From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #2579 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, July 8 2002 Volume 02 : Number 2579 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] Screening Re: [CANSLIM] Screening RE: [CANSLIM] Screening Re: [CANSLIM] Screening Re: [CANSLIM] Screening Re: [CANSLIM] Screening [CANSLIM] about stocks, but cynical none the less Re: [CANSLIM] about stocks, but cynical none the less [CANSLIM] "M" Re: [CANSLIM] "M" RE: [CANSLIM] M update ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2002 19:29:41 -0700 From: "zillagirl" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Screening This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0021_01C225EC.A452E200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Duke 13139-let me say that stating facts should not be considered = bashing anyone-unless of course you are in a communist country-which = last time I looked , we are not. Second you've brought up twice that I = refereed to a terrorist as Mr. Just to enlighten you, I said Mr. Osama = in my first email, and Osama happens to be his first name. It was said = in sarcasm. Not respect. I hope you sleep better tonight with this = info. thanks for the mail Nancy ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Duke13139@aol.com=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2002 6:36 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Screening I heard about this great CANSLIM site and spent a considerable amount = of time locating it. What do I find, a ***jerk*** that bashes the = President every chance she gets and refers to a terrorist as Mr. From = time to time she makes sense, when she goes offline.=20 Forgive me folks but I hate politics and when they are blatantly = pushed I resist.=20 - ------=_NextPart_000_0021_01C225EC.A452E200 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Duke 13139-let me say that stating = facts should not=20 be considered bashing anyone-unless of course you are in a communist=20 country-which last time I looked , we are not. Second you've brought up = twice=20 that I refereed to a terrorist as Mr.  Just to enlighten you, I = said Mr.=20 Osama in my first email, and Osama happens to be his first name.  = It was=20 said in sarcasm. Not respect.  I hope you sleep better tonight with = this=20 info. thanks for the mail Nancy
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Duke13139@aol.com
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=
Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2002 = 6:36 PM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] = Screening

I heard about this great CANSLIM site and spent a = considerable amount of time locating it. What do I find, a ***jerk*** = that=20 bashes the President every chance she gets and refers to a terrorist = as Mr.=20 From time to time she makes sense, when she goes offline. =

Forgive me=20 folks but I hate politics and when they are blatantly pushed I = resist.
=20
- ------=_NextPart_000_0021_01C225EC.A452E200-- - - - -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: Sun, 7 Jul 2002 22:37:04 EDT From: Duke13139@aol.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Screening - --part1_124.13537d70.2a5a54d0_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Please peddle your sleaze elsewhere. Your lucky to be in a noncommunist country, but that doesn't give you license to spread your liberal crap on my monitor. Hopefully the girl will mature. - --part1_124.13537d70.2a5a54d0_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Please peddle your sleaze elsewhere. Your lucky to be in a noncommunist country, but that doesn't give you license to spread your liberal crap on my monitor.
Hopefully the girl will mature.
- --part1_124.13537d70.2a5a54d0_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: Sun, 7 Jul 2002 17:06:12 -1000 From: "Mike Gibbons" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Screening This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0049_01C225D8.99037720 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On the contrary, precisely because we do live in a free country, she does have the freedom to send her emails. Equally wonderfully, you have the freedom not to read them. That being said, there are plenty of places on the web where politics can be discussed, and I think we'd all get along better if we stuck to CANSLIM only. 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 Duke13139@aol.com Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2002 4:37 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Screening Please peddle your sleaze elsewhere. Your lucky to be in a noncommunist country, but that doesn't give you license to spread your liberal crap on my monitor. Hopefully the girl will mature. - ------=_NextPart_000_0049_01C225D8.99037720 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On the=20 contrary, precisely because we do live in a free country, she does have = the=20 freedom to send her emails. Equally wonderfully, you have the freedom = not to=20 read them.
 
