From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #242 Reply-To: canslim Sender: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes canslim-digest Monday, May 18 1998 Volume 02 : Number 242 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] My list for this week Re: [CANSLIM] Re: [ TIM"S CANSLIM] My list for this week [CANSLIM] TJX and LBOR [CANSLIM] WARNING - delete before reading if you don't like my consolidation theory or picks Re: [CANSLIM] TJX and LBOR Re: [CANSLIM] STRZ Opinions please. [CANSLIM] Online version of IBD viable? [CANSLIM] Consolidation? Re: [CANSLIM] Re: [ TIM"S CANSLIM] My list for this week Re: [CANSLIM] Not a Pretty Day Re: [CANSLIM] Connie, OBV/MF Re: [CANSLIM] Online version of IBD viable? Re: [CANSLIM] Re: [ TIM"S CANSLIM] My list for this week [CANSLIM] Futures Mkt Re: [CANSLIM] Camslim amendments RE: [CANSLIM] Selections from"Your Weekend Review" [CANSLIM] Be nice, be gentle... Re: [CANSLIM] Selections from"Your Weekend Review" Re: [CANSLIM] Re: [ TIM"S CANSLIM] My list for this week [CANSLIM] Re: obv/mf RE: [CANSLIM] Selections from"Your Weekend Review" RE: [CANSLIM] Selections from"Your Weekend Review" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 03:04:50 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] My list for this week ACF - RS has slipped to 85 in the DG for 5/15 I rcvd today, otherwise CS elements all look good, and chart is suggestive of (oops, almost said consolidation!) building a new base after a nice move from under 30. BOCB - I added this one to my watch list a week or so ago, and it has moved up since as I expected. It's doing a staircase pattern, which means a reasonable base is unlikely. So far, it's giving no more than about a two week base before the next move. CS elements all look good. HIBB - nice base forming, good CS elements, price holding near the highs with volume drying up nicely. DCR - Fundies and CS elements look good. Funds % a little high for me at 37%, however float only 3.9M shares. ANF - looks like a failed rally to me, 15% drop over the past week. Too early to tell if it's over, needs to base out, and volume to dry up, before you can be confident that the damage is done. And with a trailing PE even now of 45, and projected of about 32, it is still trading at a premium. RGFC - CS elements all look good, consolidation (drat, I'm trying not to use that word) of its recent gains at 40 going well with volume drying up. Increased its dividend, now using some of its cash to buy back 5% of the "B" shares. Keep on posting, Tony. You're doing fine. If you have the time and interest to include the more important CS data and/or your comments on why you like a stock, that does help all members. But I subscribe to the belief if a member's criteria for picking stocks is well known, and the member has established that the picks are well grounded in CS elements, then anyone interested in pursuing them can do their own homework. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: Tony Austin To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Saturday, May 16, 1998 8:59 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] My list for this week > >1. Issues that may see a new high this week, market permitting. > >ACF - eps 99 relst 90 a/d A PE 19, looks like it might be forming a handle, >the cup portion was less than 4 weeks, so handle period may be short. > >BOCB - eps 83 relst 91 a/d A PE 19, penetrated upper resistance at 15 9/16 >on Friday closing at 15 3/4. Volume was strong and increasing from >Thursday. Maximum entry price would be 16 3/8. > >HIBB - eps 96 relst 91 a/d A, attempted and failed an upward move on 5/6 >and looks to be warming up for another attempt. Previous high, prior to >failed break-out is 36 1/4. Max entry would be 38. > >DCR - eps 93 relst 92 a/d B, has been consolidating since late April in a >converging triangle pattern, upward breaks out out this pattern ofter >happen at the 2/3 point of the triangle. Volume has been decreasing >steadily throughout the period. Watch for a volume surge, previous high at >59 7/16, max entry at 62 1/2. > >2. Issues that look to be near the bottom of correction/consolidation. > >ANF - eps 99 relst 96 a/d A, cap is high but still worth considering. >Tested support at 41 and looks to be working upward. > >RGFC - eps 85 relst 97 a/d A PE 27, has turned possitive, gave a stochastic >buy on 5/13 with a volume increase on Friday. > >Hope all are having a nice weekend. > >Tony > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 03:12:25 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: [ TIM"S CANSLIM] My list for this week Tony and Tim, I just finished reviewing the picks that Tony posted and forwarding my comments. I find them to be appropriate for a CANSLIM based group. Lately, we have gotten away from CANSLIM with an increasing discussion on picking stocks based on technical indicators. I have not done any TA on these, so they may not look good there, but they are good CS stocks. And, Tony, BOCB (Buffets) is not a new issue. I put it on my watch list a week or so ago, and have not removed it. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: Tony Austin To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Sunday, May 17, 1998 10:58 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: [ TIM"S CANSLIM] My list for this week > >Tim, > >I think you need to check your "loosey-goosey" scan's to make sure they are >working OK. If you will look, 5 of the 6 stocks I listed show up in this >weeks "your weekend review", and I must take issue with your statement that >these are, as you worded it "lousy prospects." > >> > It disturbs me a bit that stocks like these get posted to the group >without >> > any CANSLIM numbers which we can use to judge their WON worthines, so >to >> > speak. > >stocks like these, like what? Like those that get listed by IBD? I'll >try to do better, provide more complete info, if for no other reason than >just to make you happy. > >> ACF has practically no insider holdings and has already been grabbed by >the institutionals. > >Thats funny, I show 12% insider holdings > > > DCR looks good except for the insider holdings, > >4% isn't great, but it's not "lousy" > >After further review, the only one I would consider retracting is ANF, it >has very low %man ownership. BOCB is a new issue, we can remove that one >for that reason if you wish, but the chart is compelling. > >> > The moral of what I am trying to say here is post something like this >first >> > so I don't have to! > >No, I'll give the data that I view appropriate and adequate. If you aren't >satisfied with that which I list, do your own homework, or rather ignore my >post altogether. The issues I post largely come form "Your weekend >review", so they aren't "lousy prospects" as you so careingly worded it. > >The balance of the issues I stand by. We can debate large %instit >ownership if you wish, but going back to the section on supply and demand, >a small float with high %inst'l ownership is more beneficial than a >"reasonable" %inst'l ownership and a larger percentage float. > >Let all try to keep our posts productive, shall we. > >Kindest regards, > > >Tony Austin > >P.S. Oh, and add CBUK to my list for this week. Look Tim, no data. > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 00:33:45 -0700 From: Mike Lucero Subject: [CANSLIM] TJX and LBOR I bought TJX Tuesday when it broke out, and a little more on it's pullback. I also bought LBOR Thursday, like some other fellow here. I feel kind of stupid, since I'm going on vacation in a week, and I planned to sell everything by then. Schwab is really expensive if you're not using the Internet, even if you use their automated phone service. Plus, I don't really want to be checking on my positions every day. Do automatic trailing stops exist? The last two vacations I took (August and October 97) the market dipped, so I thought I'd warn you guys. Mike - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 03:36:03 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] WARNING - delete before reading if you don't like my consolidation theory or picks Just got my Daily Graphs books delivered today. Spent the past 8 hours or so going over lists from last week. Added to my watch list: GCABY, ILOGY, MINI. Yeah, I know, two out of three are foreign. Guess that means I must like them, but I am trying to fight my personal biases. And I know, I didn't post all the CS data, suffice it to say that they are all over 90 RS and 75 EPS, I like the charts and the rest of the CS elements, and it's 3:30AM and I gotta get to bed shortly so I can get up for work in a coupla hours. I did a brief review of my watch list and so far haven't taken any off, altho a few at first glance are close to dismissal. Tom W - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 03:49:38 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] TJX and LBOR Mike, I'm still new to using Schwab, but I think it's only a $10 difference between using the internet and calling in to do a trade. And I believe you can use stop loss and stop limit orders on both listed and NASDAQ stocks. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: Mike Lucero To: 'canslim@lists.xmission.com' Date: Monday, May 18, 1998 3:31 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] TJX and LBOR >I bought TJX Tuesday when it broke out, and a little more on it's pullback. >I also bought LBOR Thursday, like some other fellow here. > >I feel kind of stupid, since I'm going on vacation in a week, and I planned >to sell everything by then. Schwab is really expensive if you're not using >the Internet, even if you use their automated phone service. Plus, I don't >really want to be checking on my positions every day. Do automatic trailing >stops exist? > >The last two vacations I took (August and October 97) the market dipped, so >I thought I'd warn you guys. > >Mike > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 03:47:13 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] STRZ Opinions please. Dave, Can't see what you like about Star Buffet, just went public two months ago, chart is in a downtrend. Not listed in the Daily Graphs books. Even WON wants 3-6 months trading history on an IPO before he is interested, FWIW, I won't touch an IPO in its first full year since a lot of the financial data being reported for historical purposes is often "forced" and not updated till the next year's data is reported. And even when it is technically correct, it is on a substantially lower nr of shares, thus year to year comparisons are often unfavorable. The restaurant group has been doing very nicely, I suspect in part due to the expanded discretionary income due to good economic times and high consumer confidence (yeah, I know, these aren't CANSLIM factors, but I still use them). There are many better candidates in the group. