From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #206 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 Thursday, April 23 1998 Volume 02 : Number 206 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] M [CANSLIM] "M" Re: [CANSLIM] Datek (was M) Re: [CANSLIM] "M" RE: [CANSLIM] "M" [CANSLIM] MDC breaking out [CANSLIM] Positively star-crossed: AATT & IBV/MF Re: [CANSLIM] Langston's Comment on History of List Re: [CANSLIM] SDII Re: [CANSLIM] M RE: [CANSLIM] Thoughts on PGA Re: [CANSLIM] Charting Software. Re: [CANSLIM] Langston's Comment on History of List Re: [CANSLIM] Langston's Comment on History of List [CANSLIM] Profit Margin Data Re: [CANSLIM] Datek (was M) RE: [CANSLIM] Thoughts on PGA Re: [CANSLIM] Datek (was M) RE: [CANSLIM] Thoughts on PGA [CANSLIM] Equity Options [CANSLIM] re: The "L" in CANSLIM (was Thoughts on PGA) Re: [CANSLIM] Charting Software. [CANSLIM] Irregularities of OBV/MF. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 09:16:53 -0400 From: Ari Lawson Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] M Frank.What are you using for your radar screen?Thanks - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 09:22:02 -0400 From: Jeffry White Subject: [CANSLIM] "M" Thanks for all the responses, they help a great deal, especially the Ryan commentary. More specific responses to some questions raised in the kind responses, but gotta go watch my NBTY rocket and see if I'll ride or dump on the blowout quarter just announced. Jeffry (not offended at all by Dave Cameron's comments!! ;)) - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 13:45:17 GMT From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Datek (was M) At the time I had accounts at E*Trade AND Datek. E*T's system was wiped out, and much of the crucial time Datek's was accessible. That was the impression I had, though I was busy with work and couldn't devote it much attention. I dropped E*T, and now use exclusively Datek...not that I've done a survey of alternatives. (FWIW). Some tips you will probably find quite useful if you use Datek (I do find this useful!): Often times I get errors when I try to access the system through the "front door" (www.datek.com). When this happens I always get in with one of the following URL's: https://orders9.datek.com =20 https://orders10.datek.com =20 https://orders11.datek.com =20 https://orders12.datek.com =20 https://orders13.datek.com =20 https://orders14.datek.com =20 https://orders15.datek.com =20 Good luck! Dan On Thu, 23 Apr 1998 08:44:48 -0400, you wrote: :I too heard a lot about Datek's troubles last fall during the heavy :volume, however I understand they have added lots of new equipment :since. I was surprised at the high ratings they have been getting :compared to other online firms. I also had a personal recommendation :from a former CEO of mine who had recently been given the grand tour, :and he is using them for some business he is setting up as a result. :Haven't tried them yet, expect to have the paperwork today to start. : :Tom W : :-----Original Message----- :From: Johan Van Houtven :To: canslim@lists.xmission.com :Date: Thursday, April 23, 1998 8:23 AM :Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] M : : :>Tom wrote: :> :> :>BTW: Are you trading through Datek now? Be careful: I heared that :during :>last significant market correction there system went out. On the :other :>hand, theirs was not the only internet trading system that went down :that :>day... Just a word of warning, since the have virtually now telephone :>support availble as a backup. Just something to be prepared for. As :they :>say: A warned man... :> :>--- Johan Van Houtven :> : : : :- - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 09:50:02 EDT From: DCSquires Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] "M" In a message dated 98-04-22 22:28:15 EDT, you write: << My concern is this KTEL, etc. mania which I've just not seen in my market experience. A company that says it's got an little more than and AOL account seems to attract trade of five fold the float and a 1000% run in a couple of days. >> The last time I remember seeing this much froth is during the spring of 96. I believe Comparitor System moved from 5 cents to 2 bucks in a couple days. It took a while for this to finally play out in a market decline. I might add that that decline way pretty easy to spot using WON's rules. << "When the forgotten old dogs begin to bark and raise up out of the grave and spearhead the market advance, the stock market is on its last feeble leg. Watch out. >> I learned a great way to judge this from a smart trader on AOL. Each day look at the "stocks in the news" mini graphs. When the leaders a still spearheading the advance you will see all 80 and 90 EPS rank stocks in the graphs. When a fair amount of below 70 EPS ranks show up the market is getting frothy and the dogs are now spreadheading the advance. Dsquires - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 06:54:47 -0700 From: Brian Nash Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] "M" Guess