From: canslim-owner@xmission.com (canslim Digest) To: canslim-digest@xmission.com Subject: canslim Digest V1 #164 Reply-To: canslim@xmission.com Sender: canslim-owner@xmission.com Errors-To: canslim-owner@xmission.com Precedence: canslim Digest Sunday, May 4 1997 Volume 01 : Number 164 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] JPMX and MUEI RE: [CANSLIM] DailyGraphs save to spreadsheet Re: [CANSLIM] DailyGraphs save to spreadsheet Re: [CANSLIM] JPMX and MUEI Re: [CANSLIM] DailyGraphs save to spreadsheet [CANSLIM] NASDAQ chart similar to July 1996? [CANSLIM] IRRATIONAL EXUBERANCE ABOUNDS!!!! RE: [CANSLIM] Is it time to buy breakouts yet? Re: [CANSLIM] JPMX and MUEI [CANSLIM] In defense of TSK - was "Back in Heaven" Re: [CANSLIM] Dueling WON quotes [CANSLIM] Thinly Traded Re: [CANSLIM] Dueling WON quotes [CANSLIM] Point to Ponder about b/o SSSSSSS Re: [CANSLIM] IRRATIONAL EXUBERANCE ABOUNDS!!!! Re: [CANSLIM] In defense of TSK - was "Back in Heaven" Re: [CANSLIM] Is it time to buy breakouts yet? Re: [CANSLIM] Point to Ponder about b/o SSSSSSS See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the canslim or canslim-digest mailing lists and on how to retrieve back issues. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 3 May 1997 19:42:49 -0500 From: "Brenda" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] JPMX and MUEI Comments? Well, here goes. Most are aware that I DO use CANSLIM criteria but also add my own personal twist here and there. I look at a stock and imagine an 80 year old owning this stock, it is his only holding, and whether he eats and pays his rent depends on the value of this stock. I grade the stocks graph both long term (1 year) and short term (last 30 days ONLY) and the less the volatility and the more this 80 year old could sleep at night the higher the grade. If the stock would absolutely send him to the hospital with a major coronary the lower the grade. (99 is the highest and 5 is about the lowest I have ever given). JPMX- Long term grade 35, within the last six months there is a point where you could have lost 40% owning this stock with buy and hold. Short term grade 88. A stock must have a grade 70 is in bold red on all my charts and a SEVERE warning sign that surely there must be something better. Did notice the volume for the last TWO days was about the same and a big increase over previous. I would not expect the stock to BLOW through the overhead resistance it is about to encounter but have been wrong on many occasions and probably will be again. MUEI - Long term grade 55 (During last six months there is a place that you cuold have lost 56% and this was a FAST drop. Over about two days. Hope somebody wasn't on vacation that owned this one. Short term grade 15. Five is the lowest grade I have ever given to anything. Well, you asked. There it is. Thanks for the input and I do look up every stock that is mentioned. Have a good day. - ---------- > From: Patrick Toy > To: canslim@mail.xmission.com > Subject: [CANSLIM] JPMX and MUEI > Date: Saturday, May 03, 1997 7:11 PM > > JPMX > > RS 99, EPS 99, GRS 62, A/D A, Timeliness A, closed Friday at $21.50 > stock had formed something of a cup and handle (I think) - handle formed > slightly below $20. > avg daily vol is 29,100, Friday it did 194,800. Last week you had > three days of low vol and two were sharply up. Earnings are excellent, Q1 > (up 440%). Debt is 17% and Funds are 33%. > > #1 in its group on both RS and EPS > Shares issued 5.7 mil, float is 2.0 mil > Co is a manufacturer of cable assemblies and wire harnesses for OEMS in the > computer and telecommunications sectors > next earnings due July 26 > > > MUEI > > RS 95, EPS 98, GRS 90, A/D A, Timeliness B, closed Friday at $23.125 > avg daily vol is 1,233,400, Friday it did 1,830,000. Last week you had > three days of vol around 800,000 followed by two days of vol in the 1.7 mil > range. Earnings are excellent, Q1 (up 173%). Debt is 8% and Funds are > 16%. > > #1 in its group for EPS. Only two stocks in the group have a higher RS > (DELL - 99, Stratus Cmptr - 97). Other companies in the group include > Compaq, Gateway2000, and DataGeneral. > Shares issued 95.4 mil, float is 19.0 mil > Co is a manufacturer of electronic products for computing and digital > applications > next earnings due June 14 > Not sure about the chart. > > Both seem to be good CANSLIM candidates...comments anyone?? > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 3 May 1997 17:56:11 -0700 From: Joseph Vaughn-Perling Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] DailyGraphs save to spreadsheet I access it through a several firewalls all the time and it can be proxied too. I'd be willing to wager that everyone who accesses it is going through at least one firewall (theirs) As for not being able to use it on a UNIX or OS/2 or Macintosh host? *ahem* Any institution that is willing to spend the US$30K+ for a firewall should at least spent 1/10th of that