ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/canslim/archive/canslim.200006

Internet Message Format | 2000-06-30 | 773KB

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] newbie
Date: 01 Jun 2000 09:09:29 EDT

OK, I'm new.....I tryed the Daily Graphs and it really helped me with the
canslim method of finding the right stocks but I did not want to pay the
money....now, I am trying the tc2000 and all it has done is confused me...it
seems to be too much...I did the sell with the canslim but I am like some of
you guys on this list and have stocks like csco and orcl that I will not use
the canslim to sell.....the most that I have made with the stocks is a gain
of 10%.......the only thing that I have now that is still in the postive is
xlnx..I bought at 66.oo I was wondering should I sell and that the profit or
hold on to it...I still have about 5,000 in cash to still play with? hope to
hear....jan or bubbet newbie

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Salisbury)
Subject: [CANSLIM] Changing your canslim subscription
Date: 01 Jun 2000 08:00:00 -0600

This is a twice monthly posting to the CANLSLIM group.

Frequently, people sign up for the canslim list and then are overwhelmed by
the volume of the email.  There are three remedies for this problem: 1) You
can leave our group. 2) you can switch to the digest version which
"conglomerates" many canslim messages into one large message.  Or, 3) You can
setup customized filters on your own mail client to sort the incoming canslim
messages to its own folder.

If you wish to modify your canslim subscription, email a message to:

    [e-mail]

The remove yourself from the canslim list, write in the body of the email:

    unsubscribe canslim

To add yourself to the digest version of the canslim list, write in the
body of the email:

    subscribe canslim-digest

For general help with majordomo commands, write in the body of the email:

    help

If you need further clarification, write me directly at:

    [e-mail]

Best Regards,

Jeff Salisbury - CANSLIM list admin / owner


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: M, Bob Brinker, WON, etc.
Date: 01 Jun 2000 10:50:09 -0400



Hi.

Does anyone know where I can get the transcripts of Mr. Brinker's comments?

Anna

[e-mail] on 05/31/2000 10:15:35 PM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




Yes following the M yourself is the best way, I agree, yet I see people in
this
list all following the exact same M and coming up with completely different
interpretations.  I might as well throw my 2 cents in while I'm at it.  I
interpret
the volume as not convincing and do not consider this a valid follow
through.  I
don't get a feeling of overwhelming buying at all.  But I could be wrong
just like
Bob Brinker could be, and just as WON could be as he cautions even
regarding
CONVINCING follow throughs [sometimes failing].

BTW, I was eyeballing Richardson Electronics [RELL] a week ago as a future
candidate should the M ever warrant it.  (Of course I can't buy it because
I'm
already fully invested-- having never sold during this bear.  I'm
considering some
form of modified CANSLIM screening/ buy-and-hold hybrid style of less
hands-on
investing so that I don't have to watch my portfolio daily.  That might
just be a
convoluted rationalization saying "I refuse to sell DSPG and CSCO and I
have to
depart from CANSLIM to do that.")

-Jim  the-blah-blah-blah


-





-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tim Fisher <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] HGS List
Date: 01 Jun 2000 08:01:59 -0700

Wow, I just looked at this week's HGS list, and boy did it ever shrink.
Indications of a bottom? Or just another ramp on the way down? Anyway the
oil services seem to be creeping into the top tier.

BEIQ BJS CDWC CHP HSM IMPH KP PCCC PENG PLXS RHB SHFL

Tim Fisher
Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites

[e-mail]
WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
See naked fish and rocks!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tim Fisher <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] HGS List
Date: 01 Jun 2000 08:03:50 -0700

Whoops, HSM is in arbitrage, so scratch it...

Tim Fisher
Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites

[e-mail]
WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
See naked fish and rocks!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "lynn williams" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] HGS List
Date: 01 Jun 2000 09:46:06 -0400

Is it still a good time to buy SDLI??
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 11:01 AM


> Wow, I just looked at this week's HGS list, and boy did it ever shrink.
> Indications of a bottom? Or just another ramp on the way down? Anyway the
> oil services seem to be creeping into the top tier.
>
> BEIQ BJS CDWC CHP HSM IMPH KP PCCC PENG PLXS RHB SHFL
>
> Tim Fisher
> Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites
>
> [e-mail]
> WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
> See naked fish and rocks!
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] newbie
Date: 01 Jun 2000 10:24:45 -0700 (PDT)


Try www.stocktables.com and use their power ranked system. It is a slow
growth canslim method.

Buy on breakout (stock and group)

Sell when you reach +20% or -8% from your purchase price. Exception: if
the +20% happens in less than 4 weeks, then hang on to the stock.

Sell 50% of your holdings if stock goes up 100% in less than 6
months. Ride the stock with the other 50% -- this gurantees profit no
matter what happens to the stock afterwards.

Stay away from any stocks that do not have any earnings --
safety. Exception: it is a new industry and the revenue is there to
support the cap.

Above all: BE DICIPLINED -- meaning DO NOT LISTEN TO YOUR GUT FEELINGS.

Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Thu, 1 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:

> OK, I'm new.....I tryed the Daily Graphs and it really helped me with the
> canslim method of finding the right stocks but I did not want to pay the
> money....now, I am trying the tc2000 and all it has done is confused me...it
> seems to be too much...I did the sell with the canslim but I am like some of
> you guys on this list and have stocks like csco and orcl that I will not use
> the canslim to sell.....the most that I have made with the stocks is a gain
> of 10%.......the only thing that I have now that is still in the postive is
> xlnx..I bought at 66.oo I was wondering should I sell and that the profit or
> hold on to it...I still have about 5,000 in cash to still play with? hope to
> hear....jan or bubbet newbie
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tim Fisher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] newbie
Date: 01 Jun 2000 12:58:37 -0700

Today looks like a confirmation of the low-vol F/T day we had Tues. W/ 2
mins to go the vol is over 1.5 billion on the NAZ. I believe the 30 dma is
closer to 1.6 billion.

Tim Fisher
Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites

[e-mail]
WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
See naked fish and rocks!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] newbie
Date: 01 Jun 2000 16:26:43 EDT

I like your rules....do you us the stocktables?

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Follow Through?
Date: 01 Jun 2000 13:39:32 -0700 (PDT)


I think that I am beginning to see a follow through. However, I would like
to see NASDAQ above 3750 and then bounce up from 3600 to make 3600 the
support.

I would like NASDAQ to break the lower highs/lower lows sequence before I
would feel comfortable.

Then ofcourse there are leaders who need to breakout.


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Rocky Sanghvi <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] OT:  Follow Through? & Newbe Intro
Date: 01 Jun 2000 17:31:28 -0400

Pritish:

Here's some TA from a gentleman I respect highly - Bob Brogan.

If we look just at the Nasdaq Composite in the 1994 market (which I do
believe is similar),
we did have a series of 3 momentum lows 4/4/94, 4/20/94, 5/13/94 (the 3rd
low initiated the rally which lasted until 10/31)and then you had a series
of failing momentum peaks that led into the Sept. 1994 lows with the the "W"
BOTTOM 11/23 & 12/9.

Following that Dec. 1994 low we were off to the races in a big Wave-3
advance into 1995! We are now in Wave-4 (we think), that should carry to
3792 and hopefully to 3924. Price Momentum & Internal Strength shoud be our
guide as to the timing of the abort or turn down into the 5th-wave decline.
If we blow through these upside numbers and Mo & I.S. explode to the upside
we are wrong and the advance could carry to Comp:4500 But we have one ####
of a lot of technical resistance to overcome
200 day m.a.@ 3644
150 day m.a. @3771
50 day Exponential M.A. @ 3922
50 day m.a. @ 3856
Upper 21 day Bomar Band @3790
Elipse target @ 3924

As you can see the odds that one or more of these resistance levels will
abort the rally are high. But we will follow the momentum indicators for
technical evidence!
Bob Brogan
6/1/00

Now this is purely TA and doesnt conform to CANSLIM many times.  Not sure if
the FT today was on above avg volume on the NYSE (at .955 bil).  But if
Bobby is right we have some serious resistance straight ahead on the Nas.

I am invested 50% in top money flow stocks breaking into new highs recently
like ADCT ANDW PENG MIL TRMB

Regards,
Rakesh Sanghvi
(newbie to CANSLIM group, big fan of the method and Mr. O'Neill, active
trader).


-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 4:40 PM



I think that I am beginning to see a follow through. However, I would like
to see NASDAQ above 3750 and then bounce up from 3600 to make 3600 the
support.

I would like NASDAQ to break the lower highs/lower lows sequence before I
would feel comfortable.

Then ofcourse there are leaders who need to breakout.


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263




-

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Walter Stock <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Follow Through
Date: 01 Jun 2000 17:54:34 -0400

For the first time in months, I am feeling a lot better about 'M'.
Looks like the follow-through followed-through today.
The action in the market and in the leaders is constructive,
and volume is slowly improving.

The fly in the ointment is sentiment.
Not quite where I would like to see it.