the thing it reminds me most closely of was early '96. Diana Corporation, a sleepy meat-packer, announced that it was entering the network hub business and rose $3 a day, day in and out, for what seemed like weeks on end. I think Carlton Lutts ("Stocks Can't Hide from my Momentum System 9000000000") was touting it during its rise. I can't find a listing for it anymore. Or Solv-Ex, with its technique to extract oil from shale. I seem to recall that it was delisted some months ago, amid allegations of manipulation. Another KTel analogy is Syquest. The 10Q's clearly indicated to me a company on the verge of bankruptcy. But, during a period of Foolishness, it rode the coattails of Iomega and, I believe, was a 6-bagger in 2 months. This was right before the late May, 1996 peak in the Nasdaq before it corrected 20%. My reading of the index charts doesn't indicate anything wrong right now, but I'm watching it closely. > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeffry White [SMTP:postwhit@sover.net] > Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 1998 10:25 PM > To: canslim@mail.xmission.com > Subject: [CANSLIM] "M" > > > Jeffry, > > > > Your are right, the turkey's are flying like eagles in this windstorm. > KTEL is > > a great example. IMO, YHOO and several others search engines are not > poor > > quality stocks. They are building brand names in markets that have > massive > > potential and a premium is definitely acceptable. That said, the premium > is > > now ridiculous and the technicals are saying short (climax top) but you > have > > to be willing to get stopped out several times to catch the top and this > can > > test your nerves. > > > > As for the market, the froth you are seeing is definitely there but it > seems > > to me the technicals are still saying up on the Nas and neutral on the > NYSE. > > And the market has been responding great to generally bad news....a > trend that > > I want to be on the right side of. So I am long until the market shows > more > > distribution or a volume reversal on good news. I will be quick to > liquidate > > also as a frothly market get take your profits quickly. It seems your > short > > positions are making it hard for you to not have an opinion on the > market > > except for what it tells you. > > > > DSquires > > > Thanks for the note, and someone else responded, as well. However, I > think you've missed my concern. I not really looking for feedback on > shorting the net stocks, I've got Puts out the wazoo on all the climax > tops in the group. Quite comfortable with those positions, although the > early efforts are under water, my adds are screaming. > > My concern is this KTEL, etc. mania which I've just not seen in my > market experience. A company that says it's got an little more than and > AOL account seems to attract trade of five fold the float and a 1000% > run in a couple of days. > > WON's Market Direction is pretty clear, right now I think (up), with the > exception of the sentiment which I'm anxious to see updated tomorrow. I > must admit, however, a billion share day in the Nas did not look all > that impressive with a less than 1% move. > > Has anyone seen the following WON prognosticator come to fruition: > > "When the forgotten old dogs begin to bark and raise up out of the grave > and spearhead the market advance, the stock market is on its last feeble > leg. Watch out. > > "Many times this will show up in the form of poor quality stocks > dominating the most active list on "up" days in the market....." > > HTTMIS, p. 64. > > And, does it, or should it, or might it accompany the type of index > distribution indicative of short, intermediate or long term moves to the > downside? Or is it but one more indicator which we add to the mix as a > warning sign? > > That's it. My question is this: is it a singular indicator of a "bear > market" or must it accompany more typical signs of a market turn? Does > it need to be seen in more than one group, or accross the board? > > Jeffry, > > - - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 07:16:18 -0400 From: Kom Tukovinit Subject: [CANSLIM] MDC breaking out - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 10:16:56 -0400 From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: [CANSLIM] Positively star-crossed: AATT & IBV/MF Members-- Dave posted about AATT this morning. I presume he thinks it is a good looking Canslim candidate. Irrespective of its Canslim qualities, it is also a powerful OBV/MF candidate. Not often is there a conjunction of Canslim and OBV/MF indicators. If you were to abide by OBV/MF criteria, AATT would have been a buy [first level signal] 3 weeks ago, then the EMAs bunched up for 2 days [a sign of ambiguity], and then the answer to the ambiguity was resolved to the upside, as you would expect from the positive divergence of OBV/MF. With a 3-mos chart, a few trend lines will show the OBV/MF strength opposing the decline in stock price. Confirming the OBV/MF signal would be the SAR buy 5 days ago. The SlowStochastic had a burp a couple