From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #176 Reply-To: canslim Sender: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes canslim-digest Friday, April 3 1998 Volume 02 : Number 176 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] Selling per O'Neil? [CANSLIM] Re: Market Rally Re: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet Re: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Market Rally [CANSLIM] Breakout VSTN Re: [CANSLIM] Tom and Surindra [CANSLIM] Testing, Don't bother reading Re: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet [CANSLIM] Pivot point help Re: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet Re: [CANSLIM] Tom Worley's true disclaimer Re: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet Re: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet Re: [CANSLIM] Tom Worley's true disclaimer Re: [CANSLIM] Tom and Surindra Re: [CANSLIM] Tom and Surindra Re: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet Re: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet Re: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet Re: [CANSLIM] ACSC Re: [CANSLIM] ACSC Re: [CANSLIM] UBIX bid/ask Re: [CANSLIM] Unemployment -4.7% -36,000 jobs created ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 03 Apr 1998 10:18:08 -0500 From: Peter Newell Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Selling per O'Neil? Good point. Buying DELL twice was probably the only way to go. I look at the 3com chart when I forget this. Actually I sold DELL in Aug because it appearred to be topping and the general market started breaking down. I am experimenting/backtesting with 20 dma because they seem to keep you out of trouble the 50dma can allow a lot of damage to be done. The disadvantage is you will be stopped out probably early either way. Peter Newell > I bot and sold DELL twice, and doubled my money twice. Dell really doesn't > break that many rules, but then again none of my stops are as high as the 20 > DMA. If I had to guess I'd say that 75% of my 50%+ gainers broke the 20 DMA > somewhere along the way. IMHO the rules in HTMMIS are artificial and you > need to establish your own set of rules for selling. I'm stupid so I just > let the stock trip my stop, which of course I adjust on a weekly basis. > > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists > Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site > PFB Information > tfish@spiritone.com > WWW http://www.spiritone.com/~tfish -- See naked fish and rocks! > > > - - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 07:51:00 -0800 (PST) From: dbphoenix Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: Market Rally <> I think you're making too much of it, Robert. Yes, the market was under distribution last week, but it turned out to be only profit-taking. It will go through distribution again many times before this is all over. But remember that O'N counsels to maintain a broad view. You can't go by just market indices. You have to look at everything else that's going on, and the most important factor in all this craziness is the fact that there's an unprecedented amount of money pouring into the market and it has to go somewhere. This is why stock splits are being greeted with such enthusiasm. I wouldn't be surprised to see secondaries greeted with the same enthusiasm. Under no other conditions would so many stocks be rewarded so handsomely for pre-announcing earnings shortfalls. While hope, fear, and greed lose a great many people an enormous amount of money, the real money is lost through confusion, and there is one hell of a lot of confusion out there right now. My advice is to reevaluate your sell strategies and your stop levels and let CS do its work. If your stops are hit, they're hit. If they're not, they're not. Personally, I keep a very tight stop on new buys, but after that, I just let them do what they're going to do. It's either that or stay out of the market altogether. Is it "safe" to invest now? It's never safe. But all indicators, including DOW Theory, are still positive, so you may as well continue to invest. Just stick with whatever your plan is, the chart patterns you like, the fundies you require, etc., and never relax. Off this subject, as far as objectionable posts are concerned, why can't whoever's in charge of this enterprise just delete them? I'm sure that those who are on the list would welcome the imposition of standards. Witness the vast difference between the level of hosted and non-hosted message boards. As far as personal notes go, is it really necessary to send them to every subscriber? Couldn't these be rerouted to the individual concerned instead of making the list of message to go through ever-longer? Just a suggestion. - --Db _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Apr 1998 