teaching someone how to use it and set it up. The version of DG online they are providing for free (and programming isn't cheap) is Beta. Its a first version thrown together to test the market. My guess is that they may go after the 50% or so non Win32 folk sometime after they've started to recoup what they've spent so far. Around that time they will probably try to take advantage of Digital's fantastic "Millicent" program and charge per graph instead of per year. In my work doing web hosting, programming, and internet sales and service there is one rule that invariably holds true: The less someone pays for something the more time they spend complaining about it. I don't know if that's because of the type people that are attracted to inexpensive services or if it is because of the quality of inexpensive services or both. I LIKE DG online, and since its free (for now) it was worth the 3 or so hours to put a 2nd drive in one of my machines and format it with Win95. It certainly would have taken me longer than that to get this quality of data, daily, for free. Its simple to use, fast, and has an astounding amount of features for a Version 0.9 release. Now, if only the IBD web site could stay online. (and even that has improved recently too) The customer is not always right, but the market is. On Saturday, May 03, 1997 6:52 PM, Hemant Rotithor [SMTP:rotithor@zko.dec.com] wrote: > Brenda wrote: > > > > I too can NOT use their service. I have a user ID# and when I try to sign > > on it continues to tell me that my password is incorrect. I have e-mailed > > them three times, the last time was the last, and also have a 800# to call > > which you have to either leave a digital or voice message. I have left both > > three times, the third being the last. I certainly understand. It MIGHT be > > a great thing, but for me, it appears I will never find out. Just don't > > have the time to "mess with such a mess" any more. Good luck on getting > > through and "maybe" getting their attention. It does not appear that they > > care too much about yours or anybody else's opinion for that matter. Get > > off on the wrong foot with IBD and the same can happen. Also, IBD does not > > pay too much attention to their CUSTOMERS requests at times. Sorta similar > > situation. Won't go into detail but they react very close to the same. Once > > again, good luck. > > James > > > > So let us see, who does DG online not want to use their service: > > -All those using UNIX and other OSes that are non NT/win95 > -All those who try to access using a client from behind a firewall > (I could not register because there is no way to set a proxy to the > reg/DG > software so I get connection timed out, I have suggested them to use > netscape/other-brow > capabilities like Pointcast to access it since proxies/security can be > specified there). > > I would imagine most institutions will have firewalls around so access > will not be > possible. > That would cut a lot of potential customers out. > I will watch if they do anything about behind-the-firewall access and I > am not holding > my breath. > -- > Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this document are those of the author. > Digital Equipment Corp., 110 Spit Brook Rd, ZKO2-3/N30, Nashua, NH 03062 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 03 May 1997 21:47:44 -0700 From: Hemant Rotithor Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DailyGraphs save to spreadsheet Joseph Vaughn-Perling wrote: > > I access it through a several firewalls all the time and it can be proxied > too. > > I'd be willing to wager that everyone who accesses it is going through at > least one firewall (theirs) > > As for not being able to use it on a UNIX or OS/2 or Macintosh host? > *ahem* > Any institution that is willing to spend the US$30K+ for a firewall should > at least spent 1/10th of that teaching someone how to use it and set it up. > So how do you set a proxy for access? I did not see an option to do that for the registration program, when I fill in all the information it directly tries to access the server without asking for any further options (I did not see an option to set the proxy on the WEB page either). I think it is the firewall because I have tried registering on 5-6 different occasions on different days at different times and every time I get a connection timed out. I am not sure what you are trying to say about "spending 1/10th teaching someone how to use and set it up"; why would the users in an organization want to learn to set up a firewall, it should be good enough for them to be able to use it everyone does not aspire to be a system administrator. Thanks > > -- > > Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this document are those of the author. > > Digital Equipment Corp., 110 Spit Brook Rd, ZKO2-3/N30, Nashua, NH 03062 - -- Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this document are those of the author. Digital Equipment