From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #2090 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, January 28 2002 Volume 02 : Number 2090 In this issue: [CANSLIM] Short [CANSLIM] docc Re: [CANSLIM] Short Re: [CANSLIM] docc [CANSLIM] EPS Re: [CANSLIM] Another Andersen client Re: [CANSLIM] EPS Re: [CANSLIM] EPS ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 23:26:49 EST From: Vanchee1@aol.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Short - --part1_139.8792706.29877e89_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Does anyone know of a site where you can find the amount of shares shorted on a particular stock. Thanks Chris. - --part1_139.8792706.29877e89_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Does anyone know of a site where you can find the amount of shares shorted on a particular stock.

Thanks Chris. - --part1_139.8792706.29877e89_boundary-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 20:30:32 -0800 From: "Scott Gettis" Subject: [CANSLIM] docc dgo list the management ownership as 18%. however the (1 - float/total share outstanding)* 100 = 41% ? - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 22:44:04 -0600 From: "Katherine Malm" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Short This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_00CE_01C1A84D.498E5F60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Chris, http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/asp/short_interest_resp.asp?symbol=3Ddocc&Set= tlementDate=3D01%2F15%2F2002 http://www.amextrader.com/asp/short_interest.asp http://www.capitalstool.com/short-interest-nyse.htm Katherine ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Vanchee1@aol.com=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 10:26 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] Short Does anyone know of a site where you can find the amount of shares = shorted on a particular stock.=20 Thanks Chris.=20 - ------=_NextPart_000_00CE_01C1A84D.498E5F60 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Chris,

http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/asp= /short_interest_resp.asp?symbol=3Ddocc&SettlementDate=3D01%2F15%2F200= 2

http://www.amex= trader.com/asp/short_interest.asp

http://www.c= apitalstool.com/short-interest-nyse.htm

Katherine

----- Original Message -----

From:=20 Vanchee1@aol.com=20

To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=

Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 = 10:26=20 PM

Subject: [CANSLIM] Short

Does anyone = know of a=20 site where you can find the amount of shares shorted on a particular = stock.=20

Thanks Chris. - ------=_NextPart_000_00CE_01C1A84D.498E5F60-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 22:52:09 -0600 From: "Katherine Malm" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] docc This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_00D8_01C1A84E.6AF5E5A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Scott, The rest of the 41% not owned by management is owned by SFE, an = "incubator" that has a portfolio of companies in which it maintains a = substantial portion of the outstanding shares. See = http://www.safeguard.com/investorfs.html for a list. You see this kind = of discrepancy in the numbers quite often when a stock is spun off from = a parent or from an incubator and not all shares are distributed to the = public in the spin off. Katherine ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Scott Gettis=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 10:30 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] docc dgo list the management ownership as 18%. however the (1 - float/total share outstanding)* 100 =3D 41% ?=20 - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - ------=_NextPart_000_00D8_01C1A84E.6AF5E5A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Scott,

The rest of the 41% not owned by management is owned by = SFE, an=20 "incubator" that has a portfolio of companies in which it = maintains a=20 substantial portion of the outstanding shares. See http://www.safeguard.co= m/investorfs.html for=20 a list. You see this kind of discrepancy in the numbers quite often when = a stock=20 is spun off from a parent or from an incubator and not all shares are=20 distributed to the public in the spin off.

Katherine

----- Original Message -----

From:=20 Scott = Gettis=20

To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=

Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 = 10:30=20 PM

Subject: [CANSLIM] docc

dgo list the management ownership as = 18%.
however the (1=20 - float/total share outstanding)* 100 =3D 41% ?

