From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #924 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 Friday, June 16 2000 Volume 02 : Number 924 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks breaking out but still reasonable Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable Re: [CANSLIM] check out this CANSLIM screener, FREE! NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable) [CANSLIM] Changing your canslim subscription Re: [CANSLIM] check out this CANSLIM screener, FREE! [CANSLIM] Current Canslim Leaders Re: [CANSLIM] Current Canslim Leaders [CANSLIM] Re. Stocks Ready To Break-Out Re: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable) Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom? Re: [CANSLIM] Nitpicking Re: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable) Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom? Re: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable) Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom? [CANSLIM] (Fwd) Re: [quotes-plus] Cup and Handle [CANSLIM] List of stocks forming handles RE: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 00:02:33 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks breaking out but still reasonable All depends on what site you use for your data. Using legitimate CANSLIM data from DGO, the EPS is at 81 as of tonight; and the last 4 qtrs of earnings showed year over year gains of 18%; 73%; 150% and 322%. Since DG/DGO/CANSLIM weights the two most recent qtrs heavier than prior qtrs, the EPS makes sense. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net chat with me at ICQ # 5568838 get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html - ----- Original Message ----- From: Alexander T To: Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 2:49 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks breaking out but still reasonable I would have a little problem with NUHC from the CANSLIM standpoint since its yearly EPS has been declining until last year... I am not sure what EPS rank this has earned it (I think I considered it a leader), but I would consider this EPS deceleration. ______________________________________________ FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup - - - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 00:05:02 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable big gains, then consolidation, while the mkt waits for whatever action the FOMC will take late this month. Lot of money still sidelined, as shown by volume. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net chat with me at ICQ # 5568838 get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html - ----- Original Message ----- From: Rocky Sanghvi To: Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 3:03 PM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable I have a question for all CANSLIM followers. I have always beleived that one of the most powerful things that WON has said goes something like this: "Forget about what the market will do tomorrow or in the future. Focus on what the market has already done." Can we start a brief discussion on this? What has the market already done as a predictor of the what the market are going to do? I have seen utilities and financials convincingly hit bottoms. I see healthcare and certain technology stocks doing fairly well. We have also seen a convincing follow through twice in the recent past. Is this a good time to be investing? Best Regards Rakesh - -----Original Message----- From: Pritish Shah [mailto:prishah@cisco.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 2:08 PM To: canslim@xmission.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable PCS: already over avg volume NUHC: really blasting through with volume but still catachable Regards, Shah 408-525-4263 - - - - - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 01:36:40 -0700 From: han.26@osu.edu Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] check out this CANSLIM screener, FREE! I always loved stockmaster.com because of their nice LOGARITHMic charts, but now that I found they have a CANSLIM screener, I feel obligated to promote it. It's FREE, too! http://strategy.stockmaster.com/StockSearchRun.asp?cobrander=stockmaster&gurupage=ONeil&upt=2879§ion=results&WilliamONeil=1&submit1=Click+Here&type=guru - -Jim P.S. here's it's latest CANSLIM picks. Keep in mind, it lists the CANSLIM based on prices given--sometimes a day old so you have to look at current charts to see if they're still relevant. Also, I don't think it looks at technicals [chart formations]: AAON AAON INC ADBE ADOBE SYSTEMS INC ALTR ALTERA CORP CDWC CDW COMPUTER CTRS INC CHP C&D TECHNOLOGIES INC CTAC 1-800 CONTACTS INC CTK COMPTEK RESEARCH INC FORR FORRESTER RESEARCH INC JKHY JACK HENRY & ASSOCIATES KEI KEITHLEY INSTRUMENTS INC LLTC LINEAR TECHNOLOGY CORP MSS MEASUREMENT SPECIALITIES ORCL ORACLE CORPORATION PDCO PATTERSON DENTAL CO PENG PRIMA ENERGY CORP SHFL SHUFFLE MASTER INC TECH TECHNE CORP TLGD TOLLGRADE COMMUN INC TNL TECHNITROL INC XLNX XILINX INC - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 08:05:27 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable) Because in the past five years the earnings went from 1.09 to 1.03 Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net chat with me at ICQ # 5568838 get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html - ----- Original Message ----- From: Joseph Weisfish To: ; Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 8:32 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable NUHC: I don't understand why DGO shows it with a -4% growth rate, can this be a mistake? - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 08:00:01 -0600 From: owner-canslim@xmission.com (Jeff Salisbury) Subject: [CANSLIM] Changing your canslim subscription This is a twice 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 three remedies for this problem: 1) You can leave our group. 