Corp., 110 Spit Brook Rd, ZKO2-3/N30, Nashua, NH 03062 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 03 May 1997 22:08:13 -0700 From: Hemant Rotithor Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] JPMX and MUEI Brenda wrote: > > Comments? Well, here goes. Most are aware that I DO use CANSLIM criteria > but also add my own personal twist here and there. I look at a stock and > imagine an 80 year old owning this stock, it is his only holding, and > whether he eats and pays his rent depends on the value of this stock. I > grade the stocks graph both long term (1 year) and short term (last 30 days > ONLY) and the less the volatility and the more this 80 year old could sleep > at night the higher the grade. If the stock would absolutely send him to > the hospital with a major coronary the lower the grade. (99 is the highest > and 5 is about the lowest I have ever given). > JPMX- Long term grade 35, within the last six months there is a point where > you could have lost 40% owning this stock with buy and hold. Short term > grade 88. A stock must have a grade 70 is in bold red on all my charts and > a SEVERE warning sign that surely there must be something better. Did > notice the volume for the last TWO days was about the same and a big > increase over previous. I would not expect the stock to BLOW through the > overhead resistance it is about to encounter but have been wrong on many > occasions and probably will be again. > MUEI - Long term grade 55 (During last six months there is a place that you > cuold have lost 56% and this was a FAST drop. Over about two days. Hope > somebody wasn't on vacation that owned this one. Short term grade 15. Five > is the lowest grade I have ever given to anything. Well, you asked. There > it is. Thanks for the input and I do look up every stock that is mentioned. > Have a good day. > James, I guess your comments will apply to any stock that has gone through a significant price drop in the cup part of a C-H formation, so those will rate quite low in your rating system (30% drop in the cup typically to be expected), the only ones that will meet your criteria are the ones that go from LL to UR (I agree such stocks are good since they did not drop in the correction period). JPMX looks like a possibility to me (I will not buy), the only negatives I see are a spread of $1 between bid and ask, the drop in the consolidation range that you mention, and the breakout before a consolidation for a desirable period. I am not sure I like the MUEI chart. - -- Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this document are those of the author. Digital Equipment Corp., 110 Spit Brook Rd, ZKO2-3/N30, Nashua, NH 03062 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 03 May 1997 22:30:32 -0400 From: derek b Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DailyGraphs save to spreadsheet I see several have posted about DG problems. The spreadsheet command works fine for me. I saved several files this morning and just checked now to make sure it's still working. It is. Craig, I wonder if your problem is that DG can't find your Excel? Make sure .xls file association points to proper Excel location. Derek Craig Griffin wrote: > Derek, > > I tried to DL (download) to Excel format and could not get it to work. I > got an error message of "Filename is not valid" (although it does not show > the filename it is talking about). I wonder if it is because the > directories I have DG and Excel in are subdirectories and not off of the > root directory. Or is it because I have an old release of Excel. Or is the > function not working? I sent the DG folks an error report on Friday. Too > soon to hear back. > > Has anyone else had this experience? Or has anyone DL'd successfully to Excel? > > Regards, > Craig > > At 12:12 PM 5/3/97 -0400, you wrote: > >Not sure how long it's been there, but DailyGraphs Online now has a save > >to Excel or Lotus123 spreadsheet command. > > > >Under Reports: > >top 100 Earnings > >short interest NYSE, NAZ > >top industry groups > >etc. > > > >Very nice work DailyGraphs, hope that a save to spreadsheet command for > >some of the data in the graphs can also be implemented. > > > >Derek > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 04 May 1997 00:34:22 -0700 From: Hemant Rotithor Subject: [CANSLIM] NASDAQ chart similar to July 1996? I was looking at the NASDAQ chart from July 1996 that Craig and others had made available from WON's seminar in orlando and the current NASDAQ chart in IBD. It looks that both have a significant similarity and if one looks at the buy point that WON had suggested, it seems that we are currently there on the NASDAQ chart (half way up the cup) with a followthrough on high volume. If this one turned out to be a fake/deceptive rally it would be really interesting to see how WON or others explain it and identify it as such. I looked at ORBKF (Orbotech) that someone had suggested as breaking out on Friday. Its