From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #1111 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 Monday, February 5 2001 Volume 02 : Number 1111 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] Fwd: Web site updated Re: [CANSLIM] Eliminate the digest.. [CANSLIM] DGO List [CANSLIM] "M"??? Re: [CANSLIM] "M"??? Re: [CANSLIM] DGO List [CANSLIM] Acc/Dis Numbers Re: [CANSLIM] "M"??? [CANSLIM] HGS Watch List (or "Here comes the dressmakers!") ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 3 Feb 2001 21:37:54 -0800 From: "Tim Fisher" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Fwd: Web site updated Nope, I noticed that Ron is focused on the NASDAQ, but Ian Woodward (and thus HGS) definitely is not. Not too many of my HGS watch list stocks are techs these days, and Ian has been known to recommend an HD or two... At 09:35 PM 2/3/2001 -0700, you wrote: >Is the HGS totally focused on the NASDAQ as your posts seem to suggest? I >have only owned a couple of 4 letter symbol stocks the last few months, and >I'm not sure that I want to own any more. It seems to me that the DOW and >maybe the S&P are leading now, so I'm not sure focusing on the NASDAQ is >the right thing to do. I'm not really buying any tech stocks right now, >and I won't until they show some kind of leadership. Do you thing focusing >on the NASDAQ is the right thing to do? > >Note that I also see a lot of emphasis on the NASDAQ in IBD. It almost >seems like they aren't willing to admit that the other groups could lead >even if the greatest growth potential was in tech. However, it seems to >me, that the greatest growth potential has ALWAYS been in tech, for years >and years, several decades at least, but that isn't where the leadership >has been year after year, so why do we all seem to think that's where we >need to focus? > >Call me "Investing in Retail/Diversified/Financial" Earl > > > > >At 09:39 AM 2/3/01 -0800, you wrote: > >I thought Ron's comments were right on the mark so I am forwarding them > >today; as usual they are at the address below. I did get ATVI at a good > >price (<5% extended) Friday with a limit order and it closed at the high > >for the day, so I feel pretty lucky given the action on the Nasdaq. It and > >LEN (and 60 shares of USPH which Schwab never did sell and won't credit me > >a free commission for the partial execution) are my sole remaining holdings > >besides my wife's wad of MCD. Even being mostly in cash I continue to bleed > >(funds and a small buy-and-hold portfolio that is dead) and am now back to > >where I was 14 months ago or so. > > > >>The Nasdaq ended the week down 121 points, all of the losses coming on > >>Friday. > >> > >>The Nasdaq index is at critical point. You can see clearly on the chart > >>resistance is in the 2860 area and it is now at critical support at 2660. > The > >>index is still above the gap formed on January 17, but if it cannot hold >above > >>the gap, I believe the Nasdaq will test the low established on January 3, > >>2001 because the Bulls will have lost control.. > >> > >>My current analysis of the Nasdaq: > >> > >>1. The 17 DMA has turned up through the 50 DMA, but The 50 Day Moving > >>Average is still going down. We did not have enough positive days to make > >>it turn up toward the 200 DMA. > >> > >>2. Downside volume overwhelmed upside volume for the week, and overall > >>volume was down from the prior week. This is a concern because the > >>market needs positive volume and conviction to drive it higher. When the > >>market makes little headway, or falls sharply on heavy volume, these days > >>should be considered distribution days. Two good examples are the past > >>two Wednesdays where the volume was heavy, but the market went > >>nowhere or fell. Friday's