of days ago but reaffirmed a buy. The MACD gave a buy 3 weeks ago and has acted nicely since. AATT will allow members to have a good look at the efficacy of OBV/MF/EMA when applied to Canslim. Connie Mack - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 06:44:51 -0700 From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Langston's Comment on History of List Mike is still posting his LLUR scans. They are at: http://www.ccnet.com/~marto/qpscan/ He usually posts it every weekend. Keep it up Mike! At 11:38 PM 4/22/98 -0500, you wrote: > >6. A thanks to all who provide for intelligent discussion, > help in screening (Artobello, are you still there?), > and general teaching and sharing. > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@orerockon.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 06:56:16 -0700 From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] SDII I bot on the last B/O. Someone is just catching on that side airbags which several major US mfgrs. have announced for 99 or 00 cars mean $$$ for these guys. Although the insiders and institutions both at 40% should make you go hmmmm... The institutional numbers were much lower when I bot, which I guess indicates that the funds have jumped on board in the last month or two, which curiously hasn't driven the price up very much. At 11:52 PM 4/22/98 -0500, you wrote: >SDII had a good move today as well -- RS 88, EPS 97 - with a low >PE of 21. About 8 million share outstanding. Last 3 quarters >show accelerating growth of 29%, 46%, and 72%. I'd buy, but >I shot the wad on other stocks - and am over 100% invested. I >respect the concerns of those who have been saying distribution >for a while (and Connie's indicators indicating an end to the >bull for the short term), but I'm not really seeing it in the >stocks I follow... so, I'm watching closer - but not selling. > >Dave Cameron >Who's posted enough tonight. It's 11:53 PM CDT, and time >for me to pack it in. > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@orerockon.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 06:56:18 -0700 From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] M At 07:54 AM 4/23/98 -0400, you wrote: >Johan, >As for the big moves on >anything Internet related, bear in mind that this group move was >sparked by slumping sales of PCs leading to sharp price reductions, >leading to an unexpected surge in the number of new people joining the >internet. The internet group, like the telecom group, is valued not on >earnings but on mkt share and revenue growth. This new surge expanded >expectations on an already rapidly growing industry. > Yeah, I couldn't help myself and ordered a 233 mhz com-pewter with a write-once CD cause the rest of the machine was so damn cheap! I get it next week. I am paying exactly half of what I paid for this 50 mhz Pentium "bug chip" dog in Oct. 95... >There's lots of other factors also, one significant one is the amount >of money and participants in 401 plans. This creates a steady and >unchecked (since many/most can't make changes at will) flow of fresh >money into the mkt. It has to go somewhere. As well as underreported and poorly forecast. I talk with a bank manager on the bus and he regularly laments the failure of his industry to account for new money coming into the market via 401k funds which aren't even counted when the stats on Mutual Funds are compiled. And how about the effect of no capital gains on selling your house? I know when I sell this fall I'm putting a good chunk of that money into the market. Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@orerockon.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 07:23:29 -0700 From: Brian Nash Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Thoughts on PGA I already bought and sold PGA and RHI earlier this year. It may seem strange, but I always write a monograph on my reasons for picking a stock. Here was what I wrote in late January when I was deciding between PGA and RHI (I wound up taking a half-position in each). Maybe it'll be helpful to you: ==================================================== After studying the group, the company I like best is: Personnel Group of America (NYSE: PGA - 97/79/B/A) 1) Fundamental analysis: This Charlotte-based company operates 124 company-owned or franchised offices in 23 states and DC. Through 1997, it had 3 business lines: Commercial staffing, home health care services and information technology. In December, it sold its home health care operation (called Nursefinders) for 66.5 million to focus on the fast-growing, high-margin information technology sector. As of the end of fiscal 1997, it received 55% of its revenues from information technology (up from 15.1% in 1996 and 0 in 1995) and 45% (down from 51.4% in 1996 and 57.1% in 1995) from regular commercial staffing. Information technology staffing grew 96.8% year-over-year in fiscal 1997. Unlike RHI, which seeks to grow internally, PGA has historically pursued an aggressive strategy of acquisitions. In 1996, it made 5 acquisitions of information technology staffing companies (19 offices in 13 states). In the January, 1997 alone, it purchased 3 IT staffing companies (Ann Wells Personnel Services in Silicon Valley, Creative Temporaries in Charlotte, and Corporate Staffing Consultants, also in Charlotte) with a total of $40 million in revenues. During the second quarter, it purchased two more, with an aggregate of $70 million in revenues. In the fourth quarter, it purchased BAL Associates, with $19 million in revenues. It has historically used its stock and debt as currency. Outstanding shares increased 34% in 1997. If a secondary is announced, you'll probably lose the stock, and my experience is that they're damn near impossible to predict from the price and volume action. 