I don't use either dgo or Ibd at the present although I have the subscriptions. I think the Oneal philosophy is more for the medium and small cap stocks( note the limited # of shares he recommends) This is mostly small cap. I think the market is mostly into the "mattress stuffers" ( woodard) at the present. I am not buying at present. I doubt I will repurchase the dgo. The investors corner is very good and may be worth the price of the IBD. I would be interested in some of your responses John Adair - ----- Original Message ----- From: Edward P. Bullock To: Sent: Monday, May 31, 1999 10:24 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: DGO > Any advice out there would be greatly appreciated. It's time for me to renew > my DG's. Am I better off subscribing to DGO instead of the hardcopy Dg. > Also, do I really need either to be successful? Has anyone read the book by > Dhun Sethna, HTPWSWIBD? Apparently, he only uses IBD. I've subscribed to DG > for a year now and it doesn't seem that there have been many opportunities; > which makes me unsure about how patient I must be before I can make CANSLIM > work? I'd appreciate hearing from some veterans who can tell me how long > they've been at it and have you really been very successful? How long have > your dry periods been before you get the M you need as well as the other > CANSLIM factors. I went to an O'neil seminar several years ago & saw him and > David Ryan speak about canslim for a full day. They basically made it seem > that there were always opportunities to buy stocks. At that time, I read > DG's for a year but it appeared to be a poor year for canslim > characteristics and I didn't start again til last year. Any comments? Also, > where is David R? > > > - > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 15:44:06 -0400 From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: [CANSLIM] Trading SMOD [Connie Mack] For those who are trading SMOD: Believe I will hold my positions overnight if there is no further deterioration. You should have a half point, plus or minus. Under no circumstance should you take a loss on this trade. I have bought some AMD at 18.5 and KM 15.25. These should be relatively low risk entries. Connie Mack - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 13:51:57 -0700 From: "Earl Setser" Subject: [CANSLIM] Intro: Earl Setser Hi all. I am a new CANSLIM investor who has just completed reading the book and subscribing to IBD. I have just started some small investments with this approach to see how they turn out. I live in Sandy, UT. I am an Electrical Engineer. My recent investment experience is mostly mutual funds, as I gave up on Stock magazines and newsletters a couple of years back. I have read through all of the May archives and hope to join in with questions and opinions in the near term. I'll post a couple of questions in separate posts. - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 15:58:45 -0700 From: "Earl Setser" Subject: [CANSLIM] Institutions I am not clear on the correct way to interpret the "I" in CANSLIM. WON says "A stock certainly does not need a large number of institutional owners, but it should have a few such sponsors. Three to ten might be a minimum or reasonable number of mutual fund sponsors, although some stocks might have a good deal more." He then goes on to talk about "quality" institutions that are buying or adding to holdings in the latest quarter. For almost all of the smaller stocks I have looked at, the IBD institution rating is a "D". I have guessed this is based on the fact that small cap stocks and funds haven't done well over the last few years. I have also found the number of institutions and ownership % listed on the web. My first take on this was that "more was better". Based on this, I have been using the following for my screening criteria (pass): A-C rating in IBD D rating in IBD with 20 or more institutions and 30% or more owned. Now I have seen notes here and elsewhere talking about institutional ownership being too high? I am beginning to wonder if I have developed my screen wrong. After re-reading the section on "I" by WON, it mostly seems to talk about "quality institutions". What does the group suggest as a general screening approach for the "I" in CANSLIM? - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 15:04:50 -0700 From: "mikelu" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Institutions At the seminar I went to David Ryan suggested not to buy stocks with fund ownership > 30%. I believe the ratings in IBD are "less is better". I don't think you can screen for it without DGO, and even then, it's a manual screen. Other online services provide an Institutional Ownership number, but I don't see it correlating to Fund Ownership from DGO. Mike - -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Earl Setser Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 1999 3:59 PM To: canslim@xmission.