-
-To=20 subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
-In= the=20 email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
-"unsubscribe = canslim". Do=20 not use quotes in your email. - ------=_NextPart_000_00D8_01C1A84E.6AF5E5A0-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 20:58:55 -0800 From: "Scott Gettis" Subject: [CANSLIM] EPS This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01C1A83E.99597520 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit when a company buys back shares, does the number of outstanding shares decrease? If so, then it is possible for a company to show earnings growth due to the fact that there are less shares outstanding. Thus the companys earnings are not really growing. -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Katherine Malm Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 8:52 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] docc Hi Scott, The rest of the 41% not owned by management is owned by SFE, an "incubator" that has a portfolio of companies in which it maintains a substantial portion of the outstanding shares. See http://www.safeguard.com/investorfs.html for a list. You see this kind of discrepancy in the numbers quite often when a stock is spun off from a parent or from an incubator and not all shares are distributed to the public in the spin off. Katherine ----- Original Message ----- From: Scott Gettis To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 10:30 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] docc dgo list the management ownership as 18%. however the (1 - float/total share outstanding)* 100 = 41% ? - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01C1A83E.99597520 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

when a=20 company buys back shares, does the number of outstanding shares = decrease? =20 If so, then it is possible for a company to show earnings growth due to = the fact=20 that there are less shares outstanding. Thus the companys earnings = are not=20 really growing.

-----Original=20 Message-----
From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Katherine=20 Malm
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 8:52 PM
To:=20 canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]=20 docc

Hi Scott,

The rest of the 41% not owned by management is owned = by SFE,=20 an "incubator" that has a portfolio of companies in which it = maintains a=20 substantial portion of the outstanding shares. See http://www.safeguard.co= m/investorfs.html for=20 a list. You see this kind of discrepancy in the numbers quite often = when a=20 stock is spun off from a parent or from an incubator and not all = shares are=20 distributed to the public in the spin off.

Katherine

----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Scott = Gettis=20
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com= =20

Sent: Monday, January 28, = 2002 10:30=20 PM

Subject: [CANSLIM] docc

dgo list the management ownership as = 18%.
however the=20 (1 - float/total share outstanding)* 100 =3D 41% ?

-
-To=20 subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
-In= the=20 email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
-"unsubscribe = canslim". Do=20 not use quotes in your = email.

- ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01C1A83E.99597520-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 00:05:56 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Another Andersen client This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_00B4_01C1A858.B937E100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Well said, Katherine, and now we introduce the new accounting standards = of disregarding goodwill unless impaired! There are two issues for me: Conflict of interest - this applies to both accounting firms, and to = analysts. If the auditor does nothing but audit, at least this is = removed, and we only need worry about the competence. If an analyst's = compensation is fixed, and not tied to underwriting business brought in, = or commissions generated, then again the conflict is removed, at least = in part (he still has to worry about losing his job if he writes an = unfavorable report, and the client cans the brokerage house). Safety of investing - it's one thing to assume the risks of the market's = whims and direction, and rely upon management to continue running a good = business. It's another to get slimed by underhanded accounting practices = that should have not only been stopped, but reported by the auditors. = Note that PSFT was forced to buy back their wholly owned subsidiary they = were using to hide developmental costs. Auditors have great power, including the ability to write an opinion = expressing the viability of a "going concern". In the case of GX, last = audit (done less than a year ago but officially as of 12/31/00) was a = clean opinion. Technically, Andersen is in the clear because the = bankruptcy was filed over 12 months later. The bankruptcy filing itself = was no surprise, it has been known for some time that it would happen. = My concern is the apparent (but not yet proven) conflict of interest. In Enron's case, Andersen's income was split nearly equally between = auditing and consulting / non-audit services. In GX's case, it was a = 20/80 split in favor of consulting stuff. The SEC tried to ban outright = the combo of auditing / consulting, and the best they were able to do = was require reporting corps to disclose the fees they were paying. Corporate bankruptcy is the fault of management. I don't even give = tolerance for poor market conditions, because it is management's = responsibility to anticipate this happening, and adjust. It is not the = auditor's fault. But it is the auditor's responsibility to object to = improper or inaccurate accounting, and resist efforts to finds ways to = accommodate same. It is the auditor's responsibility to ensure that the = final 10K accurately and completely reports the state of the company's = financial condition. I don't think this was done by Andersen with Enron, = any more than it was done for Global Crossing, Sunbeam or Wackenhut. I = have seen auditors resign an account when they and management could not = agree on the final report. That at least gives investors, and some = analysts, a signal to dig deeper. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Katherine Malm=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 11:18 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Another Andersen client Mike, jans, Patrick, Thanks for an enjoyable exchange. If it can be this complicated just = *talking* about dereg, analysts, accounts, consultants, ENE, and = Anderson--then imagine how easy it is to muddy the financial and = political waters just enough so that *nobody* can figure out what's = really going on. I am reminded of the great Houdini. Marvelous = illusionist, very entertaining, lived a good life---until someone sucker = punched him when he wasn't paying attention. Katherine ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Mike Gibbons=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 10:15 PM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Another Andersen client Hans, I was adding amplification to Patrick Wahl's point about = industry analyst's advice being unreliable. I was not blamimg de-regulation = for the Enron debacle. Aloha, Mike Gibbons Proactive Technologies, LLC http://www.proactech.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of = Spencer48@aol.com Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 5:33 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Another Andersen client Mike: I'm not certain what you're saying here. Is the conclusion = suppose to be that deregulation and increased competition led to the Enron = debacle? But, if so, and if dereg began in the 70's, why did it take 30 = years for a financial catastrophe like this one to occur? And if it didn't take = 30 years-what was the first one? And does the go-go era of the 90's (stock market wise) evince convincing contrary evidence that dereg and increased competition in = commisssions is a bad thing? Moreover, I'd hazard that a lot of people including corporate = accounts and investment bank officers lost money in Enron. That's why it = plummeted the way it did-because everyone was selling, and no one (except = perhaps Anderson auditors, and certain officials in Enron) had any = idea-since the losses were off the books-why. jans In a message dated 1/28/2002 9:36:18 PM Eastern Standard Time, mikegibbons@proactech.com writes: << Yes, commissions were deregulated in the 70's and competition and = the internet have driven them ever lower making the investment banks = dependant on thier corporate instead of retail clients. An example of the = unintended consequences of deregulation. Every silver lining has a cloud. >> - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - ------=_NextPart_000_00B4_01C1A858.B937E100 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Well said, Katherine, and now we introduce the = new=20 accounting standards of disregarding goodwill unless = impaired!

There are two issues for me:

Conflict of interest - this applies to both = accounting=20 firms, and to analysts. If the auditor does nothing but audit, at least = this is=20 removed, and we only need worry about the competence. If an analyst's=20 compensation is fixed, and not tied to underwriting business brought in, = or=20 commissions generated, then again the conflict is removed, at least in = part (he=20 still has to worry about losing his job if he writes an unfavorable = report, and=20 the client cans the brokerage house).

Safety of investing - it's one thing to assume = the risks=20 of the market's whims and direction, and rely upon management to = continue=20 running a good business. It's another to get slimed by underhanded = accounting=20 practices that should have not only been stopped, but reported by the = auditors.=20 Note that PSFT was forced to buy back their wholly owned subsidiary they = were=20 using to hide developmental costs.

Auditors have great power, including the ability = to write=20 an opinion expressing the viability of a "going concern". In the case of = GX,=20 last audit (done less than a year ago but officially as of 12/31/00) was = a clean=20 opinion. Technically, Andersen is in the clear because the bankruptcy = was filed=20 over 12 months later. The bankruptcy filing itself was no surprise, it = has been=20 known for some time that it would happen. My concern is the apparent = (but not=20 yet proven) conflict of interest.

In Enron's case, Andersen's income was split = nearly=20 equally between auditing and consulting / non-audit services. In GX's = case, it=20 was a 20/80 split in favor of consulting stuff. The SEC tried to ban = outright=20 the combo of auditing / consulting, and the best they were able to do = was=20 require reporting corps to disclose the fees they were = paying.