only positive was that the sell off was on >reduced > >>volume. > >> > >>3. The weekly trend is now neutral. > >> > >>4. The FOMC 50 basis point rate cut on Wednesday was a non-event as > >>concern turned toward earnings growth, or the lack of earnings growth. > >>Friday's sell off was attributed to a strong jobs report which lessens the > >>likelyhood of futher near term rate cuts. > >> > >>5. The New High/Low line flattened along with the Advance/Decline line . > >> > >>6. The weekly Coppock is still going up. > >> > >>7. The Accumulation/Distribution Indicators have rolled over to the > downside > >>in the Nasdaq chart. > >> > >>8. My Defensive Stocks Surrogate is showing moderate strength which > >>indicates money looking for safety in an uncertain market environment > >> > >>9. The Nasdaq is at a critcal point. I have a couple of small positions in > >>place, but if the Nasdaq breaks support on Monday, I will close all > postions > >>and will be 100% in cash. If you need to be long this market, stick with > >>fundamentally strong stocks in strong groups. > >> > >>I made changes in Group Rankings. I am now publishing Ian Slow RS and > >>Velocity rankings. > >>Ian Slow shows the long term strength of groups in the current market > >>environment, while the 6 week Velocity Ranking shows groups gaining > >>momentum. The Market RS Rankings use 14 week Wilder RS with a 6 week > >>velocity setting. > >> > >>Ianforum.com - http://www.ianforum.com > > > >Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists > >Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site > >PFB Information > >mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com > >WWW http://OreRockOn.com > > > > > >- > > > > > > > >- Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 18:03:46 -0800 From: Dan Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Eliminate the digest.. While I subscribe to the individual email presentation, I have, off and on used the digest and believe that it is worthwhile form. With that stated, I would like to be able to receive attachment graphics such as gifs and jpg files. I belong to some mailing lists that have this capability and this makes the transmission of patterns, trends, pivot points, indicators and concepts quite easy to see and comprehend rather than relying on written descriptions to convey a concept that, in the end, is an interpretation by both the writer and the reader. By the use of a program such as Snagit, it is easy to capture the screen, edit the capture, annotate it and send it off. I believe that this mailing list would benefit immeasurably to have this capability. Yes, I know that we can post to an ftp site and as a reader access that graphic. Yes, it works, and I think it is cumbersome, and is a poor workaround. With an attached file, it is with the message as either an inline file that can be scrolled to, or as an attached file that can be clicked. As I understand the problem that Jeff has is: to receive graphics, such as gifs, and jpgs, that in the digest they are garbled code talk and it is either an all or none process. Those other lists that I am on, the digest form does not have the graphics attached, I understand that Jeff does not have that flexibility: to receive individual emails, and skip attaching in digest. At least this how I understand it. Therefore, while the digest form is important for a variety of reasons to those receiving, I think that the productivity, and educational benefits of being able to receive graphics, would greatly outweigh the disadvantage and inconvenience of not having the digest. I personally, would readily give up the digest, in a heartbeat to get the graphics! Attached graphics would be a quantum leap forward. mailto:dcash@compuall.net Kibosh spam: http://spamcop.net/ Dan - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 13:28:27 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] DGO List Interestingly (since it didn't seem that successful of a week), the overall list jumped over 20% to 221 stocks from 181 for the prior two weeks, and 185 the week before that. As always, my shorthand - Bx means "B"ase and "x" is the nr of weeks, IMO. EPIQ - failing short base, I sold half on Friday, first time in a while volume got it into the books DORL - one week handle forming on a shallow cup of what had been a LLUR FED - B2 handle on shallow cup of a LLUR SWBT - B5 PLT - B2+ RJF - B4 NHCH - B4 TWRI - B2, vol down RGFC - B3, 3 dividend increases in past 6 months BRO - B6, volatile BBT - B4 NFB - B6 SNV - B6 BFD - B4 ALAB - B4 CFFN - B8 FFBK - B2+ MAR - B4+ LSTR - B4 YELL - B3+ MATW - B3+ RAIL - stealth b/o from B5 on low volume ASD - B4 AME - B6 BOKF - B5 MER - B3 Once again, banks dominated the overall list (my personal bias against banks may have kept a few more off this list). Most stocks failed my visual check due still screaming up from their lows, a few look to be failing their highs, while many more simply had a base of less than 2 weeks (I am still applying my more conservative review). Not much in the way of techs. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 19:06:16 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] "M"??? If the past pattern of this group, where quantity of postings is in proportion to the quality of "M", continues to remain true, guess this weekend speaks volumes on how far "M" degraded this past week. Too early for indications from Asia. Europe and the Americas all were ugly on Friday. Economic reports last week rather scary, except for new jobs creation and home sales. Consumer sentiment in the pits, but that can change in a heartbeat (or swipe of a credit card, and I did my part for the consumer spending this weekend). I am partially in cash in both my 401 and my IRA, and can't find a single thing I feel compelled to buy. Not a good sign. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 20:15:44 -0700 From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] "M"??? On 4 Feb 01, at 19:06, Tom Worley wrote: > I am partially in cash in both my 401 and my IRA, and can't find > a single thing I feel compelled to buy. Not a good sign. I looked at over a thousand charts in the paper edition of the DG this weekend, and I thought most of them looked pretty ragged, I also did not see much I want to buy, guess PLT continues to look ok. I think the NASDAQ got to levels of such excessive valuation that even after the significant sell off we have had, it still has some pretty richly valued stocks. William O'Neil always says that P/E's don't matter, and I think short term they don't but longer term they eventually do matter, and I think we are still working off some of those high P/E's. - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 19:33:13 -0800 (PST) From: rolatzi Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DGO List Tom, Just a thank you for continuing to post DGO list. I am presently not invested in CANSLIM stocks. I have energy stocks mostly for a year or more. I have some PM stocks to protect against a decline in the dollar and I own my favorite biotechs, most of which have no earnings yet. I am warming up the scans to look for good cup and handles forming but they are mostly financial and energy companies. I am looking for a third wash out in the market because there wasn't nearly enough fear or pessimism but don't underestimate the ability of Allan Greenspan and an accomodative federal reserve. However, I think we are seeing the cyclical side of technology and there are few companies that have projected strong growth in