From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #2135 Reply-To: canslim Sender: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-No-Archive: yes canslim-digest Monday, February 18 2002 Volume 02 : Number 2135 In this issue: AW: AW: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates Re: AW: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 14:20:50 +0100 From: Andreas Himmelreich Subject: AW: AW: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates DSquires, Tom and Katherine covered the part of stating trading results. I would like to respond the "violating of rules" subject. For me, there is not such a thing as violating rules. I use about 5 different methods (and only one of them is canslim) which = are=20 parts of the overall system. The key to success is to know: 1. In which market phase are we in (in which sector) 2. Which method works the best for the market phases (of the sectors) 3. The discipline apply your system 1:1 without second guessing Even guys like David Ryan (a successful trader working (or worked) for=20 WON) bends Canslim rules (he disagrees on the PE Ratio with WON). The thing with canslim is that it does work only in very limited time=20 frames, at least this counts for the last two years. If good bull = markets=20 do not return for some time, "Canslim pure" is not the method you want = to=20 have. Some of the stuff out of CANSLIM is even terribly outdated (Money=20 Management, fixed 8% rule) and I do think one should not use at all. On = the=20 other hand WON is one of the best sources to time the market. A method like Canslim is a start, not more. It helps you to understand = and=20 gives a base for discussion, the tools you play with. The key is to understand why Canslim works, and why it can not work all = the=20 time. The main question is: Is this discussion group about Canslim pure, or is = Canslim just a base and we discuss other stuff as well (like we did on=20 sector rotation, IG Buy signals, or beeing in before the breakout, = shorting=20 etc.). I think and hope that we are not canslim pure. I mean what do you want do discuss in times like that (where WON says = stay=20 100% in Cash). What money market fund is the best? Best Regards Andreas > -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- > Von: David Squires [SMTP:dcsquires1@cox.net] > Gesendet am: Monday, February 18, 2002 3:46 AM > An: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Betreff: Re: AW: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates > > >>Your comments about EPIQ as a "big winner" in the portfolio remind = me=20 of comments I often hear from others when we have discussions about the = big=20 winners in our portfolios. On one hand, it really bugs me to hear people = say "well, yeah, of course you had great returns, you had XXXX an=20 YYYY....you were just lucky." Excuse me? I found XXXX and YYYY using the = same methodical diligence I apply to all my buys. The difference is, = these=20 guys never triggered sell rules like all the others. Last Fall, I = listened=20 to a presentation by Kevin Marder, a hedge fund manager and a = CANSLIM-style=20 investor. He said the same thing that I've heard from other successful=20 investors. "At the end of each year I give my accountant a list of my=20 trades for tax purposes. On that list are a bunch of trades with very = small=20 losses. Also on that list are some really big gains that were = responsible=20 for most of my returns for the year. This happens every year without=20 exception."<< > > Katherine, > > You are a true gem...my hat is off to you and eye open to everything = you=20 write...from my experience....you indeed "get it". However, I'm not so = sure=20 Tom should be cast in the light of Kevin Marder. What's the point of=20 telling everyone what you netted last year??......it's a totally=20 unverifiable assertion and only fodder for ones online ego. Spare me. It = still amazes me the proclaimed master of the CANSLIM list,...."routinely = violates CANSLIM rules" and everyone just sits there. I guess everyone's = numb from a 2 year bear raid. > > DSquires > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Katherine Malm > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 10:57 AM > Subject: Re: AW: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates > > > Hi Tom, > > Your comments about EPIQ as a "big winner" in the portfolio remind = me=20 of comments I often hear from others when we have discussions about the = big=20 winners in our portfolios. On one hand, it really bugs me to hear people = say "well, yeah, of course you had great returns, you had XXXX an=20 YYYY....you were just lucky." Excuse me? I found XXXX and YYYY using the = same methodical diligence I apply to all my buys. The difference is, = these=20 guys never triggered sell rules like all the others. Last Fall, I = listened=20 to a presentation by Kevin Marder, a hedge fund manager and a = CANSLIM-style=20 investor. He said the same thing that I've heard from other successful=20 investors. "At the end of each year I give my accountant a list of my=20 trades for tax purposes. On that list are a bunch of trades with very = small=20 losses. Also on that list are some really big gains that were = responsible=20 for most of my returns for the year. This happens every year without=20 exception." > > On the other hand, a comment such as "you were just lucky" makes me=20 smile and nod in agreement, because I define luck as "being prepared = when=20 the opportunity arises and being willing to seize it." Yes, big winners = are=20 about luck in that sense. Finally, one of my favorite quotes and one = that=20 always stays in view at my desk: > > "Opportunities are usually disguised as hard work, so most people = don't=20 recognize them." --Anne Landers > > Here's to "big winners" and your continued "good luck"! > > Cheers, > Katherine > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Tom Worley > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 3:34 PM > Subject: Re: AW: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates > > > Your memory is pretty good, altho I consider buying small caps as=20 much > closer to classic CANSLIM rules for "S" than IBD or WON currently=20 pushes. > > I wasn't losing money during the roaring bulls, just not making = what=20 I > could. But that was not the fault of my application of CANSLIM, it = was a > direct consequence of total neglect of my portfolio due dedication = and hours > spent on my day job. But even with total neglect, I still managed=20 about 12% > or so without trading, so at least better than a money market. > > You are correct also that EPIQ was a major contributor to my = profits=20 in > 2001, and I expect it to continue contributing in 2002. But I=20 finished the > year with every stock I owned up for the year, and with minimal=20 trading. I > only bought two new ones in 2001, the rest I had owned from prior=20 years. So > far in 2002, I have added 6 new ones, and sold one (merger=20 announced). Altho > three of the new ones are presently down, I am still up a little=20 overall. > And having fun. > > Tom Worley > stkguru@netside.net > AIM: TexWorley > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "esetser" > To: > Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 11:01 AM > Subject: Re: AW: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates > > > Be careful here, Tom has his own special breed of CANSLIM, and it=20 seems > that his returns have NOT been a good indicator of average returns = in=20 the > group. Unless I'm mistaken, Tom was losing money or breaking even = back in > the roaring bull, so maybe it was just his turn!! > > Tom does at least the following different from my approach (just = from > memory): > > 1 - Microcaps only (below the minimum recommended by WON) (S?) > 2 - Buys in the base before the breakout (Needs to because of 1) > 3 - Doesn't use Industry Group Strength as a leader/laggard = indicator=20 (I) > 4 - Buys in all markets (M) > > >From my perspective, he violates the normal rules for S, I, and = M. > However, Tom does admit to this, and doesn't even generally post = his > selections due to these variations. > > Given the differences, I think it should be expected that Tom's=20 performance > over a given year will vary from many of us. (And there is that = one=20 stock > that has appreciated several times his original investment that is > impacting the results too!) > > One other note. From my perspective, Tom's value to the group is = his > willingness to take the time to review most anyone's suggestions = and > selections and give great detail in his responses. His general=20 approach > may not follow CANSLIM exactly, but his postings to the group do=20 following > WON quite closely. He is our master educator on the technique, = and=20 gives a > lot of time and effort to the group. > > FWIW, I ended up 2001 with about a 13% loss and am down about 6% = more=20 this > year so far. Presently, I am only 25% invested with one position. = I am > not really responding on the group much, since I do