2) you can switch to the digest version which "conglomerates" many canslim messages into one large message. Or, 3) You can setup customized filters on your own mail client to sort the incoming canslim messages to its own folder. If you wish to modify your canslim subscription, 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: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 11:44:41 -0500 From: Kent Norman Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] check out this CANSLIM screener, FREE! You can set the screening criteria at http://www.stocktables.com rel str, EPS, Acc/dist, min & max price, vol % change, Kent han.26@osu.edu wrote: > > I always loved stockmaster.com because of their nice LOGARITHMic charts, but now > that I found they have a CANSLIM screener, I feel obligated to promote it. It's > FREE, too! > > http://strategy.stockmaster.com/StockSearchRun.asp?cobrander=stockmaster&gurupage=ONeil&upt=2879§ion=results&WilliamONeil=1&submit1=Click+Here&type=guru > > -Jim > > P.S. here's it's latest CANSLIM picks. Keep in mind, it lists the CANSLIM based on > prices given--sometimes a day old so you have to look at current charts to see if > they're still relevant. Also, I don't think it looks at technicals [chart > formations]: > > AAON > AAON INC > > ADBE > ADOBE SYSTEMS INC > > ALTR > ALTERA CORP > > CDWC > CDW COMPUTER CTRS INC > > CHP > C&D TECHNOLOGIES INC > > CTAC > 1-800 CONTACTS INC > > CTK > COMPTEK RESEARCH INC > > FORR > FORRESTER RESEARCH INC > > JKHY > JACK HENRY & ASSOCIATES > > KEI > KEITHLEY INSTRUMENTS INC > > LLTC > LINEAR TECHNOLOGY CORP > > MSS > MEASUREMENT SPECIALITIES > > ORCL > ORACLE CORPORATION > > PDCO > PATTERSON DENTAL CO > > PENG > PRIMA ENERGY CORP > > SHFL > SHUFFLE MASTER INC > > TECH > TECHNE CORP > > TLGD > TOLLGRADE COMMUN INC > > TNL > TECHNITROL INC > > XLNX > XILINX INC > > - - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:20:02 -0400 From: Walter Stock Subject: [CANSLIM] Current Canslim Leaders Greg Kuhn in his bi-weekly column at TradingMarkets.com wrote today that: "Of the leaders that have followed through from breakout moves, Keithley Instruments (KEI) experienced a heavy distribution day Wednesday -- the heaviest-volume day since the breakout to new highs -- off of a climax run, Elantec Semiconductor (ELNT) pulled back on very light volume in its first downside reaction since its breakout move, Corning (GLW), which popped out to new highs on heavy turnover Monday, acts great, as does Newport Corp (NEWP). So, outside of Keithley's death rattle, leading stocks are performing on cue. "And while the majority of leaders continue to act fine to this point, other top stocks continue along, building basing patterns. "Here are some basing in fine fashion until proven otherwise: Brocade Communications (BRCD), Checkpoint Software (CHKP), Cephalon (CEPH). Celgene (CELG), Copper Mountain Networks (CMTN),Ericcson (ERICY) Flextronics (FLEX), JDS Uniphase (JDSU), Koninklijke Philips (PHG), Kopin (KOPN), M Systems (FLSH), Medimunne (MEDI), Nokia (NOK), Nortel Networks (NT), Nvidia (NVDA), Sapient Corp (SAPE), Siebel Systems (SEBL), STMicroelectronics (STM), Telcom Semiconductor(TLCM) and Triquint Semiconductor (TQNT)." Kuhn also notes the false breakouts in some leaders such as ADI and XLNX, occurences he believes happen because traders jump the gun. He also mentions that "the intermediate-term-minded trader should be far from loaded up on stocks in here." Am about 60% invested myself (and entirely in the stocks above). Walter Stock Oakville, ON, Canada - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 11:39:22 -0700 From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Current Canslim Leaders SEBL is busting to get out of that base today. Volume is not there and the 52-wk hi is one of those blowoff tops but if it gets over this resistance at 150-ish on volume, I'd consider it to have broken out. On 11:20 AM 6/15/00, Walter Stock Said: >Greg Kuhn in his bi-weekly column at TradingMarkets.com >wrote today that: > > "Of the leaders that have followed through from breakout moves, > Keithley Instruments (KEI) experienced a heavy distribution day > Wednesday -- the heaviest-volume day since the breakout to > new highs -- off of a climax run, Elantec Semiconductor (ELNT) > pulled back on very light volume in its first downside reaction > since its breakout move, Corning (GLW), which popped out to > new highs on heavy turnover Monday, acts great, as does > Newport Corp (NEWP). So, outside of Keithley's death rattle, > leading stocks are performing on cue. > > "And