21:05:42 -0800 From: Dan Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet Dear Tom, Since your last letter to me, I have been wanting to respond to you in kind, but have not taken the discipline to think through that process. Suffice it to say, I am ok, on hormone blocking and my being is adapting to the changes foiced upon it in this most unnatural way. Mostly odd quality of thought. Feels diminished part of the day, but in fact does not seem to be. More importantly, is you and your well-being. The little that you have shared me, and what said here, there is no love lost. No there is little loyalty in the work world. I too, suspect that their actions will be their loss. Unless it would terribly offend you, and you do not want me to do so, I am going to have you put on our prayer chain at our church for meaningful employment. I have no clue to this facet of your life, but mine has had this thread of love running through it, and I can and will believe for you. Don't let the bastards get you down!! Dan Tom Worley wrote: > You may note the altered version of my signature block. YES, I am no > longer an "inactive" broker, I'm now a "former" broker. As of today, > on about 5 minutes notice, I was terminated, which is probably a > blessing in disguise. I'm still adjusting to the concept of being > unemployed, and also not regulated, so hopefully I can be a little > more active as a poster while I hunt for a new way to pay my bills. My > program for tomorrow, due to the short notice, is to file for > unemployment and begin submitting more job applications. With what I > know of what was going on, I'm a lot happier being out of there, and > my former employer may be sorry eventually for their actions. I feel > no loyalty after the way I was treated. At least now my job won't > interfere with my investments!! > > My comments are strictly my own opinion, and SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED > AS A RECOMMENDATION OF ANY KIND. I am an EX- broker and an active > investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any > investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. > Tom W > > - - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 03 Apr 1998 08:55:07 -0500 From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet Tom-- Ordinarily I'd say that I was sorry to hear of your 5-minute termination. But in your instance it sounds as if you're only modestly harmed and only a bit surprised. Ought I infer that your employer may have legally stumbled and bumbled on your release? Have had a legal scrape with my university, whose president didn't understand First Amendment rights. Thousands of dollars later, he's getting the idea. Nail the bastards. Connie Mack Tom Worley wrote: > You may note the altered version of my signature block. YES, I am no > longer an "inactive" broker, I'm now a "former" broker. As of today, > on about 5 minutes notice, I was terminated, which is probably a > blessing in disguise. I'm still adjusting to the concept of being > unemployed, and also not regulated, so hopefully I can be a little > more active as a poster while I hunt for a new way to pay my bills. My > > program for tomorrow, due to the short notice, is to file for > unemployment and begin submitting more job applications. With what I > know of what was going on, I'm a lot happier being out of there, and > my former employer may be sorry eventually for their actions. I feel > no loyalty after the way I was treated. At least now my job won't > interfere with my investments!! > > My comments are strictly my own opinion, and SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED > > AS A RECOMMENDATION OF ANY KIND. I am an EX- broker and an active > investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any > investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. > Tom W > > - - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 10:26:43 -0600 From: "Joe Scott" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Market Rally This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0033_01BD5EEA.FFAFA020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable db,=20 you wrote; . If your stops are hit, they're hit. If they're not, they're not. Personally, I keep a very tight stop on new buys, but after that, I just let them do what they're going to do how do you handle stops on your gainers, so as not to give your profits = back? don't know a thing joe - ------=_NextPart_000_0033_01BD5EEA.FFAFA020 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
db,
you wrote;
.  If your stops are hit, they're = hit.  If=20 they're not,
they're not.  Personally, I keep a very tight stop = on new=20 buys, but
after that, I just let them do what they're going to=20 do
 
how do you handle stops on your gainers, so = as not to=20 give your profits back?
