From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #2265 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 Wednesday, April 3 2002 Volume 02 : Number 2265 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool Re: [CANSLIM] DFXI Re: [CANSLIM] Canslim Eva...now spam Re: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool RE: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool Re: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool Re: [CANSLIM] MGAM - Another conventional wisdom question Re: [CANSLIM] MGAM - Another conventional wisdom question RE: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 21:26:08 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool Mike, surprised it would rate so well. Currently about 30+% under its recent high, so substantial overhead resistance. Industry is a D, GRS 23 Lots (and I mean LOTS) of insider selling, with no buying cash flow of 59 cents, way behind earnings of $2.14 earnings forecast for this year for only 12% growth Tom Worley stkguru@bellsouth.net AIM: TexWorley - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Gibbons" To: Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 9:11 PM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool Duke, (and others) here's one for you... AHMH ... a "10" - lacking only industry ranking 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 Duke Miller Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 9:09 AM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool Bill, Great input here. How about a show of hands of those who've been stopped out of A+ Stock Checkup stocks! And as always, thanks, Mike. I'm one of the heavy users, and if it doesn't hit 6/11 or better, I'm onto the next one. Duke - -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Bill Triffet Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 1:56 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool Mike, First, I'd like to say thanks for the tool. I have yet to see anyone else - WON's products included - attempt to do something so basic as rate a stock directly to the c-a-n-s-l-i-m acronym attributes. Maybe because it's such a subjective thing that it's easier to dance around the numbers than really grade a stock based on canslim. The Stock Evaluator on the IBD site is pretty weak with in that regard. I guess if they actually graded a stock on ACTUAL IBD canslim data that would be construed as touting a stock. This is why most of us go to at least 3-5 different places to review a stock or use Daily Graphs where the data is all there but not exactly spelled out so as to not tout the issue. I think it's a great tool in addition to several others. Given it's price (g) I have no complaints and it comes close in some of the canslim criteria for me. Things like (M)arket direction and (N)ew can be very subjective and must be reviewed several ways. Come to think of it, lately when I see a high (L) rating it's usually extended as that is how it got there. I'm of the consensus of several others here that with data being so immediate, it's better to look for the gems in rising groups - not at the top. - -Bill - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Gibbons" To: Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 10:24 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool > > Since I released this tool to the group on 3/13, I (and my server) > have been > overwhelmed with the response. 182 of you have used the tool at least > once and several of you have accessed it frequently. Some of you are > using it extensively - the current record is 100 stocks analyzed by > one list subscriber in a single day! > > Apart from being pleasantly surprized at the use that many of you are making > of it, I'm also surprized that only one of you has questioned the > validity of the data, and the assumptions that go into the pass/fail > ranking. I was expecting a lively debate about the definitions of > CANSLIM and their applicability in the recent market conditions. > > For those of you who may have missed it, the link is > http://www.cwhcharts.com/canslim > > Aloha, > > Mike Gibbons > Proactive Technologies, LLC > http://www.proactech.com > > > > - > -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. - - - -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. - - - -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, 2 Apr 2002 22:15:03 EST From: RWElmer@aol.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DFXI - --part1_18.1ce6ce09.29dbcdb7_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Jans, Funny you mentioned the article Katherine posted because it was in reading it that my memory was jogged on those numbers on DFXI being troublesome (it has been a while since I studied them). I do appreciate your response, however. In rereading my post I can understand the impression you formed regarding my apparent lack of respect for the time of others. This was unfortunate phrasing on my part. My only reason for even mentioning the items was to bring them to the attention to others who may have still been researching DFXI. I was just noting that, if somebody could shed light on the subject, I'd be interested to know their thoughts. I certainly was not trying to get somebody to do my DD for me; I've owned the stock for a while now and my decisions were made long ago. I have not contributed much to this Board, as I'm not a dedicated CANSLIMer; my entry points tend to be off of bottoms. I saw an opportunity to contribute on DFXI, as I had done some research on it, and thought others might benefit from the couple of items I had made note of. At any rate, no harm or disrespect intended. Thanks again for the response. Regards, Robert W. Elmer - --part1_18.1ce6ce09.29dbcdb7_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Jans,

Funny you mentioned the article Katherine posted because it was in reading it that my memory was jogged on those numbers on DFXI being troublesome (it has been a while since I studied them). I do appreciate your response, however.