fundamentals and CANSLIM characteristic look really great, I would be interested if someone can point any negatives in this stock. I think the only problem currently is that the earnings are supposed to be out May 5/6 and the run up may have been in anticipation. Will appreciate any other input +ve/-ve on this one. Thanks - -- Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this document are those of the author. Digital Equipment Corp., 110 Spit Brook Rd, ZKO2-3/N30, Nashua, NH 03062 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 May 1997 00:34:52 -0500 From: "Brenda" Subject: [CANSLIM] IRRATIONAL EXUBERANCE ABOUNDS!!!! Remember, when WON said that many stocks would probably bouce upwards of 30-40% almost overnight when it did turn around? How true!! You recognize me as being the one who has wanted Mr. G to sit down in front of my computer with me and go through ALL of the stocks on my base and when he comes to ONE stocks that exhibits IE to please point it out to me. Well, one of my favorite parameters that I use to find stocks is currently is absolutely no use to me. Tonight, I got through ONE FOURTH of the stocks that came up in that particular parameter search. I surrender. What I found would make anything else I found in it of no use. You talk about IRRATIONAL EXUBERANCE. Well, it abounds and in abundance. If you have the time just take a gander at some of these stocks (You'll recognize some of them): BARR, SEEC, JDAS, BCHXF, ONTK, ANLY, CELL, PWAV, LRCX, INCY, CEPH, PSDI, MVSI, INFS, PRRC, ABRX, ERTS, SROM, SAPE, EXAR, BGEN, CLFY, HMSY, NVLS, FCAA, NCSS, VLSI, TLAB, PLAT, CMOS, PMTS - and that is just getting through one fourth of the stocks in the category. Maybe, Ms. G is absolutely correct. Better go and see if I can round up my darts. How long will this continue? I hope long enough for me to find my darts. This is the most absurd thing I have seen happen in the market in a long, long, long time. What do you think about it? Surely, one or two of the above "might" deserve "some" of the attention but to find them ----- Well, have a great rest of teh week-end. Guess Mr. G IS GOING to have a reason to raise the interest rates after all and "The Market" will have given it to him on a silver platter, after all! Go for it, TOM! James ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 May 1997 16:22:12 GMT+7 From: Peter Christiansen Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Is it time to buy breakouts yet? ** Reply to note from rkhenry@naxs.com (Robert Henry) Sat, 3 May 1997 13:57:49 -0400 > Ok, could someone take a look at Manugistics' (MANU) chart? Help me learn here, is that a double-bottom? It looks like a double bottom to me. The right side of the W slightly undercuts the left, which is positive. The next day there is huge volume as the stock gaps up on the open (nice action). As it nears the levels of the middle of the W, it builds a handle and then breaks out of good volume. The buy point was 45 7/8. I really like the fact the there is a handle on the right side of the W. I think this takes some of the risk out of a double bottom formation. Peter Christiansen Bangkok, Thailand Connected with OS/2 Warp 3.0 & The Post Road Mailer _____________________________________________________________________________________ Troubleshooting: if it gives you any trouble, shoot it. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 May 1997 16:22:21 GMT+7 From: Peter Christiansen Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] JPMX and MUEI ** Reply to note from "Patrick Toy" Sat, 3 May 1997 20:11:04 -0400 On the surface JPMX looks pretty good to me. When you look closer, you will notice that the handle didn't remain in the upper half of the cup. It should have held above 18 3/4, but the lows of the handle were at 18. It looks like this one is going to work out though. I don't like the looks of MUEI. No handle to speak of. Maybe it will shape up, but right now I'd look for something else. Peter Christiansen Bangkok, Thailand Connected with OS/2 Warp 3.0 & The Post Road Mailer _____________________________________________________________________________________ SET PATH=Bookshelf;DeskDrawer;Closet;BoxUnderBed;GarbageCan ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 May 1997 16:21:59 GMT+7 From: Peter Christiansen Subject: [CANSLIM] In defense of TSK - was "Back in Heaven" ** Reply to note from "Tom Worley" Fri, 2 May 1997 06:56:55 -0400 > Looked at a couple charts mentioned here: from Peter C - CIBR does > look good, on other hand watch out for TSK. It is showing very > little growth, thinly traded (avg vol 44,500), and most sig is > up/down vol at 0.5. Even tho accum/dist is still a C, u/d is very > neg. Well so far I have my biggest gain in TSK, but I bought it exactly right. When you say it has little growth, are you talking about the 5 year growth rate? When I look at the last four quarters, I see earnings gains of 36%, 47%, 50%, & 64% with sales