That=20 being said, there are plenty of places on the web where politics can be=20 discussed, and I think we'd all get along better if we stuck to CANSLIM = only.=20
 
Aloha,
 
Mike Gibbons
Proactive Technologies, = LLC
http://www.proactech.com
-----Original Message-----
From:=20 owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of=20 Duke13139@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2002 4:37=20 PM
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: = [CANSLIM]=20 Screening

Please peddle your sleaze = elsewhere. Your=20 lucky to be in a noncommunist country, but that doesn't give you = license to=20 spread your liberal crap on my monitor.
Hopefully the girl will=20 mature.
- ------=_NextPart_000_0049_01C225D8.99037720-- - - - -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: Sun, 7 Jul 2002 22:14:23 -0500 From: "Katherine Malm" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Screening This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0113_01C22603.A6683600 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MessageOh darn it, Duke....just when I was making such progress on that = stack of juicy poolside reading..... Actually, your question ties in well to a something I posted last week, = and that is, how are people modifying their strategies given the = accounting issues at hand? The effects on my own strategies have been = subtle....as I've always been a fundamental hound and peeked into SEC = filings for accounting and business red flags. But...over the last = couple of years, whether is was Bear induced or lightbulb-in-the-brain = induced, I've made an ever so slight shift in my thinking and approach = to mining for candidates and that shift is already reflected in what you = listed in your post. That is, I used to look first at fundamentals, find = really great companies, whether or not the current technicals were = "favorable" and then waited patiently to see if they would ever set up = and break out. Duh.... in a rotating market, and in any market for that = matter, good fundamentals don't always translate into good stocks for = purchase. That meant that I was carrying around a lot of stocks on my = master watch and biasing my view of the markets because I would often = overlook what *was* working. Now, I *always* let technical strength lead = me to stocks that are working, then weigh in on the fundamentals to see = which companies have a sustainable "N" that could potentially fuel = future growth. That means I'll stay away from defensive and cyclical = issues that are technically strong, because I know that they are short = term plays. Just to clarify the items you listed, I don't mine for EPS>=3D50. I = believe this was a "for example" I gave in one of our previous = discussions if someone were including the EPS ranking in their = filtering. It may seem heresy to mine so low, but I mine for stocks that = are "not laggards" vs "are leaders." EPS and SMR are summary indicators, = so to begin mining in the "top half" eliminates laggards without = summarily dismissing stocks which may have improving fundamentals. = (That's fairly common when coming out of a recessionary period.) That's also the reason that I mine for stocks with RS>=3D60 as long as = the RS Line is increasing in strength. That is, a stock that is gaining = strength vs. the market is of interest, because I want to see a stock = when it *begins* outperforming. That also lets you do all your = fundamental and due diligence homework while the base is still forming. = Then, you can decide if it's worth watching as it finishes its base and = sets up for a break out. If you wait to start watching only after the RS = has reached 80 or 85, it might just be too late. To your question, = however, as to whether you want to pay special attention to stocks with = very high RS's above others right now.... Not necessarily. The super = high RS's may very well be stocks in 3rd or 4th stage bases, defensives, = cyclicals, etc. In other words, stocks that typically do well in a Bear = Market and not necessarily stocks that are there because they have a = clean accounting slate. I'd be more inclined to pay particular attention = to companies that have sustained their high forward growth rates and = have managed to move sideways in price and/or printed rising RS Lines = over the last