In rereading my post I can understand the impression you formed regarding my apparent lack of respect for the time of others. This was unfortunate phrasing on my part. My only reason for even mentioning the items was to bring them to the attention to others who may have still been researching DFXI. I was just noting that, if somebody could shed light on the subject, I'd be interested to know their thoughts. I certainly was not trying to get somebody to do my DD for me; I've owned the stock for a while now and my decisions were made long ago.

I have not contributed much to this Board, as I'm not a dedicated CANSLIMer; my entry points tend to be off of bottoms. I saw an opportunity to contribute on DFXI, as I had done some research on it, and thought others might benefit from the couple of items I had made note of.

At any rate, no harm or disrespect intended. Thanks again for the response.

Regards,

Robert W. Elmer
- --part1_18.1ce6ce09.29dbcdb7_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: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 19:53:02 -0800 From: "Bill Triffet" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Canslim Eva...now spam Tom, Me too!!! I signed up for hotmail a few weeks back to use as a spam collector while I subsribed to various sites. Behold! More junk mail than ever to my origional account. - -Bill - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Worley" To: Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 6:17 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Canslim Eva...now dumping topic. > Tim, > > If you discovered the hole causing all the spam, I owe you my next hot stock > pick!! Even if you don't want it! > > I am convinced that MSN either has a similar security breach, or is selling > hotmail addresses. Within only several hours of setting up an account there, > spam was flooding in. And continues to this day, even tho I just delete it. > Amazing how these guys operate. > > I have been getting so much spam that I just delete it, didn't even bother > trying to figure out why. - - - -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: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 00:04:30 EST From: KLall1112@aol.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool As Katherine stated earlier all Israeli stocks are being dumped including TVA, TARO and several others. Kris - - - -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, 2 Apr 2002 22:02:39 -1000 From: "Mike Gibbons" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool To Tim, I wonder if you would pour such similar scorn on other stocks that rate a 94 on Investors.com (with two best in groups!). Yes it's 30% below it's high but does that disqualify it as a CANSLIM stock? Also, as I understand CANSLIM, there is nothing in the definition that speaks of 50 or 200dma's, although they may well be additional metrics to add to the mix of decision making tools. If I'm wrong please correct me. To Tom's more rational response, I would make the following comments and ask for more commentary: - - overhead resistance? when stocks start climbing the right side of the cup, the overhead resistance is always there, but many overcome it. We try to identify such potential candidates. Would a stock that's 30% off it's high be automatically excluded from consideration. - - industry is a D: yup, few stocks are perfect - - no buying? As I see it, the stock experienced buying from 3/4 to 3/7 and then formed a classic downward wedging handle. It then rose again and is forming a second handle. Is there another source of information I'm missing apart from what's in the chart? - - cash flow: Not part of the CANSLIM definition as I understand it but maybe I should incorporate it into the analysis. What should be the parameters? - - earnings forecast of "only 12% growth": again not a formal CANSLIM component, but I wonder what the average forecast is? 12% sounds pretty good to me in an economy that may grow 3.5% if we're lucky. What would be the standard that you would look for? I have no interest in touting this stock, but it came on to my radar screen and I shared it with you all as the best CWH and CANSLIM candidate I have seen recently. This is the type of discussion I had hoped to generate so I can improve the tool. Thank you for your input - I look forward to your responses. 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 Tim Fisher Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 4:19 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool A stock 30% below its 52 wk high and with the 50dma under the 200 gets a 10? Out of what, 100? Seriously, how is this a CANSLIM chart? At 04:11 PM 4/2/2002 -1000, you wrote: >Duke, > >(and others) here's one for you... AHMH ... a "10" - lacking only industry >ranking > >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 Duke Miller >Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 9:09 AM >To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool > > >Bill, > >Great input here. How about a show of hands of those who've been >stopped out of A+ Stock Checkup stocks! > >And as always, thanks, Mike. I'm one of the heavy users, and if it >doesn't hit 6/11 or better, I'm onto the next one. > >Duke > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com >[mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Bill Triffet >Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 1:56 PM >To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool > > >Mike, > >First, I'd like to say thanks for the tool. > >I have yet to see anyone else - WON's products included - attempt to do >something so basic as rate a stock directly to the c-a-n-s-l-i-m acronym >attributes. Maybe because it's such a subjective thing that it's easier >to dance around the numbers than really grade a stock based on canslim. >The Stock Evaluator on the IBD site is pretty weak with in that regard. >I guess if they actually graded a stock on ACTUAL IBD canslim data that >would be construed as touting a stock. This is why most of us go to at >least 3-5 different places to review a stock or use Daily Graphs where >the data is all there but not exactly spelled out so as to not tout the >issue. > >I think it's a great tool in addition to several others. Given it's >price >(g) I have no complaints and it comes close in some of the canslim >criteria for me. Things like (M)arket direction and (N)ew can be very >subjective and must be reviewed several ways. Come to think of it, >lately when I see a high >(L) rating it's usually extended as that is how it got there. I'm of the >consensus of several others here that with data being so immediate, it's >better to look for the gems in rising groups - not at the top. > >-Bill > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Mike Gibbons" >To: >Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 10:24 AM >Subject: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool > > > > > > Since I released this tool to the group on 3/13, I (and my server) > > have >been > > overwhelmed with the response. 182 of you have used the tool at least > > once and several of you have accessed it frequently. Some of you are > > using it extensively - the current record is 100 stocks analyzed by > > one list subscriber in a single day! > > > > Apart from being pleasantly surprized at the use that many of you are >making > > of it, I'm also surprized that only one of you has questioned the > > validity of the data, and the assumptions that go into the pass/fail > > ranking. I was expecting a lively debate about the definitions of > > CANSLIM and their applicability in the recent market conditions. > > > > For those of you who may have missed it, the link is > > http://www.cwhcharts.com/canslim > > > > Aloha, > > > > Mike Gibbons > > Proactive Technologies, LLC > > http://www.proactech.com Tim Fisher Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site Owner, Fisher Fisheries, Ltd. mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - - -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. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 05:00:47 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool Hi Mike, I thought it interesting that both Tim and I saw, within seconds of each other, exactly the same point: AHMH is over 30% below recent highs. Because I screen only for stocks breaking new highs, I don't use the 50/200 DMA lines as screening criteria, but from chart reading training, I do normally want to see the 50 above the 200, as this shows that the short term trend is up, not flat or down. I have also noted many times in the past that a stock I otherwise liked, but had the 50 still under the 200, would often show an explosive growth starting when the 50 crossed the 200 upward. I skimmed thru HTMMIS this morning without finding the references to moving averages I was looking for. Will keep looking for this, but I know that when WON's staffers trained me to read charts, these two averages were heavily emphasized. I also note that at least the 50 DMA is included in every WON chart. I took a closer look at the chart tonight. Initially, all I saw was lower highs and lower lows, which is why I was surprised at a rating of 10. Examining the past week, I did see that intraday, it broke the last high of 14.90 several times, but failed to close there. At the moment, the latest low around $13 appears to be holding. So this pattern may be reversing. But I completely agree with Tim, so long as the 50 DMA is below the 200 DMA, it's too early to be buying. Would I exclude a stock that is 30% or more below its 12 month high? Absolutely not, for just that reason. But I definitely would not want to be buying until it had not only based out, but had begun to recover to a point where the 50 was trending up, and climbing past the 200 DMA. As to the rest of my criticisms: Industry Group = D - as most know, I look for strong stocks, regardless of industry. Not a good practice, also not correct per CANSLIM. Works for me, but not something I advocate for most. And many / most in the group do pay attention to the Industry strength. Some may be interested in a stock performing well in a low rated industry, but usually only when the industry group is moving up. my comment on selling vs buying was only about insider activity, not overall volume - in the past seven months, DGO shows 27 separate instances of insider selling without a single insider buy. And during most of that time, the stock was in a