Nevertheless,  I will be coming out of the 100% cash position
that I have held over the last quarter.  Have had lots
of  rest by now, so I will be devoting a lot of time and effort to
tracking the early leaders as they start to emerge from their bases.
Have to jump all over them when they peak their little heads
over the pivot points.  May happen sooner than many think.

(Almost took an early jump onto the SDLI bandwagon today.)

Walter Stock
Oakville, ON, Canada




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kent Norman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Follow Through
Date: 01 Jun 2000 17:02:44 -0500

Good, enjoy the rise, but keep a hand on the ripcord if you have to bail
quickly.
Kent

Walter Stock wrote:
>
> For the first time in months, I am feeling a lot better about 'M'.
> Looks like the follow-through followed-through today.
> The action in the market and in the leaders is constructive,
> and volume is slowly improving.
>
> The fly in the ointment is sentiment.
> Not quite where I would like to see it.
>
> Nevertheless,  I will be coming out of the 100% cash position
> that I have held over the last quarter.  Have had lots
> of  rest by now, so I will be devoting a lot of time and effort to
> tracking the early leaders as they start to emerge from their bases.
> Have to jump all over them when they peak their little heads
> over the pivot points.  May happen sooner than many think.
>
> (Almost took an early jump onto the SDLI bandwagon today.)
>
> Walter Stock
> Oakville, ON, Canada
>
> -

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tim Fisher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Follow Through
Date: 01 Jun 2000 15:15:57 -0700

IMHO, KP and PCCC are still reachable. PENG is a bit extended but may come
back within a few % of the pivot.

On 02:54 PM 6/1/00, Walter Stock Said:
>For the first time in months, I am feeling a lot better about 'M'.
>Looks like the follow-through followed-through today.
>The action in the market and in the leaders is constructive,
>and volume is slowly improving.
>
>The fly in the ointment is sentiment.
>Not quite where I would like to see it.
>
>Nevertheless,  I will be coming out of the 100% cash position
>that I have held over the last quarter.  Have had lots
>of  rest by now, so I will be devoting a lot of time and effort to
>tracking the early leaders as they start to emerge from their bases.
>Have to jump all over them when they peak their little heads
>over the pivot points.  May happen sooner than many think.
>
>(Almost took an early jump onto the SDLI bandwagon today.)
>
>Walter Stock
>Oakville, ON, Canada
>
>
>
>
>-

Tim Fisher
Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites

[e-mail]
WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
See naked fish and rocks!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Dave Massaglia" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Follow Through
Date: 01 Jun 2000 19:16:53 CDT

Walt,
Please keep us informed as to what you're nibbling at!!

Thanks

>
>For the first time in months, I am feeling a lot better about 'M'.
>Looks like the follow-through followed-through today.
>The action in the market and in the leaders is constructive,
>and volume is slowly improving.
>
>The fly in the ointment is sentiment.
>Not quite where I would like to see it.
>
>Nevertheless,  I will be coming out of the 100% cash position
>that I have held over the last quarter.  Have had lots
>of  rest by now, so I will be devoting a lot of time and effort to
>tracking the early leaders as they start to emerge from their bases.
>Have to jump all over them when they peak their little heads
>over the pivot points.  May happen sooner than many think.
>
>(Almost took an early jump onto the SDLI bandwagon today.)
>
>Walter Stock
>Oakville, ON, Canada
>
>
>
>
>-
>

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Hugh Fader" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Follow Through
Date: 01 Jun 2000 20:35:05 -0400

Today is still not a convincing follow through day. Althogh NASDAQ was up
5%, volume was only slightly higher, and still just above the 50 day moving
average.

By the way, what is this stock IMHO everyone is always talking about? :-)

- Hugh

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Tim Fisher
Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 6:16 PM


IMHO, KP and PCCC are still reachable. PENG is a bit extended but may come
back within a few % of the pivot.

On 02:54 PM 6/1/00, Walter Stock Said:
>For the first time in months, I am feeling a lot better about 'M'.
>Looks like the follow-through followed-through today.
>The action in the market and in the leaders is constructive,
>and volume is slowly improving.
>
>The fly in the ointment is sentiment.
>Not quite where I would like to see it.
>
>Nevertheless,  I will be coming out of the 100% cash position
>that I have held over the last quarter.  Have had lots
>of  rest by now, so I will be devoting a lot of time and effort to
>tracking the early leaders as they start to emerge from their bases.
>Have to jump all over them when they peak their little heads
>over the pivot points.  May happen sooner than many think.
>
>(Almost took an early jump onto the SDLI bandwagon today.)
>
>Walter Stock
>Oakville, ON, Canada
>
>
>
>
>-

Tim Fisher
Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites

[e-mail]
WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
See naked fish and rocks!


-


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Time to tiptoe in?
Date: 01 Jun 2000 18:36:11 -0600

Well, I agree with several of the posts I just waded through.  Today looked
like a nice confirmation of the FT day, and I decided to watch closely for
some action.  I got into SDLI and MU today, both on new closing and
intraday highs.  Both were very close or above 50 day volume too (although
I haven't checked the final numbers to see exactly.)

I'm hopeful that today showed a little of the power we were lacking on
Tuesday.  Given that the average volume is declining rapidly, this could
look like a very busy day a few weeks from now.  If that's the case, then
Tuesday and today look even better!  I hope so.

(And now for my IBD impression...)  On the other hand, the overall volume
numbers aren't yet convincing and it will take more good action to convince
me further.  I plan to watch my stocks closely and be ready to pull the
trigger very quickly in case of weakness.

Overall, this puts me 33% invested, and I'm watching a few other stocks for
possible B/Os over the next few day.  A little more good action would be
nice for my frame of mind and the cushion would help, but only time will
tell.  Hang in there everyone!!



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Ricardo Bekin" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] YAWL (yet another watch list)
Date: 01 Jun 2000 19:55:17 -0500

some (most?) don't have all the CANSLIM requirements, but I think these are
all worth watching

AAS
ACF
BARZ (I think the $60 52wkHI is a fluke)
BBOX
CDWC
CHUX
EPII
EV
GILA.TO
NSIT
RCGI
RHB
RYL
SZA
TBL
THX
TSMA.TO
UGI


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Bill Triffet" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Time to tiptoe in?
Date: 01 Jun 2000 19:30:56 -0700

I'm finally starting to look at the market again. Gee, it seems like sooo
long ago I was holding some stocks!
RELL looks like a b/o today. Also, in IBD's Internet & Tech section they
listed SYMC, BSYS, GLW, and  PTEL all showing b/o's yesterday. BSYS looks to
have pulled back to a buyable range.

Will be interesting to see if the Naz can pop back through its 200dma. While
not necessarily a CANSLIM requirement for me at this point, it would point
to some support. As it stands the NAZ chart looks the same today as back on
April 7, May 1, and May 16.  The rally quickly failed after those days.

I'm still hangin with the IBD impression. Would like to see some real
leaders start to breakout. Also, still not seeing any real bearish sentiment
either. I'm definitely starting to look now though. : )

On a side note: you gotta love those full page ads in IBD showing how if you
had listened to the "analysts" instead of reading the markets, just where
one would be now (g).

-Bill
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 5:36 PM


> Well, I agree with several of the posts I just waded through.  Today
looked
> like a nice confirmation of the FT day, and I decided to watch closely for
> some action.  I got into SDLI and MU today, both on new closing and
> intraday highs.  Both were very close or above 50 day volume too (although
> I haven't checked the final numbers to see exactly.)
>
> I'm hopeful that today showed a little of the power we were lacking on
> Tuesday.  Given that the average volume is declining rapidly, this could
> look like a very busy day a few weeks from now.  If that's the case, then
> Tuesday and today look even better!  I hope so.
>
> (And now for my IBD impression...)  On the other hand, the overall volume
> numbers aren't yet convincing and it will take more good action to
convince
> me further.  I plan to watch my stocks closely and be ready to pull the
> trigger very quickly in case of weakness.
>
> Overall, this puts me 33% invested, and I'm watching a few other stocks
for
> possible B/Os over the next few day.  A little more good action would be
> nice for my frame of mind and the cushion would help, but only time will
> tell.  Hang in there everyone!!
>
>
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Bill Triffet" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] newbie
Date: 01 Jun 2000 19:44:30 -0700

Maybe try a simpler approach. First buy a mutual fund for long term growth.
No selling rules needed. Next for your CANSMIM trades, try using the 2%
rule. ie, Make sure that no one single trades max 7-8% loss is more than 2%
of your total trading portfolio. While not the fast track to riches, you'll
preserve your capital.

-Bill

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 6:09 AM


> OK, I'm new.....I tryed the Daily Graphs and it really helped me with the
> canslim method of finding the right stocks but I did not want to pay the
> money....now, I am trying the tc2000 and all it has done is confused
me...it
> seems to be too much...I did the sell with the canslim but I am like some
of
> you guys on this list and have stocks like csco and orcl that I will not
use
> the canslim to sell.....the most that I have made with the stocks is a
gain
> of 10%.......the only thing that I have now that is still in the postive
is
> xlnx..I bought at 66.oo I was wondering should I sell and that the profit
or
> hold on to it...I still have about 5,000 in cash to still play with? hope
to
> hear....jan or bubbet newbie
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Behdad Forghani <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] newbie
Date: 01 Jun 2000 21:46:38 -0600



Pritish Shah wrote:

>
> Sell when you reach +20% or -8% from your purchase price. Exception: if
> the +20% happens in less than 4 weeks, then hang on to the stock.