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Institutions I am not clear on the correct way to interpret the "I" in CANSLIM. WON says "A stock certainly does not need a large number of institutional owners, but it should have a few such sponsors. Three to ten might be a minimum or reasonable number of mutual fund sponsors, although some stocks might have a good deal more." He then goes on to talk about "quality" institutions that are buying or adding to holdings in the latest quarter. For almost all of the smaller stocks I have looked at, the IBD institution rating is a "D". I have guessed this is based on the fact that small cap stocks and funds haven't done well over the last few years. I have also found the number of institutions and ownership % listed on the web. My first take on this was that "more was better". Based on this, I have been using the following for my screening criteria (pass): A-C rating in IBD D rating in IBD with 20 or more institutions and 30% or more owned. Now I have seen notes here and elsewhere talking about institutional ownership being too high? I am beginning to wonder if I have developed my screen wrong. After re-reading the section on "I" by WON, it mostly seems to talk about "quality institutions". What does the group suggest as a general screening approach for the "I" in CANSLIM? - - - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 20:21:14 -0400 From: Hugh Fader Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Institutions My thinking about "I" is that you don't want institutional ownership to be too high or too low. If it is too high, and the institutions bail out, the price drops like a rock. However, some institutional ownership confirms your opinion that this is a stock worth buying. I look for 10 -- 30% institutional ownership. I also have the impression that management ownership balances out institutional ownership. That is, you can tolerate high institutional ownership if there is higher management ownership. Gotta go, my daughter needs help with her homework. Hugh Earl Setser wrote: > I am not clear on the correct way to interpret the "I" in CANSLIM. WON > says "A stock certainly does not need a large number of institutional > owners, but it should have a few such sponsors. Three to ten might be a > minimum or reasonable number of mutual fund sponsors, although some stocks > might have a good deal more." He then goes on to talk about "quality" > institutions that are buying or adding to holdings in the latest quarter. > > For almost all of the smaller stocks I have looked at, the IBD institution > rating is a "D". I have guessed this is based on the fact that small cap > stocks and funds haven't done well over the last few years. I have also > found the number of institutions and ownership % listed on the web. My > first take on this was that "more was better". Based on this, I have been > using the following for my screening criteria (pass): > > A-C rating in IBD > D rating in IBD with 20 or more institutions and 30% or more owned. > > Now I have seen notes here and elsewhere talking about institutional > ownership being too high? I am beginning to wonder if I have developed my > screen wrong. After re-reading the section on "I" by WON, it mostly seems > to talk about "quality institutions". What does the group suggest as a > general screening approach for the "I" in CANSLIM? > > - - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 21:47:10 EDT From: FBNAirPlt@aol.com Subject: [CANSLIM] ACC/Dis Numbers Hi all. Here are the latest ACC/Dis numbers: Date A B C D E AB/A:E %E 5/14/1999 1676 2856 1067 766 308 68% 5% 5/17/1999 1715 2889 1044 762 289 69% 4% 5/18/1999 1623 2876 1078 807 318 67% 5% 5/19/1999 1582 2866 1087 820 342 66% 5% 5/20/1999 1570 2910 1072 813 339 67% 5% 5/21/1999 1606 2886 1071 793 349 67% 5% 5/24/1999 1653 2890 1094 756 328 68% 5% 5/25/1999 1674 2889 1089 758 323 68% 5% 5/26/1999 1567 2919 1096 802 331 67% 5% 5/27/1999 1439 2892 1178 850 342 65% 5% 5/28/1999 1418 2884 1199 842 346 64% 5% 6/1/1999 1391 2858 1238 848 355 64% 5% Spreedsheet version Date,A,B,C,D,E,AB/A:E,%E 5/14/1999,1676,2856,1067,766,308,68%,5% 5/17/1999,1715,2889,1044,762,289,69%,4% 5/18/1999,1623,2876,1078,807,318,67%,5% 5/19/1999,1582,2866,1087,820,342,66%,5% 5/20/1999,1570,2910,1072,813,339,67%,5% 5/21/1999,1606,2886,1071,793,349,67%,5% 5/24/1999,1653,2890,1094,756,328,68%,5% 5/25/1999,1674,2889,1089,758,323,68%,5% 5/26/1999,1567,2919,1096,802,331,67%,5% 5/27/1999,1439,2892,1178,850,342,65%,5% 5/28/1999,1418,2884,1199,842,346,64%,5% 6/1/1999,1391,2858,1238,848,355,64%,5% Robert - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 21:21:27 -0800 From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: DGO > Any advice out there would be greatly appreciated. It's time for me to renew > my DG's. Am I better off subscribing to DGO instead of the hardcopy Dg. > Also, do I really need either to be successful? Has anyone read the book by The Daily Graphs are pretty good, luckily I am able to get it at my local library. The IBD is a pretty good alternative. Another option you might consider is Quotes Plus, which a number of people on this list use. If you aren't familiar with it, it is charting software that also provides fundamental information on many thousands of stocks, and also has scanning capabilities, so you can write searches that will use criteria that will generate a list of canslim type stocks. I think it is $18 a month. They have a web site somewhere. - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 23:58:11 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: DGO Hi Sam, If you go to the homepage www.dailygraphs.com and meander around