downtrend, so not a healthy signal. cash flow: the most basic rule I observe is that you want cash flow to exceed latest full year profits. Of course, games can be played with both figures. You can get more specific on this, and others in the group have more knowledge and experience in measuring cash flow and using it to evaluate stocks, so I will let them comment further. earnings forecast - 12%, even in a slow, or even shrinking, economy will not attract me. I look for a minimum of 20% for current year. If late in the year, I need to see at least 20% for the next year. If there are no forecasts, then I need to see sequential earnings growth that convinces me of a strong and continuing trend upward in earnings. Most stocks I actually buy will have forecasts of 30-50% growth or more. Hope this clarifies, Tom Worley stkguru@bellsouth.net AIM: TexWorley - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Gibbons" To: Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 3:02 AM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool To Tim, I wonder if you would pour such similar scorn on other stocks that rate a 94 on Investors.com (with two best in groups!). Yes it's 30% below it's high but does that disqualify it as a CANSLIM stock? Also, as I understand CANSLIM, there is nothing in the definition that speaks of 50 or 200dma's, although they may well be additional metrics to add to the mix of decision making tools. If I'm wrong please correct me. To Tom's more rational response, I would make the following comments and ask for more commentary: - - overhead resistance? when stocks start climbing the right side of the cup, the overhead resistance is always there, but many overcome it. We try to identify such potential candidates. Would a stock that's 30% off it's high be automatically excluded from consideration. - - industry is a D: yup, few stocks are perfect - - no buying? As I see it, the stock experienced buying from 3/4 to 3/7 and then formed a classic downward wedging handle. It then rose again and is forming a second handle. Is there another source of information I'm missing apart from what's in the chart? - - cash flow: Not part of the CANSLIM definition as I understand it but maybe I should incorporate it into the analysis. What should be the parameters? - - earnings forecast of "only 12% growth": again not a formal CANSLIM component, but I wonder what the average forecast is? 12% sounds pretty good to me in an economy that may grow 3.5% if we're lucky. What would be the standard that you would look for? I have no interest in touting this stock, but it came on to my radar screen and I shared it with you all as the best CWH and CANSLIM candidate I have seen recently. This is the type of discussion I had hoped to generate so I can improve the tool. Thank you for your input - I look forward to your responses. 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 Tim Fisher Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 4:19 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool A stock 30% below its 52 wk high and with the 50dma under the 200 gets a 10? Out of what, 100? Seriously, how is this a CANSLIM chart? At 04:11 PM 4/2/2002 -1000, you wrote: >Duke, > >(and others) here's one for you... AHMH ... a "10" - lacking only industry >ranking > >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 Duke Miller >Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 9:09 AM >To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool > > >Bill, > >Great input here. How about a show of hands of those who've been >stopped out of A+ Stock Checkup stocks! > >And as always, thanks, Mike. I'm one of the heavy users, and if it >doesn't hit 6/11 or better, I'm onto the next one. > >Duke > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com >[mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Bill Triffet >Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 1:56 PM >To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool > > >Mike, > >First, I'd like to say thanks for the tool. > >I have yet to see anyone else - WON's products included - attempt to do >something so basic as rate a stock directly to the c-a-n-s-l-i-m acronym >attributes. Maybe because it's such a subjective thing that it's easier >to dance around the numbers than really grade a stock based on canslim. >The Stock Evaluator on the IBD site is pretty weak with in that regard. >I guess if they actually graded a stock on ACTUAL IBD canslim data that >would be construed as touting a stock. This is why most of us go to at >least 3-5 different places to review a stock or use Daily Graphs where >the data is all there but not exactly spelled out so as to not tout the >issue. > >I think it's a great tool in addition to several others. Given it's >price >(g) I have no complaints and it comes close in some of the canslim >criteria for me. Things like (M)arket direction and (N)ew can be very >subjective and must be reviewed several ways. Come to think of it, >lately when I see a high >(L) rating it's usually extended as that is how it got there. I'm of the >consensus of several others here that with data being so immediate, it's >better to look for the gems in rising groups - not at the top. > >-Bill > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Mike Gibbons" >To: >Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 10:24 AM >Subject: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool > > > > > > Since I released this tool to the group on 3/13, I (and my server) > > have >been > > overwhelmed with the response. 