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: hoseco7@concentric.net To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Sunday, May 17, 1998 2:09 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] STRZ Opinions please. > >Check out the chart on this one. >It is rated number one in group strength >Opinions are appreciated. > >Still cant figure why I like restaurants so well.?? > >Dave the rookie. > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 00:06:59 +0200 From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: [CANSLIM] Online version of IBD viable? I might be mistaken, but I seem to remember that IBD once wrote that there is no market for an online version of IBD. Considering the following: "The Wall Street Journal Interactive Edition Surpasses 200,000 Subscriber Milestone" and ***National Survey by Deloitte & Touche Reveals Top Business Issues For 2005 As Predicted by Senior Executives (March 24) *** "Electronic Business News and Commerce: Will Newspapers Still Matter? Electronic delivery will be the key source of business news for most executives in 2005. Specifically, 91% will turn to Internet information services; 80%, corporate intranets; and 74%, e-mail. Yet, 64% of respondents believe old fashioned face-to-face business meetings will still rank high as a primary source of information. Only half (50%) of the executives expect daily newspapers to be an important business news source. To get the message out about their companies, 87% report they are now using the Internet. Of those, 98% use it to provide information on the company, and 81% use it to communicate with other companies. More than two-thirds (69%) of the surveyed executives' companies use the Internet to sell products and services on-line." they might want to rethink that. Johan Van Houtven CLICK! N.V. / Wilrijk, Belgium - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 06:27:42 -0400 From: Jeffry White <"postwhit@sover.net"@sover.net> Subject: [CANSLIM] Consolidation? > Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 02:20:34 -0400 > From: "Tom Worley" > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Consolidation? > > Jeffry, since you apparently can't figure out that I am trying to > politely ignore your taunts, I guess I must state it for the record. I meant nothing of the sort, sorry. What I meant to understand, and for that matter, make clearer for myself and those who are here with varying degrees of experience and interests in the "CANSLIM" discipline, was some appreciation of why you do not adhere "rigidly" to the discipline? What is it about WON's "M" that doesn't work for you? Why do you not trade the "leadership" stocks in favor of low priced CANSLI stocks? Not taunting, just trying to understand your comments. "distribution signals" aren't clear over the past 5 years. Which ones? Why? Did you stay in stocks beyond January and October 1997? What factors kept you in? Are you in now? Why? What does it mean when you say "as long as the market indicates it is moving higher"? I can't imagine that you would not see the benefit to your readers in an explanation of these differences with CANSLIM which you have developed over 40 years. Jeffry - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 07:40:17 -0400 From: Ari Lawson Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: [ TIM"S CANSLIM] My list for this week Tom,Tony, Doesn't the 1% growth rate on BOCB bother you? - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 07:49:45 -0400 From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Not a Pretty Day At 21:39 5/17/98 -0500, Luke Lang wrote: >Frank, > >Sorry to respond so late to your observations. > >Frank V. Wolynski wrote: >> >> Russell 2000 looks to be in trouble, needs to pull out of it soon! > >RUT looks like a head-and-shoulder formation. The formation will be >complete if RUT falls below 468.5. > >> >> My calculations place the OTC Advance/Decline line at a new 1 year low and >> still in a steep decline. I was watching this one yesterday and thinking, >> one not so great day of advancers and we get a new low. Well, we got it. > >The OTC a/d line is not yet at 1 year low but very close to the low set >on 1/12/98. > >Luke Lang > The OTC A/D line condition would be dependant upon the source of the data. I realized that ones accumulation of the advancing versus declining issues would possibly be different than anothers, all dependant upon the source of the data. I used the data that automatically is downloaded with other market information in AIQ's TradingExpert. Those numbers are different from Holt's daily review page and both are different than Markets@Close information. These three are different than the daily data published in Barrons at the close of the week. So much for reliable data! AIQ shows three consecutive new lows in the OTC advance decline line. Data source Track Data, Dial Data. I won't belabor rather it is or isn't a new