 
don't know a = thing
joe
- ------=_NextPart_000_0033_01BD5EEA.FFAFA020-- - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 03 Apr 1998 23:36:18 From: Peter Christiansen Subject: [CANSLIM] Breakout VSTN From my watch list, VSTN is breaking out on good volume. Peter Christiansen Chiang Mai - Thailand - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 03 Apr 1998 08:35:12 -0800 (PST) From: frank swenson Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Tom and Surindra Before, this thing gets out of hand. Please note Surinda wrote his note BEFORE Tom posted. Whether you think it is funny or not, I'm sure Surinda wrote it wihout any malice whatsoever. That said, my sympathies to Tom. Tom you may want to go back and reread the inspirational post you sent a couple of weeks ago about looking at events as a learning experience and opportunity. Frank - ---JANSI1AUG1 wrote: > > Tom: > > I sympathize with you; I imagine it's not the "firing" per se, it's the > reason given that grates. I'm about your age, Tom, and I know what this > means. It's fortunate for you that investing provides you with another route > to make income. May you prosper, and may your enemies decline in vigor! > Also, Tom, if you have the inclination, would you explain more fully how > the MM or BD benefits from the spread-and, perhaps, what exactly he does when > he has to borrow the stock. I get confused on how exactly he makes money. Is > it that he is able to buy at the bid and sell at the ask (the opposite of what > investors using market orders must do)? > > Surindra- Regarding the post you made in Tom's name: I can't believe you > wrote what you wrote. I thought, "How can anybody be so insensitive and > thick"? Then I thought it was a private joke between Tom and you. But after > reading Tom's post, I realized it was no laughing matter. It would be a shame > if Tom stops posting because of what you wrote; you should be ashamed of > yourself. Tom provides a lot of timely information to us all, and this group > would be much worse off-in my opinion-if Tom decides to belong to this group > no longer. If you're not a complete dunderhead you ought to apologize to Tom > for your moronic attempt at humor! > > jans > > - > > > > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 03 Apr 1998 23:46:30 From: Peter Christiansen Subject: [CANSLIM] Testing, Don't bother reading Testing Peter Christiansen Chiang Mai - Thailand - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 03 Apr 1998 09:20:07 PST From: "Charles Morgan" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet Sorry to hear about the loss of your job, though it sounds that you are better off not working for that company. Good luck on your future endeavors. I definitely lurk here more than post (I am going to try and post more often) and I enjoy reading your posts. So I hope you continue to post. Your posts definitely sound like someone who has a very good understanding of the market. Even though I have only been investing in individual stocks for a year and subscribed to Investors Business Daily about 6 months ago, I have studied and followed the market for quite a few years (I wanted to know why my mutual funds do what they do). P.S. Please don't "nurse" that bottle to long ;) >From: "Tom Worley" >To: "CANSLIM" >Subject: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet >Date: Thu, 2 Apr 1998 21:10:45 -0500 >Reply-To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > >You may note the altered version of my signature block. YES, I am no >longer an "inactive" broker, I'm now a "former" broker. As of today, >on about 5 minutes notice, I was terminated, which is probably a >blessing in disguise. I'm still adjusting to the concept of being >unemployed, and also not regulated, so hopefully I can be a little >more active as a poster while I hunt for a new way to pay my bills. My >program for tomorrow, due to the short notice, is to file for >unemployment and begin submitting more job applications. With what I >know of what was going on, I'm a lot happier being out of there, and >my former employer may be sorry eventually for their actions. I feel >no loyalty after the way I was treated. At least now my job won't >interfere with my investments!! > >My comments are strictly my own opinion, and SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED >AS A RECOMMENDATION OF ANY KIND. I am an EX- broker and an active >investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any >investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. >Tom W > > >- > > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 13:17:42 -0500 From: "Bud Barton" Subject: [CANSLIM] Pivot point help This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD5F02.E26B5460 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable What do you guys think about the volume by price display on big charts = and using longest volume bar as the pivot point? - ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD5F02.E26B5460 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
What do you guys think about the = volume by price=20 display on big charts and using longest volume bar as the pivot=20 point?
- ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD5F02.E26B5460-- - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 03 Apr 1998 13:19:13 -0500 From: "B. Miller" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet I, too, would like to echo may of the messages that were posted to Tom and wish Tom the best of luck in future endeavors. It sounds like you sure got a raw deal Tom. Brad - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 13:15:46 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Tom Worley's true disclaimer I understand and no hard feelings. I admit I was rather "raw" when I read it, and also several sheets to the wind for those that understand nautical terms (inebriated for everyone else). Actually it was amazing I could still read, much less type!! I'm still here, you are still stuck with me, didn't unregister, spent the morning making numerous phone calls, somehow my addiction to the mkt took a lower priority this morning. My comments are strictly my own opinion, and SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED AS A RECOMMENDATION OF ANY KIND. I am an EX- broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Tom w - -----Original Message----- From: Surindra Singh To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Thursday, April 02, 1998 10:33 PM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Tom Worley's true disclaimer >Tom: > >We all love you too much. Look at the timing to clean up this mess as I >think you can retrieve the timing of the posts sent to the list. I wrote >this prior to your bad news on the list about your job and did not know a >thing about it. Sorry to hear it happened against your wishes. In any event >I apologize and regret that I made this provocative remarks on the list, - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 13:25:58 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet Thanks Dave, Been too busy this morning making phone calls to even get on the net, actually had to check opening quotes BY PHONE!! Yuch!! I have some feelers out, fortunately I have a good reputation in the industry, one of the reasons why I had to leave sooner or later, just would have preferred it was on my own terms. While I would probably enjoy trading for a living, capital prevents this now. I must now be very "capital protective" until I get a new job. Tom w - -----Original Message----- From: Dave Cameron To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Thursday, April 02, 1998 10:55 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet >Tom Worley wrote: >> >> You may note the altered version of my signature block. YES, I am no >> longer an "inactive" broker, I'm now a "former" broker. As of today, - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 13:50:10 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet Thanks Dean, In my limited industry, reputation is so important, and I have spent the morning talking to people I dealt with, and who value my expertise and professionalism. They are already putting out the word that I am available, and hopefully a job will soon be offered. My comments are strictly my own opinion, and SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED AS A RECOMMENDATION OF ANY KIND. I am an EX- broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Tom w - -----Original Message----- From: Dean Edwards To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Friday, April 03, 1998 5:46 AM Subject: Fw: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet >Tom , > My deepest sympathies. Any change in life that requires a person to >adapt to new circumstances can cause stress, regardless of whether or not >the change is beneficial. >Job loss is ranked as one of the highest, most stressful events in the >impact of life changes. Especially with regard to your circumstances, in >having such very short notice... > My other concern is that you may overtrade or do something >irrational such as increase your risk taking because of these events. The >market does not beat them, >they beat themselves. > >But I have the utmost respect for your character. > <. Quite a reward for over four years of works 60-70 hour weeks. >. As John Train says:" the biggest differences between the ones that make it >and the ones that don't is simply that the successful ones have the drive to >win through in spite of all the frustrations. The difference between the >professional and the amateur is often just that the professional will work >terribly hard and keep at it." > >With your veracity and integrity, I am sure that you will acquire another >job. > > Regards Dean > >-----Original Message----- >From: Tom Worley >To: CANSLIM >Date: Friday, April 03, 1998 2:13 PM >Subject: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet > > >>You may note the altered version of my signature block. YES, I am no >>longer an "inactive" broker, I'm now a "former" broker. As of today, >>on about 5 minutes notice, I was terminated, > > > > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 13:57:30 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Tom Worley's true disclaimer Thanks Nelson, but don't blame Surindra, his post was simply his dry humor, and he and I both had the misfortune of bad timing. My comments are strictly my own opinion, and SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED AS A RECOMMENDATION OF ANY KIND. I am an EX- broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Tom w - -----Original Message----- From: Nelson E. Timken, Esq. To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Friday, April 03, 1998 6:53 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Tom Worley's true disclaimer Ditto Tom. You