not feel I = have=20 the > experience to short, and I am waiting for "M" to clear up before = new > purchases. > > > > > At 11:36 AM 2/16/02 +0100, you wrote: > >I think Tom bend only one rule --> stay out of the market if = there=20 is a > >downtrend in the overall market. > > > >But as I said, if you choose small caps and or IGs that are going = up, no > >problem making money on the long side. > >Just look on the builders or on the gold stocks latley ... > > > >BUT NEVER, NEVER buy stocks when the market and the IG is down. > >I have not seen one example where a member of the group does not=20 break down > >then (besides its a small cap) as well. > > > >Some IGs are just setting up a bull market for its members no = matter=20 what > >the market is doing. > > > >> -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- > >> Von: Tom Worley [SMTP:stkguru@netside.net] > >> Gesendet am: Saturday, February 16, 2002 6:19 AM > >> An: canslim@lists.xmission.com > >> Betreff: Re: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates > >> > >> While I routinely violate CANSLIM rules, nonetheless my entire=20 process is > >heavily based in CANSLIM. And I netted 76% for the full year, so=20 yeah, I > >made a net profit. > >> > >> Tom Worley > >> stkguru@netside.net > >> AIM: TexWorley > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: David Squires > >> To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > >> Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 12:11 AM > >> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates > >> > >> > >> haven't shorted in years, fully invested year round, made = lots=20 of $$ > >last year, and profitable so far this year (including my fully=20 margined > >account). > >> > >> >>fully invested year round, made lots of $$ last year<< > >> > >> You were fully invested last year long and made a net profit? = You > >better call George Soros! BTW, is this even remotely CANSLIM. > >> > >> DSquires > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: Tom Worley > >> To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > >> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 10:47 PM > >> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates > >> > >> > >> haven't shorted in years, fully invested year round, made = lots=20 of $$ > >last year, and profitable so far this year (including my fully=20 margined > >account). > >> > >> Tom Worley > >> stkguru@netside.net > >> AIM: TexWorley > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: Dan Forant > >> To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > >> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 8:03 PM > >> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates > >> > >> > >> Of course it's absurd. If anyone's been in the market for = the past > >year and hasn't shorted and made $$, they are either very lucky = or=20 far > >better than the average investor. There was no shortage of stocks = to=20 short > >in TC2000 and candlesticks. > >> > >> L8ter > >> DanF > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: Ian > >> To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > >> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 11:13 AM > >> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates > >> > >> > >> I find it almost absurd that WON discourages shorting.=20 Almost all > >of WON's ideas appear to have originated with Jesse Livermore, = who=20 made the > >bulk of his money on the short side. The rules for selling a big=20 CANSLIM > >winner make for perfect short candidates. Although selling a = failed > >breakout as it returns into its base is NOT typically a good = short > >candidate. JMHO. > >> > >> Ian > >> > >> > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: Rob Miller > >> To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > >> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 6:40 AM > >> Subject: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates > >> > >> > >> Even if we have a FTD from here, I see few stocks = worth=20 buying. > > However, my short list is overflowing. The only moderately attr = =20 active > >stocks I see on the long side are those already in an uptrend = that=20 are > >riding their lower channel. > >> > >> Is shorting considered off limits for this list? I = know=20 that > >WON discourages it, but he also claimed to make good money from=20 shorts in > >HTMMIS. As I understand it, he discourages it as a medium for = the=20 masses, > >nor necessarily for everyone. > >> > >> Rob > >> << Datei: ATT00014.htm >> > > > > > - > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" > -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. > > << Datei: ATT00002.htm >> - - - -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, 18 Feb 2002 08:25:22 -0600 From: "Katherine Malm" Subject: Re: AW: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0021_01C1B855.CF000320 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Tom, Well...this is exactly the reason that I believe posting returns is so = dangerous. You should never feel the need to defend the numbers you = post, it's your business what they are, how you calculate them, whether = or not you should have to prove them with statements, etc. It's also = your business whether you choose to share your returns with the group. I = also *understand* David's point of view, though I can't say I completely = *agree* with it. Just the same, I believe it is his business whether or = not he chooses to speak his mind. I hope what people will take away from all this is that one person's = gain on the list is not at the expense of another's. While technically = this is true in the marketplace, I think most of us would agree that we = are tiny cogs in the great wheel of the market and that competing = against ourselves over time is far more important than competing against = each other. It seems the purpose of the list is to help each other = become *better* at what we do and the thoughtful and enlightening posts = by each and every person contributes to this goal. Katherine ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Tom Worley=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 6:05 AM Subject: Re: AW: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates Thanks for the defense, Katherine, My claim of 76% return last year is a simple calculation of the net = gain of the total portfolio divided by the value of the portfolio at the = start of the year. If David chooses to suggest I am lying, I am willing = to post my year end statement showing the net gain for the year (with = the acct # and SS # concealed). I will, of course, also graciously = accept his public apology. My only "self controlled" account was my IRA, so there was no tax = issue. My expenses for DGO and other net services was not considered in = the calculation. I was forced to liquidate my shares in my Employee Option Plan in late = summer, and converted the Euros to US $ and brought them home (US = residents were not permitted to swap into shares of the acquiring = company, Allianz, a major insurer). Turned out to be a good thing as = Allianz shares got sliced in half by September 11 attacks. I did not = re-invest this money as I planned to use it for major renovations on my = house. Since that plan has now been postponed, I fully invested this = money on margin a few weeks ago. I did not consider it as "investable" = money during 2001. I worked as an active broker, without a single customer complaint, for = eight years handling well over 200 clients. The entire relationship, = usually conducted over the phone without ever having met the client, was = totally based on trust. I learned over 4 decades ago it was easier to = tell the truth and not waste energy trying to keep the story "straight". = My personal accounts were always open to my clients to review if they = wished. In 8 years, not a single one ever requested this. I know of no = other stock broker that ever made a similar offer to his clients. Of = course, they were paying me a commission, unlike David. Because I have worked with WON's staff and products and CANSLIM for so = many years, I understand the rules pretty well, and recognize when I am = consciously violating them. It is for this reason that I do not post my = stock picks, other than as a disclosure when they make the WWW list. = What I do in my personal investing works for me, and I am comfortable = with the risks I take. But I have repeatedly said that most investors = should stay away from both small/micro cap stocks, as well as low = priced. That I do both is a testament to my level of risk taking, as = well as understanding of these type investments. It is also why I put in = 4 hours or so a day on the net, in addition to my 11-12 hour work day. Best regards to you and please keep up all the quality posts you = generously give us, Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Katherine Malm=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 10:31 PM Subject: Re: AW: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates Hi David, Thanks