a little, esp down towards the bottom of the page, you will find buttons for "downloading and pricing" or some such. After you click on that, and go to the bottom again, you will find a button for present Daily Graph subscriber discounts for DGO. Clicking on that will reveal a matrix showing that "full" DG subscribers (e.g. both books weekly on an annual subscribtion) can still add DGO for only $99/year, and other DG subscribers can add it for $299/year. Since the cheapest annual subscription to DG is one book a month, that gets you this discounted rate of $299. Adding the two together (one DG book a month plus DGO) results in $530 or $535 annually. So far there is no discount offered for IBD subscribers, but wouldn't hurt to call and ask for one. It's an 800 nr and the worst they may do is say no. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net chat with me at ICQ # 5568838 get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html - -----Original Message----- From: Sam Funchess To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Tuesday, June 01, 1999 8:47 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: DGO > I subscribed to DG and was a beta tester on DGO, I found DGO to be better. However, DG was nice because I could look at it when I didn't have access to a computer. (Tom, I am interested in getting DGO again am I am interested in the offer you received. Last time I looked it cost more to have DGO and DG even on a monthly basis. Where can I get the offer you get?) I was also an avid reader of IBD as well. My portfolio has suffered since my lapses in all of my subscriptions. I have not had the time to research and thus have not traded much lately. So, after babbling, my recommendation is to subscribe to IBD and sign up for Toms plan af 535 a year for DGO and DG monthly. I plan on re-subscribing to DGO and IBD in the near future. As for patience; I would recommend that you wait until you find something you really like. It is worth the wait and there are not opportunities in the market all the time (IMHO). My first year returns prove this. However, I waited for the market to show me something and picked up YHOO at a split price of 19.25 some time ago and QWST (split adjusted) at 19.00. Then I had to wait again to realize my profits (and have not realized all of them yet.) Hope all this helps. Sam > Am I better off subscribing to DGO instead of the hardcopy Dg. > I've subscribed to DG > for a year now and it doesn't seem that there have been many opportunities; > which makes me unsure about how patient I must be before I can make CANSLIM > work? I too went t a WON seminar a little over a year or so ago. I found it quite entertaining. I would like to go back in the next year or two because it was just information overload and began purging information about 3pm. > I went to an O'neil seminar several years ago & saw him and > David Ryan speak about canslim for a full day. > > - - - - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 00:13:17 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Intro: Earl Setser Welcome, Earl Fire away with questions, ideas, and picks when ready. I'm sure someone in the group will respond. There's a wealth of experience and knowledge here, and it's usually a very civil and friendly group. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net chat with me at ICQ # 5568838 get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html - -----Original Message----- From: Earl Setser To: canslim@xmission.com Date: Tuesday, June 01, 1999 3:48 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] Intro: Earl Setser Hi all. I am a new CANSLIM investor who has just completed reading the book and subscribing to IBD. I have just started some small investments with this approach to see how they turn out. I live in Sandy, UT. I am an Electrical Engineer. My recent investment experience is mostly mutual funds, as I gave up on Stock magazines and newsletters a couple of years back. I have read through all of the May archives and hope to join in with questions and opinions in the near term. I'll post a couple of questions in separate posts. - - - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 00:40:51 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Institutions Hi Earl, There are several things to bear in mind in assessing "funds" ownership. First, funds report their holdings on a quarterly basis. Any site that claims to have more timely info is highly suspect to me, I suspect there is a lot of guessing to have any more timely data. And the official data is usually available and being incorporated in places like DGO several weeks after the end of the qtr, so it's not timely in any event. Second, different sites measure "funds" or "institutional" holdings in different ways. For example, DG and DGO first measure "management" (or insiders) ownership as a percentage of the total issue. This then generates the remaining shares (the "float"). Funds ownership, as well as banks and insurance cos, are then measured as a percentage of the float (not the total issue), thus you can't simply add up all the percentage figures. Different sites also define "institutional" in different ways. This can include or exclude such sources as insurance cos and banks (which normally have large