quarter or two. What changes am I making? None to what I described in previous emails. = I'm still seeking out *rising* strength, non-laggard, high forward = growth rate, good risk/reward tradeoff stocks with a sustainable = competitive advantage. Translation: First pass mining: RS>=3D60 RS Line rising Price >=3D 200 day MA Price no more than 15% below the 50 day MA Forward growth rate >=3D 15% Acceptable risk/reward tradeoff (That is, given past profitability and = future growth estimates, is not overpriced) Then and only then, I'll look at specific fundamentals: D/E, ROE, = earnings & revenue growth, operating cash flow vs. eps, etc. If I like = what I see, I dig in for due diligence. If I like what I see there, I = check the technicals on competitors and other stocks in the industry to = see if they are breaking down or setting up. At the time of purchase I = want RS>=3D70 and A/D =3D A, B, C. I think in the end that price/volume = tells the tale. There isn't a single accounting scandal (yet, anyway) in = which the stock had not already broken down technically long before the = "reason" was revealed.=20 Katherine - ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Duke Miller=20 To: CANSLIM=20 Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2002 11:43 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] Screening Ok, wake up out there!! =20 Could it be that things might possibly by some mere stretch of the = imagination...start looking up? Is it time to proceed with some = early-on mining? To that end, I went back through my CAN SLIM Keepers folder...you = know, where I put stuff my 50-something mind needs to be refreshed upon = because it's meaningful, and I'm prone to forgetting. (See anecdote at = end of this message; if it rings a bell, so to speak, you need your own = CAN SLIM Keepers Folder!). Katherine Malm is in the "from" line in my Keeper folder more than = anyone else (wonder why?), so I'm using her as the catapult for my = query. At the same time, I'm asking others to chime in, PLEASE. =20 On April 29, Katherine, you summarized your screening tactics in an = email, subject: "How are you choosing your stocks." To paraphrase: RS>=3D60 Price>=3D200dma Price>=3D50 dma -15% A/D =3D A, B, or C EPS Rating =3D>50 Meeting or exceeding these criteria, you flip through the charts to = see which are setting up, then proceed to additional scrutiny. The = following is quoting directly from your email:(hilite is mine): With respect to annual and quarterly growth, ROE, D/E, cashflow etc., = again, I look at these things in total, knowing that accounting rules = often obfuscate the "real" story. For that reason, I like to skim the = recent SEC filings if a stock makes my short due diligence list, rather = than eliminating stocks entirely just because ROE is 14.6 vs 15% for = example.=20 At the risk of interrupting Katherine's summer reading program, my = question for the week:=20 Now that the market has dipped this far, what screen changes, if any, = are you contemplating to narrow down your selections? =20 I've stated before that my feeling is the stocks that have not = succumbed as much lately (RS above 90, for instance) will be huge = winners; they are passing "obfuscated 'real' story" scrutiny. =20 Or will they? Are they more havens than performers, with the prospect = of giving way to other types of issues destined to surface into the = winners' pool? Duke >Senior Moment: >An elderly couple had dinner at another couple's house, and after >eating, the wives left the table and went into the kitchen. The two=20 >elderly gentlemen were talking, and one said, "Last night we went out = >to a new restaurant, and it was really great. I would recommend it=20 >very highly." > >The other man said, "What is the name of the restaurant?" The first = man >thought and thought and finally said, "What is the name of that = flower=20 >you give to someone you love? You know... the one that is red and has = >thorns. > >"Do you mean a rose?" > >"Yes," the man said. He turned toward the kitchen and yelled, "Hey >Rose, what's the name of that restaurant we went to last night?" > - ------=_NextPart_000_0113_01C22603.A6683600 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message
Oh darn it, Duke....just when I was making such progress on that = stack of=20 juicy poolside reading.....
 