2) Valuation and incidentals: * Brokers rate 7 strong buys, ranked ranked 2nd of 151 in the Business Services - Staffing industry. I usually take this as a contrarian indicator, but I don't think that's the case here. Almost no notice has been taken of this stock, or of this group among the Internet or institutional community. This group is currently 20th in IBD, with a bullet, up 15.3% so far in 1998. * Earnings: In FY '97, PGA earned 1.60, with estimates for 1.88 in 1998 and 2.33 in 1999. This values the company at 21x 1998 earnings and 17x 1999 earnings. March 1998 Q1 estimate is .39 (due on 04/30/98), which would represent 34.5% sequential growth over the prior year. Last quarter was .45, a negative surprise of 4%. Four analysts of the seven who cover the stock have revised either Q1 98 or FY 98 earnings estimates upward in the last 30 days. * Price/Book is 2.48, good for the industry * Trailing Price/Earnings is 27.77, for a company that has historically grown earnings at an average annual rate of 104.7%. * Price/Sales is 0.89. It's never a bad thing to be below 1 on this measure. * By contrast, RHI sells for 10x book, 45x earnings and 3.5x sales. * Another thing I like about it is that the shorts like it too. They are incorrect to short this chart. There are 726K shares short interest, down 1%, vs ADV of 70,800, or roughly 10 days' ADV in short interest. * Cash flow analysis values it at $58, or some 36% above current levels. * A bad point is that the stock is 98% institutionally owned. 3) Technical analysis * Double bottom, with volume falling out at the very bottom. Short handle, again with volume falling out of it. Pivot at (call it) 36, buyable to 38 and change. * Moving Average Convergence/Divergence (MACD) is BULLISH * Chart pattern is BULLISH * Relative Strength is BULLISH * Up/Down volume pattern indicates that the stock is under ACCUMULATION * The 50 DMA is BULLISH * The 200 DMA is BULLISH * Telechart recommends it as a STRONG BUY * VectorVest likes it too. Values it at 58.00 RV. of 1.52 is excellent. An RS of 1.15 is good. An RT of 1.44 is excellent. VST vector is 1.38 (excellent). * Majority of the money is at 31, but is well-spread between 34, 28 and 38 also. * Money flow: +43.2m. * OBV + 2.4m. * Stochastics - nothing special. The upside: If the charts and the earnings estimates are to be believed, PGA is substantially undervalued relative to the industry and to its competitors, with significant growth potential. The downside: * The company has substantial debt (47%, or $161 million), whereas the other selection, RHI, has just 2%. * There's a history of secondary offerings and aggressive purchases * It's relatively thinly traded - just 70K shares ADV * It generates roughly half the ROE of the much larger RHI. * You take the chance of a negative earnings surprise, which doesn't seem to be the case with RHI. Conclusion: Not a screaming 12-cylinder buy, but a buy. Looking for a breakout above 36 on at least twice ADV. Despite the relatively conservative valuation, this is a much riskier stock than RHI. Chart is marginally better than RHI's, mainly because of the way it behaved in the double bottom. It also has one damned impressive 10K. > -----Original Message----- > From: Frank V. Wolynski [SMTP:Wolynski@MindSpring.Com] > Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 1998 9:25 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com; 'canslim@xmission.com' > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Thoughts on PGA > > At 17:20 4/22/98 -0400, Voelker, David wrote: > >Ran across an interesting chart in Friday's Weekend Review that I would > >like to get some feedback on. > > > >PGA - Personnel Group of America > >EPS Rank 97, RS 84, PE 29 > > A couple of months back Individual Investor magazine had PGA on their "Hot > List" for 98. Great group, look at Syntel and Headway! > > Frank Wolynski > > > - - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 08:47:09 -0600 From: Kirby Benson Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Charting Software. Dan, I took a look at the web site for TC2000 a couple of days ago - it looks like a very good program - at least from their description of all the things it will do, fundamentals, technicals, intraday updates, etc.  However, the fee is about $2.50 a day = about 75.00 a month.  