Corporate bankruptcy is the fault of management. = I don't=20 even give tolerance for poor market conditions, because it is = management's=20 responsibility to anticipate this happening, and adjust. It is not the = auditor's=20 fault. But it is the auditor's responsibility to object to improper or=20 inaccurate accounting, and resist efforts to finds ways to accommodate = same. It=20 is the auditor's responsibility to ensure that the final 10K accurately = and=20 completely reports the state of the company's financial condition. I = don't think=20 this was done by Andersen with Enron, any more than it was done for = Global=20 Crossing, Sunbeam or Wackenhut. I have seen auditors resign an account = when they=20 and management could not agree on the final report. That at least gives=20 investors, and some analysts, a signal to dig deeper.

Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 TexWorley

----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Katherine=20 Malm
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=

Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 = 11:18=20 PM

Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Another = Andersen=20 client

Mike, jans, Patrick,

Thanks for an enjoyable exchange. If it can be this complicated = just=20 *talking* about dereg, analysts, accounts, consultants, ENE, and=20 Anderson--then imagine how easy it is to muddy the financial and = political=20 waters just enough so that *nobody* can figure out what's really going = on. I=20 am reminded of the great Houdini. Marvelous illusionist, very = entertaining,=20 lived a good life---until someone sucker punched him when he wasn't = paying=20 attention.

Katherine

----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Mike Gibbons
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com= =20

Sent: Monday, January 28, = 2002 10:15=20 PM

Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] = Another Andersen=20 client

Hans, I was adding amplification to Patrick Wahl's = point=20 about industry
analyst's advice being unreliable. I was not = blamimg=20 de-regulation for the
Enron debacle.

Aloha,

Mike=20 Gibbons
Proactive Technologies, LLC
http://www.proactech.com

-----Original=20 Message-----
From: owner-canslim@lists.xmis= sion.com
[mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On=20 Behalf Of Spencer48@aol.com
Sent:=20 Monday, January 28, 2002 5:33 PM
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=
Subject:=20 Re: [CANSLIM] Another Andersen=20 client

Mike:

     I'm not = certain what=20 you're saying here. Is the conclusion suppose to
be that=20 deregulation and increased competition led to the Enron = debacle?
But, if=20 so, and if dereg began in the 70's, why did it take 30 years = for=20 a
financial catastrophe like this one to occur? And if it = didn't=20 take 30
years-what was the first = one?

     And=20 does the go-go era of the 90's (stock market wise)=20 evince
convincing
contrary evidence that dereg and increased=20 competition in commisssions is a
bad=20 thing?

     Moreover, I'd hazard that a = lot of=20 people including corporate accounts
and investment bank officers = lost=20 money in Enron. That's why it plummeted
the way it = did-because=20 everyone was selling, and no one (except perhaps
Anderson = auditors, and=20 certain officials in Enron) had any idea-since the
losses were = off the=20 books-why.

jans

In a message dated = 1/28/2002=20 9:36:18 PM Eastern Standard Time,
mikegibbons@proactech.com=20 writes:

<< Yes, commissions were deregulated in the = 70's and=20 competition and the
internet have driven them ever lower = making the=20 investment banks dependant
on thier corporate instead of = retail=20 clients. An example of the unintended
consequences of = deregulation.=20 Every silver lining has a cloud.
>>

-
-To=20 subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
-In= the=20 email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
-"unsubscribe = canslim". Do=20 not use quotes in your email.

-
-To = subscribe/unsubscribe,=20 email "majordomo@xmission.com"
-In= the=20 email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
-"unsubscribe = canslim". Do=20 not use quotes in your = email.