Hi,

If you are interested, the way I sell stocks is through stop loss. When
I feel that I am satisfied with the profits, I put a stop loss at 4%
below the closing price of the stock. This way, I risk %4 of the price
and slippage but I will not miss the potential continous further
increase in the stock price. The figure %4 is quite arbitrary and I have
not taken time to optimize it yet. BTW, in order to protect my profits
after my original %8 stop loss I always move up the stop loss to at
least 10% (at the most in terms of absolute value) of the closing price
of the stock. This way, I will never lose more than %10 of my portfolio.
Of course, the rule is never to decrease the price of stop loss and only
increase it.

Behdad

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] On Economics, FOMC, and the June meeting
Date: 02 Jun 2000 01:41:18 -0400

On 5/19/00, I took my stand by posting:

So I'll go out on a limb and report my expectations that the Feds
will take no further action at the June meeting.  Yeah, I know,
I'm being a #@%$#@ contrarian again, oh well.

But I do actually have my reasons:

further windy yada yada yada followed defending this position.

But now, just two weeks later, I find the consensus has already
shifted to a "worst case scenario" of no more than a 25 BP hike
at the late June meeting.  While a lot could change after
tomorrow's employment report is released, I will extend my
position to forecast that not only will the Feds not hike in the
June meeting, but if there is any change, it will be to shift the
bias towards a future rate cut.  I do not even rule out an actual
cut, tho give that less than a 5% probability, mostly since it
would suggest they didn't know what they were doing at the May
meeting.

Reasons:

More and more economic reports are showing that the rate of
growth (but with growth continuing) is slowing, including in home
construction and new starts and permits; retail; and durable
goods

The dollar remains strong against currencies that are the primary
source of imports (Euro, Yen). Oil prices have stabilized, and
further production increases are at least a possibility. Panic
over a widening trade deficit seems to ignore reality that our
exports will slow with a strong dollar, and imports increase.
Pretty tough to prevent a widening deficit, but that slows
manufacturing.

Comments like this one I found at Infobeat tonight:
"** Most Americans expect a recession, a dramatic drop in the
stock market and significantly higher interest rates in next four
years and few believe their income taxes will be cut, according
to a Reuters/Zogby public opinion poll released on Thursday. The
poll of 1,002 likely voters taken May 29-31 by pollster John
Zogby also found some cautious optimism. Only 40 percent of
respondents expected a substantial increase in unemployment in
the next four years and 56 percent were very or somewhat
confident that their personal wealth would increase. "  In other
words, everyone else will suffer, but they'll do ok.

Not only do I have my doubts on the statistical ability of 1,002
voters to correctly forecast the sentiments of over 250 million,
I was surprised they could find even 500 people that think the
Feds will allow us to slip into recession.

A much higher proportion of economic reports that not only fail
to meet the estimates, but fall below the prior month as well.
Today for example, New Jobless Claims; NAPM manufacturing
activity; and Construction Spending were all expected to be
better (lower, higher, higher) than the prior month. Actual
released results in all three cases not only went the other way,
but surpassed in a economically healthy direction (higher, lower,
lower)  the prior month's results. None of these reports by
themselves are that important, but for 3 of 3 to go this way is
significant.  And the latest half point hike hasn't even begun to
kick in. That will take a few more months. Tomorrow's Employment
Report still remains the gorilla report of the week, and
especially the included average hourly wage report. If it shows
weakening employment, esp if wage gains are slight, stand by for
a major up day on all indexes, possibly enough to break thru some
critical levels (DOW 10,950; Naz 3,720; NYSE Composite 660 (which
would also be close to a record); NYSE Finance today closed
higher than it has traded since 11/18/99, any more continues the
breakout; S&P500 1,470; even the lowly R2000 is only another day
like today away from 508). And remember some of my past comments
about the importance of the Financials group being present as a
secondary, or support, leadership group to support the techs as
the true leaders. It's been a while since we saw this
juxtaposition of finances and techs groups.

There is still an enormous amount of cash on the sidelines, hence
the weaker volume (remember the days just a few months back where
we thought a billion shares a day on Naz was HUGE??, and now 1.6
billion shares is puny). Already the long bond (back below 6%) is
reflecting an expectation of few, if any, further rate hikes.
Should this view seep into the stock market as well, I would
expect a flood of cash to drive volume to levels not yet seen,
and satisfy even the most skeptical of our members on a FT day.

Stay tuned for more economic noise, I'm back to 14-16 hour work
days, so time is limited, but will try to express myself
occasionally. If you're not already identifying and watching
potential leaders, you better get started. Time's awastin'

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "John Lloyd" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] IBD Industry Group
Date: 02 Jun 2000 08:02:14 -0400

You can get a weekly report on the IBD Industry Groups
Ranking at this website. It's a good place for CANSLIM
investors.
http://www.delphi.com/realcanslim/messages/?ctx=1&msg=814%2E1


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dave Cameron <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Acronyms and M
Date: 02 Jun 2000 05:53:05 -0700 (PDT)

Someone jokingly posted:

<< what's this IMHO stock that everyone keeps talking
about?>>

Well... with all the time I have on my hands, I decided to
waste some by looking up the commonly used internet
acronyms.   The only one that I could find that has a stock
symbol is BTW: Bitwise Systems

What is relevant though, is that there have been instances
where people have bought the wrong stock because they
mistakenly assumed a symbol for a particular stock and were
wrong.   I can't think of an example off the top of my
head, but I remember one giving a false buy signal on my
watch list a couple of years ago.

Finally, just so I have SOME CANSLIM content here - I still
don't see 'M' as ready for buying yet.   Sure, some stocks
have started to reverse the downward trend, but the volume
just doesn't seem to be there.   Of course, that's just my
read - if we all read it the same way, no one would buy...

Dave Cameron
[e-mail]


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints!
http://photos.yahoo.com

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Acronyms and M
Date: 02 Jun 2000 07:30:50 -0600



On 2 Jun 00, at 5:53, Dave Cameron wrote:


> Finally, just so I have SOME CANSLIM content here - I still
> don't see 'M' as ready for buying yet.   Sure, some stocks
> have started to reverse the downward trend, but the volume
> just doesn't seem to be there.   Of course, that's just my
> read - if we all read it the same way, no one would buy...

Do you still think this after today's Employment number?  Looks
like stocks are going to skyrocket today, I think I will try to find
something to buy.



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Salisbury)
Subject: [CANSLIM] Sending large files to the canslim group
Date: 02 Jun 2000 08:00:00 -0600

Everyone,

There are times when you may wish to share large files with our group (i.e. gif, jpeg, spreadsheets, etc).  Our list is configured to reject large postings (even if they are properly encoded) since the sheer volume has caused problems in the past.  As an alternative, we have provided an anonymous ftp site.  To provide your file to the group, please follow these instructions:

1. Send your file to:

    ftp://ftp.xmission.com/pub/users/m/mcjathan/incoming/

If you need some help doing this step, there are ftp instructions below.

2. Send mail to me directly at "[e-mail]" telling me the name of the file that you uploaded.  I will move the file from the incoming directory, to the canslim directory where people will be able to download your file.

3. After I notify you that the file has been moved to the canslim directory, you should send an email to the canslim group describing your file, and its URL (i.e. ftp://ftp.xmission.com/pub/users/m/mcjathan/GreatBoom.gif).

Although this may seem unwieldy at first, it really isn't too bad and it solves more problems than it creates.

You should note that I do not monitor my email on the weekends as closely as during the week.  Therefore, steps 2-3 may take longer over a weekend.

Best Regards,

Jeff Salisbury

===========================================================================

FTP Instructions:

1. Using Netscape, go to the URL:

     ftp://ftp.xmission.com/pub/users/m/mcjathan/incoming/

2. On the Netscape "File" menu, select "Upload File..."  This will open a file selection widget on your hard-drive.  Select the file you wish to upload and hit the "Ok" button.  At this point, your file will be uploaded.

3. Eventhough your file has been uploaded, you will not be able to see the file in your netscape browser.  The reason for this is that the "incoming" directory is set to write-only for security reasons.