will get right back on your feet, and bigger and better things will be in your future. So hang in there. As for those who would satirize your comments, and act like fools on this list, particularly when you are in a tough situation, they have a lot of growing up to do and will find themselves the victims of my efficient mail filter. Nelson E. Timken, Esq. Queens, New York - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - ------ - ------------- Home Page: http://www.geocities.com/wallstreet/5791 - -----Original Message----- From: David S. Pinhasik To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Friday, April 03, 1998 3:49 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Tom Worley's true disclaimer I second. All the best, Tom. I am positive you are going to do much better with a different firm or perhaps on your own as someone mentioned. David - -----Original Message----- From: Richard E. Jenkins To: canslim@lists.xmission.com ; stkguru@netside.net Cc: jenkr@global2000.net Date: =E9=E5=ED =F9=E9=F9=E9 03 =E0=F4=F8=E9=EC 1998 08:05 Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Tom Worley's true disclaimer Tom, I, and I am sure the vast majority of the members of this group, greatly appreciate your knowledge and expertise. Your firm conviction to the CANSLIM concepts have also been an inspiration and have often held this group to the subject material, not allowing it to wander off-topic for more than a few few moments. I was deeply saddened to learn of your misfortune and sincerely hope that your experience soon leads to far greater riches and rewards. We are all pulling for you, Tom. Hang in there. > From: "Tom Worley" > To: > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Tom Worley's true disclaimer > Date: Thu, 2 Apr 1998 21:59:22 -0500 > Reply-to: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Surindra, I truly hope this was intended as a joke and satire, as the > timing could not be worse. I was just fired from my job as Operations > Manager today for internal reasons (basically I knew too much and am > considering taking what I know to the regulators as early as tomorrow, > I am stubborn and principled, which is why my license is still totally > clean after over ten years in this industry). If it was not intended > in good, clean fun, and right now I am so upset that I am likely to > deregister from this group tonight without even waiting for a > response, then you just gave me the best reason of all to totally stop > posting to this group. > > My comments are strictly my own opinion, and SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED > AS A RECOMMENDATION OF ANY KIND. I am an EX- broker and an active > investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any > investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. > Tom w The remainder has been cut, as it was, in my opinion, in extremely poor taste, under any circumstances. - - - - - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 14:22:58 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Tom and Surindra Thanks for the kind words, Jans, and ease up on Surindra, he was just the victim of terrible timing. Under other circumstances, I even might have found it satirical and funny. Market Makers (MMs) make their money from "trading the spread" just as always. They also make it from day trading the stock just like any day trader, gambling on news or momentum to gain a qtr or half a point. Since the implementation of the new Order Display rules, it has become tougher for a MM to make a living trading the spread, thus many have dropped stocks they used to make a market in, which hurts competitiveness and liquidity and ultimately increases the spread. By tightening the spread with limit orders, we as investors actually hurt the remaining liquidity, as it's harder for a MM to execute a mkt buy order of any size if there's no room left for him to go high bid and cover the shares. Nonetheless, I firmly support using limit orders where there is much of a spread. A MM can no more buy at the bid and sell at the offer than any individual investor using limits. My comments are strictly my own opinion, and SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED AS A RECOMMENDATION OF ANY KIND. I am an EX- broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Tom w - -----Original Message----- From: JANSI1AUG1 To: CANSLIM@xmission.com Date: Friday, April 03, 1998 10:22 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] Tom and Surindra >Tom: > > I sympathize with you; I imagine it's not the "firing" per se, it's the >reason given that grates. I'm about your age, Tom, and I know what this >means. It's fortunate for you that investing provides you with another route >to make income. May you prosper, and may your enemies decline in vigor! > Also, Tom, if you have the inclination, would you explain more fully how >the MM or BD benefits from the spread-and, perhaps, what exactly he does when >he has to borrow the stock. I get confused on how exactly he makes money. Is >it that he is able to buy at the bid and sell at the ask (the opposite of what >investors using market orders must do)? > > Surindra- Regarding the post you made in Tom's name: I can't believe you - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 14:35:00 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Tom and Surindra Thanks, Frank. I agree, Surindra was as much the victim of terrible timing as was I. I hold no grudge against him for what was intended as a spoof, and would have likely amused me under any other circumstance. My comments are strictly my own opinion, and SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED AS A