increasing every quarter as well. When I see earnings growth accelerating, I can ignore the five year GR. 44,500 shares isn't too thin for me. If I eliminated stocks with this amount of daily volume, I would be tossing out some of the fastest growers. I usually draw the line at 20,000 shares a day. Of course I'm not buying 10,000 shares at a time. I'll admit that the acc/dist isn't great, but it has improved from D a couple of weeks ago. I made big money with call options on this stock late last year, so maybe I am partial to it. Peter Christiansen Bangkok, Thailand Connected with OS/2 Warp 3.0 & The Post Road Mailer _____________________________________________________________________________________ A confident manner is important; computers can sense this. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 04 May 1997 07:41:50 -0700 From: Hemant Rotithor Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Dueling WON quotes Tom Worley wrote: > > Again from the first edition (revised): > From "When to be Patient and Hold a Stock" > "#3. Any stock that rises close to 20% should never be > allowed to drop back into the loss column. For example, if you buy > a stock at $50 and it shoots up to $60 (+ 20%) and you don't take > the profit when you have it, there is no intelligent reason to ever > let it drop all the way back to $50 or below and create a loss. You > may feel embarrassed, ridiculous, and not too bright buying at $50, > watch it it hit $60, and then selling at $50 or $51, but you've > already made the mistake of not taking your profit. Avoid making a > second mistake and letting it develop into a loss." > > What I took from this, and subsequent training by O'Neill acct > execs, and interview reports with WON, is that once you are up 15% > from your entry point (which was hopefully selected correctly and > according to the rules, otherwise all bets are off), then and only > then do you begin to adjust your trailing stop loss higher, still > using about an 8% stop loss. Thus, if the stock does just barely > hit an up 20% level, then retreats, your stop loss has been > adjusted higher and you are taken out with a profit, albeit smaller > than you could have had. If the stock never passes the 15% point, > you still have a stop loss based on your original entry point, > selected in the 8% range and based on where the support lies. If > the stock rockets or strolls, but goes to the up 50% or so level, > you still have it and keep moving your stop loss up as the stock > moves up. > > If a stock moves up 20%, then falls 50%, you should never still be > in it if you follow the rules unless it achieved that fall by > gapping down, and then there are no rules that could have prevented > that. > > A stock that has moved up substantially then goes into basing > action is behaving in a healthy fashion, allowing the short term > holders to take their profits while it sets up another entry point > for those that missed the earlier one. Not a reason to sell unless > you have a better place for your money or are just trading short > term (in which case you are not likely to ever be around for the > 200% and 300% stocks anyway). > > tom w > Yes I agree about the mechanics of such setting. However, in the next basing, setting a 8% stop below will take you out of a multibagger if the stock drops more than 8% in the base; this is where a subjective action will be required to decide whether to sell. A pure mechanical model will work only if the stock follows the "staircase" price model showing less than 8% volatility. Few companies show a staircase with less than 8% drop within the base like James Timken (TKR) which by the way is looking good: EPS 94 RS 91 Acc/Dist A Grp str B Featured in IBD recently Low volatility P/R 12.8 By the way, I did a detailed study of James's picks for this weekend and there are good stocks there and analyzing their behavior shows why that approach works well. Thanks for your comments Tom. - -- Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this document are those of the author. Digital Equipment Corp., 110 Spit Brook Rd, ZKO2-3/N30, Nashua, NH 03062 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 May 1997 07:41:13 -0500 From: "Brenda" Subject: [CANSLIM] Thinly Traded Tom, If you cut out everything that was 50,000 or even 40,000 avg daily vol because it was too thinly traded then you would have cut out 95% of the stocks that I made money on during the correction. I agree, that during the best of times, I would prefer trading stocks that the average daily volume is 1,000,000 or more. However, I have found one MUST be agile and able to change with the market. When most of the stocks whose graph remains intact over all exchanges is showing avg daily vol of less than 50,000, as for me, I am going with that. When one's mtg pmt and basic intact of food is determined by whether any money is made in the market or not I have not reached that point of financial independence