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Sam Funchess <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Acronyms and M
Date: 02 Jun 2000 10:17:08 -0400

>

> Ok group,

I have a question for everyone.  A few months back my company had some
lay-off's and I was an unlucky one.  Had a severance package that was
decent and felt I could find another job in the mean time.  I almost did
not apply for unemployment for that reason and only chose to apply for
it in the final days before my severance ran out.  I was wondering if
and how accurate the unemployment report is and if anyone else has used
unemployment in the last year and if you were eligible to receive it but
did not because of the job market.  Just curious as to how accurate the
government report is and how much weight it really deserves.

sam

>
> Do you still think this after today's Employment number?  Looks
> like stocks are going to skyrocket today, I think I will try to find
> something to buy.
>
> -


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dave Cameron <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Acronyms and M
Date: 02 Jun 2000 08:27:37 -0700 (PDT)

Hey... I posted at 5:53 AM - before the report - cut me
some slack, will ya  ;-)

Today is an interesting day.   I'm used to buying off of
bases.   Most of the stocks making big moves are reversing
previous trends.   There aren't a lot of bases.   I think I
need a re-read of HTMMIS.


--- Patrick Wahl <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>
> On 2 Jun 00, at 5:53, Dave Cameron wrote:
>
>
> > Finally, just so I have SOME CANSLIM content here - I
> still
> > don't see 'M' as ready for buying yet.   Sure, some
> stocks
> > have started to reverse the downward trend, but the
> volume
> > just doesn't seem to be there.   Of course, that's just
> my
> > read - if we all read it the same way, no one would
> buy...
>
> Do you still think this after today's Employment number?
> Looks
> like stocks are going to skyrocket today, I think I will
> try to find
> something to buy.
>
>
>
> -
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints!
http://photos.yahoo.com

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: Bob Brinker archives
Date: 02 Jun 2000 12:44:10 -0700

Anna,  Bob Brinker Real Player [audio only] archives at:

http://www.broadcast.com/radio/archives/kxl/brinker/



-Jim


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: [CANSLIM] Volume!!!
Date: 02 Jun 2000 12:45:41 -0700

As of midday Friday, the VOLUME finally looks real...perhaps this is a valid
follow through now.

-Jim


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Acronyms and M
Date: 02 Jun 2000 21:08:16 -0400

Hi Sam,

I was unemployed two years ago for a brief time, and did not
apply immediately, thinking my unemployment compensation would
start from my layoff date. Until I went thru the paperwork, I
didn't realize it only started from a) when I was eligible, and
b) once I applied; whichever was later.

Like most any govt report, it has theoretical adjustments made to
it.  It's always worth noting whatever comments and qualifiers
are attached. For example, this latest report only showed some
jobs creation due to the govt hiring of over 347,000 for the
census. Without that, there would have been a net loss of jobs,
way lower than expectation. And those census jobs are only short
term, so there will be a later increase in unemployment. Actual
"business" jobs creation last month was a negative 116,000. so
that's the "real" number, and reflected in the overall
unemployment rate of 4.1%. Altho the weekly new claims reports
have been inching up, they are generally considered unreliable
due week to week variances and causes. The 4 week average is a
better barometer, and it also has been inching up. My biggest
surprise was that the economists were forecasting as high as they
were, even taking into account the govt census hiring.

How much importance should it be given? It is considered one of
the most important monthly reports, as it is timely; directly
impacts the issue of inflation; affects investor psychology; has
a direct bearing on whether increased productivity is keeping up
with labor costs (avg hourly wage component); affects job
security temperament (in a tight labor pool workers are more
likely to demand raises); and directly contributes to consumer
spending habits both from current income and from sentiment.

Good luck with the job search. Been there, done that, and it's
never fun.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 02, 2000 10:17 AM


>

> Ok group,

I have a question for everyone.  A few months back my company had
some
lay-off's and I was an unlucky one.  Had a severance package that
was
decent and felt I could find another job in the mean time.  I
almost did
not apply for unemployment for that reason and only chose to
apply for
it in the final days before my severance ran out.  I was
wondering if
and how accurate the unemployment report is and if anyone else
has used
unemployment in the last year and if you were eligible to receive
it but
did not because of the job market.  Just curious as to how
accurate the
government report is and how much weight it really deserves.

sam

>
> Do you still think this after today's Employment number?  Looks
> like stocks are going to skyrocket today, I think I will try to
find
> something to buy.
>
> -


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Acronyms and M
Date: 02 Jun 2000 23:24:10 -0400

Hi Dave,

You can add to this short list WON, (Westwood).

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 02, 2000 8:53 AM


Someone jokingly posted:

<< what's this IMHO stock that everyone keeps talking
about?>>

Well... with all the time I have on my hands, I decided to
waste some by looking up the commonly used internet
acronyms.   The only one that I could find that has a stock
symbol is BTW: Bitwise Systems

What is relevant though, is that there have been instances
where people have bought the wrong stock because they
mistakenly assumed a symbol for a particular stock and were
wrong.   I can't think of an example off the top of my
head, but I remember one giving a false buy signal on my
watch list a couple of years ago.

Finally, just so I have SOME CANSLIM content here - I still
don't see 'M' as ready for buying yet.   Sure, some stocks
have started to reverse the downward trend, but the volume
just doesn't seem to be there.   Of course, that's just my
read - if we all read it the same way, no one would buy...

Dave Cameron
[e-mail]


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints!
http://photos.yahoo.com

-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tim Fisher" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Volume!!!
Date: 02 Jun 2000 21:06:18 -0700

The volume IS real. Everybody back in the pool!

At 12:45 PM 6/2/00 -0700, you wrote:
>As of midday Friday, the VOLUME finally looks real...perhaps this is a valid
>follow through now.
>
>-Jim



Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists
Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site
PFB Information
mailto:[e-mail]
WWW http://OreRockOn.com


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Acronyms and M
Date: 02 Jun 2000 22:42:52 -0600



On 2 Jun 00, at 8:27, Dave Cameron wrote:

> Hey... I posted at 5:53 AM - before the report - cut me
> some slack, will ya  ;-)

I knew that, just wondered how it affected your thinking.

>
> Today is an interesting day.   I'm used to buying off of
> bases.   Most of the stocks making big moves are reversing
> previous trends.   There aren't a lot of bases.   I think I
> need a re-read of HTMMIS.

I haven't gone through my charts yet tonight, but most stocks I
follow are still in less than perfect buying positions, still have
incomplete bases.  I am tempted (well, I did nibble a bit today) to
get some stuff before it breaks out, given the strength of the
nasdaq overall.

on another topic....

I have a fairly obvious observation - The market is responding to
good news and bad news extremely rapidly.  Its seems that
everyone interprets news events in the same way, therefore money
flows are all pretty much in the same direction.  The Nasdaq was
up 17% THIS WEEK, which in the past has been considered a
pretty good year.  It fell about 37% in two months or so, from its
low of a few weeks ago it is now up 24%.  I guess this is a natural
offshoot of a few things I can think of - a generally more educated
investor, much cheaper transaction costs so you can get in and
out for a neglible commission,  rapid and widespread dissemination
of economic and other stock market information, and finally there
just seems to be a hell of a lot of money sloshing around out there
that can pour into stocks.

Regarding my first point, CNBC is in everyone's living room now,
and for all the babbling they do, they also pump out a lot of
information about fed meetings, interest rates, economic reports,
etc., and what all of that stuff means, you can at least get a feeling
for what the consensu thinking is.   I guess my  point in all this is
that probably we can expect these rapid moves to continue.

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] some stock
Date: 02 Jun 2000 23:58:46 -0600

Here are a few stocks that had breakouts on Friday, have only
looked at the charts so perform your own due diligence on these -

JACO
MERX
TECH
BBOX

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Acronyms and M
Date: 02 Jun 2000 17:26:29 -0600

Well, we have one more day of action (and I DO mean ACTION!!) on the
NASDAQ, and today's 1.9 Billion shares should erase the volume questions
for this rally.  Now, we can just start wondering about the "legs" of this
rally, because any FT day and associated rally can fail.

There was an interesting story in the paper's Motley Fool section last
week.  This guy heard about this really good tech company called "Sysco" a
few years back.  He was very impressed with it's prospects and decided to
invest $10K or so in this company.  He looked for the company, and found
the food company SYSCO, read about it, and decided that wasn't for him.
Cisco was the company he wanted, but the lack of spelling cost him millions
(assuming he had stayed in the whole time).

FWIW, I purchased KEI and XLNX today, and stand at 67% invested.  (I think
both are still within 5% of their previous closing highs.)  I'm looking for
other breakouts on Monday or so to get me the rest of the way invested if
the trend continues.

At 05:53 AM 6/2/00 -0700, you wrote:
>Someone jokingly posted:
>
><< what's this IMHO stock that everyone keeps talking
>about?>>
>
>Well... with all the time I have on my hands, I decided to
>waste some by looking up the commonly used internet
>acronyms.   The only one that I could find that has a stock
>symbol is BTW: Bitwise Systems
>
>What is relevant though, is that there have been instances
>where people have bought the wrong stock because they
>mistakenly assumed a symbol for a particular stock and were
>wrong.   I can't think of an example off the top of my
>head, but I remember one giving a false buy signal on my
>watch list a couple of years ago.
>
>Finally, just so I have SOME CANSLIM content here - I still
>don't see 'M' as ready for buying yet.   Sure, some stocks
>have started to reverse the downward trend, but the volume
>just doesn't seem to be there.   Of course, that's just my
>read - if we all read it the same way, no one would buy...
>
>Dave Cameron
>[e-mail]
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints!
>http://photos.yahoo.com
>
>-
>
>
>

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Salisbury)
Subject: [CANSLIM] Accessing the discussion canslim archives...
Date: 03 Jun 2000 08:00:01 -0600

From time to time, CANSLIM members may wish to browse the discussion archives.  This posting provides instructions on how to access the archives.  Thanks to David Cameron for compiling the essentials of this message.