amounts of capital to invest and must make better than average returns on); pension funds (same thing); and mutual funds. Thus, it's important to understand the definition and counting methodology of whatever site you use for info. That said, the bottom line remains that you like to see some mutual fund participation (e.g. one or two fund mgrs at least have already discovered this "gem"). But you also don't want to see funds ownership already at the saturation point, you want lots more room for more funds to gobble up shares, as well as the early buyers to add to their position. Funds, even small cap funds, want some degree of liquidity. Thus, a 10 mil share issue, where mngmt already owns half, only leaves 5 mil shares for everyone else. If funds already own 20%, then only 4 mil are left. Contrast that to a 50 mil share issue, where mngmt owns 10% leaving 45 mil shares. If funds own the same 20%, there are still 36 mil shares freely trading. This creates vastly different scenarios whether the funds start buying more or start selling. Personally, because I prefer small caps, I like to find my "gems" before even the small cap mgrs do. So I will venture into a stock with zero funds holdings, tho prefer a small showing by the funds in the under 10% level. I steer clear of stocks where the funds already hold 30% or more, regardless of the float size. At that level, I have found they rarely increase their ownership, and are far more likely to be sellers than holders or buyers. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net chat with me at ICQ # 5568838 get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html - -----Original Message----- From: Earl Setser To: canslim@xmission.com Date: Tuesday, June 01, 1999 5:55 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] Institutions I am not clear on the correct way to interpret the "I" in CANSLIM. WON says "A stock certainly does not need a large number of institutional owners, but it should have a few such sponsors. Three to ten might be a minimum or reasonable number of mutual fund sponsors, although some stocks might have a good deal more." He then goes on to talk about "quality" institutions that are buying or adding to holdings in the latest quarter. For almost all of the smaller stocks I have looked at, the IBD institution rating is a "D". I have guessed this is based on the fact that small cap stocks and funds haven't done well over the last few years. I have also found the number of institutions and ownership % listed on the web. My first take on this was that "more was better". Based on this, I have been using the following for my screening criteria (pass): A-C rating in IBD D rating in IBD with 20 or more institutions and 30% or more owned. Now I have seen notes here and elsewhere talking about institutional ownership being too high? I am beginning to wonder if I have developed my screen wrong. After re-reading the section on "I" by WON, it mostly seems to talk about "quality institutions". What does the group suggest as a general screening approach for the "I" in CANSLIM? - - - - ------------------------------ Date: 2 Jun 1999 08:00:01 -0600 From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com (Jeff Salisbury) Subject: [CANSLIM] Sending large files to the canslim group Everyone, There are times when you may wish to share large files with our group (i.e. gif, jpeg, spreadsheets, etc). Our list is configured to reject large postings (even if they are properly encoded) since the sheer volume has caused problems in the past. As an alternative, we have provided an anonymous ftp site. To provide your file to the group, please follow these instructions: 1. Send your file to: ftp://ftp.xmission.com/pub/users/m/mcjathan/incoming/ If you need some help doing this step, there are ftp instructions below. 2. Send mail to me directly at "owner-canslim@xmission.com" telling me the name of the file that you uploaded. I will move the file from the incoming directory, to the canslim directory where people will be able to download your file. 3. After I notify you that the file has been moved to the canslim directory, you should send an email to the canslim group describing your file, and its URL (i.e. ftp://ftp.xmission.com/pub/users/m/mcjathan/GreatBoom.gif). Although this may seem unwieldy at first, it really isn't too bad and it solves more problems than it creates. You should note that I do not monitor my email on the weekends as closely as during the week. Therefore, steps 2-3 may take longer over a weekend. Best Regards, Jeff Salisbury =========================================================================== FTP Instructions: 1. Using Netscape, go to the URL: ftp://ftp.xmission.com/pub/users/m/mcjathan/incoming/ 2. On the Netscape "File" menu, select "Upload File..." This will open a file selection widget on your hard-drive. Select the file you wish to upload and hit the "Ok" button. At this point, your file will be uploaded. 3. Eventhough your file has been uploaded, you will not be able to see the file in your netscape browser. The reason for this is that the "incoming" directory is set to write-only for security reasons. - - ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #617 ***************************** 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.