Too steep for me!  I am waiting for Quotes Plus 2.0 to be released (they said sometime about the end of this month) and don't know what they will be charging. Kirby Benson Dan Musicant wrote: > Since when did a Windows version of TC2000 come out? Is it much > different from the DOS version? Any new features? From the sounds of > things DG Online is gonna start charging people and I for one am going > to be looking around for alternatives. > > Dan > > On Tue, 21 Apr 1998 10:29:13 -0400, you wrote: > > :Check out TC2000, windows version is wonderful, and affordable. > : > :---------- > :> From: budfox2 > :> To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com > :> Subject: [CANSLIM] Charting Software. > :> Date: Tuesday, April 21, 1998 1:59 AM > :> > :> > :> > :> Hello, > :> > :> I interested in either SuperCharts 4.0 or MetaStock 6.5.  Can anyone > :> tell me which one is better?  Thanks. > :> > :> Vince > :> > :> > :> - > :> > : > :- > > -   - -- Visit The Great White Trout Studios: http://www.zianet.com/kbenson/trout.html   - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 08:47:42 -0600 From: jeff@scrooge.csd.sdl.usu.edu (Jeff Salisbury) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Langston's Comment on History of List On Apr 22, 11:38pm, Dave Cameron wrote: > Subject: [CANSLIM] Langston's Comment on History of List > Mike Langston (who has been on this list since day 1 - unless he > took a sabbatical from it) recently commented that the list has > changed quite a bit since then. Welll.... I signed on around > day 3. So, I can add my two cents. > > 3. There are a LOT of topics which have been discussed in the > past and get re-hashed. Several questions have been asked > many times over as new people sign on. There is an easy > way to search the archives. Ironically, I'm the one who > discovered it, but can't remember how to do it - I haven't > bothered in so long. Anyway, there are some great answers > to some of the questions that were posted in the past. > Craig Griffin seems to be good at dredging them out. Anyone can easily do simple key-word searches on the entire canslim archives by pointing their browser to: http://www.xmission.com/~mcjathan/canslim/search.html For example, there has been recent and renewed discussion on pivot points in our group. If you do a search on "pivot point", you will find a mother lode of past discussions... > > 4. We've had a remarkable lack of flaming in general on this > list. From time to time we get some inconsiderate types, > but this is pretty rare. I've tried to control my own > general sarcasm. I know some people (I'll pick on Jeffry > White, as an example) get frustrated easily, but that's a > result of being so passionate about the market. Far and > away most people are very civil. Having participated in many other internet discussion forums, I have to agree with Dave. I've not seen a discussion group maintain such a high level of civility with such a high level of activity. > 7. Jeff Salisbury deserves a great amount of credit for > starting this up. I've learned a lot. Heck, when I > started, I didn't think it was worth it to buy Daily > Graphs. I still don't like the Arithmetic Scale, I > prefer the log scale, but I love the easy to find facts. > Without Jeff, none of us would have met. I've even > met a couple of you in person - and exchanged ideas. > It has been my pleasure. In fact, I started this list because I was/am a novice. I wanted to learn more. The results have far exceeded my wildest expectations. My participation on this list has been notoriously low due to personal time constraints. However, I've learned a lot... > 8. Finally, I'd like to extend thanks to Tom Worley. Tom > has been the one constant throughout, posting responses > on any topic. Tom seems to (as you know), consider no > question to basic, and seems to give everyone the benefit > of the doubt until they prove otherwise. You and I may > not agree with everything Tom says - and he's not always > CANSLIM, but his stuff is well thought out, and he always > shares. I firmly believe that without Tom, this group > would have died in infancy due to lack of interest. > And... I don't mean to slight several others who have > been on consistently in a semi-active mode, nor those who > have been on only the last few months in an active mode. I could not agree with this more. Tom has been the heart and soul of our community. Tom, you deserve everyone's thanks... Jeff - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 11:14:39 -0400 From: Craig Griffin Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Langston's Comment on History of List Jeff and Everyone, You might not be aware that there was an article titled "Top 5 Mailing Lists" in PCWorld Online (not in print edition) in December '97. This group was one of the 5 top! Here is the link to the article http://www.pcworld.com/news/daily/data/1297/971217160221.html Congratulations to all the members. Best regards, Craig - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 17:08:12 -0700 From: "Robert Venchiarutti" Subject: [CANSLIM] Profit Margin Data This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0028_01BD6E11.3B357360 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Can anyone refer me to a free site on the Web where I can get = information on a company's profit margins compared to the average profit = margins of that company's industry or sector? One of the criteria I = look for in a stock is rising profit margins, but I would also like to = able able to compare profit margins to industry averages. Thanks in = advance for any leads. - ------=_NextPart_000_0028_01BD6E11.3B357360 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Can anyone refer me to = a free site on=20 the Web where I can get information on a company's profit margins = compared to=20 the average profit margins of that company's industry or sector?  = One of=20 the criteria I look for in a stock is rising profit margins, but I would = also=20 like to able able to compare profit margins to industry averages.  = Thanks=20 in advance for any leads.
- ------=_NextPart_000_0028_01BD6E11.3B357360-- - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 11:32:46 EDT From: SACADS Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Datek (was M) I still have occassional problems logging on to DATEK. As an example I tried several times yesterday to no avail. Today I was timed out twice before getting through. My larger concern with the company has to do with limit orders they have failed to excecute. I had placed a good till cancelled order to sell 699 shares at 6 3/4 two weeks ago. Recently, maybe Monday, I sold 667 @ 6 3/4. I closely watched the stock as it went to 6 13/16 and then topped at 7 before it slid back down. Amazing to me I held and still hold 32 shares. This is the second time this type of thing has occured. Anyone have any answers? Greg George - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 08:16:26 -0700 From: Tim Fisher Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Thoughts on PGA This is exactly the sort of thing I was asking about yesterday. And according to the reply (thanks!) the following numbers for MF and OBV are meaningless. What is the trend? Is it divergent or convergent w/ respect to price? At 07:23 AM 4/23/98 , you wrote: >* Money flow: +43.2m. >* OBV + 2.4m. Tim Fisher / tim@OreRockOn.com Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites: http://OreRockOn.com See naked fish and rocks! - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 12:04:00 -0400 From: Craig Griffin Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Datek (was M) Greg, Sounds like a mistake. Your shares should have been the "ask" until they were filled. So the price should have been something like bid 6 5/8, ask 6 3/4 until all of your shares were sold. If the price went to ask 7, then your shares should have been sold already - no way around it. Datek should be able to go back and look at "time of trade" or some keyword like that and see that you should have been executed. I would take it up with them (and please let us know how it comes out). I wonder if your shares that sold were posted and matched on Island (a matching system that happens with Datek before being sent to a Market Maker if I am not mistaken). And then the remaining shares were somehow never routed out to a MM? Regardless, clearly a mistake that Datek should correct by selling your other 32 shares at 6 3/4 (absorbing any loss if necessary), IMO. They may be able to simply appeal to the market maker with the "time of trade" data and get him to make it good (if they can show that the limit order was entered from their system). Craig PS. The sooner you complain the better. At 11:32 AM 4/23/98 EDT, you wrote: >I still have occassional problems logging on to DATEK. As an example I tried >several times yesterday to no avail. Today I was timed out twice before >getting through. My larger concern with the company has to do with limit >orders they have failed to excecute. I had placed a good till cancelled order >to sell 699 shares at 6 3/4 two weeks ago. Recently, maybe Monday, I sold >667 @ 6 3/4. I closely watched the stock as it went to 6 13/16 and then >topped at 7 before it slid back down. Amazing to me I held and still hold 32 >shares. This is the second time this type of thing has occured. Anyone have >any answers? > >Greg George > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 09:05:24 -0700 From: Brian Nash Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Thoughts on PGA The T/A is months out of date on this one. I think I was also struggling with Evans & McGee at the time and took an idiot savant's delight in being able to use the words. I wrote it in late January, and I don't have the faintest clue whether it converged or diverged at the time. The next time I write one up I'll be sure to include this information. > -----Original Message----- > From: Tim Fisher [SMTP:tim@OreRockOn.com] > Sent: Thursday, April 23, 1998 11:16 AM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Thoughts on PGA > > This is exactly the sort of