Actually, your question ties in well to a something I posted last = week, and=20 that is, how are people modifying their strategies given the accounting = issues=20 at hand? The effects on my own strategies have been subtle....as I've = always=20 been a fundamental hound and peeked into SEC filings for accounting and = business=20 red flags. But...over the last couple of years, whether is was Bear = induced or=20 lightbulb-in-the-brain induced, I've made an ever so slight shift in my = thinking=20 and approach to mining for candidates and that shift is already = reflected in=20 what you listed in your post. That is, I used to look first at = fundamentals,=20 find really great companies, whether or not the current technicals were=20 "favorable" and then waited patiently to see if they would ever set up = and break=20 out. Duh.... in a rotating market, and in any market for that matter, = good=20 fundamentals don't always translate into good stocks for purchase. That = meant=20 that I was carrying around a lot of stocks on my master watch and = biasing my=20 view of the markets because I would often overlook what *was* working. = Now, I=20 *always* let technical strength lead me to stocks that are working, then = weigh=20 in on the fundamentals to see which companies have a sustainable "N" = that could=20 potentially fuel future growth. That means I'll stay away from defensive = and=20 cyclical issues that are technically strong, because I know that they = are short=20 term plays.
 
Just to clarify the items you listed, I don't mine for = EPS>=3D50. I=20 believe this was a "for example" I gave in one of our previous = discussions if=20 someone were including the EPS ranking in their filtering. It may seem = heresy to=20 mine so low, but I mine for stocks that are "not laggards" vs "are = leaders." EPS=20 and SMR are summary indicators, so to begin mining in the "top half" = eliminates=20 laggards without summarily dismissing stocks which may have improving=20 fundamentals. (That's fairly common when coming out of a recessionary=20 period.)
 
That's also the reason that I mine for stocks with RS>=3D60 as = long as the=20 RS Line is increasing in strength. That is, a stock that is gaining = strength vs.=20 the market is of interest, because I want to see a stock when it = *begins*=20 outperforming. That also lets you do all your fundamental and due = diligence=20 homework while the base is still forming. Then, you can decide if it's = worth=20 watching as it finishes its base and sets up for a break out. If you = wait to=20 start watching only after the RS has reached 80 or 85, it might just be = too=20 late. To your question, however, as to whether you want to pay special = attention=20 to stocks with very high RS's above others right now.... Not = necessarily. The=20 super high RS's may very well be stocks in 3rd or 4th stage bases, = defensives,=20 cyclicals, etc. In other words, stocks that typically do well in a Bear = Market=20 and not necessarily stocks that are there because they have a clean = accounting slate. I'd be more inclined to pay particular attention to = companies=20 that have sustained their high forward growth rates and have managed to = move=20 sideways in price and/or printed rising RS Lines over the last quarter = or=20 two.
 
What changes am I making? None to what I described in previous = emails. I'm=20 still seeking out *rising* strength, non-laggard, high forward growth = rate, good=20 risk/reward tradeoff stocks with a sustainable competitive advantage.=20 Translation:
 
First pass mining:
RS>=3D60
RS Line rising
Price >=3D 200 day MA
Price no more than 15% below the 50 day MA
Forward growth rate >=3D 15%
Acceptable risk/reward tradeoff (That is, given past profitability = and=20 future growth estimates, is not overpriced)
 
Then and only then, I'll look at specific fundamentals: D/E, ROE, = earnings=20 & revenue growth, operating cash flow vs. eps, etc. If I like what I = see, I=20 dig in for due diligence. If I like what I see there, I check the = technicals on=20 competitors and other stocks in the industry to see if they are breaking = down or=20 setting up. At the time of purchase I want RS>=3D70 and A/D =3D A, B, = C.  I=20 think in the end that price/volume tells the tale. There isn't a single=20 accounting scandal (yet, anyway) in which the stock had not already = broken down=20 technically long before the "reason" was revealed.
 
Katherine
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Duke=20 Miller
To: CANSLIM
Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2002 = 11:43=20 AM
Subject: [CANSLIM] = Screening

 
Ok, wake up = out=20 there!! 
 
Could it be = that things=20 might possibly by some mere stretch of the imagination...start looking = up?  Is it time to proceed with some early-on = mining?
 
To that end, = I went back=20 through my CAN SLIM Keepers folder...you know, where I put stuff my=20 50-something mind needs to be refreshed upon because it's meaningful, = and I'm=20 prone to forgetting.  (See anecdote at end of this message; if it = rings a=20 bell, so to speak, you need your own CAN SLIM Keepers=20 Folder!).
 
Katherine Malm is in=20 the "from" line in my Keeper folder more than anyone else = (wonder=20 why?), so I'm using her as the catapult for my query.  At = the same=20 time, I'm asking others to chime in, PLEASE.  =
 
On April 29, = Katherine,=20 you summarized your screening tactics in an email, subject: "How are = you=20 choosing your stocks."   To paraphrase:
 
RS>=3D60
Price>=3D200dma
Price>=3D50 dma=20 -15%
A/D =3D  = A, B, or=20 C
EPS Rating=20 =3D>50
Meeting or = exceeding=20 these criteria, you flip through the charts to see which are setting = up, then=20 proceed to additional scrutiny.  The following is quoting = directly from=20 your email:(hilite is mine):
 
With respect to annual and = quarterly=20 growth, ROE, D/E, cashflow etc., again, I look at these things in = total,=20 knowing that accounting rules often obfuscate = the "real"=20 story. For that reason, I like to skim the recent SEC filings = if a=20 stock makes my short due diligence list, rather than eliminating = stocks=20 entirely just because ROE is 14.6 vs 15% for example. =

At the risk of = interrupting Katherine's summer reading program, my question for = the=20 week:

Now that the=20 market has dipped this far, what screen changes, if any, are you=20 contemplating to narrow down your selections? 