the next few quarters. Sorry for the diatribe but it just leaked out. ciao, rolatzi - --- Tom Worley wrote: > Interestingly (since it didn't seem that successful of a > week), > the overall list jumped over 20% to 221 stocks from 181 > for the > prior two weeks, and 185 the week before that. > > As always, my shorthand - Bx means "B"ase and "x" is the > nr of > weeks, IMO. > > EPIQ - failing short base, I sold half on Friday, first > time in a > while volume got it into the books > DORL - one week handle forming on a shallow cup of what > had been > a LLUR > FED - B2 handle on shallow cup of a LLUR > SWBT - B5 > PLT - B2+ > RJF - B4 > NHCH - B4 > TWRI - B2, vol down > RGFC - B3, 3 dividend increases in past 6 months > BRO - B6, volatile > BBT - B4 > NFB - B6 > SNV - B6 > BFD - B4 > ALAB - B4 > CFFN - B8 > FFBK - B2+ > MAR - B4+ > LSTR - B4 > YELL - B3+ > MATW - B3+ > RAIL - stealth b/o from B5 on low volume > ASD - B4 > AME - B6 > BOKF - B5 > MER - B3 > > Once again, banks dominated the overall list (my personal > bias > against banks may have kept a few more off this list). > Most > stocks failed my visual check due still screaming up from > their > lows, a few look to be failing their highs, while many > more > simply had a base of less than 2 weeks (I am still > applying my > more conservative review). Not much in the way of techs. > > Tom Worley > stkguru@netside.net > ICQ # 5568838 > > > > > > - > __________________________________________________ Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 23:15:27 -0500 From: Robert Subject: [CANSLIM] Acc/Dis Numbers Here are the latest Acc/Dis Numbers. I would like to vote for keeping the digest version. Date A B C D E AB/A:E %E 1/16/01 953 2482 1085 906 411 59% 7% 1/17/01 959 2563 1087 912 375 60% 6% 1/18/01 1067 2487 1177 874 347 60% 6% 1/19/01 1062 2583 1099 811 344 62% 6% 1/22/01 1055 2601 1076 845 340 62% 6% 1/23/01 1052 2600 1099 840 346 62% 6% 1/24/01 1069 2628 1085 836 327 62% 6% 1/25/01 1131 2656 1122 750 306 63% 5% 1/26/01 1135 2687 1130 741 293 64% 5% 1/29/01 1120 2722 1125 746 274 64% 5% 1/30/01 1150 2677 1122 760 280 64% 5% 1/31/01 1186 2723 1082 746 263 65% 4% 2/1/01 1249 2725 1072 721 245 66% 4% 2/2/01 1269 2718 1038 750 239 66% 4% 2/5/01 1296 2699 1062 705 250 66% 4% Spread sheet version: Date,A,B,C,D,E,AB/A:E,%E 1/16/01,953,2482,1085,906,411,59%,7% 1/17/01,959,2563,1087,912,375,60%,6% 1/18/01,1067,2487,1177,874,347,60%,6% 1/19/01,1062,2583,1099,811,344,62%,6% 1/22/01,1055,2601,1076,845,340,62%,6% 1/23/01,1052,2600,1099,840,346,62%,6% 1/24/01,1069,2628,1085,836,327,62%,6% 1/25/01,1131,2656,1122,750,306,63%,5% 1/26/01,1135,2687,1130,741,293,64%,5% 1/29/01,1120,2722,1125,746,274,64%,5% 1/30/01,1150,2677,1122,760,280,64%,5% 1/31/01,1186,2723,1082,746,263,65%,4% 2/1/01,1249,2725,1072,721,245,66%,4% 2/2/01,1269,2718,1038,750,239,66%,4% 2/5/01,1296,2699,1062,705,250,66%,4% Robert _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 00:34:44 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] "M"??? Trailing P/Es really don't matter as they are historical. Future P/Es are a different matter, as they reflect expectation, and high P/Es are tough to sustain in a falling market. The higher they are, the harder they fall. Right now, the market is focused on falling profit trends, and that attitude does not sustain high expectations. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 - ----- Original Message ----- From: Patrick Wahl To: Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 10:15 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] "M"??? I think the NASDAQ got to levels of such excessive valuation that even after the significant sell off we have had, it still has some pretty richly valued stocks. William O'Neil always says that P/E's don't matter, and I think short term they don't but longer term they eventually do matter, and I think we are still working off some of those high P/E's. - - - - ------------------------------ Date: 5 Feb 2001 06:11:49 -0800 From: "Tim Fisher" Subject: [CANSLIM] HGS Watch List (or "Here comes the dressmakers!") Only one clothing mfgr on the preliminary list didn't make the cut (CHCO) due to its 50% cup which is too deep for me. These guys have blasted to second place the past few weeks. I did horrible with GIL so I am (planning on) watching them instead of participating this week. Other than that the builders are still on top. What does it say for the market that RJR is now a "high growth" stock? Not much, IMHO. Stock ERG E R G A/D SMR Growth Curr Earn Prev Earn Proj Earn Group EPS Due MTH 297 99 99 99 B A 126 176 100 99 BUILD_RES 2/8/2001 SPF 297 99 99 99 B B 82 86 57 8 BUILD_RES 4/24/2001 RYL 295 98 98 99 B B 85 59 45 6 BUILD_RES 4/28/2001 BZH 294 96 99 99 A B 33 89 24 25 BUILD_RES 4/25/2001 CHBS 294 98 99 97 A A 73 86 363 93 RET_CLOTHES 4/5/2001 MDC 294 98 97 99 C B 55 54 49 2 BUILD_RES 4/18/2001 NVR 294 99 96 99 B A 71 58 49 39 BUILD_RES 2/3/2001 SKX 294 98 99 97 A A 168 67 65 72 RET_CLOTHES 3/6/2001 CHIC 292 96 99 97 A A 43 52 41 28 RET_CLOTHES 4/13/2001 HOTT 291 98 96 97 A A 65 55 142 49 RET_CLOTHES 3/14/2001 LEN 290 96 95 99 B A 31 67 25 17 BUILD_RES 3/23/2001 USPH 290 92 99 99 A A 18 58 53 40 MED_OUTPAT 2/28/2001 TBL 289 97 98 94 C A 55 53 30 17 SHOES 4/15/2000 ESRX 288 97 97 94 B B 31 40 40 35 MED_WDRUG 2/10/2001 RJR 288 91 99 98 C C 72 25 15 14 TOBACCO 4/18/2001 THX 288 95 96 97 B A 27 263 106 74 O&G_USEXPL 4/13/2001 WBB 288 93 96 99 B B 19 64 20 13 BUILD_RES 4/25/2001 AMSGA 287 96 99 92 B B 42 25 25 25 MEDDEN_SERV 2/22/2001 PHCC 287 98 95 94 C A 61 35 43 37 MED_WDRUG 2/23/2001 TOL 287 95 93 99 C A 22 69 25 14 BUILD_RES 2/24/2001 CACOA 286 94 95 97 A B 36 38 22 20 RET_CLOTHES 3/14/2001 FED 286 93 98 95 B A 43 34 17 17 FIN_S&L 4/26/2001 SWBT 286 94 97 95 B A 24 30 27 17 BANK_WSW 4/18/2001 ABFS 285 96 93 96 C B 100 32 45 2 TRANS_TRUCK 4/18/2001 EASI 285 98 98 89 A A 25 72 93 18 ELEC_MILITARY 2/16/2001 DBRN 284 92 95 97 B B 21 45 21 22 RET_CLOTHES 2/17/2001 JBHT 284 96 92 96 B D 33 94 86 14 TRANS_TRUCK 4/14/2001 GCO 283 92 97 94 A A 19 44 33 33 SHOES 02/29/01 KBH 283 95 89 99 B B 41 47 12 9 BUILD_RES 3/20/2001 BNKU 282 90 97 95 C A 23 24 21 10 BANK_WSW 1/24/2001 APOL 281 97 97 87 A A 38 29 31 27 COMM_SCHOOL 3/16/2001 KNGT 278 89 93 96 A A 24 22 13 18 TRANS_TRUCK 4/22/2000 AMFH 276 94 87 95 C B 14 500 164 12 FIN_S&L 4/24/2001 IGT 276 97 97 82 C A 19 113 100 40 LEIS_GAMES 4/19/2001 PSS 276 92 87 97 C B 15 30 34 22 RET_CLOTHES 2/22/2001 CFR 275 90 90 95 A A 17 16 27 -1 BANK_WSW 4/25/2001 LLL 275 95 91 89 C B 63 31 33 34 ELEC_MILITARY 4/25/2001 SBIB 275 86 94 95 B A 16 13 18 13 BANK_WSW 4/17/2001 SHFL 275 96 97 82 A A 38 69 38 19 LEIS_GAMES 2/18/2001 RCII 274 98 96 80 A B 35 37 61 35 RET_HOMEFURN 2/9/2001 MFC 273 94 96 83 C C 22 44 24 -19 INS_MISC 2/18/2001 SLOT 272 92 98 82 A A 32 34 20 22 LEIS_GAMES 4/27/2001 UVV 272 81 93 98 B C 18 19 5 4 TOBACCO 5/4/2001 ABK 270 87 92 91 B A 18 14 15 15 INS_PROP 4/19/2001 DYN 269 96 92 81 C B 26 146 162 42 O&G_PIPES 4/24/2001 NYCB 269 90 96 83 A A 20 51 7 36 BANK_NE 4/12/2001 ATK 267 84 94 89 A B 15 14 18 14 ELEC_MILITARY 5/11/2000 BBT 267 90 87 90 B A 21 18 17 13 BANK_SUPERS 4/12/2001 PFGC 267 90 92 85 C C 17 21 21 22 RETWHL_FOOD 2/8/2001 SNV 267 85 92 90 A A 15 18 10 14 BANK_SE 4/11/2001 FITB 265 89 86 90 A A 18 19 14 27 BANK_SUPERS 4/14/2001 WAG 265 89 83 93 C B 18 15 19 18 RET_DRUGS 3/27/2001 BJS 261 81 91 89 B B 1 204 733 112 O&F_FIELD 4/20/2001 Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #1111 ****************************** 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.