where I can tell the market that I don't like what it is saying and, for now, I don't want to play. Sometimes when you find a stock with avg daily vol of 10,000 and it is steadily moving up you can make a MINT. It is sort of like KNOWING a particular horse or dog is absolutely going to win a race. If you REALLY know this are you going to sell tip sheets telling the world about it, OR are you going to quietly place your wager and then after the race, collect your winnings. I know what has worked in the past. All things do not work at all times. There is nothing that has yet been found that works in all cases. CANSLIM does provide an EXCELLENT base. In it's purest form, practiced with absolute brilliance and perfection, never faltering in any facit, remain rigid and true - even it does not work at all times but it is the best of any system I have yet found. Guess that is why even Mr. O'Neil goes against some of the very things he mentions in his book when he actually gives trade recommendations and does it on a daily basis to those paying for his services. For me, some of the very best (100 baggers) have been stocks with thin volume. Seems like I remember something being said about once the news it out and most know about it, time is short and one needs to be thinking about selling and a proper exit point. Just a thought. James - ---------- > From: Peter Christiansen > To: canslim@mail.xmission.com > Subject: [CANSLIM] In defense of TSK - was "Back in Heaven" > Date: Sunday, May 04, 1997 11:21 AM > > ** Reply to note from "Tom Worley" Fri, 2 May 1997 06:56:55 -0400 > > > > Looked at a couple charts mentioned here: from Peter C - CIBR does > > look good, on other hand watch out for TSK. It is showing very > > little growth, thinly traded (avg vol 44,500), and most sig is > > up/down vol at 0.5. Even tho accum/dist is still a C, u/d is very > > neg. > > Well so far I have my biggest gain in TSK, but I bought it exactly right. When you say it > has little growth, are you talking about the 5 year growth rate? When I look at the last four > quarters, I see earnings gains of 36%, 47%, 50%, & 64% with sales increasing every > quarter as well. When I see earnings growth accelerating, I can ignore the five year GR. > 44,500 shares isn't too thin for me. If I eliminated stocks with this amount of daily volume, > I would be tossing out some of the fastest growers. I usually draw the line at 20,000 > shares a day. Of course I'm not buying 10,000 shares at a time. I'll admit that the acc/dist > isn't great, but it has improved from D a couple of weeks ago. I made big money with call > options on this stock late last year, so maybe I am partial to it. > > Peter Christiansen > Bangkok, Thailand > > Connected with OS/2 Warp 3.0 & The Post Road Mailer > ____________________________________________________________________________ _________ > > A confident manner is important; computers can sense this. > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 May 1997 07:59:23 -0500 From: "Brenda" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Dueling WON quotes Page 91: Once you are ahead and have a good profit, you can afford to, and should, allow the stock more than 7% or 8% room for normal fluctuations in price. Do NOT sell a stock just because it's off 7% to 8% from it's peak price. Page 105: #20 - After a stock declines 8% or so from its peak, in some cases examination of the previous runup, the top, and the decline may help determine if the advance may be over or if a normal 8% to 12% correction is in progress. You may occasionally want to sell if a decline from peak exceeds 12% to 15% Now if WON uses the word "occassionally" in the above what does that mean. Is what he says ususual or not unusual. I can almost read it either way. You may OCCASIONALLY want to sell, IF a decline exceeds 12 to 15%. Where would he recommend selling if he OCASSIONALLY wants to sell at down 12-15%? James - ---------- > From: Hemant Rotithor > To: canslim@mail.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Dueling WON quotes > Date: Sunday, May 04, 1997 9:41 AM > > Tom Worley wrote: > > > > Again from the first edition (revised): > > From "When to be Patient and Hold a Stock" > > "#3. Any stock that rises close to 20% should never be > > allowed to drop back into the loss column. For example, if you buy > > a stock at $50 and it shoots up to $60 (+ 20%) and you don't take > > the profit when you have it, there is no intelligent reason to ever > > let it drop all the way back to $50 or below and create a loss. You > > may feel embarrassed, ridiculous, and not too bright buying at $50, > > watch it it hit $60, and then selling at $50 or $51, but you've > > already made the mistake of not taking your profit. Avoid making a > > second mistake and letting it develop into a loss." > > > > What I took from this, and subsequent training by O'Neill acct > > execs, and interview reports with WON, is that once you are up 