for the kind words and I'd like to speak up in Tom's defense. = He is square and straightforward about what he does at all times. He = learned from WON early in his career and he has learned to mold CANSLIM = to his personal preferences. I can't say that I agree with everything = Tom does only in the sense that it is not "right for me." But that is = far different than judging whether or not it is successful and/or "right = for him." With respect to telling returns, I think this is a *very* personal = issue. I, for example, look upon returns and absolutely *anything* to do = with what positions I am currently holding, what stocks I am looking at, = what % winners vs. losers, etc. as extremely personal. I put it right up = there with a question like "what's your salary" or "what's your net = worth." I was recently hammered by several folks when I made a = presentation in Dallas and would not reveal such things. I figure it's = my business and mine alone. There's absolutely no way to win when such = things are revealed. Either people believe that you are boasting, not = telling the truth, that your earnings are paltry by comparison to their = own, etc. etc. On the other hand, if someone reveals their returns, I = figure that's their business as well. I view this as a personal choice = and make no judgments either way. It's a tough market out there. In the = end, I find it's far more important at the end of the day to be able to = ask myself "did I do everything possible to earn the best returns that = I am able." To me, if I can answer "yes" to that question, then I have = had a successful day. I applaud Tom's returns, but I applaud his = willingness to admit that his returns in '99 would have been more = substantial if he'd focused on his portfolio with the same intensity = that he did in '01. *That's* the message I take away from his statement. --Katherine While we're on the subject of returns, here's something that I wrote = during a discussion over this very issue: Returns.What Does That Mean? I never make assumptions about the numbers people give when they = specify returns. Here are some examples as to why. For all examples I'll = use a simple total portfolio number of $100K at the beginning of the = year. All percentages and dollar amounts are used only for the purpose = of demonstration. (1) Invested vs. Investable monies: - Statement: I made 50% last year.=20 - Person A makes 50% on *invested* monies. Lets say A invests = $10K and earns 50%. Total ending value =3D $15K. But what about the $90K = that wasn't invested? Let's say it made 5% in bonds and/or cash. That = means it's now worth $94,500. Total ending portfolio =3D $109,500. Total = compounded returns for the year =3D 0.095%. That's less than 1%. = Certainly doesn't make the same statement as "I made 50%." - Person B makes 50% on *investable* monies. B invests $50K in = bonds and/or cash. Say it earns 5%. Ending value =3D $52,500. The = remaining is invested and earns enough so that the total portfolio earns = 50%. That means the ending portfolio is $150,000. Invested monies = accounted for $97,500 of this ending value. This means that B turned = $50K into $97.5K by the end of the year through active investing. Total = returns on *invested* monies =3D 95%.=20 - Part of effective money management and risk control is to = determine how much of your investable dollars you are willing to risk. = Your ability to consistently earn a return on invested dollars will = allow you to increase the percentage of investable dollars. Don't assume = that every person who tells you they earned 50% is able to do this = consistently. And certainly don't assume that all of their investable = dollars earned 50%. Also keep in mind that there are actually people who = would rather understate their returns than overstate them. (2) Risk - Statement: I earned 50% with this system. - Person A earns 50% on invested dollars. Maximum drawdown on = total portfolio -50%. Person A also margined 100% of their account to = generate these returns. The average beta for the portfolio was 3 times = the market average. - Person B earns 50% on invested dollars. Maximum drawdown -10%. = They did not margin and the average beta of the portfolio was 1.5 times = the market average. This person by far earned the higher risk adjusted = return. - A good trader is able to consistently generate returns with = the least amount of risk. (3) Open positions at year's end - Statement: I earned 50% last year. - Person A had 5 open positions on 12/31 that accounted for = 15% of that gain. On January 15th of the following year, the market dive = bombed and they were forced to sell at a loss. - Person B had 5 open positions on 12/31 that accounted for = 15% of potential gains. Until these gains are monetized, they do not = include them in the total for the year. - Intermediate term investors will often carry a position = for several weeks to several months. Until you sell the position = (monetize it), the gains are fairy dust. The bank might be willing to = lend you money against the value of your assets, but these dollars are = not "real" until they are in your pocket. If you have any doubts, go ask = Barry Ebbers of Worldcom why he had to sell stock to satisfy the bank. (4) Average vs Compounded returns - Statement: I earn 50% on average. - Person A earned 200% one year and (-100%) the next. Average = return is (200-100)/2 =3D 50%. Sound impressive? They're flat broke. - Person B earned an average 50% compounded return over the last = 5 years. That means that if they started with $100K year one, they now = have $100K*(1.50)^5 =3D $759,375. (Even after 2 years, they have = $225,000) (5) Annualized vs Actual - Statement: I earned 50% on that trade. - Person A made an investment during the year that earned = 12.5% in 2 weeks. They have annualized this as 12.5% * (10days/250days) = =3D 50%. - Person B made an investment that returned 50% in two = months. They have an annualized return on this investment of = approximately 50% * (40days/250days) =3D 800% (6) Personal Ownership v. Professional Management - Statement: I earned 50% last year. - Person A has 10% of their money in an account that they manage = personally. The remaining 90% is with a money manger. They earned 50% on = only 10% of their money. - Person B takes responsibility for 100% of their investable = assets. They earned 50% on 100% of those investable assets. (7) Gross vs. Net Returns - Statement: I earned 50% last year. - Person A made 50% *gross* returns on investable assets. = Their ending portfolio was $150,000. This does not include the $2K they = spent purchasing various trading systems nor commissions paid during the = year to generate these returns. A treats their investments like a hobby = and spends money freely to find "a better system." - Person B made 50% *net* returns on investable assets. They = spent $2K in commissions; subscriptions to business and investing = magazines, newspapers and tools; investing books; investing seminars and = the associated costs to attend these seminars. B treats their = investments like a business and evaluates all tools and expenditures as = to how they generate a return on investment. (8) Taxable vs Tax Deferred Account/Before vs After Tax - Statement: I earned 50% last year. - Person A earned 50% in their tax deferred IRA. - Person B earned 50% *after taxes* in their taxable account. Conclusion: Numbers alone don't tell you a darned thing. --Katherine ----- Original Message -----=20 From: David Squires=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 8:45 PM Subject: Re: AW: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates >>Your comments about EPIQ as a "big winner" in the portfolio = remind me of comments I often hear from others when we have discussions = about the big winners in our portfolios. On one hand, it really bugs me = to hear people say "well, yeah, of course you had great returns, you had = XXXX an YYYY....you were just lucky." Excuse me? I found XXXX and YYYY = using the same methodical diligence I apply to all my buys. The = difference is, these guys never triggered sell rules like all the = others. Last Fall, I listened to a presentation by Kevin Marder, a hedge = fund manager and a CANSLIM-style investor. He said the same thing that = I've heard from other successful investors. "At the end of each year I = give my accountant a list of my trades for tax purposes. On that list = are a bunch of trades with very small losses. Also on that list are some = really big gains that were responsible for most of my returns for the = year. This happens every year without exception."