Here are the two ways to access the archives:

1. The best way is to use your web browser.  To browse the archives, point your browser to:

       http://www.xmission.com/~mcjathan/cgi/lwgate.cgi/CANSLIM/

   You can do simple key-word searches on the archive by going to:

    http://www.xmission.com/~mcjathan/canslim/search.html

2. (Not as convenient) via email:
    Send an email to [e-mail]
    with the following as the body of your message:

        "index canslim".

    Then send a follow up email to request an old
    email from either the "archive" or "latest"
    directory.  Note that your request must be in
    the body of your email.

    For example:

        "get canslim latest/001"

    will retrieve file "001" from the "latest"
    directory.

        "get canslim  archive/v01.n066"

    will retrieve file "v01.n066" from the
    "archive" dir.

Best Regards,

Jeff Salisbury - CANSLIM list owner/admin


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] DGO List - Part 1
Date: 04 Jun 2000 08:17:51 -0400

Sorry for the delay, hopefully some of you missed getting the
list yesterday, but I ended up putting in a full day's work at
the office. Will try to get the full review out today.

No surprise, the overall list jumped nearly 25% to 152 from 121
last week. Prior to that it was 131 and 103.

For the newcomers, Bx is my shorthand for Base where x equals the
nr of weeks, IMO.

IFIN - B4
SHFL - B2
DYN - staircase
FII - B5
DSL - B5, already extended over 10%, but still trailing PE only
13
AZZ - B2
CVG - B5
RHI - B3
GBCB - B4
AC - B3
TGH - B2
MGG - B3

Finding decent charts that have not already broken out too far is
not easy!

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] DGO List - Part 2
Date: 04 Jun 2000 11:41:56 -0400

PDCO - B6
SYK - B6, RS declined last week
PFE - B4
TA - B5
UNH - B3
APA - 4 week consolidation, good nrs, worth watching
CYN - B3
CECO - B3

A proportionately higher nr of stocks on the list were from the
financials sector, no surprise given the looks of the NYSE
Financial Index. Likewise, oil service cos also dominated the
list, continuing their stellar performance of the past several
months as oil prices remained stabilized at high prices. Tech
stocks for the most part took such a hit that it will likely be a
week or two at least before they can again dominate this list.
There was also a high nr of stocks making the original list due
M&A activity, which I tried to catch and leave off my list.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kent Norman <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Oils defensive?
Date: 04 Jun 2000 19:01:16 -0500

Does the group think the oils will continue to grow during the general
up market. I am under the impression they were defensive when not much
else was available.

Thanks
Kent

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kent Norman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Acronyms and M
Date: 04 Jun 2000 19:14:47 -0500

Sam

In my opinion, any report (especially Government) is flawed. I just
assume the flaws are consistent from month to month and hopefully the
information is better than guessing. Once a few years ago someone
published a report from several months previous as the current months
data. It took a while to discover.

Kent

Sam Funchess wrote:
>
> >
>
> > Ok group,
>
> I have a question for everyone.  A few months back my company had some
> lay-off's and I was an unlucky one.  Had a severance package that was
> decent and felt I could find another job in the mean time.  I almost did
> not apply for unemployment for that reason and only chose to apply for
> it in the final days before my severance ran out.  I was wondering if
> and how accurate the unemployment report is and if anyone else has used
> unemployment in the last year and if you were eligible to receive it but
> did not because of the job market.  Just curious as to how accurate the
> government report is and how much weight it really deserves.
>
> sam
>
> >
> > Do you still think this after today's Employment number?  Looks
> > like stocks are going to skyrocket today, I think I will try to find
> > something to buy.
> >
> > -
>
> -

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Oils defensive?
Date: 04 Jun 2000 18:13:56 -0600

I am personally not looking at these groups for CANSLIM candidates.  I
guess I consider them too "old industry" for my own tastes.  However, I
know others in the group are.  I find it interesting that the Oil groups
were VERY weak on Friday.  In fact, there were 7 Oil&Gas groups in the
worst 10 industry groups for the day.  I'm looking for the groups that
looked the BEST on Friday and this week, so they are off of my scope.

At 07:01 PM 6/4/00 -0500, you wrote:
>Does the group think the oils will continue to grow during the general
>up market. I am under the impression they were defensive when not much
>else was available.
>
>Thanks
>Kent
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: rolatzi <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Oils defensive?
Date: 04 Jun 2000 17:57:53 -0700 (PDT)

Disclaimer: I am heavily into oil and natural gas.
Disclaimer2:  This is not CANSLIM especially
Energy has been showing an interesting counter rotation to
the tech sector.  Tech can be traded short term for bear
market bounces and then switched for energy.  The best
moves in the last few months have been in natural gas.
IMHO, natural gas will continue to outperform in this
sector.  There is a New (N) here, namely, electrical
utilities are increasingly begin forced to switch from coal
to natural gas, nuclear power is dead for the forseeable
future, people have larger homes (more electricity), demand
more air conditioning (more electricity).  This will
continue to increase demand for natural gas and the supply
is currently inadequate.  We are looking at a secular trend
here, as long as the world economy continues to perk along
and the developing countries to develop, world demand for
energy will continue to exceed supply for the next decade.
In just this last year alone, China has increased imports
of oil by four fold (albeit starting at a small base).  The
large reservoirs of oil have already been found and are
being depleted.  OPEC has the swing production and they are
currently without large excess.  All of this is New (N).
Energy exploration and production companies will show
superb profits and cash flow in this quarter.  Energy
service companies will take longer to show increased
profitability.  The uncertainty in the price of oil over
the last six months to a year has caused the big companies
to not ramp up new exploration very much.  The current
supplies of oil and natural gas are dangerously low.

That's all for now,
Rolatzi
--- Earl Setser <[e-mail]> wrote:
> I am personally not looking at these groups for CANSLIM
> candidates.  I
> guess I consider them too "old industry" for my own
> tastes.  However, I
> know others in the group are.  I find it interesting that
> the Oil groups
> were VERY weak on Friday.  In fact, there were 7 Oil&Gas
> groups in the
> worst 10 industry groups for the day.  I'm looking for
> the groups that
> looked the BEST on Friday and this week, so they are off
> of my scope.
>
> At 07:01 PM 6/4/00 -0500, you wrote:
> >Does the group think the oils will continue to grow
> during the general
> >up market. I am under the impression they were defensive
> when not much
> >else was available.
> >
> >Thanks
> >Kent
> >
> >-
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> -
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints!
http://photos.yahoo.com

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "John Lloyd" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] markets
Date: 05 Jun 2000 07:17:28 -0400

Even with the nasdaq daily chart showing a breakout,
the nasdaq weekly chart is still basing and has not
confirmed a breakout.




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jeff Salisbury <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] [Fwd: Gaps in Foreign Stocks]
Date: 05 Jun 2000 07:11:13 -0600



-------- Original Message --------
Reply-To: <[e-mail]>

I have noticed certain foreign stocks have many more day-to-day gaps
than
you normally see in domestic stocks. An example of this is TDK which is
forming a very nice cup with handle. Another example is TM. Has anybody
else
noticed this? What do you make of it?

- Hugh

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kent Norman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] [Fwd: Gaps in Foreign Stocks]
Date: 05 Jun 2000 08:55:35 -0500

The change in price happens while our market is closed, thus the gap the
next day

Jeff Salisbury wrote:
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Gaps in Foreign Stocks
> Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 19:35:25 -0400
> From: "Hugh Fader" <[e-mail]>
> Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
> To: "CANSLIM Mailing List \(E-mail\)" <[e-mail]>
>
> I have noticed certain foreign stocks have many more day-to-day gaps
> than
> you normally see in domestic stocks. An example of this is TDK which is
> forming a very nice cup with handle. Another example is TM. Has anybody
> else
> noticed this? What do you make of it?
>
> - Hugh
>
> -

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Walter Stock <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] markets
Date: 05 Jun 2000 11:41:17 -0400

For those who are interested, Dr. Alexander Elder's
Triple Screen system (using the weekly MACD-histo)
issued the first buy signal of 2000 on Friday on the Nasdaq.

For me, this confirms the recent rally and followthrough
signalled by WON's method.

Happy trading....

Walter Stock
Oakville, ON, Canada


John Lloyd wrote:

> Even with the nasdaq daily chart showing a breakout,
> the nasdaq weekly chart is still basing and has not
> confirmed a breakout.
>
>
>
> -


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Gumpel <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] markets
Date: 05 Jun 2000 18:50:42 +0200

and what was it?