low, just that the trend is clear, whichever your source of data. Frank Wolynski - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 07:56:44 -0400 From: "Chris Peek" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Connie, OBV/MF Connie, I would like to get a copy of your file also if you wou would not mind. I have been studying CANSLIM for a while now but am not convinced that the indicators give a complete enough picture of what is actually going on. I have been following your posts but to be quite honest have not had much luck in figuring it all out. Thanks for you help and information, Chris Peek - -----Original Message----- From: Connie Mack Rea To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Sunday, May 17, 1998 9:41 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Connie, OBV/MF >Morning Joe-- > >If you're not familiar with BigCharts [http://BigCharts.com], you might want >to learn that site. It is free and the best chart site around. There is a >definition section that has all the items you will need. > >Too, there is a Money Flow [MF] indicator, along with OBV [On Balance Volume] >indicator; both appear in the lower screen. > >Joe, I've finally put together most of my posts because others have come to >technical analysis late and were then uninterested in my indicators. I will >send you my entire file, if you like, and you can trash what is not to the >point. There are quite a few. > >Thanks for the mail. > >Connie Mack > >Joe Scott wrote: > >> Connie, >> First before I ask these few questions, I must apologize for not saving = >> your posts so I could go back and study them. >> Truthfully though I though I would never understand these indicators, = >> but you have me hooked. I want to try a more technical approach to my = >> trading, I think it will compliment my personality. I can follow rules, = >> and I think if I set hard, fast limits (that I'm sure I won't follow) at = >> least I'll be a more disciplined than I am now. >> I have Elders book "Trading for a living" open now, studying the OBV, = >> EMA, and MACD.=20 >> I'm stuck on MF, what is it? >> If you have any of your old posts with explanations of how you use these = >> indicators, and could forward to me I would appreciate it. >> >> don't know a thing >> joe >> >> joe@2fords.net >> http://www.2fords.net/joe/ >> >> - > > > > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 08:02:17 -0400 From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Online version of IBD viable? The folks at IBD should rethink a lot of things. However dogmatically you adhere to the principles of WON's canslim, other sources of the same data are offered on the internet for free. I'm specifically referring to DGO, not the printed IBD. Let's see caNslim, N is for new. Search for the young, innovative, responsive to change companies to invest in! Paraphrasing the HTMMIS of course. If IBD and Daily Graphs were a public company, I'd probably consider them a short! JMTC Frank Wolynski At 00:06 5/18/98 +0200, Johan Van Houtven wrote: >I might be mistaken, but I seem to remember that IBD once wrote that there >is no market for an online version of IBD. > >Considering the following: > >"The Wall Street Journal Interactive Edition Surpasses 200,000 Subscriber >Milestone" > >and ***National Survey by Deloitte & Touche Reveals Top Business >Issues For 2005 As Predicted by Senior Executives (March 24) *** > >"Electronic Business News and Commerce: Will Newspapers Still Matter? > >Electronic delivery will be the key source of business news for most >executives in 2005. Specifically, 91% will turn to Internet information >services; 80%, corporate intranets; and 74%, e-mail. Yet, 64% of >respondents believe old fashioned face-to-face business meetings will still >rank high as a primary source of information. Only half (50%) of the >executives expect daily newspapers to be an important business news source. > >To get the message out about their companies, 87% report they are now using >the Internet. Of those, 98% use it to provide information on the company, >and 81% use it to communicate with other companies. More than two-thirds >(69%) of the surveyed executives' companies use the Internet to sell >products and services on-line." > >they might want to rethink that. > > > >Johan Van Houtven >CLICK! N.V. / Wilrijk, Belgium > > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 07:57:57 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: [ TIM"S CANSLIM] My list for this week Actually, DG (book) shows the 5 yr earnings growth at minus 1%, however I put more weight on what they have done in the past year or so, than a 5 yr average. For the past 2 years they earned 56 cents and 65 cents. The forecast for this year is 80 cent, up 23%, and for next year 90 cents, up another 13%. And for the past 4 qtrs, earnings on a year to year were down 17%, up 50%, up 133% and up 57%. From what I have gleaned from WON comments, it seems to me that, while sticking to his 5 year formula, he is gravitating more towards a 3 year performance model. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: Ari Lawson To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Cc: BOCB@smtp1.erols.com Date: Monday, May 18, 1998 7:38 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: [ TIM"S CANSLIM] My list for this week >Tom,Tony, > Doesn't the 1% growth rate on BOCB bother you? > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 08:23:30 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] Futures Mkt Nice reversal on the NASDAQ 100 futures in the past hour, now down less than half what they were. Maybe there's some hope for today's mkt after all. Even theS&P500 futures are trying to get back to even before the open. Tom W - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 03:26:35 -0400 From: Tom Worley Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Camslim amendments Connie, To a degree, I would agree with you. I am not a rigid follower of the "rules" of CANSLIM, since I feel it is more a guide to developing one's own personal approach. I am not sure where you want to apply the "10% relaxation" item, however. If there was a post on this, I must have missed it. There are some aspects of CANSLIM that, for me, are reasonably inviolate, just as MF and OBV both being positively divergent are for you. For me, RS must be 80 or better, and EPS must be 75 or better. If RS is under 90, then I usually require a commensurate improvement in EPS as well as other CS elements before it goes on my watch list. In truth, most of the stocks that work for you as a day trader do not meet my personal criteria using CANSLIM for investing. Thus, I don't look at too many of your picks unless they have been identified by you or another member as CANSLIM. But, I do greatly appreciate all your time and contributions to this group in helping us learn and understand and apply technical analysis. I feel this can greatly improve our timing, and that remains a big part of CANSLIM. As should be well known in this group, I am not scared off a stock by mngmt ownership exceeding even 50%, nor by funds not having found a gem that I like, nor by ADV under 10,000. These are, in fact, events I expect since I am primarily looking at small and micro cap stocks. Because of the small float on many stocks I buy, I usually don't wait for a 4-6 week base, much less an 8 week one (in fact would find this suspect on a small cap, and examine it more carefully). I do look at the consistency of earnings and revenue growth, and this weighs heavily, along with any forecasts, in my expectations of this continuing. As I improve with my use of TA, I am attempting to find the right combination of indicators that works for me in timing my entry, aiding my decision to hold or sell, and my exit points. But before I apply any TA, I have already selected the stock on the basis of its CS character, and the chart pattern. Tom W - -----Original Message----- From: Connie Mack Rea To: canslim Date: Sunday, May 17, 1998 10:44 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] Camslim amendments >Members-- > >>From my correspondence with Tom, I find him not to be an implacable >Canslim follower. I believe he does a bit of trading when the >opportunity comes, has held a few stocks for investments that didn't >meet every one of O'Neill's criteria, and knows immeasurably more about >Canslim than I do, and probably most others. I, therefore, have never >once tried to re-read or over-read his comments. > >Tom will perhaps not reprimand me severely if I make a suggestion to >Canslim criteria. What is most obvious about Canslim criteria is that >there is much "soft" information, i.e., information that is amenable to >several readings. And the "hard" information--IBD numbers, >especially--get the investor late to the party. The later you are to >the party, the closer you are to the next correction. > >Would it be unthinkable that a 10% relaxation, either across the board >or for specific criteria, be permitted. It seems to me that such a >strategy might bring more profits. > >My experience with market mavens is that the strategy of today, once it >has already been published or otherwise made public, is already the >strategy of yesterday. Often I think that the mavens are not >substantially different from marketers of the latest diet. Each , by the >time I see his latest product, is on his next marketing adventure. > >Tom speaks of O'Neill's corporate customers. Ought I believe that there >is available for me the same information that corporations receive. If >it should be the same, it is tardy to me and I am late to the party. I >judge that O'Neill is not oblivious to technical work and likely has a >few technicians in his employ. He may be conservative, but he is not >crazy. > >The great and former overseer of Fidelity's Magellan Fund admitted that >he, too, could not ignore the power of the technician and did, in fact, >use technical indicators. > >Never have I disparaged Canslim, nor will I. And as a trader, all I >have ever suggested about my technical indicators is that they might in >some circumstances be useful for Canslim, especially for evaluating >breakouts and for finding entries and exits. > >Therefore, my suggestion of a 10% relaxation rule is not to disparage >Canslim; and it is certainly not one of my technical rules that I'm >trying to impose on any member's strategy. > >It is important to those who are putting together a strategy that they >do not become discouraged and, heaven forbid, lose their capital as a >function