<< Katherine, You are a true gem...my hat is off to you and eye open to = everything you write...from my experience....you indeed "get it". = However, I'm not so sure Tom should be cast in the light of Kevin = Marder. What's the point of telling everyone what you netted last = year??......it's a totally unverifiable assertion and only fodder for = ones online ego. Spare me. It still amazes me the proclaimed master of = the CANSLIM list,...."routinely violates CANSLIM rules" and everyone = just sits there. I guess everyone's numb from a 2 year bear raid. DSquires ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Katherine Malm=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 10:57 AM Subject: Re: AW: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates Hi Tom, Your comments about EPIQ as a "big winner" in the portfolio = remind me of comments I often hear from others when we have discussions = about the big winners in our portfolios. On one hand, it really bugs me = to hear people say "well, yeah, of course you had great returns, you had = XXXX an YYYY....you were just lucky." Excuse me? I found XXXX and YYYY = using the same methodical diligence I apply to all my buys. The = difference is, these guys never triggered sell rules like all the = others. Last Fall, I listened to a presentation by Kevin Marder, a hedge = fund manager and a CANSLIM-style investor. He said the same thing that = I've heard from other successful investors. "At the end of each year I = give my accountant a list of my trades for tax purposes. On that list = are a bunch of trades with very small losses. Also on that list are some = really big gains that were responsible for most of my returns for the = year. This happens every year without exception." On the other hand, a comment such as "you were just lucky" makes = me smile and nod in agreement, because I define luck as "being prepared = when the opportunity arises and being willing to seize it." Yes, big = winners are about luck in that sense. Finally, one of my favorite quotes = and one that always stays in view at my desk: "Opportunities are usually disguised as hard work, so most = people don't recognize them." --Anne Landers Here's to "big winners" and your continued "good luck"! Cheers, Katherine ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Tom Worley=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 3:34 PM Subject: Re: AW: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates Your memory is pretty good, altho I consider buying small caps = as much closer to classic CANSLIM rules for "S" than IBD or WON = currently pushes. I wasn't losing money during the roaring bulls, just not = making what I could. But that was not the fault of my application of = CANSLIM, it was a direct consequence of total neglect of my portfolio due = dedication and hours spent on my day job. But even with total neglect, I still = managed about 12% or so without trading, so at least better than a money market. You are correct also that EPIQ was a major contributor to my = profits in 2001, and I expect it to continue contributing in 2002. But I = finished the year with every stock I owned up for the year, and with = minimal trading. I only bought two new ones in 2001, the rest I had owned from = prior years. So far in 2002, I have added 6 new ones, and sold one (merger = announced). Altho three of the new ones are presently down, I am still up a = little overall. And having fun. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley ----- Original Message ----- From: "esetser" To: Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 11:01 AM Subject: Re: AW: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates Be careful here, Tom has his own special breed of CANSLIM, and = it seems that his returns have NOT been a good indicator of average = returns in the group. Unless I'm mistaken, Tom was losing money or breaking = even back in the roaring bull, so maybe it was just his turn!! Tom does at least the following different from my approach = (just from memory): 1 - Microcaps only (below the minimum recommended by WON) (S?) 2 - Buys in the base before the breakout (Needs to because of = 1) 3 - Doesn't use Industry Group Strength as a leader/laggard = indicator (I) 4 - Buys in all markets (M) >From my perspective, he violates the normal rules for S, I, = and M. However, Tom does admit to this, and doesn't even generally = post his selections due to these variations. Given the differences, I think it should be expected that = Tom's performance over a given year will vary from many of us. (And there is = that one stock that has appreciated several times his original investment = that is impacting the results too!) One other note. >From my perspective, Tom's value to the = group is his willingness to take the time to review most anyone's = suggestions and selections and give great detail in his responses. His = general approach may not follow CANSLIM exactly, but his postings to the group = do following WON quite closely. He is our master educator on the = technique, and gives a lot of time and effort to the group. FWIW, I ended up 2001 with about a 13% loss and am down about = 6% more this year so far. Presently, I am only 25% invested with one = position. I am not really responding on the group much, since I do not feel I = have the experience to short, and I am waiting for "M" to clear up = before new purchases. At 11:36 AM 2/16/02 +0100, you wrote: >I think Tom bend only one rule --> stay out of the market if = there is a >downtrend in the overall market. > >But as I said, if you choose small caps and or IGs that are = going up, no >problem making money on the long side. >Just look on the builders or on the gold stocks latley ... > >BUT NEVER, NEVER buy stocks when the market and the IG is = down. >I have not seen one example where a member of the group does = not break down >then (besides its a small cap) as well. > >Some IGs are just setting up a bull market for its members no = matter what >the market is doing. > >> -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- >> Von: Tom Worley [SMTP:stkguru@netside.net] >> Gesendet am: Saturday, February 16, 2002 6:19 AM >> An: canslim@lists.xmission.com >> Betreff: Re: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates >> >> While I routinely violate CANSLIM rules, nonetheless my = entire process is >heavily based in CANSLIM. And I netted 76% for the full year, = so yeah, I >made a net profit. >> >> Tom Worley >> stkguru@netside.net >> AIM: TexWorley >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: David Squires >> To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >> Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 12:11 AM >> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates >> >> >> haven't shorted in years, fully invested year round, made = lots of $$ >last year, and profitable so far this year (including my = fully margined >account). >> >> >>fully invested year round, made lots of $$ last year<< >> >> You were fully invested last year long and made a net = profit? You >better call George Soros! BTW, is this even remotely CANSLIM. >> >> DSquires >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Tom Worley >> To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 10:47 PM >> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates >> >> >> haven't shorted in years, fully invested year round, = made lots of $$ >last year, and profitable so far this year (including my = fully margined >account). >> >> Tom Worley >> stkguru@netside.net >> AIM: TexWorley >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Dan Forant >> To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 8:03 PM >> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates >> >> >> Of course it's absurd. If anyone's been in the market = for the past >year and hasn't shorted and made $$, they are either very = lucky or far >better than the average investor. There was no shortage of = stocks to short >in TC2000 and candlesticks. >> >> L8ter >> DanF >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Ian >> To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 11:13 AM >> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates >> >> >> I find it almost absurd that WON discourages = shorting. Almost all >of WON's ideas appear to have originated with Jesse = Livermore, who made the >bulk of his money on the short side. The rules for selling a = big CANSLIM >winner make for perfect short candidates. Although selling a = failed >breakout as it returns into its base is NOT typically a good = short >candidate. JMHO. >> >> Ian >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Rob Miller >> To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 6:40 AM >> Subject: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy Candidates >> >> >> Even if we have a FTD from here, I see few stocks = worth buying. > However, my short list is overflowing. The only moderately = attractive >stocks I see on the long side are those already in an uptrend = that are >riding their lower channel. >> >> Is shorting considered off limits for this list? = I know that >WON discourages it, but he also claimed to make good money = from shorts in >HTMMIS. As I understand it, he discourages it as a medium = for the masses, >nor necessarily for everyone. >> >> Rob >> << Datei: ATT00014.htm >> - -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_0021_01C1B855.CF000320 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Tom,
 