while the majority of leaders continue to act fine to this >point, > other top stocks continue along, building basing patterns. > > "Here are some basing in fine fashion until proven otherwise: > Brocade Communications (BRCD), Checkpoint Software (CHKP), > Cephalon (CEPH). Celgene (CELG), Copper Mountain Networks > (CMTN),Ericcson (ERICY) Flextronics (FLEX), JDS Uniphase (JDSU), > Koninklijke Philips (PHG), Kopin (KOPN), M Systems (FLSH), > Medimunne (MEDI), Nokia (NOK), Nortel Networks (NT), > Nvidia (NVDA), Sapient Corp (SAPE), Siebel Systems (SEBL), > STMicroelectronics (STM), Telcom Semiconductor(TLCM) > and Triquint Semiconductor (TQNT)." > >Kuhn also notes the false breakouts in some leaders such as ADI and >XLNX, occurences he believes happen because traders jump the gun. > >He also mentions that "the intermediate-term-minded trader should be far > >from loaded up on stocks in here." > >Am about 60% invested myself (and entirely in the stocks above). > >Walter Stock >Oakville, ON, Canada > > > > > > >- Tim Fisher Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites Tim@OreRockOn.com WWW: http://OreRockOn.com See naked fish and rocks! - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:46:53 EDT From: JANSI1AUG1@aol.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Re. Stocks Ready To Break-Out Walter: Just a "thanks" from a lurker who never knew, and so overlooked, the significance of the "Follow the Leaders" column in IBD. In case others want to know about the thread, here's the meat of Walter's answer to Anna: The information is in IBD's daily "Follow the Leader" industry group analysis, usually on or near page 8. I cut this section out every day, use a highlighter for the stocks that meet my buy criteria, and then keep it ready on my desk. I also keep the old ones for comparison purposes. In addition to following the number of quality institutions going in and out of a stock (and yes I know that this information is not necessarily up to date), it is also very interesting to see exactly which groups IBD chooses to analyze. For example, IBD has analyzed the semiconductor manufacturers no fewer than five times since the end of March. On the other hand, a group like Internet-Network Security/Solutions (one of last year's best groups) has been analyzed a paltry once. Food for thought. Walter Stock Oakville, ON, Canada jans - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 13:03:08 -0700 From: "Joseph Weisfish" Subject: Re: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable) Thanks, how do you explain the -4% for CGNX? - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Worley" To: Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 5:05 AM Subject: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable) > Because in the past five years the earnings went from 1.09 to > 1.03 > > Tom Worley > stkguru@netside.net > chat with me at ICQ # 5568838 > get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Joseph Weisfish > To: ; > Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 8:32 PM > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable > > > NUHC: I don't understand why DGO shows it with a -4% growth > rate, can > this be a mistake? > > > > > > - > - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:43:36 -0700 From: "Joseph Weisfish" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom? Uh, the total shares outstanding of QCOM before the 4-1 split on 12/31/99 and 2-1 on 5/11/99 was 92 mil. take away % owned by management and your left with a float of about 80 mil. a far cry from 2 billion! And the high for QCOM was only 200. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Fisher" To: Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 7:05 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom? > Uh, the same type of buying that pushed QCOM to 250? > > At 09:42 PM 6/13/00 -0700, you wrote: > >What's all the fuss about EMC? How can you justify a position in a stock > >with a float of almost 2 billion shares?! Are you aware what type of buying > >is needed to push this one? > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Patrick Wahl" > >To: > >Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 9:33 PM > >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom? > > > > > > > Looks pretty good to me, I think you could call a cup on this, it > > > wasn't too deep, from 71 or so to 53, which I think is around 28% > > > (approximately) deep, which isn't bad, volume shriveled up a bit for > > > a few days. > > > > > > On 12 Jun 00, at 22:57, Alexander T wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Could someone help me understand the chart of EMC's recent action? It > >sort > > > > of looks like there was a double bottom from end of march to early may, > >and > > > > then some other cup-like base. > > > > > > > > On the other hand, one may think that there is a "Tripple" bottom since > >the > > > > latest peak did not go over the second peak of the W. Could someone > >point > > > > out their view on this? > > > > > > > > Thank you > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________ > > > > FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com > > > > Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > >- > > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists > Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site > PFB Information > mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com > WWW http://OreRockOn.com > > > - > - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 15:22:31 -0700 From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Nitpicking Your CANSLIM related point being what, exactly? My point was, and continues to be, that big-to-mega-caps, well over WON's outdated size limit, which QCOM certainly is (50B market cap argues MEGA-cap, not just big-cap!), can and do perform as well as or better than small-to-mid-caps which WON focused on in 1986, when big caps traded in increments of a point each day. What's the difference between 80 M shares out and 2B shares out? Nothing to a hedge fund or day trader. All they care about is liquidity. And growth. EMC routinely moves 10-15% in a day, just like QCOM. So it's easy to push the price around even with 2B shares. Face it, if you got more than a point out of your large cap portfolio in a day way back in HTMMIS' glory days, you bought all your institutional trader buddies beers after the market closed. Now, you do the same if your ignored, brain-dead PE 8 (sorry Tom, couldn't resist!) small-cap goes to a PE of 16. The best performers of 1999 were almost exclusively large, extremely liquid, high growth big-to-mega-cap technologies. Interesting that Kuhn's list that Earl reported earlier today has about 90% overlap with this week's 90/90/90 HGS list. Looks like KUHN, Marder, and friends have thrown the capitalization cap (cap cap?) out the window. Indeed, I'd be tempted to use it as a _floor_ these days. The exceptions like KEI with its pitiful 14M shares out continue to do nicely (boy, what if they increased their float through a 2:1 split? Wham boom, Alice!), but their compatriots generally languish in the land of "high growth but totally ignored" because they are too illiquid for the day, growth fund, and hedge fund traders that are moving the growth stocks. P.S. QCOM traded 61M shares today, and I highly doubt it turned over 75% of its float. On 02:43 PM 6/15/00, Joseph Weisfish Said: >Uh, the total shares outstanding of QCOM before the 4-1 split on 12/31/99 >and 2-1 on 5/11/99 was 92 mil. take away % owned by management and your left >with a float of about 80 mil. a far cry from 2 billion! > >And the high for QCOM was only 200. > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Tim Fisher" >To: >Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 7:05 AM >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom? > > > > Uh, the same type of buying that pushed QCOM to 250? > > > > At 09:42 PM 6/13/00 -0700, you wrote: > > >What's all the fuss about EMC? How can you justify a position in a stock > > >with a float of almost 2 billion shares?! Are you aware what type of >buying > > >is needed to push this one? > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: "Patrick Wahl" > > >To: > > >Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 9:33 PM > > >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom? > > > > > > > > > > Looks pretty good to me, I think you could call a cup on this, it > > > > wasn't too deep, from 71 or so to 53, which I think is around 28% > > > > (approximately) deep, which isn't bad, volume shriveled up a bit for > > > > a few days. > > > > > > > > On 12 Jun 00, at 22:57, Alexander T wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > Could someone help me understand the chart of EMC's recent action? >It > > >sort > > > > > of looks like there was a double bottom from end of march to early >may, > > >and > > > > > then some other cup-like base. > > > > > > > > > > On the other hand, one may think that there is a "Tripple" bottom >since > > >the > > > > > latest peak did not go over the second peak of the W. Could someone > > >point > > > > > out their view on this? > > > > > > > > > > Thank you Tim Fisher Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites Tim@OreRockOn.com WWW: http://OreRockOn.com See naked fish and rocks! - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 19:05:34 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable) for 1995, they earned 79 cents, for 1999 they earned 70 cents, so a decline over 5 years. NOTE: for 2000, the forecast is for 1.50! more than a double, and for Q1 they earned 34 cents, up 386% over Q1, '99, so they are on track for the forecast. Nice cup with 2 week handle with volume declining until today when it matched ADV. This stock may be waking up, well worth keeping an eye on. Only real negative I saw at a quick glance was the 30% ownership already by funds. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net chat with me at ICQ # 5568838 get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html - ----- Original Message ----- From: Joseph Weisfish To: Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 4:03 PM Subject: Re: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable) Thanks, how do you explain the -4% for CGNX? - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Worley" To: Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 5:05 AM Subject: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable) > Because in the past five years the earnings went from 1.09 to > 1.03 > > Tom Worley > stkguru@netside.net > chat with me at ICQ # 5568838 > get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Joseph Weisfish > To: ; > Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 8:32 PM > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable > > > NUHC: I don't understand why DGO shows it with a -4% growth > rate, can > this be a mistake? > > > > > > - > - - - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 19:12:25 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom? Joseph, I think the float reference was to EMC, where according to DGO the float presently is 1.9943 billion, close enough to 2 bil for me. On QCOM, DGO shows management only owning 9%, with the remaining float at 671 million, so not sure how you come up with 80 mil. It really doesn't matter today what the shares outstanding was, or mngmt owned, six months ago, the liquidity is measured today. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net chat with me at ICQ # 5568838 get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html - ----- Original Message ----- From: Joseph Weisfish To: Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 5:43 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom? Uh, the total shares outstanding of QCOM before the 4-1 split on 12/31/99 and 2-1 on 5/11/99 was 92 mil. take away % owned by management and your left with a float of about 80 mil. a far cry from 2 billion! And the high for QCOM was only 200. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Fisher" To: Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 7:05 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom? > Uh, the same type of buying that pushed QCOM to 250? > > At 09:42 PM 6/13/00 -0700, you wrote: > >What's all the fuss about EMC? How can you justify a position in a stock > >with a float of almost 2 billion shares?! Are you aware what type of buying > >is needed to push this one? > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Patrick Wahl" > >To: > >Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 9:33 PM > >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom? > > > > > > > Looks pretty good to me, I think you could call a cup on this, it > > > wasn't too deep, from 71 or so to 53, which I think is around 28% > > > (approximately) deep, which isn't bad, volume shriveled up a bit for > > > a few days. > > > > > > On 12 Jun 00, at 22:57, Alexander T wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Could someone help me understand the chart of EMC's recent action? It > >sort > > > > of looks like there was a double bottom from end of march to early may, > >and > > > > then some other cup-like base. > > > > > > > > On the other hand, one may think that there is a "Tripple" bottom since > >the > > > > latest peak did not go over the second peak of the W. Could someone > >point > > > > out their view on this? > > > > > > > > Thank you > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________ > > > > FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com > > > > Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > >- > > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists > Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site > PFB Information > mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com > WWW http://OreRockOn.com > > > - > - - - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 16:47:49 -0700 From: "Joseph Weisfish" Subject: Re: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable) Ya, there's still room for more, what would you call overbought by institutions? - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Worley" To: Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 4:05 PM Subject: Re: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable) > for 1995, they earned 79 cents, for 1999 they earned 70 cents, so > a decline over 5 years. NOTE: for 2000, the forecast is for 1.50! > more than a double, and for Q1 they earned 34 cents, up 386% over > Q1, '99, so they are on track for the forecast. Nice cup with 2 > week handle with volume declining until today when it matched > ADV. This stock may be waking up, well worth keeping an eye on. > Only real negative I saw at a quick glance was the 30% ownership > already by funds. > > Tom Worley > stkguru@netside.net > chat with me at ICQ # 5568838 > get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Joseph Weisfish > To: > Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 4:03 PM > Subject: Re: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but > still reasonable) > > > Thanks, how do you explain the -4% for CGNX? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tom Worley" > To: > Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 5:05 AM > Subject: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still > reasonable) > > > > Because in the past five years the earnings went from 1.09 to > > 1.03 > > > > Tom Worley > > stkguru@netside.net > > chat with me at ICQ # 5568838 > > get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Joseph Weisfish > > To: ; > > Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 8:32 PM > > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable > > > > > > NUHC: I don't understand why DGO shows it with a -4% growth > > rate, can > > this be a mistake? > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > - > > > > - > - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 16:51:39 -0700 From: "Joseph Weisfish" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom? QCOM was just brought in as an example for stocks that made good advances with low/high float (depending who you ask). You'll have to read the whole chain. Liquidity meaning volume? - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Worley" To: Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 4:12 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom? > Joseph, I think the float reference was to EMC, where according > to DGO the float presently is 1.9943 billion, close enough to 2 > bil for me. On QCOM, DGO shows management only owning 9%, with > the remaining float at 671 million, so not sure how you come up > with 80 mil. It really doesn't matter today what the shares > outstanding was, or mngmt owned, six months ago, the liquidity is > measured today. > > Tom Worley > stkguru@netside.net > chat with me at ICQ # 5568838 > get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Joseph Weisfish > To: > Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 5:43 PM > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom? > > > Uh, the total shares outstanding of QCOM before the 4-1 split on > 12/31/99 > and 2-1 on 5/11/99 was 92 mil. take away % owned by management > and your left > with a float of about 80 mil. a far cry from 2 billion! > > And the high for QCOM was only 200. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tim Fisher" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 7:05 AM > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom? > > > > Uh, the same type of buying that pushed QCOM to 250? > > > > At 09:42 PM 6/13/00 -0700, you wrote: > > >What's all the fuss about EMC? How can you justify a position > in a stock > > >with a float of almost 2 billion shares?! Are you aware what > type of > buying > > >is needed to push this one? > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: "Patrick Wahl" > > >To: > > >Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 9:33 PM > > >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom? > > > > > > > > > > Looks pretty good to me, I think you could call a cup on > this, it > > > > wasn't too deep, from 71 or so to 53, which I think is > around 28% > > > > (approximately) deep, which isn't bad, volume shriveled up > a bit for > > > > a few days. > > > > > > > > On 12 Jun 00, at 22:57, Alexander T wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > Could someone help me understand the chart of EMC's > recent action? > It > > >sort > > > > > of looks like there was a double bottom from end of march > to early > may, > > >and > > > > > then some other cup-like base. > > > > > > > > > > On the other hand, one may think that there is a > "Tripple" bottom > since > > >the > > > > > latest peak did not go over the second peak of the W. > Could someone > > >point > > > > > out their view on this? > > > > > > > > > > Thank you > > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________ > > > > > FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com > > > > > Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > > > >- > > > > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists > > Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site > > PFB Information > > mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com > > WWW http://OreRockOn.com > > > > > > - > > > > > - > > > > - > - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 18:57:36 -0600 From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: [CANSLIM] (Fwd) Re: [quotes-plus] Cup and Handle 0100,0100,0100This was on the Quotes Plus list, I know there are quite a few QP users on this list, so perhaps someone will find this useful. Have not used it myself. - ------- Forwarded message follows ------- To: 0000,0000,8000< From: 0000,0000,8000"Brooke" < Date sent: 0000,0000,8000Thu, 15 Jun 2000 12:01:27 -0400 Send reply to: 0000,0000,8000quotes-plus@egroups.com Subject: 0000,0000,8000Re: [quotes-plus] Cup and Handle 0000,8000,0000[ Double-click this line for list subscription options ] This is the scan. It's flawed, but it does find some cups & handles amidst a lot of bad hits. The hits are dependent on the time frames, of course. // Cup and Handle Scan, by Brooke // based on "Cup-With-Handle and the Computerized Approach // by Rich Martinelli and Barry Hyman in October 1998 issue of TASC output="cuph.lst"; input="commplus.lst"; ProcessMS = "d:\meta\cuph\",MSDATA; DaysRequired=200; Daystoload=250; integer i, j, k, l, datea, dateb, datec, dated; float pointa, pointb, pointc, pointd; pointd:=min(0,-14,lo); pointc:=max(-5,-30,hi); pointb:=min(-8,-55,lo); pointa:=max(-28,-155,hi); dated:=0; datec:=0; dateb:=0; datea:=0; for i = -14 to 0 step 1 do if low(i)=pointd then dated:=i; endif; next i; for j = -30 to -5 step 1 do if high(j)=pointc then datec:=j; endif; next j; for k = -55 to -8 step 1 do if low(k)=pointb then dateb:=k; endif; next k; for l = -155 to -28 step 1 do if high(l)=pointa then datea:=l; endif; next l; if pointb<<=.88*pointc then if pointb>.55*pointc then if