At 11:41 AM 5/6/00 -0400, Walter Stock wrote:
>For those who are interested, Dr. Alexander Elder's
>Triple Screen system (using the weekly MACD-histo)
>issued the first buy signal of 2000 on Friday on the Nasdaq.
>
>For me, this confirms the recent rally and followthrough
>signalled by WON's method.
>
>Happy trading....
>
>Walter Stock
>Oakville, ON, Canada
>
>
>John Lloyd wrote:
>
> > Even with the nasdaq daily chart showing a breakout,
> > the nasdaq weekly chart is still basing and has not
> > confirmed a breakout.
> >
> >
> >
> > -
>
>
>-

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Tom Gumpel
Department of Special Education                         972-2-588-2165
School of Education                                   Fax:    [phone]
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem        in US:  877-258-9406
Jerusalem, ISRAEL 91905
http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msgumpel/main.htm
VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Gumpel <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] markets
Date: 05 Jun 2000 18:50:42 +0200

and what was it?


At 11:41 AM 5/6/00 -0400, Walter Stock wrote:
>For those who are interested, Dr. Alexander Elder's
>Triple Screen system (using the weekly MACD-histo)
>issued the first buy signal of 2000 on Friday on the Nasdaq.
>
>For me, this confirms the recent rally and followthrough
>signalled by WON's method.
>
>Happy trading....
>
>Walter Stock
>Oakville, ON, Canada
>
>
>John Lloyd wrote:
>
> > Even with the nasdaq daily chart showing a breakout,
> > the nasdaq weekly chart is still basing and has not
> > confirmed a breakout.
> >
> >
> >
> > -
>
>
>-

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Tom Gumpel
Department of Special Education                         972-2-588-2165
School of Education                                   Fax:    [phone]
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem        in US:  877-258-9406
Jerusalem, ISRAEL 91905
http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msgumpel/main.htm
VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tim Fisher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] markets
Date: 05 Jun 2000 08:10:23 -0700

Breakout from what to what? Breakouts by definition occur near a former
high and go on to new high ground, preferably on the breakout day. The
NASDAQ is right now possibly forming the right side of an extremely deep
(and therefore not CANSLIM) C&H. We are in a confirmed rally as defined by
HTMMIS. That is all that matters when tracking the market indices.

On 04:17 AM 6/5/00, John Lloyd Said:
>Even with the nasdaq daily chart showing a breakout,
>the nasdaq weekly chart is still basing and has not
>confirmed a breakout.

Tim Fisher
Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites

[e-mail]
WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
See naked fish and rocks!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Walter Stock <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] markets
Date: 05 Jun 2000 12:10:54 -0400

Hi Tom,

If you apply Elder's system to the Nasdaq Composite Index,
you get a buy signal.  I find it useful in terms of interpreting 'M'.
That's it.

Walter

Tom Gumpel wrote:

> and what was it?
>
> At 11:41 AM 5/6/00 -0400, Walter Stock wrote:
> >For those who are interested, Dr. Alexander Elder's
> >Triple Screen system (using the weekly MACD-histo)
> >issued the first buy signal of 2000 on Friday on the Nasdaq.
> >
> >For me, this confirms the recent rally and followthrough
> >signalled by WON's method.
> >
> >Happy trading....
> >
> >Walter Stock
> >Oakville, ON, Canada


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "david lawson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] [Fwd: Gaps in Foreign Stocks]
Date: 05 Jun 2000 13:49:31 -0400

Low Volume?

ari

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 9:11 AM


>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Gaps in Foreign Stocks
> Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 19:35:25 -0400
> From: "Hugh Fader" <[e-mail]>
> Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
> To: "CANSLIM Mailing List \(E-mail\)" <[e-mail]>
>
> I have noticed certain foreign stocks have many more day-to-day gaps
> than
> you normally see in domestic stocks. An example of this is TDK which is
> forming a very nice cup with handle. Another example is TM. Has anybody
> else
> noticed this? What do you make of it?
>
> - Hugh
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Anna Sosis <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] insider and institutional selling + COGN
Date: 05 Jun 2000 13:58:00 -0700 (PDT)

Hi everyone.

Do you have an opinion with respect to insider and
institutional selling in the reset breakout stocks.
For example: TECH (insider), XLNX (both insider and
institutional) just to name a couple. It is my
understanding that the first ones to break out go on
to become learders.  However, what about the selling
and what about relatively low EPS ranks (e.g. ANDW,
COGN which broke out on 300% volume)  It seems to me
that at the begining of new bull it is ok to go with
the flow (i.e. break outs) even though they may not be
as fundamentaly sound.  Do you agree
PS:  I have problems with my keyboard and the question
mark character does not work.  Sorry.

Anna

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints!
http://photos.yahoo.com

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tim Fisher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] insider and institutional selling + COGN
Date: 05 Jun 2000 14:06:36 -0700

I think insider selling is a positive esp. when it takes place at an all
time high. When it takes place on the way down then it is a red flag that
the management does not believe in the co's ability to regain that share
value.  I have a list of high EPS rank stocks, those you mention are not on
it. It is probably not OK to go with the flow according to WON. Stick with
high RS/GRS/EPS stocks (I use 80/80/80 A/B/C). Institutional selling is
only bad if they have a large % of the float, then it drives prices down
real quick.

On 01:58 PM 6/5/00, Anna Sosis Said:
>Hi everyone.
>
>Do you have an opinion with respect to insider and
>institutional selling in the reset breakout stocks.
>For example: TECH (insider), XLNX (both insider and
>institutional) just to name a couple. It is my
>understanding that the first ones to break out go on
>to become learders.  However, what about the selling
>and what about relatively low EPS ranks (e.g. ANDW,
>COGN which broke out on 300% volume)  It seems to me
>that at the begining of new bull it is ok to go with
>the flow (i.e. break outs) even though they may not be
>as fundamentaly sound.  Do you agree
>PS:  I have problems with my keyboard and the question
>mark character does not work.  Sorry.
>
>Anna

Tim Fisher
Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites

[e-mail]
WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
See naked fish and rocks!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] insider and institutional selling + COGN
Date: 05 Jun 2000 14:05:07 -0700 (PDT)


Hi Tim,

What is GRS?

BTW if you want to see the bad of institutional selling, look at
ADIC. Excellent growth/earnings -- great everything. Accumulation used to
be A and probably around 80% of the float was owned by institutions. This
was one of the stellar growth stocks of 1999 but then it hiccuped and lost
around 80% of its value. Today it is off 70% from its high.

BTW the PE is 9 (if you believe that on a growth stock)

I do not know what the issue is and I had sold before I took a loss on it
(got a 10% gain only compared to around 200+% at one point)

I am now trying to figure out the sell rules on positive stocks :(


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Mon, 5 Jun 2000, Tim Fisher wrote:

> I think insider selling is a positive esp. when it takes place at an all
> time high. When it takes place on the way down then it is a red flag that
> the management does not believe in the co's ability to regain that share
> value.  I have a list of high EPS rank stocks, those you mention are not on
> it. It is probably not OK to go with the flow according to WON. Stick with
> high RS/GRS/EPS stocks (I use 80/80/80 A/B/C). Institutional selling is
> only bad if they have a large % of the float, then it drives prices down
> real quick.
>
> On 01:58 PM 6/5/00, Anna Sosis Said:
> >Hi everyone.
> >
> >Do you have an opinion with respect to insider and
> >institutional selling in the reset breakout stocks.
> >For example: TECH (insider), XLNX (both insider and
> >institutional) just to name a couple. It is my
> >understanding that the first ones to break out go on
> >to become learders.  However, what about the selling
> >and what about relatively low EPS ranks (e.g. ANDW,
> >COGN which broke out on 300% volume)  It seems to me
> >that at the begining of new bull it is ok to go with
> >the flow (i.e. break outs) even though they may not be
> >as fundamentaly sound.  Do you agree
> >PS:  I have problems with my keyboard and the question
> >mark character does not work.  Sorry.
> >
> >Anna
>
> Tim Fisher
> Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites
>
> [e-mail]
> WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
> See naked fish and rocks!
>
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Dave" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] [Fwd: Gaps in Foreign Stocks]
Date: 05 Jun 2000 19:28:34 -0700



This occurs because of arbitrageur's. A long time ago someone realized they
could make money locking the spread on a certain stock if it traded at
differing price levels on the NYSE and in Europe(or any other market). So,
the NYSE open will tend to match the current trading price in Europe.
Simultaneously, buying on one exchange and selling on the other is a
riskless trade that can be multiplied by many 1000's of shares for a nice
profit!