I've stated=20 before that my feeling is the stocks that have not succumbed as much=20 lately (RS above 90, for instance) will be huge winners; = they are=20 passing "obfuscated 'real' story" scrutiny. 

Or = will=20 they?  Are they more havens than performers, with the prospect of = giving=20 way to other types of issues destined to surface into the winners'=20 pool?

Duke

>Senior=20 Moment:

>An elderly couple had dinner at = another=20 couple's house, and after

>eating, the wives left the table and went into = the=20 kitchen. The two

>elderly gentlemen were talking, and one said, = "Last night=20 we went out

>to a new restaurant, and it was really great. I = would=20 recommend it

>very highly."

>

>The other man said, "What is the name of the = restaurant?"=20 The first man

>thought and thought and finally said, "What is = the name of=20 that flower

>you give to someone you love? You know... the = one that is=20 red and has

>thorns.

>

>"Do you mean a rose?"

>

>"Yes," the man said. He turned toward the = kitchen and=20 yelled, "Hey

>Rose, what's = the name of=20 that restaurant we went to last night?"

>

- ------=_NextPart_000_0113_01C22603.A6683600-- - - - -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: Sun, 7 Jul 2002 20:15:38 -0700 (PDT) From: Fanus Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Screening I think I like the other Duke more... - --- Duke13139@aol.com wrote: > Please peddle your sleaze elsewhere. Your lucky to > be in a noncommunist > country, but that doesn't give you license to spread > your liberal crap on my > monitor. > Hopefully the girl will mature. > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free http://sbc.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. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Jul 2002 20:58:36 -0700 From: Harvey Brion Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Screening You're way off base, Duke 13139. Based on three or four of your posts, I'd be delighted if you hadn't succeeded in finding us. I haven't seen one constructive post on your part. Get lost, if this is all you can contribute. Duke13139@aol.com wrote: > Please peddle your sleaze elsewhere. Your lucky to be in a > noncommunist country, but that doesn't give you license to spread your > liberal crap on my monitor. > Hopefully the girl will mature. - - - -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: Sun, 7 Jul 2002 20:52:48 -0700 From: "oaktoad" Subject: [CANSLIM] about stocks, but cynical none the less In this month's Bloomberg's Personal Finance (the guy who bought the mayorship of NY) .. is an article by Arthur Levitt, Jr. about how bad option accounting is .. He blasts it pretty hard.. What makes me cynical is the fact that he was in charge of the SEC from 1993-2001 and did nothing about this practice.. now he sits in the "20/20 hindsight seat" and says that it is "very, very bad" - - - -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, 8 Jul 2002 02:09:29 -0400 From: "Winston Little" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] about stocks, but cynical none the less When Arthur Levitt Jr was Chairman of the SEC, he did make several valiant efforts to bring changes to the accounting for options by corporations. He testified to the Congress about the need for changes when he was chairman.However, it was an era when anyone with half a brain knew that YHOO, QCOM, WCOM etc. were going to $1000/share, and Enron would soon be larger than Exxon/Mobil. ANYONE who got in the way was viewed as "road kill or a lunatic". Since leaving the SEC, he was asked back to a House panel looking into the current accounting situation. Most of his words were almost verbatim of what he had said to them some time ago, yet the questions to him from the panel was as though they were hearing the words for the first time (as the circumstances are now different). Thus, I believe that his current treatise it is not a pretence of 20/20 hindsight, but a re-iteration of his beliefs and convictions to a more tolerant and humbled audience. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "oaktoad" To: Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2002 11:52 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] about stocks, but cynical none the less > In this month's Bloomberg's Personal Finance (the guy who bought the > mayorship of NY) .. is an article by Arthur Levitt, Jr. about how bad option > accounting is .. > > He blasts it pretty hard.. > > What makes me cynical is the fact that he was in charge of the SEC from > 1993-2001 and did nothing about this practice.. now he sits in the "20/20 > hindsight seat" and says that it is "very, very bad" > > > - > -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: Mon, 8 Jul 2002 07:05:12 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] "M" Well, why should today be any different? Instead of terrorist attack fears, we have renewed accounting fears, this time with Merck apparently overstating revenues by a trivial $12 billion with their pharmacy benefits unit. What's $12 billion among friends anyway? Only