pointb<<=.88*pointa then if pointb>.55*pointa then // if pointc>1.12*pointb then // if pointc<<1.45*pointb then // if pointa>1.12*pointb then // if pointa<<1.45*pointb then if pointc>=.95*pointa then if pointd<<(.8*pointc)+(.2*pointb) then if datea<< dateb then; if dateb<< datec then; if datec<< dated then; if datea-dateb<<=-20 then if datea-dateb>=-120 then if dateb-datec<<=-3 then if datec-dated<<=-5 then println symbol, ", ", pointa:5:2, ", ", pointb:5:2, ", ", pointc:5:2, ", ", pointd:5:2, ", ", "Date A: ", date(datea), ", ", "Date B: ", date(dateb), ", ", "Date C: ", date(datec), ", ", "Date D: ", date(dated), ", ", "Dates A-B: ", datea-dateb, ", ", "Dates B-C: ", dateb-datec, ", ", "Dates C-D: ", datec-dated; endif; endif; endif; endif; endif; endif; endif; endif; endif; endif; endif; endif; endif; - ----- Original Message ----- From: Murphy Peter < To: < Sent: Friday, June 09, 2000 1:38 PM Subject: [quotes-plus] Cup and Handle 7F00,0000,0000> Jeff. > What you said was completely correct - there is'nt a cup and handle scan > on that > website. But if my memory serves me Brooke wrote a brilliant one that a > number > of people kicked in with suggestions about two years ago. I don't know > if it will > work on QP2, maybe Brooke can tell us, it was on the "other site" around > the > message 10000. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Want insight into hot IPOs, investing strategies and stocks to watch? > Red Herring FREE newsletters provide strategic analysis for investors. > http://click.egroups.com/1/5176/9/_/512950/_/960572291/ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SALESFORCE.COM MAKES SOFTWARE OBSOLETE Secure, online sales force automation with 5 users FREE for 1 year! Go to: http://click.egroups.com/1/5021/9/_/512950/_/961084948/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 0100,0100,0100------- End of forwarded message ------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 22:13:24 -0400 From: Brian Bellamy Subject: [CANSLIM] List of stocks forming handles My list of stocks to watch for breakout based on positive daily graphs data and chart patterns. Comments or questions as to why I included on the list always appreciated. Any additions appreciated. Criteria included EPS over 90, industry group strength of A or B, chart forming a handle, prefer accelerating sales and earnings in recent quarters. ALTR Altera Corp AMK American Tech Ceramics ADI Analog Devices BBRC Burr Brown Corp CHKP Check Point Softwar Tech CIEN Ciena Corporation FLEX Flextronics Intl Ltd JBL Jabil Circuit Inc MXIM Maxim Integrated Prods NOK Nokia Corp Ads ORCL Oracle Corp PSEM Pericom Semiconductor PLT Plantronics Inc PWAV Powerwave Tech Inc SDLI S D L Inc SANM Sanmina Corp STM Stmicroelectronics N V XLNX Xilinx Inc - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 01:28:58 -0700 From: "mikelu" Subject: RE: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable) I believe Kuhn says to sell when fund ownership > 40%. I try to buy fund ownership < 30%, but can't remember exactly who advised this. Mike - -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Joseph Weisfish Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 4:48 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable) Ya, there's still room for more, what would you call overbought by institutions? - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Worley" To: Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 4:05 PM Subject: Re: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable) > for 1995, they earned 79 cents, for 1999 they earned 70 cents, so > a decline over 5 years. NOTE: for 2000, the forecast is for 1.50! > more than a double, and for Q1 they earned 34 cents, up 386% over > Q1, '99, so they are on track for the forecast. Nice cup with 2 > week handle with volume declining until today when it matched > ADV. This stock may be waking up, well worth keeping an eye on. > Only real negative I saw at a quick glance was the 30% ownership > already by funds. > > Tom Worley > stkguru@netside.net > chat with me at ICQ # 5568838 > get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Joseph Weisfish > To: > Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 4:03 PM > Subject: Re: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but > still reasonable) > > > Thanks, how do you explain the -4% for CGNX? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tom Worley" > To: > Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 5:05 AM > Subject: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still > reasonable) > > > > Because in the past five years the earnings went from 1.09 to > > 1.03 > > > > Tom Worley > > stkguru@netside.net > > chat with me at ICQ # 5568838 > > get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Joseph Weisfish > > To: ; > > Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 8:32 PM > > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable > > > > > > NUHC: I don't understand why DGO shows it with a -4% growth > > rate, can > > this be a mistake? > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > - > > > > - > - - - - ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #924 ***************************** 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.