DSquires



----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 6:11 AM


>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Gaps in Foreign Stocks
> Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 19:35:25 -0400
> From: "Hugh Fader" <[e-mail]>
> Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
> To: "CANSLIM Mailing List \(E-mail\)" <[e-mail]>
>
> I have noticed certain foreign stocks have many more day-to-day gaps
> than
> you normally see in domestic stocks. An example of this is TDK which is
> forming a very nice cup with handle. Another example is TM. Has anybody
> else
> noticed this? What do you make of it?
>
> - Hugh
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] [Fwd: Gaps in Foreign Stocks]
Date: 05 Jun 2000 20:15:53 -0400

Hi Dave,

Since most ADRs are trading NYSE, you can't really "lock in the
spread" as there is no spread until it opens for trading. And, as
you point out, when it does it essentially matches the equivalent
value on the European exchange.  I think the main cause, as one
member already pointed out, is that the ADR opens on the NYSE
some 4-6 hours after the same stock opened for trading in Europe.
If it made a move up or down there, then it naturally follows
that it will open with a gap up (or down) on NYSE.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 10:28 PM




This occurs because of arbitrageur's. A long time ago someone
realized they
could make money locking the spread on a certain stock if it
traded at
differing price levels on the NYSE and in Europe(or any other
market). So,
the NYSE open will tend to match the current trading price in
Europe.
Simultaneously, buying on one exchange and selling on the other
is a
riskless trade that can be multiplied by many 1000's of shares
for a nice
profit!

DSquires



----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 6:11 AM


>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Gaps in Foreign Stocks
> Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 19:35:25 -0400
> From: "Hugh Fader" <[e-mail]>
> Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
> To: "CANSLIM Mailing List \(E-mail\)"
<[e-mail]>
>
> I have noticed certain foreign stocks have many more day-to-day
gaps
> than
> you normally see in domestic stocks. An example of this is TDK
which is
> forming a very nice cup with handle. Another example is TM. Has
anybody
> else
> noticed this? What do you make of it?
>
> - Hugh
>
> -
>


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Marder/Kuhn comments
Date: 05 Jun 2000 18:38:28 -0600

I just got a reminder that I registered for the free trial at Trading
Markets, but had not used it.  I went there and checked out today's
articles by Marder and Kuhn.  Both are positive on M from today's
perspective.  Kuhn talked about the strength of Thursday's FT day (or FT on
a FT).  He mentioned a few stocks I'm following and noted that at least one
version of the Put/Call ratio has reached levels indicative of a bottom.

Marder discussed today's action as "just what the Market ordered" as far as
a breather after last week's furious action.  Weaker prices with lowering
volume was a good sign for this rally in his mind.

They both discussed that we should be getting into stocks as the STOCKS
tell us to, and that we should watch the market closely to see what it
tells us.  In both cases, they aren't willing to forcast this rally will
hold, but they are happy with the action to date.

I felt these were very good CANSLIM lessons and right on my take on M also.
 I am invested 67%, and watching my candidate list for a couple of more
positions if the action warrants the purchases.  At this point, XLNX is
slightly below my purchase price, but I am well up on my other 3 purchases
(including KEI that screamed up almost 18% today!!).  Good luck all!!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Dave" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] [Fwd: Gaps in Foreign Stocks]
Date: 05 Jun 2000 21:41:38 -0700

Tom,

While I certainly agreed with your comments, it is the arbitrageurs that
have made overseas "price matching" the norm not the simple fact of where
the stock is trading in Europe when the NYSE opens. The stock trades there
because the arbs will lock in the spread if it opens lower/higher than the
current price in Europe or anywhere else.

Dave

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 5:15 PM


> Hi Dave,
>
> Since most ADRs are trading NYSE, you can't really "lock in the
> spread" as there is no spread until it opens for trading. And, as
> you point out, when it does it essentially matches the equivalent
> value on the European exchange.  I think the main cause, as one
> member already pointed out, is that the ADR opens on the NYSE
> some 4-6 hours after the same stock opened for trading in Europe.
> If it made a move up or down there, then it naturally follows
> that it will open with a gap up (or down) on NYSE.
>
> Tom Worley
> [e-mail]
> chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Dave <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 10:28 PM
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] [Fwd: Gaps in Foreign Stocks]
>
>
>
>
> This occurs because of arbitrageur's. A long time ago someone
> realized they
> could make money locking the spread on a certain stock if it
> traded at
> differing price levels on the NYSE and in Europe(or any other
> market). So,
> the NYSE open will tend to match the current trading price in
> Europe.
> Simultaneously, buying on one exchange and selling on the other
> is a
> riskless trade that can be multiplied by many 1000's of shares
> for a nice
> profit!
>
> DSquires
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Salisbury" <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 6:11 AM
> Subject: [CANSLIM] [Fwd: Gaps in Foreign Stocks]
>
>
> >
> >
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: Gaps in Foreign Stocks
> > Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 19:35:25 -0400
> > From: "Hugh Fader" <[e-mail]>
> > Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
> > To: "CANSLIM Mailing List \(E-mail\)"
> <[e-mail]>
> >
> > I have noticed certain foreign stocks have many more day-to-day
> gaps
> > than
> > you normally see in domestic stocks. An example of this is TDK
> which is
> > forming a very nice cup with handle. Another example is TM. Has
> anybody
> > else
> > noticed this? What do you make of it?
> >
> > - Hugh
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
> -
>
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] insider and institutional selling + COGN
Date: 05 Jun 2000 21:46:22 -0400

Hi Anna,

As I have posted many times before, I disregard insider selling,
as I have seen little evidence that insiders understand mkt
dynamics. I view insider buying as an almost universal positive,
the exception being where I have evidence it's forced and coerced
(e.g. Amerifirst some years ago).  The exception would be insider
selling on a sustained downtrend, since insiders should sell when
the shares are in demand.

Institutional selling has become more of a short term trading
phenomena, so has less impact to the long term investor. I tend
to avoid stocks with significant (more that 5% or so)
institutional holdings, so the only institutional action that
tends to affect my stocks is buying.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 4:58 PM


Hi everyone.

Do you have an opinion with respect to insider and
institutional selling in the reset breakout stocks.
For example: TECH (insider), XLNX (both insider and
institutional) just to name a couple. It is my
understanding that the first ones to break out go on
to become learders.  However, what about the selling
and what about relatively low EPS ranks (e.g. ANDW,
COGN which broke out on 300% volume)  It seems to me
that at the begining of new bull it is ok to go with
the flow (i.e. break outs) even though they may not be
as fundamentaly sound.  Do you agree
PS:  I have problems with my keyboard and the question
mark character does not work.  Sorry.

Anna

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints!
http://photos.yahoo.com

-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] [Fwd: Gaps in Foreign Stocks]
Date: 05 Jun 2000 22:13:07 -0400

but the question that was asked was regarding the gaps on open
here.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 12:41 AM


Tom,

While I certainly agreed with your comments, it is the
arbitrageurs that
have made overseas "price matching" the norm not the simple fact
of where
the stock is trading in Europe when the NYSE opens. The stock
trades there
because the arbs will lock in the spread if it opens lower/higher
than the
current price in Europe or anywhere else.

Dave

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 5:15 PM


> Hi Dave,
>
> Since most ADRs are trading NYSE, you can't really "lock in the
> spread" as there is no spread until it opens for trading. And,
as
> you point out, when it does it essentially matches the
equivalent
> value on the European exchange.  I think the main cause, as one
> member already pointed out, is that the ADR opens on the NYSE
> some 4-6 hours after the same stock opened for trading in
Europe.
> If it made a move up or down there, then it naturally follows
> that it will open with a gap up (or down) on NYSE.
>
> Tom Worley
> [e-mail]
> chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Dave <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 10:28 PM
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] [Fwd: Gaps in Foreign Stocks]
>
>
>
>
> This occurs because of arbitrageur's. A long time ago someone
> realized they
> could make money locking the spread on a certain stock if it
> traded at
> differing price levels on the NYSE and in Europe(or any other
> market). So,
> the NYSE open will tend to match the current trading price in
> Europe.
> Simultaneously, buying on one exchange and selling on the other
> is a
> riskless trade that can be multiplied by many 1000's of shares
> for a nice
> profit!
>
> DSquires
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Salisbury" <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 6:11 AM
> Subject: [CANSLIM] [Fwd: Gaps in Foreign Stocks]
>
>
> >
> >
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: Gaps in Foreign Stocks
> > Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 19:35:25 -0400
> > From: "Hugh Fader" <[e-mail]>
> > Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
> > To: "CANSLIM Mailing List \(E-mail\)"
> <[e-mail]>
> >
> > I have noticed certain foreign stocks have many more
day-to-day
> gaps
> > than
> > you normally see in domestic stocks. An example of this is
TDK
> which is
> > forming a very nice cup with handle. Another example is TM.
Has
> anybody
> > else
> > noticed this? What do you make of it?
> >
> > - Hugh
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
> -
>
>
>
> -
>


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] insider and institutional selling + COGN
Date: 05 Jun 2000 23:22:59 -0400



Tom, thank you for the advice.  I am wondering how you determine the % of
institutional ownership. I've looked at your watch list that you so
gratiously provide, and have found that the institutional numbers are quite
high ( some > 80%)  I use yahoo to determine that.  This makes me wonder if
I am not interpreting the numbers correctly.

Anna


"Tom Worley" <[e-mail]> on 06/05/2000 09:46:22 PM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




Hi Anna,

As I have posted many times before, I disregard insider selling,
as I have seen little evidence that insiders understand mkt
dynamics. I view insider buying as an almost universal positive,
the exception being where I have evidence it's forced and coerced
(e.g. Amerifirst some years ago).  The exception would be insider
selling on a sustained downtrend, since insiders should sell when
the shares are in demand.