of learning. You must learn and conserve your money; these are >two disparate and dangerous concerns. > >And you must learn not to fear the market or that your strategy is not >the right strategy. > >As with Canslim, or any system, anchored fear is only nominally better >than unanchored. Whatever takes away the fear is what is to be >chosen--even if a technical indicator receive anchor. > >In society, wealth is a sacred thing; and in a democracy, it is the only >thing. > >Connie Mack > > > > > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 09:38:49 -0400 From: Larry Horn Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Selections from"Your Weekend Review" I was just informed that there was a file not found error for this weeks .xls file. I just corrected it. Larry Horn - -----Original Message----- From: Larry Horn [SMTP:clhorn@acpub.duke.edu] Sent: Sunday, May 17, 1998 9:02 PM To: CANSLIM (E-mail) Subject: [CANSLIM] Selections from"Your Weekend Review" I just posted my selections from "Your Weekend Review" at www.duke.edu/~clhorn/canslim. - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 07:55:59 -0600 From: jeff@scrooge.csd.sdl.usu.edu (Jeff Salisbury) Subject: [CANSLIM] Be nice, be gentle... Everyone, I've received a couple of private complaints from members of the group who feel that there is some harshness and impatience developing in our group. I want to make a gentle reminder to the group that we all were newbies at some point. If you feel annoyed by someone's posting, don't assume the worst. To the contrary, my experience with our group combined with recent events in other online forums have made it clear to me what a great thing we have going - both in terms of content and civility. The credit goes to each of the members of our group. Let's continue to keep it that way. Best Regards, Jeff Salisbury - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 07:15:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Selections from"Your Weekend Review" Just a suggestion: Put a title on your page, http://www.duke.edu/~clhorn/canslim/description.htm The title now is "Frame Page" and when people add it to their bookmarks that is the title that shows up. I ran them through my loosey-goosey filter and came up with the following: MANU CTXS BBBY TMBS ROMC LBOR DELL STLY At least MANU, LBOR, and DELL make my strict scan, although you have to ignore DELL's 57 billion market cap. ROMC is new to me; the rest are on one watch list or another. Thanks Larry! As for your second list, NTR, ATRO, NTSC, BCP are not followed by Zacks (yeah yeah, but it's free!), and of the rest, only AXR makes my loose scan. Here's the dirt on those (smaller list than the IBD list, so I'm posting it). Boy am I ever gonna be late for work! CEBC gets kicked out because of lower Q0 earnings, WBPR the same, XETA less tha 10% institutions, NOBH insiders too high by a hair. BANKS-WEST Centennial Bcp BLDG-MBL/MFG&RV Nobility Homes BLDG-RSDNT/COMR Amrep Corp FIN-SVGS & LOAN Westernbank Pr T ELECOMM EQUIP Xeta Corp TICKER CEBC NOBH AXR WBPR XETA EXCHANGE NSDQ NSDQ NYSE NSDQ NSDQ X SECTOR 13 8 8 13 10 X INDUSTRY 18 30 31 67 179 24WK PCHG% 28.57 81.94 44.44 105.41 11.95 TREND EPGR 30.73 20.67 37.13 47.28 73.58 QEPS 0/-4 17.24 50.00 1,300.00 15.38 107.14 QEPS -1/-5 33.86 54.42 750.00 21.85 50.00 QEPS -2/-6 25.98 23.57 40.00 27.27 78.57 QEPS -3/-7 27.19 N/A N/A 23.85 N/A TREND SALE 29.19 26.74 9.73 N/A 36.24 P/E 12M 27.91 22.13 8.29 33.33 21.19 ROI 16.57 22.96 9.46 N/A 28.83 D/Equity 19.30 0.00 2.91 N/A 0.00 PEG F1 1.18 1.01 N/A N/A 0.71 % INSIDERS 11.17 53.52 16.90 N/A 17.98 % INSTITUT 6.14 10.22 15.04 4.18 8.15 At 09:02 PM 5/17/98 -0400, you wrote: >I just posted my selections from "Your Weekend Review" at >www.duke.edu/~clhorn/canslim. I also updated the concatenation that Frank W. >created from them on the same site. Once again, the spreadsheet lists all cos >over $7, within 15% of 52 week high, with EPS and RS 85 or higher. All are >group strength A, A/D = A or B, and the best fund with a large investment is A- >or better. The spreadsheet also lists %Mgmt from IBD tables, %Instit from >rapidresearch.com, Shr, Flt, ROE, and Debt:Eq from Yahoo! > >>From information that I got from articles I have read in IBD, Investor's Corner- >March 12, 1998, and a tape that came with my subscription, "Investing to Win" >an interview with David Ryan, I have been looking to buy stocks with %Instit >between 5-15% and "sell them usually by the time they reach 30%". Not that I >have been able to do that yet. That is pretty restrictive and most of the cos >posted above have %Instit greater than 30%. I have been doing another screen >at rapidresearch.com on the advanced page for %Instit 5-15%, annual EPS > >18, 5 year EPS > 25, ROE > 14.5 (another criteria I got from IBD) and profit >margin to industry > 100 %. Today I was left with 16 stocks and needless to say, >I can look up the remaining data items much faster with so few stocks. I then >take only those stocks with %Mgmt between 5 and 60, though I prefer 15-50, >EPS and RS > 80. I mention this because I am planning to stop doing the >selections from "Your Weekend Review" because it takes much longer and >leaves me with lots of stocks I'm not interested in due to %Instit. > >Here is a list of all of the stocks that meet those criteria: > >Ticker EPS RS Sum Mgmt A/D Shr Flt D:E Inst Grp PE PEG ROE >TMBS 99 96 195 27 A 7.01 4.9 0 13.7 A 25 0.22 39.8 >AXR 97 92 189 54 C 7.37 3.5 0.56 15 B 8 0 16.3 >XETA 97 83 180 40 C 2.05 1.2 0 9.1 B 20 0.34 26.9 >BCP 91 94 185 ? A 3.2 2.5 0.07 5.3 ? ? 