15% > > from your entry point (which was hopefully selected correctly and > > according to the rules, otherwise all bets are off), then and only > > then do you begin to adjust your trailing stop loss higher, still > > using about an 8% stop loss. Thus, if the stock does just barely > > hit an up 20% level, then retreats, your stop loss has been > > adjusted higher and you are taken out with a profit, albeit smaller > > than you could have had. If the stock never passes the 15% point, > > you still have a stop loss based on your original entry point, > > selected in the 8% range and based on where the support lies. If > > the stock rockets or strolls, but goes to the up 50% or so level, > > you still have it and keep moving your stop loss up as the stock > > moves up. > > > > If a stock moves up 20%, then falls 50%, you should never still be > > in it if you follow the rules unless it achieved that fall by > > gapping down, and then there are no rules that could have prevented > > that. > > > > A stock that has moved up substantially then goes into basing > > action is behaving in a healthy fashion, allowing the short term > > holders to take their profits while it sets up another entry point > > for those that missed the earlier one. Not a reason to sell unless > > you have a better place for your money or are just trading short > > term (in which case you are not likely to ever be around for the > > 200% and 300% stocks anyway). > > > > tom w > > > Yes I agree about the mechanics of such setting. > However, in the next basing, setting a 8% stop below will > take you out of a multibagger if the stock drops more than 8% in the > base; > this is where a subjective action will be required to decide whether to > sell. > A pure mechanical model will work only if the stock follows the > "staircase" price model > showing less than 8% volatility. > Few companies show a staircase with less than 8% drop within the base > like > James Timken (TKR) which by the way is looking good: > EPS 94 > RS 91 > Acc/Dist A > Grp str B > Featured in IBD recently > Low volatility > P/R 12.8 > > By the way, I did a detailed study of James's picks for this weekend > and there are > good stocks there and analyzing their behavior shows why that approach > works well. > Thanks for your comments Tom. > -- > Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this document are those of the author. > Digital Equipment Corp., 110 Spit Brook Rd, ZKO2-3/N30, Nashua, NH 03062 > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 May 1997 08:10:24 -0500 From: "Brenda" Subject: [CANSLIM] Point to Ponder about b/o SSSSSSS During normal bull markets you can usually find CANSLIM shapes of all types. They do not abound at every corner, but they nonetheless are there for those who chose to take the time and look for them. I dare say that right now I could find at least 50 stocks with cups w/handles breaking out. Is that good? Did they all break out properly? What percentage of these will perform as we would expect them to? Should we be surprised if an alarming percentage ....... increased or decreased? In light of the 50 of so stocks that I previously gave showing, IMHO, absurd irrational exuberance, would that same exuberance not be spilled over into other stocks, and particularly those with cups w/handles? If it's dart throwing time...... would it not be prudent to be especially suspicious about false b/o s? Keep in mind that I have been 100% invested throughout all of this and if a train is headed north I plan to be on it. I'm just concerned that ALL OF A SUDDEN there are so many properly formed shapes that you can find one "almost by throwing a dart" at any of the previous winners. Just a thought. When things are either too good or too bad I usually find myself checking out are things really THIS good or either really THIS bad. In the past, I have usually found that neither extreme has proven out to be true. Have a good day and be careful. James ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 May 1997 09:03:18 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] IRRATIONAL EXUBERANCE ABOUNDS!!!! Market action and pricing will not cause him to raise rates. It is only one, and a minor one at that, of the inputs and criteria he uses. tom w Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be intrepreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. - ---------- > From: Brenda > To: canslim > Subject: [CANSLIM] IRRATIONAL EXUBERANCE ABOUNDS!!!! > Date: Sunday, May 04, 1997 1:34 AM > > teh week-end. Guess Mr. G IS GOING to have a reason to raise the interest > rates after all and "The Market" will have given it to him on a silver > platter, after all! Go for it, TOM! > James > > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 May 1997 08:59:27 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] In defense of TSK - was "Back in Heaven" When I see substantial earnings increases without commensurate sales