- ------=_NextPart_000_00B4_01C1A858.B937E100-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 00:10:22 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EPS This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_00C4_01C1A859.583441E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable all depends on what they do with the purchased shares. In some cases, = they are retired, and thereby may improve EPS (assuming they could make = no better use of the cash). In other cases, they are added to Treasury = stock, and can later be sold, used for employees exercising options, = acquisition with stock, etc. If they are put into Treasury, then they are still outstanding, and must = be counted in the number of shares. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Scott Gettis=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 11:58 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] EPS when a company buys back shares, does the number of outstanding shares = decrease? If so, then it is possible for a company to show earnings = growth due to the fact that there are less shares outstanding. Thus the = companys earnings are not really growing. =20 -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com = [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Katherine Malm Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 8:52 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] docc Hi Scott, The rest of the 41% not owned by management is owned by SFE, an = "incubator" that has a portfolio of companies in which it maintains a = substantial portion of the outstanding shares. See = http://www.safeguard.com/investorfs.html for a list. You see this kind = of discrepancy in the numbers quite often when a stock is spun off from = a parent or from an incubator and not all shares are distributed to the = public in the spin off. Katherine ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Scott Gettis=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 10:30 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] docc dgo list the management ownership as 18%. however the (1 - float/total share outstanding)* 100 =3D 41% ?=20 - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - ------=_NextPart_000_00C4_01C1A859.583441E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

all depends on what they do with the purchased = shares. In=20 some cases, they are retired, and thereby may improve EPS (assuming they = could=20 make no better use of the cash). In other cases, they are added to = Treasury=20 stock, and can later be sold, used for employees exercising options, = acquisition=20 with stock, etc.

If they are put into Treasury, then they are = still=20 outstanding, and must be counted in the number of shares.

Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 TexWorley

----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Scott = Gettis=20
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=

Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 = 11:58=20 PM

Subject: [CANSLIM] EPS

when=20 a company buys back shares, does the number of outstanding shares=20 decrease? If so, then it is possible for a company to show = earnings=20 growth due to the fact that there are less shares outstanding. = Thus the=20 companys earnings are not really growing.

-----Original=20 Message-----
From: owner-canslim@lists.xmis= sion.com=20 [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Katherine = Malm
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 8:52 PM
To:=20 canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]=20 docc

Hi Scott,

The rest of the 41% not owned by management is owned = by SFE,=20 an "incubator" that has a portfolio of companies in which it = maintains=20 a substantial portion of the outstanding shares. See http://www.safeguard.co= m/investorfs.html for=20 a list. You see this kind of discrepancy in the numbers quite often = when a=20 stock is spun off from a parent or from an incubator and not all = shares are=20 distributed to the public in the spin off.

Katherine

----- Original Message ----- =
From:=20 Scott = Gettis=20
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com= =20

Sent: Monday, January 28, = 2002 10:30=20 PM

Subject: [CANSLIM] = docc

dgo list the management ownership as = 18%.
however=20 the (1 - float/total share outstanding)* 100 =3D 41% ? =

-
-To=20 subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
-In= =20 the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
-"unsubscribe=20 canslim". Do not use quotes in your=20 email.

- ------=_NextPart_000_00C4_01C1A859.583441E0-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 23:10:40 -0600 From: "Katherine Malm" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EPS This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_00F5_01C1A851.00D41180 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable When the company buys back shares and turns them into treasury stock, = they are considered issued but no longer outstanding. you can look in = the 10Q to see the number of shares used in computing the EPS. Look in = the balance sheet section to see a reconciliation of shares issued, = outstanding, etc. Here's an example from DOCC's latest 10Q found at = http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1033864/000095013401509538/d92952e= 10-q.txt Katherine =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D NOTE 3 - NET INCOME PER SHARE The Company's basic and diluted net income per share are computed in = accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 128, "Earnings Per = Share" ("SFAS 128"). Basic net income per share is computed using the weighted = average number of common shares outstanding. Diluted net income per share is = computed using the weighted average number of common shares outstanding and the = assumed exercise of stock options and warrants (using the treasury stock = method). The following is a reconciliation of the shares used in computing basic and = diluted net income per share for the periods indicated (in thousands):