24.4 >NOBH 90 97 187 55 B 4.46 2.1 0 10.2 B 26 0.58 20.5 >WBPR 90 93 183 37 B ? ? ? 5.2 C 30 23.2 >NTSC 86 89 175 42 B 6.97 4.7 0.62 12.7 A 19 0.28 14.7 >ATRO 84 90 174 14 A 4.3 3.2 0.18 5.8 B 17 0.39 19.8 >CEBC 92 84 176 20 B 14.5 9.7 0 6.1 B 27 18 > >I've seen TMBS, XETA and NOBH mentioned here often but I don't recall any of >the others. As usual, I haven't found any with particularly good charts. NTSC >looks to be forming the right side of a cup. Many of you won't like that the price >for many of these is < 12 and many are thinly traded. I'd love to hear your >comments on these especially if anyone thinks one of the charts looks good to >them. > >Larry Horn > > >- > > > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 07:24:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: [ TIM"S CANSLIM] My list for this week As you should have read in previous posts by others, Your Weekend Review has VERY loose criteria for inclusion on the list, and when "weak" stocks begin to show up just to fill in the blank lines in the paper, "caveat emptor!" I find your attitude a bit defensive and not supported by the majority of the group. Plese refrain from publishing such personally-directed comments to the group in the future. None of this discussion would have taken place if you would have taken the time to research C, A, N, S, L, and I on the stocks that you posted to the group. I won't take the time to respond to your other comments, suffice it to say that there is more than one opinion of CANSLIM criteria out there, and you are getting mine in my comments. If you can't handle that I have a different opinion since I read HTMMIS and wrote down WON's numerical criteria for institutional and insider ownership, then I can't help you there. At 10:58 PM 5/17/98 -0400, you wrote: > >Tim, > >I think you need to check your "loosey-goosey" scan's to make sure they are >working OK. If you will look, 5 of the 6 stocks I listed show up in this >weeks "your weekend review", and I must take issue with your statement that >these are, as you worded it "lousy prospects." > >> > It disturbs me a bit that stocks like these get posted to the group >without >> > any CANSLIM numbers which we can use to judge their WON worthines, so >to >> > speak. > >stocks like these, like what? Like those that get listed by IBD? I'll >try to do better, provide more complete info, if for no other reason than >just to make you happy. > >> ACF has practically no insider holdings and has already been grabbed by >the institutionals. > >Thats funny, I show 12% insider holdings > > > DCR looks good except for the insider holdings, > >4% isn't great, but it's not "lousy" > >After further review, the only one I would consider retracting is ANF, it >has very low %man ownership. BOCB is a new issue, we can remove that one >for that reason if you wish, but the chart is compelling. > >> > The moral of what I am trying to say here is post something like this >first >> > so I don't have to! > >No, I'll give the data that I view appropriate and adequate. If you aren't >satisfied with that which I list, do your own homework, or rather ignore my >post altogether. The issues I post largely come form "Your weekend >review", so they aren't "lousy prospects" as you so careingly worded it. > >The balance of the issues I stand by. We can debate large %instit >ownership if you wish, but going back to the section on supply and demand, >a small float with high %inst'l ownership is more beneficial than a >"reasonable" %inst'l ownership and a larger percentage float. > >Let all try to keep our posts productive, shall we. > >Kindest regards, > > >Tony Austin > >P.S. Oh, and add CBUK to my list for this week. Look Tim, no data. > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 09:24:55 -0500 (CDT) From: mckeener@ix.netcom.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: obv/mf Hi Connie, Would you mind including me in your list of people to forward your file? Thanks so much. Mary Keener - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 11:35:54 -0400 From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Selections from"Your Weekend Review" I just got this error myself: 404 Not Found The requested URL /~clhorn/canslim/98wkrvw.csv was not found on this server. Thanks Larry, Frank At 09:38 AM 5/18/98 -0400, Larry Horn wrote: >I was just informed that there was a file not found error >for this weeks .xls file. I just corrected it. > >Larry Horn > >-----Original Message----- >From: Larry Horn [SMTP:clhorn@acpub.duke.edu] >Sent: Sunday, May 17, 1998 9:02 PM >To: CANSLIM (E-mail) >Subject: [CANSLIM] Selections from"Your Weekend Review" > >I just posted my selections from "Your Weekend Review" at >www.duke.edu/~clhorn/canslim. > > > > > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 11:29:14 -0400 From: Larry Horn Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Selections from"Your Weekend Review" Tim, It's interesting (and frustrating) how different some of the data at = Zacks is=20 compared to IBD's and Yahoo!'s. Particularly %Mgmt vs. %Insiders, and = D:E=20 which I got at Yahoo!. When you use the selections page I made, you = might want=20 to keep in mind that those data are from different sources than the ones = you=20 usually get.