increases, I can only assume it is the result of some internal process or cost cutting within the company and not as a result of sales. Good year to year earnings comparisons thus only last a finite time, until as is now the case, you start to compare to a quarter in which that process was already applied and, with sales nearly equal, are likely to also show earnings pretty flat instead of the 30-50% increase many may have been expecting. On the up/down ratio, anything under 0.8 is negative and supports a "distribution" pattern, suggesting the stock is more likely to move sideways or down than it is likely to move up. I have played some very thinly traded stocks, some that averaged only several thousand a day and would go several days without any trades, but I did so knowing I had no liquidity and would never see institutional interest. I made good money on some of them, but had to be patient and hold for long term. I also couldn't apply CANSLIM rules very well due larger spreads and difficulty of buying/selling within the spread. The lack of liquidity also caused more volatility. tom w Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be intrepreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. - ---------- > From: Peter Christiansen > To: canslim@mail.xmission.com > Subject: [CANSLIM] In defense of TSK - was "Back in Heaven" > Date: Sunday, May 04, 1997 12:21 PM > > ** Reply to note from "Tom Worley" Fri, 2 May 1997 06:56:55 -0400 > > > look good, on other hand watch out for TSK. It is showing very > > little growth, thinly traded (avg vol 44,500), and most sig is > > up/down vol at 0.5. Even tho accum/dist is still a C, u/d is very > > neg. > > Well so far I have my biggest gain in TSK, but I bought it exactly right. When you say it > has little growth, are you talking about the 5 year growth rate? When I look at the last four > quarters, I see earnings gains of 36%, 47%, 50%, & 64% with sales increasing every > quarter as well. When I see earnings growth accelerating, I can ignore the five year GR. > 44,500 shares isn't too thin for me. If I eliminated stocks with this amount of daily volume, > I would be tossing out some of the fastest growers. I usually draw the line at 20,000 this. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 May 1997 09:06:14 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Is it time to buy breakouts yet? For what it's worth, the CANSLIM brokers in my office were buying it last week, I haven't looked at a single chart yet this weekend, but if I do will try to look at MANU. tom w Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be intrepreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. - ---------- > From: Peter Christiansen > To: canslim@mail.xmission.com > Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Is it time to buy breakouts yet? > Date: Sunday, May 04, 1997 12:22 PM > > ** Reply to note from rkhenry@naxs.com (Robert Henry) Sat, 3 May 1997 13:57:49 -0400 > > > Ok, could someone take a look at Manugistics' (MANU) chart? Help me learn here, is that a double-bottom? > > It looks like a double bottom to me. The right side of the W slightly undercuts the left, > which is positive. The next day there is huge volume as the stock gaps up on the open ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 May 1997 09:14:01 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Point to Ponder about b/o SSSSSSS Don't know how many started following VIX (the S&P volatility index) since Mike Langston first mentioned it, but I have been (thanks Mike). His tip that when VIX is under 20 it shows a good CANSLIM market is right on target. I plan on using this index in the future to give me one more clue on which way the mkt is moving for CANSLIM candidates. tom w Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be intrepreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. - ---------- > From: Brenda > To: canslim > Subject: [CANSLIM] Point to Ponder about b/o SSSSSSS > Date: Sunday, May 04, 1997 9:10 AM > > During normal bull markets you can usually find CANSLIM shapes of all > types. They do not abound at every corner, but they nonetheless are there > thought. When things are either too good or too bad I usually find myself > checking out are things really THIS good or either really THIS bad. In the > past, I have usually found that neither extreme has proven out to be true. ------------------------------ End of canslim Digest V1 #164 ***************************** To subscribe to canslim Digest, send the command: subscribe canslim-digest in the body of a message to "majordomo@xmission.com". If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-canslim": subscribe canslim-digest local-canslim@your.domain.net A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "canslim-digest" in the commands above with "canslim". Back issues are available for anonymous FTP from ftp.xmission.com, in pub/lists/canslim/archive. These are organized by date.