RECOMMENDATION OF ANY KIND. I am an EX- broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Tom w - -----Original Message----- From: frank swenson To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Friday, April 03, 1998 11:45 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Tom and Surindra > >Before, this thing gets out of hand. Please note Surinda wrote his >note BEFORE Tom posted. Whether you think it is funny or not, I'm sure >Surinda wrote it wihout any malice whatsoever. That said, my >sympathies to Tom. Tom you may want to go back and reread the >inspirational post you sent a couple of weeks ago about looking at >events as a learning experience and opportunity. >Frank > > >---JANSI1AUG1 wrote: >> >> Tom: >> >> I sympathize with you; I imagine it's not the "firing" per se, >it's the >> reason given that grates. I'm about your age, Tom, and I know what >this >> means. It's fortunate for you that investing provides you with >another route >> to make income. May you prosper, and may your enemies decline in >vigor! >> Also, Tom, if you have the inclination, would you explain more >fully how >> the MM or BD benefits from the spread-and, perhaps, what exactly he >does when >> he has to borrow the stock. I get confused on how exactly he makes >money. Is >> it that he is able to buy at the bid and sell at the ask (the >opposite of what >> investors using market orders must do)? >> >> Surindra- Regarding the post you made in Tom's name: I can't >believe you >> wrote what you wrote. I thought, "How can anybody be so insensitive >and >> thick"? Then I thought it was a private joke between Tom and you. >But after >> reading Tom's post, I realized it was no laughing matter. It would >be a shame >> if Tom stops posting because of what you wrote; you should be >ashamed of >> yourself. Tom provides a lot of timely information to us all, and >this group >> would be much worse off-in my opinion-if Tom decides to belong to >this group >> no longer. If you're not a complete dunderhead you ought to >apologize to Tom >> for your moronic attempt at humor! >> >> jans >> >> - >> >> >> >> > >_________________________________________________________ >DO YOU YAHOO!? >Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 14:38:50 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet Thanks, Brad, but it will be better in the longer term, I am sure. My comments are strictly my own opinion, and SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED AS A RECOMMENDATION OF ANY KIND. I am an EX- broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Tom w - -----Original Message----- From: B. Miller To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Friday, April 03, 1998 1:16 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet >I, too, would like to echo may of the messages that were posted to Tom and >wish Tom the best of luck in future endeavors. It sounds like you sure got >a raw deal Tom. > >Brad > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 14:37:36 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet Thanks for the kind words, Charles. And glad to hear you will be posting more in the future. Tom w - -----Original Message----- From: Charles Morgan To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Friday, April 03, 1998 12:19 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet >Sorry to hear about the loss of your job, though it sounds that you are >better off not working for that company. Good luck on your future >endeavors. > >I definitely lurk here more than post (I am going to try and post more >often) and I enjoy reading your posts. So I hope you continue to post. >Your posts definitely sound like someone who has a very good >understanding of the market. Even though I have only been investing in - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 03 Apr 1998 14:32:59 -0500 From: Tom Worley Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet Florida is an "employment at will" state, so no ground rules for termination, including no notice as is my case. On the other hand, if they fail to give me COBRA notice within 30 days, I will nail them for a $100/day fine. On the other hand, as an employee my first loyalty was to my firm, as an ex-employee my first loyalty is to myself and my licenses, so may have some interesting conversations with the regulators about what has been gong on. My comments are strictly my own opinion, and SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED AS A RECOMMENDATION OF ANY KIND. I am an EX- broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Tom w - -----Original Message----- From: Connie Mack Rea To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Friday, April 03, 1998 11:05 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] To all my friends on the Internet >Tom-- > >Ordinarily I'd say that I was sorry to hear of your 5-minute >termination. But in your instance it sounds as if you're only modestly >harmed and only a bit surprised. > >Ought I infer that your employer may have legally stumbled and bumbled >on your release? > >Have had a legal scrape with my university, whose president didn't >understand First Amendment rights. Thousands of dollars later, he's >getting the idea. > >Nail the bastards. > >Connie Mack > > > > >Tom Worley wrote: > >> You may note the altered version of my signature block. YES, I am no >> longer an "inactive" broker, I'm now a "former" broker. As of today, >> on about 5 minutes notice, I was terminated, which is probably a >> blessing in disguise. I'm still adjusting to the concept of being >> unemployed, and also not regulated, so hopefully I can be a little >> more active as a poster while I hunt for