thing I was asking about yesterday. And > according > to the reply (thanks!) the following numbers for MF and OBV are > meaningless. > What is the trend? Is it divergent or convergent w/ respect to price? > > At 07:23 AM 4/23/98 , you wrote: > >* Money flow: +43.2m. > >* OBV + 2.4m. > > > Tim Fisher / tim@OreRockOn.com > Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites: > > http://OreRockOn.com > See naked fish and rocks! > > > - - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 12:09:49 EDT From: JBescoe Subject: [CANSLIM] Equity Options Hi Can anyone recommend a good newsletter or web page for options. Preferably one that focuses on blue chip stocks but not necessary. Would like help with ideas or selections. Thanks, Jason - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 12:50:41 -0400 From: "Voelker, David" Subject: [CANSLIM] re: The "L" in CANSLIM (was Thoughts on PGA) Alex wrote - >>David, for the "L" in CANSLIM, if you used the Yahoo Industry Ranking then >>I think all you're getting the securities ordered by Zacks broker opinion >>scores. Agreed, although I was not attempting to imply that this was my sole criteria. >>I don't consider this equivalent to being a market leader. For example, in >>computer software, the Yahoo Industry Ranking leader is CMSX, which got 6 >>strong-buy >>recommendations, giving it an average Zacks score of 1.0. Microsoft is 138 >>of 289 >>because it was rated 10-11-6-1-0 for an average of 1.9, and the other >>significant >>companies (PSFT,CA,SAG) are also scattered about. I interpret the Industry >>Ranking number as optimism, not market leadership. I agree that the Zacks ranking should not be interpreted as market leadership where market leadership is defined as price performance. I am not so sure of the term optimism as it implies, to me anyway, some level of subjective perception of where a particular stock is going. I assume, perhaps incorrectly, that the Zacks analysts who are ranking these stocks are basing their decisions on primarily objective criteria, much as CANSLIM teaches us to do. >>From my read of HTMMIS, the "L" is price performance. The REL STR value >>in IBD gives us Twelve (12) month averages. I need to reference HTMMIS again as I was viewing market leadership more as the company's ability to be a leader in the market segment in which they operate and not a performance leader in the financial market, a BIG difference in meaning. Thanks - Dave Voelker - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 13:23:48 -0400 From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Charting Software. Kirby-- Worden's TC2000 doesn't have to be that expensive. You get a 100 or so stocks when you join [I think]. But you don't have to take their whole data list. I took out those I didn't want and put in, little by little, those I did. I have about 250 now. Costs a dollar to download each evening. Think the dollar is standard, no matter how many stocks in your data base that you download. Too, you get hit hard if you choose to download five years of data. I use only a year's worth. Costs .39 one time for new stock. Weekly cost: $5.00. Connie Mack Kirby Benson wrote: > Dan, > > I took a look at the web site for TC2000 a couple of days ago - it > looks > like a very good program - at least from their description of all the > things it will do, fundamentals, technicals, intraday updates, etc. > However, the fee is about $2.50 a day = about 75.00 a month. Too > steep for > me! I am waiting for Quotes Plus 2.0 to be released (they said > sometime > about the end of this month) and don't know what they will be > charging. > > Kirby Benson > > Dan Musicant wrote: > > > Since when did a Windows version of TC2000 come out? Is it much > > different from the DOS version? Any new features? From the sounds of > > > things DG Online is gonna start charging people and I for one am > going > > to be looking around for alternatives. > > > > Dan > > > > On Tue, 21 Apr 1998 10:29:13 -0400, you wrote: > > > > :Check out TC2000, windows version is wonderful, and affordable. > > : > > :---------- > > :> From: budfox2 > > :> To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com > > :> Subject: [CANSLIM] Charting Software. > > :> Date: Tuesday, April 21, 1998 1:59 AM > > :> > > :> > > :> > > :> Hello, > > :> > > :> I interested in either SuperCharts 4.0 or MetaStock 6.5. Can > anyone > > :> tell me which one is better? Thanks. > > :> > > :> Vince > > :> > > :> > > :> - > > :> > > : > > :- > > > > - > > > > -- > Visit The Great White Trout Studios: > http://www.zianet.com/kbenson/trout.html > > > - - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 13:40:16 -0400 From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: [CANSLIM] Irregularities of OBV/MF. Members-- I have been impressed with the quality of the questions and the answers about the formulation of OBV and MF. I have carried some of your questions around without satisfactory answers since I began trading OBV/MF/EMA. BigCharts has ignored many of my questions or has been cemetarily