Well...this is exactly the reason that I believe posting returns is = so=20 dangerous. You should never feel the need to defend the numbers you = post, it's=20 your business what they are, how you calculate them, whether or not you = should=20 have to prove them with statements, etc. It's also your business whether = you=20 choose to share your returns with the group. I also *understand* David's = point=20 of view, though I can't say I completely *agree* with it. Just the same, = I=20 believe it is his business whether or not he chooses to speak his = mind.
 
I hope what people will take away from all this is that one = person's gain=20 on the list is not at the expense of another's. While technically this = is true=20 in the marketplace, I think most of us would agree that we are tiny cogs = in the=20 great wheel of the market and that competing against ourselves over time = is far=20 more important than competing against each other. It seems the purpose = of the=20 list is to help each other become *better* at what we do and the = thoughtful and=20 enlightening posts by each and every person contributes to this = goal.
 
Katherine
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Tom = Worley=20
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 = 6:05=20 AM
Subject: Re: AW: [CANSLIM] Lack = of Buy=20 Candidates

Thanks for the defense, = Katherine,
 
My claim of 76% return last year is a simple = calculation=20 of the net gain of the total portfolio divided by the value of the = portfolio=20 at the start of the year. If David chooses to suggest I am lying, I am = willing=20 to post my year end statement showing the net gain for the year (with = the acct=20 # and SS # concealed). I will, of course, also graciously accept his = public=20 apology.
 
My only "self controlled" account was my IRA, = so there=20 was no tax issue. My expenses for DGO and other net services was not=20 considered in the calculation.
 
I was forced to liquidate my shares in my = Employee=20 Option Plan in late summer, and converted the Euros to US $ and = brought them=20 home (US residents were not permitted to swap into shares of the = acquiring=20 company, Allianz, a major insurer). Turned out to be a good thing as = Allianz=20 shares got sliced in half by September 11 attacks. I did not re-invest = this=20 money as I planned to use it for major renovations on my house. Since = that=20 plan has now been postponed, I fully invested this money on margin a = few weeks=20 ago. I did not consider it as "investable" money during = 2001.
 
I worked as an active broker, without a single = customer=20 complaint, for eight years handling well over 200 clients. The entire=20 relationship, usually conducted over the phone without ever having met = the=20 client, was totally based on trust. I learned over 4 decades ago it = was easier=20 to tell the truth and not waste energy trying to keep the story=20 "straight".  My personal accounts were always open to my clients = to=20 review if they wished. In 8 years, not a single one ever requested = this. I=20 know of no other stock broker that ever made a similar offer to his = clients.=20 Of course, they were paying me a commission, unlike = David.
 
Because I have worked with WON's staff and = products and=20 CANSLIM for so many years, I understand the rules pretty well, and = recognize=20 when I am consciously violating them. It is for this reason that I do = not post=20 my stock picks, other than as a disclosure when they make the WWW = list. What I=20 do in my personal investing works for me, and I am comfortable with = the risks=20 I take. But I have repeatedly said that most investors should stay = away from=20 both small/micro cap stocks, as well as low priced. That I do both is = a=20 testament to my level of risk taking, as well as understanding of = these type=20 investments. It is also why I put in 4 hours or so a day on the net, = in=20 addition to my 11-12 hour work day.
 