a new way to pay my bills. My >> >> program for tomorrow, due to the short notice, is to file for >> unemployment and begin submitting more job applications. With what I >> know of what was going on, I'm a lot happier being out of there, and >> my former employer may be sorry eventually for their actions. I feel >> no loyalty after the way I was treated. At least now my job won't >> interfere with my investments!! >> >> My comments are strictly my own opinion, and SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED >> >> AS A RECOMMENDATION OF ANY KIND. I am an EX- broker and an active >> investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any >> investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. >> Tom W >> >> - > > > > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 16:52:32 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ACSC Sorry for the late commentary, but been busy today. DG Online shows RS at 73, with a slight upturn from Thursday's trading. Friday's trading not yet shown. My comments are strictly my own opinion, and SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED AS A RECOMMENDATION OF ANY KIND. I am an EX- broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Tom w - -----Original Message----- From: DCSquires To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Thursday, April 02, 1998 11:39 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ACSC >In a message dated 98-04-02 23:32:08 EST, you write: > ><< On my chart the RS deteriorating as the stock breaks out. Can someone with >access to DG online confirm that? > >> > >Your right the RS is a low 66. However, a 12 dollar stock that emerges from a >sound base on good volume can have a dramatic increase in RS in a short period >of time. >This is more of a technical buy for me; perhaps I should have given it a "non- >CS" label. > >DSquires > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 17:18:10 EST From: DCSquires Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ACSC In a message dated 98-04-03 17:03:03 EST, you write: << Sorry for the late commentary, but been busy today. DG Online shows RS at 73, with a slight upturn from Thursday's trading. Friday's trading not yet shown. >> FWIW, I sold this today. I didn't like that it had no follow through whatsoever after such huge volume yesterday. Couple that with the Nasdaq only moving 8 points in the past to days on 1.7 billion shares and I saw no reason to continue with the extra risk. Dsquires - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 17:10:53 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] UBIX bid/ask Still here, Anthony And once again, I am convinced that Surindra meant his post in good humor, not his fault that he posted it just as I was announcing my firing. Bad timing for both of us. My comments are strictly my own opinion, and SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED AS A RECOMMENDATION OF ANY KIND. I am an EX- broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Tom w - -----Original Message----- From: Antista, Anthony To: 'CANSLIM' Date: Friday, April 03, 1998 9:33 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] UBIX bid/ask >Tom, thank you very much for your in depth explanation of bid/ask. I was >enlightened by it. > >Also, I hope Surindra was being sarcastic as I would prefer that you not >leave this list. >You provide us with great information and insight. > >thanks again, >Tony > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 17:08:48 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Unemployment -4.7% -36,000 jobs created Low jobs creation numbers, suggesting that the economy may be slowing, indicates more damage to corporate profits than suppression of inflation (which so far hasn't been a major issue). Coming at a time when theAsian flu has already damaged corp profits, it's not as helpful as several months ago when the focus was on labor costs. My comments are strictly my own opinion, and SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED AS A RECOMMENDATION OF ANY KIND. I am an EX- broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Tom w - -----Original Message----- From: Ken Davidson To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Friday, April 03, 1998 9:19 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] Unemployment -4.7% -36,000 jobs created >4/3/98 9:20 est. >Sorry Patrick. Globex futures only closed up +2.30 points at 9:15 est so the >open will be up but not as strong as you would expect. We should still see >Dow 9000 today though! Before the release of the number globex futures were >already up +2.50 points. Quite interesting actually! We have good news >that looks like the economy is slowing so there is little inflation and >futures are barely up. Topping action....maybe! The old adage seems to >still be alive, rally on the rumor, sell on the fact. Bonds are still up 1 >& 3/32nds but they were up 3/4 of a point before the number was released >because of the Moody's downgrade on Japan. > >Ken >The information contained in this commentary is based upon data that is >believed to be accurate, but is not guaranteed, and subject to change >without notice. All projections, forecasts, opinions, and track records >cannot be guaranteed to equal our past performance. Persons reading this >are responsible for their actions. >Employment number is just out, bonds are going beserk, up that is, >which means yields down, good for the stock market, as if it needs >any help. Should be a strong open. > >- > > > > > >- > - - ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #176 ***************************** 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.