indifferent. Irrespective of their attitude, I have found that my trading strategy has not suffered. The main reason I have not suffered is that mostly I use the OBV/MF as a screen for swing trades [2-10 days, or longer]. I do not use the indicator as an entry/exit timer. My 3/7/10 does that. That is not to say that in my occasional day trading or very short swing trading I do not pay especial attention to the indicator on BC's 1-2-5-day hourly and minute charts. There are times when either the OBV or the MF precedes the 3/7/10 indictor, and I buy or sell on the position of OBV or MF. I have been asked which one I hold more reliable or which has more significance. My answer is that I have no answer. Were I forced to choose, I'd probably say MF--but only if coerced. Remember that you can get too cute with indicators by reducing them incrementally until they cut smaller and smaller. E.g., the 3/7/10 EMA viewed on various intraday screens is often an instance of being too cute, cutting too thin, especially if you work from a 5 or 15 minute chart. You have numbers, but are they "good" numbers. It is as if you have a cesium watch with a dial that counts and evaluates life in milliseconds. It would be a helluva instrument but of little use in the everyday unravelling of life. I have attended to the comments of members who were "confused" about OBV/MF. Tom has rightly observed that on 5-day charts he has seen instances in which the two indicators [OBV and MF] were saying disparate things. He asked about a stock, "Are these indicators trying to tell me that the rise was on heavy volume and the fall on light volume? Nothing else makes sense to me." I see no reason why his conclusion is not reasonable and accurate. OBV and MF can make these distinctions. His question prompts me to say also that there are other instances when OBV and MF give opposite readings, but this you already know if you've given more than a cursory look at the indicators. Not all indicators are amenable to acting counter to price. One reason why OBV and MF are valuable is that each can go counter to price. It is this counter-acting [positive and negative divergence] that makes them valuable where indicators that cannot counter-act are less valuable, at least to me. Rarely do I see both OBV/MF have negative divergence to price. When I see such a divergence, I see a prospective short sale. When I see positive divergence, I see a buy [providing the 3/7/10 has given a first level signal]. What I have seen also are instances in which BC's Volume+ [not Volume] indicator read green while the corresponding price [use candlesticks for viewing] is red. I sometimes use this positive divergence in day trading and short term swing trading as a hint to watch for a quick upturn of price and perhaps an entry or exit point. You will see this same divergence [both positive and negative] on daily charts where similar inferences are valid. These divergences are hints, nothing more. Too, if you will click Volume by Price in the Upper Indicator box and Volume+ in the Lower Indicator, you may be able to infer a correlation--admittedly loose--between volume and price. The VP will appear as bars on the left of the stock chart. If you have access to a Time/Sales chart, you can further see how volume and price are tracking. Today, seven of my eight stocks had enormous blocks of stock pass through in the last 15 minutes of trading. Six went through on upticks and one on a downtick. Tomorrow, I'll infer that I may get further strength in the open; the heavy trading would hint at further strength. And I will look at the candlestick for that hour on an intraday chart and on the daily candlestick for confirmation. Perhaps I'll see a nice engulfing candle, and my spirits will be lifted. My guess is that there is but nominal difference in the result of how the OBV/MF is calculated. Chaikin's formula may be a bit more refined, but does that refinement result in a "good" number, a number significantly better than BC's? Because I don't use OBV/MF for entry or exit, the differences between the calculations can be tossed into a hat. What some members have not seen is that though a stock does not meet my positive divergence criteria for OBV/MF that does not invalidate the indicator or make it not useful. On the contrary, it can be enormously valuable for the Canslimer. If both the OBV and the MF track price, that concurrence is a powerful confirmation, especially for determining the quality of breakouts or breakdowns. What I have further found is that OBV and MF and EMA are amenable to several indexes as well as stocks. Use OBV and MF in any instance. Do not be like the churchmen who refused to lookthrough Galileo's telescope. Neither a trader nor an investor ought to try to live on good and bad indicators and all in between. Do this and you be forever rising and falling and never knowing why the success or why the failure. Connie Mack - - ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #206 ***************************** 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.