enough to turn Asia around from a nice 1% or better gain across the board into red ink for almost every exchange. Japan, which had been up nearly 200 points and breaking 11,000 once again, ended closing down 56 points. And Europe is down across the board, while USA futures suggest a 1 to 1.5% drop on the open. In Mexico, former officials of the govt owned PEMEX and some businessmen are being investigated for paying $134 million for a petrochemical plant that was never built. Some of those officials were also under investigation earlier this year for company contributions of $100 million to the campaign of presidential candidate Francisco Labastida. Some things just don't seem to be changing, or getting better. Tom Worley stkguru@bellsouth.net AIM: TexWorley - - - -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, 8 Jul 2002 07:23:22 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] "M" One further thought on Merck's treatment of patient co-payments, which resulted in the Friday filing with the SEC disclosing that nearly 10% of its reported revenue since 1999 was never collected. Their auditor, Price Waterhouse Cooper, signed off on this methodology even though Express Scripts, the third largest pharmacy provider, does not include patient co-payments. Who is the auditor for Express? Price Waterhouse Cooper. And the largest provider, Advance PCS, also does not include patient co-payments, while the fourth largest, Caremark RX, does include these payments. One might ask how one of the big 4 auditing firms can find treatment of patient co-payment to be one way and consistent with GAAP, yet treat it differently at another firm. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Worley" To: "CANSLIM" Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 7:05 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] "M" Well, why should today be any different? Instead of terrorist attack fears, we have renewed accounting fears, this time with Merck apparently overstating revenues by a trivial $12 billion with their pharmacy benefits unit. What's $12 billion among friends anyway? Only enough to turn Asia around from a nice 1% or better gain across the board into red ink for almost every exchange. Japan, which had been up nearly 200 points and breaking 11,000 once again, ended closing down 56 points. And Europe is down across the board, while USA futures suggest a 1 to 1.5% drop on the open. In Mexico, former officials of the govt owned PEMEX and some businessmen are being investigated for paying $134 million for a petrochemical plant that was never built. Some of those officials were also under investigation earlier this year for company contributions of $100 million to the campaign of presidential candidate Francisco Labastida. Some things just don't seem to be changing, or getting better. Tom Worley stkguru@bellsouth.net AIM: TexWorley - - - -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: Sun, 7 Jul 2002 13:39:15 -0500 From: "Hill, Ernie" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] M update The low turn was made on 7-3 one day outside of the projected turn window. This is not uncommon when dealing with a move as strong as this one. The bottom was actually made at 934.88, we have since rallied 54 plus S&P points in less than two trading days (pretty explosive). The next turn high is due within four trading days of 7-15. The market is at a critical juncture right now. The highest probability for this next turn is for it to occur in the first day of the turn window or one day before the turn window. This translates into 7-8 or 7-9. In either case the price level is the determining factor. 999 on the SPX is a key level. This level represents a .618% retracement of the move from the high of 6-18 to the low of 7-3. The highest probable course for the market to take is for it to reach this level (999) and then to reverse course and continue it's recent slide. However, if this resistance level is taken out convincingly then the market will likely continue up to the next most likely price target of 1033 which will be a complete retracement of the move from 6-18 to 7-3 plus a couple of bonus points, and the turn would likely occur near the midpoint of the turn window. E - -----Original Message----- From: Hill, Ernie [mailto:Ernie.Hill@ElPaso.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 8:10 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: [CANSLIM] M tomorrow If the market continues to go south tomorrow the downside risk is to 933 on the S&P. If the low turn was not made today it will very likely be made tomorrow. We should then get at the very least a tradable rally, and there is strong potential for an explosive move to the upside. E ****************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it from the ElPaso Corporation are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender. ****************************************************************** - - - -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 #2579 ****************************** 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.