182 of you have used the tool at least > > once and several of you have accessed it frequently. Some of you are > > using it extensively - the current record is 100 stocks analyzed by > > one list subscriber in a single day! > > > > Apart from being pleasantly surprized at the use that many of you are >making > > of it, I'm also surprized that only one of you has questioned the > > validity of the data, and the assumptions that go into the pass/fail > > ranking. I was expecting a lively debate about the definitions of > > CANSLIM and their applicability in the recent market conditions. > > > > For those of you who may have missed it, the link is > > http://www.cwhcharts.com/canslim > > > > Aloha, > > > > Mike Gibbons > > Proactive Technologies, LLC > > http://www.proactech.com Tim Fisher Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site Owner, Fisher Fisheries, Ltd. mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - - -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. - - - -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: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 06:20:04 -0500 From: "Leo Antons" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] MGAM - Another conventional wisdom question Excellent thought-provoking post, Tom. Doesn't such a large increase in shares require shareholder approval since such dilution would dramatically affect their holdings? - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Johnson" To: Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 8:49 PM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] MGAM - Another conventional wisdom question > Steve, > > Just an observation about announcements of stock sales. > > The intent of MGAM to issue 2.8 million new shares to the 12.19 million > outstanding represents about a 23% dilution for its shares. If the > pre-announcement market capitalization of the firm was about $423 million, > and nothing else announced today changes the expected future earnings > stream, then the shares would theoretically drop 23% to offset that same > increase in outstanding shares. Indeed it dropped less than 9%, meaning it > had a great day and/or was announced late enough that many have not sold > yet. > > The CEO's additional authorization to sell 200,000 of his personal shares > would represent further downward pressure equivalent to today's whole volume > in that stock. MGAM may place all these shares through institutions > (presently 64 institutions own 57% of the outstanding shares) and brokers > which will entail some greater visibility (presently only 2 analysts follow > this company). > > I'd offer that you should adjust your stop down so you do not get stopped > out as the company is just as strong as it was fundamentally and no > technical weakness. > > Tom Johnson > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tom Worley > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 4:48 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] MGAM - Another conventional wisdom question > > > Steve, I am regularly amazed at the number of stocks I see where inside > information obviously leaked before being made publicly available, yet I see > little enforcement action by the SEC. While today was an overall ugly day, I > would agree that the drop was at least caused by this news, as it is the > kind of news that induces selling. > > I have seen some stocks in past months able to rebound back from this type > of news, largely seems to depend on whether they have institutional support > and/or whether it will be institutions that will take down this offering. If > the latter, they will support it at some price, but only they know the > price. > > The lack of volume today may be of some encouragement, but if you can place > a hard stop, and don't already have one in place, I would do so tonight. > > Tom Worley > stkguru@bellsouth.net > AIM: TexWorley > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steve F" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 6:27 PM > Subject: [CANSLIM] MGAM - Another conventional wisdom question > > > Mgam dropped 9% today and after the close there was an > announcement that the company is issuing an additional > 2.8 million shares. I am assuming the drop was > related to the announcement even though the drop came > before the news. > > Hang on or run ??.....Still not at my stop price > > Thanks > Steve > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax > http://taxes.yahoo.com/ > > - > -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. > > > > - > -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. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 06:39:03 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] MGAM - Another conventional wisdom question only requires shareholder approval if the total exceeds the amount already approved for the company Tom Worley stkguru@bellsouth.net AIM: TexWorley - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Leo Antons" To: Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 6:20 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] MGAM - Another conventional wisdom question Excellent thought-provoking post, Tom. Doesn't such a large increase in shares require shareholder approval since such dilution would dramatically affect their holdings? - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Johnson" To: Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 8:49 PM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] MGAM - Another conventional wisdom question > Steve, > > Just an observation about announcements of stock sales. > > The intent of MGAM to issue 2.8 million new shares to the 12.19 million > outstanding represents about a 23% dilution for its shares. If the > pre-announcement market capitalization of the firm was about $423 million, > and nothing else announced today changes the expected future earnings > stream, then the shares would theoretically drop 23% to offset that same > increase in outstanding shares. Indeed it dropped less than 9%, meaning it > had a great day and/or was announced late enough that many have not sold > yet. > > The CEO's additional authorization to sell 200,000 of his personal shares > would represent further downward pressure equivalent to today's whole volume > in that stock. MGAM may place all these shares through institutions > (presently 64 institutions own 57% of the outstanding shares) and brokers > which will entail some greater visibility (presently only 2 analysts follow > this company). > > I'd offer that you should adjust your stop down so you do not get stopped > out as the company is just as strong as it was fundamentally and no > technical weakness. > > Tom Johnson > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tom Worley > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 4:48 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] MGAM - Another conventional wisdom question > > > Steve, I am regularly amazed at the number of stocks I see where inside > information obviously leaked before being made publicly available, yet I see > little enforcement action by the SEC. While today was an overall ugly day, I > would agree that the drop was at least caused by this news, as it is the > kind of news that induces selling. > > I have seen some stocks in past months able to rebound back from this type > of news, largely seems to depend on whether they have institutional support > and/or whether it will be institutions that will take down this offering. If > the latter, they will support it at some price, but only they know the > price. > > The lack of volume today may be of some encouragement, but if you can place > a hard stop, and don't already have one in place, I would do so tonight. > > Tom Worley > stkguru@bellsouth.net > AIM: TexWorley > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steve F" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 6:27 PM > Subject: [CANSLIM] MGAM - Another conventional wisdom question > > > Mgam dropped 9% today and after the close there was an > announcement that the company is issuing an additional > 2.8 million shares. I am assuming the drop was > related to the announcement even though the drop came > before the news. > > Hang on or run ??.....Still not at my stop price > > Thanks > Steve > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax > http://taxes.yahoo.com/ > > - > -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. > > > > - > -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. - - - -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: 3 Apr 2002 04:27:35 -0800 From: "Tim Fisher" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool Yes, I do. You haven't been here that long, have you? IBD never has got CANSLIM right, never will. However they can bend the rules toward self-promotion, they do. Comeback stories are CASLIM in my book. Show me the money (N). Best in a group with an F in my book is best of the worst. Is that CANSLIM? Hardly. Now you're talking CASIM. I'll even speak for Tom when I say that when you bend the rules to include 12% growth because of E (read:M), you're CSIM. Oh yeah and you are ignoring M, so it's CSI now. Sounds like you should start your own list. You even said it yourself: few stocks are perfect. Those few is what this list is about. IMHO. I'll shut up before I rant about my perception of your self-promoting motives. You wanted someone to question the validity of your data? You've got someone(s) questioning it. At 10:02 PM 4/2/2002 -1000, you wrote: >To Tim, > >I wonder if you would pour such similar scorn on other stocks that rate a 94 >on Investors.com (with two best in groups!). > >Yes it's 30% below it's high but does that disqualify it as a CANSLIM stock? >Also, as I understand CANSLIM, there is nothing in the definition that >speaks of 50 or 200dma's, although they may well be additional metrics to >add to the mix of decision making tools. If I'm wrong please correct me. > >To Tom's more rational response, I would make the following comments and ask >for more commentary: > >- overhead resistance? when stocks start climbing the right side of the cup, >the overhead