Best regards to you and please keep up all the = quality=20 posts you generously give us,
 
Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 TexWorley
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Katherine=20 Malm
Sent: Sunday, February 17, = 2002 10:31=20 PM
Subject: Re: AW: [CANSLIM] = Lack of Buy=20 Candidates

Hi David,
 
Thanks for the kind words and I'd like to speak up in Tom's = defense. He=20 is square and straightforward about what he does at all times. He = learned=20 from WON early in his career and he has learned to mold CANSLIM to = his=20 personal preferences. I can't say that I agree with everything Tom = does only=20 in the sense that it is not "right for me." But that is far = different than=20 judging whether or not it is successful and/or "right for = him."
 
With respect to telling returns, I think this is a *very* = personal=20 issue. I, for example, look upon returns and absolutely *anything* = to do=20 with what positions I am currently holding, what stocks I am looking = at,=20 what % winners vs. losers, etc. as extremely personal. I put it = right up=20 there with a question like "what's your salary" or "what's your net = worth."=20 I was recently hammered by several folks when I made a presentation = in=20 Dallas and would not reveal such things. I figure it's my business = and mine=20 alone. There's absolutely no way to win when such things are = revealed.=20 Either people believe that you are boasting, not telling the truth, = that=20 your earnings are paltry by comparison to their own, etc. etc. On = the other=20 hand, if someone reveals their returns, I figure that's their = business as=20 well. I view this as a personal choice and make no judgments either = way.=20 It's a tough market out there. In the end, I find it's far more = important at=20 the end of the day to be able to ask myself  "did I do = everything=20 possible to earn the best returns that I am able." To me, if I can = answer=20 "yes" to that question, then I have had a successful day. I applaud = Tom's=20 returns, but I applaud his willingness to admit that his returns in = '99=20 would have been more substantial if he'd focused on his portfolio = with the=20 same intensity that he did in '01. *That's* the message I take away = from his=20 statement.
 
--Katherine
 
While we're on the subject of returns, here's something that I = wrote=20 during a discussion over this very issue:

Returns…What Does That=20 Mean?

I never make assumptions about the numbers = people give=20 when they specify returns. Here are some examples as to why. For all = examples I'll use a simple total portfolio number of $100K at the = beginning=20 of the year. All percentages and dollar amounts are used only for = the=20 purpose of demonstration.

(1) Invested vs. Investable monies:

-           =20 Statement: I made 50% last year.

-    =20 Person A makes 50% on *invested* monies. Lets say A invests = $10K and=20 earns 50%. Total ending value =3D $15K. But what about the $90K that = wasn't=20 invested? Let's say it made 5% in bonds and/or cash. That means it's = now=20 worth $94,500. Total ending portfolio =3D $109,500. Total compounded = returns=20 for the year =3D 0.095%. That's less than 1%. Certainly doesn't make = the same=20 statement as "I made 50%."

-    =20 Person B makes 50% on *investable* monies. B invests $50K in = bonds=20 and/or cash. Say it earns 5%. Ending value =3D $52,500. The = remaining is=20 invested and earns enough so that the total portfolio earns 50%. = That means=20 the ending portfolio is $150,000. Invested monies accounted for = $97,500 of=20 this ending value. This means that B turned $50K into $97.5K by the = end of=20 the year through active investing. Total returns on *invested* = monies =3D=20 95%. 

-    =20 Part of effective money management and risk control is to = determine=20 how much of your investable dollars you are willing to risk. Your = ability to=20 consistently earn a return on invested dollars will allow you = to=20 increase the percentage of investable dollars. Don't assume that = every=20 person who tells you they earned 50% is able to do this = consistently. And=20 certainly don't assume that all of their investable dollars earned = 50%. Also=20 keep in mind that there are actually people who would rather = understate=20 their returns than overstate them.

(2) Risk

-           =20 Statement: I earned 50% with this system.

-    =20 Person A earns 50% on invested dollars. Maximum drawdown on = total=20 portfolio -50%. Person A also margined 100% of their account to = generate=20 these returns. The average beta for the portfolio was 3 times the = market=20 average.

-    =20 Person B earns 50% on invested dollars. Maximum drawdown = - -10%. They=20 did not margin and the average beta of the portfolio was 1.5 times = the=20 market average. This person by far earned the higher risk adjusted=20 return.

-    =20 A good trader is able to consistently generate returns with = the least=20 amount of risk.

(3) Open positions at year's end

 -        =20 Statement: I earned 50% last year.

-        =20 Person A had 5 open positions on 12/31 that accounted for 15% = of that=20 gain. On January 15th of the following year, the market = dive=20 bombed and they were forced to sell at a loss.

-        =20 Person B had 5 open positions on 12/31 that accounted for 15% = of=20 potential gains. Until these gains are monetized, they do not = include them=20 in the total for the year.

-        =20 Intermediate term investors will often carry a position for = several=20 weeks to several months. Until you sell the position (monetize it), = the=20 gains are fairy dust. The bank might be willing to lend you money = against=20 the value of your assets, but these dollars are not = “real” until they are in=20 your pocket. If you have any doubts, go ask Barry Ebbers of Worldcom = why he=20 had to sell stock to satisfy the bank.

(4) Average vs Compounded returns

-           =20 Statement: I earn 50% on average.

-    =20 Person A earned 200% one year and (-100%) the next. Average = return is=20 (200-100)/2 =3D 50%. Sound impressive? They're flat broke.

-    =20 Person B earned an average 50% compounded return over the = last 5=20 years. That means that if they started with $100K year one, they now = have=20 $100K*(1.50)^5 =3D $759,375. (Even after 2 years, they have = $225,000)

(5) Annualized vs Actual

 -        =20 Statement: I earned 50% on that trade.

-        =20 Person A made an investment during the year that earned 12.5% = in 2=20 weeks. They have annualized this as 12.5% * (10days/250days) =3D = 50%.

-        =20 Person B made an investment that returned 50% in two months. = They=20 have an annualized return on this investment of approximately 50% *=20 (40days/250days) =3D 800%

(6) Personal Ownership v. Professional = Management

-           =20 Statement: I earned 50% last year.