=20 Larry - -----Original Message----- From: Tim Fisher [SMTP:tim@OreRockOn.com] Sent: Monday, May 18, 1998 10:15 AM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Selections from"Your Weekend Review" Just a suggestion: Put a title on your page,=20 http://www.duke.edu/~clhorn/canslim/description.htm The title now is "Frame Page" and when people add it to their bookmarks = that is the title that shows up. I ran them through my loosey-goosey = filter and came up with the following: MANU CTXS BBBY TMBS ROMC LBOR DELL STLY At least MANU, LBOR, and DELL make my strict scan, although you have to = ignore DELL's 57 billion market cap. ROMC is new to me; the rest are on = one watch list or another. Thanks Larry! As for your second list, NTR, ATRO, NTSC, BCP are not followed by Zacks = (yeah yeah, but it's free!), and of the rest, only AXR makes my loose = scan. Here's the dirt on those (smaller list than the IBD list, so I'm = posting it). Boy am I ever gonna be late for work! CEBC gets kicked out = because of lower Q0 earnings, WBPR the same, XETA less tha 10% = institutions, NOBH insiders too high by a hair.=20 As for your second list, NTR, ATRO, NTSC, BCP are not followed by Zacks = (yeah yeah, but it's free!), and of the rest, only AXR makes my loose = scan. Here's the dirt on those (smaller list than the IBD list, so I'm = posting it). Boy am I ever gonna be late for work! CEBC gets kicked out = because of lower Q0 earnings, WBPR the same, XETA less tha 10% = institutions, NOBH insiders too high by a hair.=20 BANKS-WEST Centennial Bcp=09 BLDG-MBL/MFG&RV Nobility Homes=09 BLDG-RSDNT/COMR Amrep Corp=09 FIN-SVGS & LOAN Westernbank Pr T ELECOMM EQUIP Xeta Corp TICKER CEBC NOBH AXR WBPR XETA =20 EXCHANGE NSDQ NSDQ NYSE NSDQ NSDQ =20 X SECTOR 13 8 8 13 10 X INDUSTRY 18 30 31 67 179 24WK PCHG% 28.57 81.94 44.44 105.41 11.95 TREND EPGR 30.73 20.67 37.13 47.28 73.58 QEPS 0/-4 17.24 50.00 1,300.00 15.38 107.14 QEPS -1/-5 33.86 54.42 750.00 21.85 50.00 QEPS -2/-6 25.98 23.57 40.00 27.27 78.57 QEPS -3/-7 27.19 N/A N/A 23.85 N/A TREND SALE 29.19 26.74 9.73 N/A 36.24 P/E 12M 27.91 22.13 8.29 33.33 21.19 ROI 16.57 22.96 9.46 N/A 28.83 D/Equity 19.30 0.00 2.91 N/A 0.00 PEG F1 1.18 1.01 N/A N/A 0.71 % INSIDERS 11.17 53.52 16.90 N/A 17.98 % INSTITUT 6.14 10.22 15.04 4.18 8.15 At 09:02 PM 5/17/98 -0400, you wrote: >I just posted my selections from "Your Weekend Review" at=20 >www.duke.edu/~clhorn/canslim. I also updated the concatenation that = Frank W.=20 >created from them on the same site. Once again, the spreadsheet lists = all cos=20 >over $7, within 15% of 52 week high, with EPS and RS 85 or higher. All = are=20 >group strength A, A/D =3D A or B, and the best fund with a large = investment is A-=20 >or better. The spreadsheet also lists %Mgmt from IBD tables, %Instit = from=20 >rapidresearch.com, Shr, Flt, ROE, and Debt:Eq from Yahoo! > >>From information that I got from articles I have read in IBD, = Investor's Corner- >March 12, 1998, and a tape that came with my subscription, "Investing = to Win"=20 >an interview with David Ryan, I have been looking to buy stocks with = %Instit=20 >between 5-15% and "sell them usually by the time they reach 30%". Not = that I=20 >have been able to do that yet. That is pretty restrictive and most of = the cos=20 >posted above have %Instit greater than 30%. I have been doing another = screen=20 >at rapidresearch.com on the advanced page for %Instit 5-15%, annual EPS = >=20 >18, 5 year EPS > 25, ROE > 14.5 (another criteria I got from IBD) and = profit=20 >margin to industry > 100 %. Today I was left with 16 stocks and = needless to say,=20 >I can look up the remaining data items much faster with so few stocks. = I then=20 >take only those stocks with %Mgmt between 5 and 60, though I prefer = 15-50,=20 >EPS and RS > 80. I mention this because I am planning to stop doing the = >selections from "Your Weekend Review" because it takes much longer and=20 >leaves me with lots of stocks I'm not interested in due to %Instit. > >Here is a list of all of the stocks that meet those criteria: > >Ticker EPS RS Sum Mgmt A/D Shr Flt D:E Inst Grp PE PEG ROE >TMBS 99 96 195 27 A 7.01 4.9 0 13.7 A 25 0.22 39.8 >AXR 97 92 189 54 C 7.37 3.5 0.56 15 B 8 0 16.3 >XETA 97 83 180 40 C 2.05 1.2 0 9.1 B 20 0.34 26.9 >NOBH 90 97 187 55 B 4.46 2.1 0 10.2 B 26 0.58 20.5 >WBPR 90 93 183 37 B ? ? ? 5.2 C 30 23.2 >CEBC 92 84 176 20 B 14.5 9.7 0 6.1 B 27 18 > >I've seen TMBS, XETA and NOBH mentioned here often but I don't recall = any of=20 >the others. As usual, I haven't found any with particularly good = charts. NTSC=20 >looks to be forming the right side of a cup. Many of you won't like = that the price=20 >for many of these is < 12 and many are thinly traded. I'd love to hear = your=20 >comments on these especially if anyone thinks one of the charts looks = good to=20 >them. > >Larry Horn > > >- > > > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #242 ***************************** 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.