resistance is always there, but many overcome it. We try to >identify such potential candidates. Would a stock that's 30% off it's high >be automatically excluded from consideration. > >- industry is a D: yup, few stocks are perfect > >- no buying? As I see it, the stock experienced buying from 3/4 to 3/7 and >then formed a classic downward wedging handle. It then rose again and is >forming a second handle. Is there another source of information I'm missing >apart from what's in the chart? > >- cash flow: Not part of the CANSLIM definition as I understand it but maybe >I should incorporate it into the analysis. What should be the parameters? > >- earnings forecast of "only 12% growth": again not a formal CANSLIM >component, but I wonder what the average forecast is? 12% sounds pretty good >to me in an economy that may grow 3.5% if we're lucky. What would be the >standard that you would look for? > >I have no interest in touting this stock, but it came on to my radar screen >and I shared it with you all as the best CWH and CANSLIM candidate I have >seen recently. This is the type of discussion I had hoped to generate so I >can improve the tool. Thank you for your input - I look forward to your >responses. > >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 Tim Fisher >Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 4:19 PM >To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool > > >A stock 30% below its 52 wk high and with the 50dma under the 200 gets a >10? Out of what, 100? Seriously, how is this a CANSLIM chart? > >At 04:11 PM 4/2/2002 -1000, you wrote: > >Duke, > > > >(and others) here's one for you... AHMH ... a "10" - lacking only industry > >ranking > > > >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 Duke Miller > >Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 9:09 AM > >To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > >Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool > > > > > >Bill, > > > >Great input here. How about a show of hands of those who've been > >stopped out of A+ Stock Checkup stocks! > > > >And as always, thanks, Mike. I'm one of the heavy users, and if it > >doesn't hit 6/11 or better, I'm onto the next one. > > > >Duke > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > >[mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Bill Triffet > >Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 1:56 PM > >To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool > > > > > >Mike, > > > >First, I'd like to say thanks for the tool. > > > >I have yet to see anyone else - WON's products included - attempt to do > >something so basic as rate a stock directly to the c-a-n-s-l-i-m acronym > >attributes. Maybe because it's such a subjective thing that it's easier > >to dance around the numbers than really grade a stock based on canslim. > >The Stock Evaluator on the IBD site is pretty weak with in that regard. > >I guess if they actually graded a stock on ACTUAL IBD canslim data that > >would be construed as touting a stock. This is why most of us go to at > >least 3-5 different places to review a stock or use Daily Graphs where > >the data is all there but not exactly spelled out so as to not tout the > >issue. > > > >I think it's a great tool in addition to several others. Given it's > >price > >(g) I have no complaints and it comes close in some of the canslim > >criteria for me. Things like (M)arket direction and (N)ew can be very > >subjective and must be reviewed several ways. Come to think of it, > >lately when I see a high > >(L) rating it's usually extended as that is how it got there. I'm of the > >consensus of several others here that with data being so immediate, it's > >better to look for the gems in rising groups - not at the top. > > > >-Bill > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Mike Gibbons" > >To: > >Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 10:24 AM > >Subject: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool > > > > > > > > > > Since I released this tool to the group on 3/13, I (and my server) > > > have > >been > > > overwhelmed with the response. 182 of you have used the tool at least > > > once and several of you have accessed it frequently. Some of you are > > > using it extensively - the current record is 100 stocks analyzed by > > > one list subscriber in a single day! > > > > > > Apart from being pleasantly surprized at the use that many of you are > >making > > > of it, I'm also surprized that only one of you has questioned the > > > validity of the data, and the assumptions that go into the pass/fail > > > ranking. I was expecting a lively debate about the definitions of > > > CANSLIM and their applicability in the recent market conditions. > > > > > > For those of you who may have missed it, the link is > > > http://www.cwhcharts.com/canslim > > > > > > Aloha, > > > > > > Mike Gibbons > > > Proactive Technologies, LLC > > > http://www.proactech.com > Tim Fisher Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site Owner, Fisher Fisheries, Ltd. mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - - -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 #2265 ****************************** 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.