-    =20 Person A has 10% of their money in an account that they = manage=20 personally. The remaining 90% is with a money manger. They earned = 50% on=20 only 10% of their money.

-    =20 Person B takes responsibility for 100% of their investable = assets.=20 They earned 50% on 100% of those investable assets.

(7) Gross vs. Net Returns

-        =20 Statement: I earned 50% last year.

-        =20 Person A made 50% *gross* returns on investable = assets. Their=20 ending portfolio was $150,000. This does not include the $2K they = spent=20 purchasing various trading systems nor commissions paid during the = year to=20 generate these returns. A treats their investments like a hobby and = spends=20 money freely to find “a better system.”

-        =20 Person B made 50% *net* returns on investable assets. = They=20 spent $2K in commissions; subscriptions to business and investing = magazines,=20 newspapers and tools; investing books; investing seminars and the = associated=20 costs to attend these seminars. B treats their investments like a = business=20 and evaluates all tools and expenditures as to how they generate a = return on=20 investment.

(8) Taxable vs Tax Deferred Account/Before vs = After=20 Tax

-        =20 Statement: I earned 50% last year.

-        =20 Person A earned 50% in their tax deferred IRA.

-   =20 Person B earned 50% *after taxes* in their taxable=20 account.
 
Conclusion:=20 Numbers alone don't tell you a darned thing.
 
--Katherine
 
----- Original Message ----- =
From:=20 David=20 Squires
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com= =20
Sent: Sunday, February 17, = 2002 8:45=20 PM
Subject: Re: AW: [CANSLIM] = Lack of=20 Buy Candidates

>>Your comments about EPIQ as a "big winner" in the = portfolio=20 remind me of comments I often hear from others when we have = discussions=20 about the big winners in our portfolios. On one hand, it = really bugs=20 me to hear people say "well, yeah, of course you had great = returns, you=20 had XXXX an YYYY....you were just lucky." Excuse me? I found XXXX = and YYYY=20 using the same methodical diligence I apply to all my buys. The = difference=20 is, these guys never triggered sell rules like all the others. = Last Fall,=20 I listened to a presentation by Kevin Marder, a hedge fund manager = and a=20 CANSLIM-style investor. He said the same thing that I've heard = from other=20 successful investors. "At the end of each year I give my = accountant a list=20 of my trades for tax purposes. On that list are a bunch of trades = with=20 very small losses. Also on that list are some really big gains = that were=20 responsible for most of my returns for the year. This happens = every year=20 without exception."<<
 
Katherine,
 
You are a true gem...my hat is off to you and eye open to = everything=20 you write...from my experience....you indeed "get it". However, = I'm not so=20 sure Tom should be cast in the light of Kevin Marder. What's the = point of=20 telling everyone what you netted last year??......it's a totally=20 unverifiable assertion and only fodder for ones online ego. Spare = me. It=20 still amazes me the proclaimed master of the CANSLIM = list,...."routinely=20 violates CANSLIM rules" and everyone just sits there. I guess = everyone's=20 numb from a 2 year bear raid.
 
DSquires
 
----- Original Message ----- =
From:=20 Katherine=20 Malm
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com= =20
Sent: Sunday, February = 17, 2002=20 10:57 AM
Subject: Re: AW: = [CANSLIM] Lack of=20 Buy Candidates

Hi Tom,
 
Your comments about EPIQ as a "big winner" in the portfolio = remind=20 me of comments I often hear from others when we have discussions = about=20 the big winners in our portfolios. On one hand, it = really bugs me=20 to hear people say "well, yeah, of course you had great returns, = you had=20 XXXX an YYYY....you were just lucky." Excuse me? I found XXXX = and YYYY=20 using the same methodical diligence I apply to all my buys. The=20 difference is, these guys never triggered sell rules like all = the=20 others. Last Fall, I listened to a presentation by Kevin Marder, = a hedge=20 fund manager and a CANSLIM-style investor. He said the same = thing that=20 I've heard from other successful investors. "At the end of each = year I=20 give my accountant a list of my trades for tax purposes. On that = list=20 are a bunch of trades with very small losses. Also on that list = are some=20 really big gains that were responsible for most of my returns = for the=20 year. This happens every year without exception."
 
On the other hand, a comment such as "you were just lucky" = makes me=20 smile and nod in agreement, because I define luck as "being = prepared=20 when the opportunity arises and being willing to seize it." Yes, = big=20 winners are about luck in that sense. Finally, one of my = favorite quotes=20 and one that always stays in view at my desk:
 
"Opportunities are usually disguised as hard work, so most = people=20 don't recognize them." --Anne Landers
 
Here's to "big winners" and your continued "good = luck"!
 
Cheers,
Katherine
----- Original Message ----- =
From:=20 Tom=20 Worley
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com= =20
Sent: Saturday, = February 16, 2002=20 3:34 PM
Subject: Re: AW: = [CANSLIM] Lack=20 of Buy Candidates

Your memory is pretty good, altho I consider = buying=20 small caps as much
closer to classic CANSLIM rules for "S" = than IBD=20 or WON currently pushes.

I wasn't losing money during = the=20 roaring bulls, just not making what I
could. But that was = not the=20 fault of my application of CANSLIM, it was a
direct = consequence of=20 total neglect of my portfolio due dedication and = hours
spent on my=20 day job. But even with total neglect, I still managed about = 12%
or=20 so without trading, so at least better than a money = market.

You=20 are correct also that EPIQ was a major contributor to my = profits=20 in
2001, and I expect it to continue contributing in 2002. = But I=20 finished the
year with every stock I owned up for the year, = and=20 with minimal trading. I
only bought two new ones in 2001, = the rest=20 I had owned from prior years. So
far in 2002, I have added = 6 new=20 ones, and sold one (merger announced). Altho
three of the = new ones=20 are presently down, I am still up a little overall.
And = having=20 fun.

Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 TexWorley
----- Original Message -----
From: "esetser" = <esetser@covad.net>
To:=20 <canslim@lists.xmission.com= >
Sent:=20 Saturday, February 16, 2002 11:01 AM
Subject: Re: AW: = [CANSLIM]=20 Lack of Buy Candidates


Be careful here, Tom has his = own=20 special breed of CANSLIM, and it seems
that his returns = have NOT=20 been a good indicator of average returns in = the
group.  Unless=20 I'm mistaken, Tom was losing money or breaking even back = in
the=20 roaring bull, so maybe it was just his turn!!

Tom does = at least=20 the following different from my approach (just=20 from
memory):

1 - Microcaps only (below the minimum=20 recommended by WON) (S?)
2 - Buys in the base before the = breakout=20 (Needs to because of 1)
3 - Doesn't use Industry Group = Strength as=20 a leader/laggard indicator (I)
4 - Buys in all markets=20 (M)

>From my perspective, he violates the normal = rules for=20 S, I, and M.
However, Tom does admit to this, and doesn't = even=20 generally post his
selections due to these = variations.

Given=20 the differences, I think it should be expected that Tom's=20 performance
over a given year will vary from many of = us.  (And=20 there is that one stock
that has appreciated several times = his=20 original investment that is
impacting the results = too!)

One=20 other note.  >From my perspective, Tom's value to the = group is=20 his
willingness to take the time to review most anyone's=20 suggestions and
selections and give great detail in his=20 responses.  His general approach
may not follow = CANSLIM=20 exactly, but his postings to the group do following
WON = quite=20 closely.  He is our master educator on the technique, and = gives=20 a
lot of time and effort to the group.

FWIW, I ended = up 2001=20 with about a 13% loss and am down about 6% more this
year = so=20 far.  Presently, I am only 25% invested with one=20 position.   I am
not really responding on the = group much,=20 since I do not feel I have the
experience to short, and I = am=20 waiting for "M" to clear up before=20 new
purchases.




At 11:36 AM 2/16/02 = +0100, you=20 wrote:
>I think Tom bend only one rule --> stay out = of the=20 market if there is a
>downtrend in the overall=20 market.
>
>But as I said, if you choose small caps = and or=20 IGs that are going up, no
>problem making money on the = long=20 side.
>Just look on the builders or on the gold stocks = latley=20 ...
>
>BUT NEVER, NEVER buy stocks when the market = and the=20 IG is down.
>I have not seen one example where a member = of the=20 group does not break down
>then (besides its a small = cap) as=20 well.
>
>Some IGs are just setting up a bull = market for=20 its members no matter what
>the market is=20 doing.
>
>> -----Urspr=FCngliche=20 Nachricht-----
>> Von: Tom Worley=20 [SMTP:stkguru@netside.net]
>> Gesendet am: Saturday, = February=20 16, 2002 6:19 AM
>> An: canslim@lists.xmission.com=
>>=20 Betreff: Re: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy = Candidates
>>
>>=20 While I routinely violate CANSLIM rules, nonetheless my entire = process=20 is
>heavily based in CANSLIM. And I netted 76% for the = full=20 year, so yeah, I
>made a net = profit.
>>
>> Tom=20 Worley
>> stkguru@netside.net
>>=20 AIM: TexWorley
>>   ----- Original Message=20 -----
>>   From: David=20 Squires
>>   To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=
>>  =20 Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 12:11 = AM
>>  =20 Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy=20 Candidates
>>
>>
>>   = haven't=20 shorted in years, fully invested year round, made lots of=20 $$
>last year, and profitable so far this year = (including my=20 fully = margined
>account).
>>
>>  =20 >>fully invested year round, made lots of $$ last=20 year<<
>>
>>   You were = fully=20 invested last year long and made a net profit? = You
>better call=20 George Soros! BTW, is this even remotely=20 CANSLIM.
>>
>>  =20 DSquires
>>     ----- Original = Message=20 -----
>>     From: Tom=20 Worley
>>     To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=
>>    =20 Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 10:47=20 PM
>>     Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] = Lack of=20 Buy=20 = Candidates
>>
>>
>>    =20 haven't shorted in years, fully invested year round, made lots = of=20 $$
>last year, and profitable so far this year = (including my=20 fully=20 = margined
>account).
>>
>>    = =20 Tom Worley
>>     stkguru@netside.net
>>&n= bsp;   =20 AIM: TexWorley
>>       = - -----=20 Original Message = - -----
>>      =20 From: Dan = Forant
>>       To:=20 canslim@lists.xmission.com=
>>      =20 Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 8:03=20 PM
>>       Subject: = Re:=20 [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy=20 = Candidates
>>
>>
>>    &nb= sp; =20 Of course it's absurd. If anyone's been in the market for the=20 past
>year and hasn't shorted and made $$, they are = either very=20 lucky or far
>better than the average investor. There = was no=20 shortage of stocks to short
>in TC2000 and=20 = candlesticks.
>>
>>      = =20 L8ter
>>      =20 = DanF
>>         -----=20 Original Message=20 = - -----
>>        =20 From: = Ian
>>        =20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=
>>        =20 Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 11:13=20 AM
>>         = Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy=20 = Candidates
>>
>>
>>    &nb= sp;   =20 I find it almost absurd that WON discourages shorting. Almost=20 all
>of WON's ideas appear to have originated with Jesse = Livermore, who made the
>bulk of his money on the short = side.=20 The rules for selling a big CANSLIM
>winner make for = perfect=20 short candidates. Although selling a failed
>breakout as = it=20 returns into its base is NOT typically a good = short
>candidate.=20 = JMHO.
>>
>>       &n= bsp;=20 = Ian
>>
>>
>>
>>   &nbs= p;    =20 ----- Original Message=20 = - -----
>>         &n= bsp;=20 From: Rob=20 = Miller
>>         &= nbsp;=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=
>>           = Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 6:40=20 = AM
>>          = ;=20 Subject: [CANSLIM] Lack of Buy=20 = Candidates
>>
>>
>>    &nb= sp;     =20 Even if we have a FTD from here, I see few stocks worth=20 buying.
> However, my short list is overflowing.  = The only=20 moderately attractive
>stocks I see on the long side are = those=20 already in an uptrend that are
>riding their lower=20 = channel.
>>
>>       = ;   =20 Is shorting considered off limits for this list?  I know=20 that
>WON discourages it, but he also claimed to make = good money=20 from shorts in
>HTMMIS.  As I understand it, he = discourages=20 it as a medium for the masses,
>nor necessarily for=20 = everyone.
>>
>>      &nbs= p;   =20 Rob
>>  << Datei: ATT00014.htm=20 >>




-
-To 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_0021_01C1B855.CF000320-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #2135 ****************************** 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.