Institutional selling has become more of a short term trading
phenomena, so has less impact to the long term investor. I tend
to avoid stocks with significant (more that 5% or so)
institutional holdings, so the only institutional action that
tends to affect my stocks is buying.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 4:58 PM


Hi everyone.

Do you have an opinion with respect to insider and
institutional selling in the reset breakout stocks.
For example: TECH (insider), XLNX (both insider and
institutional) just to name a couple. It is my
understanding that the first ones to break out go on
to become learders.  However, what about the selling
and what about relatively low EPS ranks (e.g. ANDW,
COGN which broke out on 300% volume)  It seems to me
that at the begining of new bull it is ok to go with
the flow (i.e. break outs) even though they may not be
as fundamentaly sound.  Do you agree
PS:  I have problems with my keyboard and the question
mark character does not work.  Sorry.

Anna

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints!
http://photos.yahoo.com

-



-





-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] insider and institutional selling + COGN
Date: 06 Jun 2000 06:04:20 -0400

Different sites count institutional nrs differently.  I use DGO,
which shows mutual fund and banks holdings as a percentage of the
float.

I do not look at institutional holdings at all in building my
"DGO List". The full list I start with from DGO consists of those
stocks in the DG books that were within 5% of their 12 month high
during the prior week; and also as of Friday had both RS and EPS
of at least 80.  I then scroll thru the list and identify those
with constructive chart patterns.  As I review the chart, I also
glance at the earnings and sales for the prior 8 qtrs, and may
skip one due to something I don't like there.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 11:22 PM




Tom, thank you for the advice.  I am wondering how you determine
the % of
institutional ownership. I've looked at your watch list that you
so
gratiously provide, and have found that the institutional numbers
are quite
high ( some > 80%)  I use yahoo to determine that.  This makes me
wonder if
I am not interpreting the numbers correctly.

Anna


"Tom Worley" <[e-mail]> on 06/05/2000 09:46:22 PM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




Hi Anna,

As I have posted many times before, I disregard insider selling,
as I have seen little evidence that insiders understand mkt
dynamics. I view insider buying as an almost universal positive,
the exception being where I have evidence it's forced and coerced
(e.g. Amerifirst some years ago).  The exception would be insider
selling on a sustained downtrend, since insiders should sell when
the shares are in demand.

Institutional selling has become more of a short term trading
phenomena, so has less impact to the long term investor. I tend
to avoid stocks with significant (more that 5% or so)
institutional holdings, so the only institutional action that
tends to affect my stocks is buying.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 4:58 PM


Hi everyone.

Do you have an opinion with respect to insider and
institutional selling in the reset breakout stocks.
For example: TECH (insider), XLNX (both insider and
institutional) just to name a couple. It is my
understanding that the first ones to break out go on
to become learders.  However, what about the selling
and what about relatively low EPS ranks (e.g. ANDW,
COGN which broke out on 300% volume)  It seems to me
that at the begining of new bull it is ok to go with
the flow (i.e. break outs) even though they may not be
as fundamentaly sound.  Do you agree
PS:  I have problems with my keyboard and the question
mark character does not work.  Sorry.

Anna

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints!
http://photos.yahoo.com

-



-





-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] insider and institutional selling + COGN
Date: 06 Jun 2000 07:01:48 EDT

hey, Tom what is the DGO?

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] insider and institutional selling + COGN
Date: 06 Jun 2000 07:42:35 -0400

Daily Graphs Online, a WON (Wm O'Neil) product

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 7:01 AM


hey, Tom what is the DGO?

-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] insider and institutional selling + COGN
Date: 06 Jun 2000 08:17:23 EDT

Tom, I had the DGO.....and liked it but decided to try the tc2000....I think
that I miss the DGO, I wish that it didn't cost so much...the dgo helped me
understand and now how to read the canslim stuff...what do you think about
the tc2000?  I am invested in atml, orcl, csco, xlnx, qqq........I still have
about 40% still in cash..I have only been trading for about two months and
really have not made any money or lost any

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "John Lloyd" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Institutional Buying & Selling
Date: 06 Jun 2000 10:22:13 -0400

If you want to see if your stock is being bought or
sold by institutions go to I-Watch, it's free.
http://www.thomsoninvest.net/iwatch/


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] insider and institutional selling + COGN
Date: 06 Jun 2000 11:43:47 -0400



Tom, sorry to go on about this, I am just curious how it happens that most
of the stocks you end up have low institutional holding.  I use the paper
and almost anything with good numbers have high institutional %.  e.g,
ANEN, LFUS,  ELNT.....  I agree with you that low institutional #'s is
better.  I guess the question is: did you see the stocks above in your
scans?  (I guess I am wondering if I got it all wrong and maybe am not
seeing the things correctly)

Thank you

Anna Sosis




"Tom Worley" <[e-mail]> on 06/06/2000 06:04:20 AM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




Different sites count institutional nrs differently.  I use DGO,
which shows mutual fund and banks holdings as a percentage of the
float.

I do not look at institutional holdings at all in building my
"DGO List". The full list I start with from DGO consists of those
stocks in the DG books that were within 5% of their 12 month high
during the prior week; and also as of Friday had both RS and EPS
of at least 80.  I then scroll thru the list and identify those
with constructive chart patterns.  As I review the chart, I also
glance at the earnings and sales for the prior 8 qtrs, and may
skip one due to something I don't like there.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 11:22 PM




Tom, thank you for the advice.  I am wondering how you determine
the % of
institutional ownership. I've looked at your watch list that you
so
gratiously provide, and have found that the institutional numbers
are quite
high ( some > 80%)  I use yahoo to determine that.  This makes me
wonder if
I am not interpreting the numbers correctly.

Anna


"Tom Worley" <[e-mail]> on 06/05/2000 09:46:22 PM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




Hi Anna,

As I have posted many times before, I disregard insider selling,
as I have seen little evidence that insiders understand mkt
dynamics. I view insider buying as an almost universal positive,
the exception being where I have evidence it's forced and coerced
(e.g. Amerifirst some years ago).  The exception would be insider
selling on a sustained downtrend, since insiders should sell when
the shares are in demand.

Institutional selling has become more of a short term trading
phenomena, so has less impact to the long term investor. I tend
to avoid stocks with significant (more that 5% or so)
institutional holdings, so the only institutional action that
tends to affect my stocks is buying.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 4:58 PM


Hi everyone.

Do you have an opinion with respect to insider and
institutional selling in the reset breakout stocks.
For example: TECH (insider), XLNX (both insider and
institutional) just to name a couple. It is my
understanding that the first ones to break out go on
to become learders.  However, what about the selling
and what about relatively low EPS ranks (e.g. ANDW,
COGN which broke out on 300% volume)  It seems to me
that at the begining of new bull it is ok to go with
the flow (i.e. break outs) even though they may not be
as fundamentaly sound.  Do you agree
PS:  I have problems with my keyboard and the question
mark character does not work.  Sorry.

Anna

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints!
http://photos.yahoo.com

-



-





-



-





-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: [CANSLIM] ALTR
Date: 06 Jun 2000 13:48:58 -0400



what do you think about ALTR chart?  It is currently breaking out and the
fundamentals are pretty good.

Anna Sosis



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tim Fisher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ALTR
Date: 06 Jun 2000 11:18:22 -0700

Predictably, the HGS 80/80/80 ABC list has exploded this week. ALTR is
among these. The following are also within 15% of their high (as of Friday
close). The oils have come into this list in a big way.

ADI ALTR ASML CHP CPN DFXI DIAN DS DY ELNT EMC ERICY FII HSM IMPH JBL KP
LFUS LTRE MSS NEWP ORBK PENG PLT PLXS PWAV RHB SANM SHFL SDLI TECH TLGD TNL WAT

My chart read on ALTR: A very deep C&H with a way too droopy handle and a
breakout on merely ADV today makes me suspicious. There are plenty of
other, better, charts out there. Some recent (late last week) breakouts
were from rock solid bases, i.e. DIAN, LFUS, FII

On 10:48 AM 6/6/00, [e-mail] Said:


>what do you think about ALTR chart?  It is currently breaking out and the
>fundamentals are pretty good.
>
>Anna Sosis
>
>
>
>-

Tim Fisher
Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites

[e-mail]
WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
See naked fish and rocks!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Hugh Fader" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Stocks ready to break out
Date: 06 Jun 2000 18:58:30 -0400

Here are some stocks I observe are ready to break out. All meet the basic
CANSLIM requirements:

ADI is forming a handle on a 10-week cup. Up near its 52 week high on
Friday. Down on lower volume yesterday and today.

DY is close to breaking out of a double-bottom.

FORR has formed a 12-week cup with handle.

SYK 12-week cup with handle.

TDK 23-week cup with handle.

Regards,
Hugh




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ALTR
Date: 06 Jun 2000 17:17:05 -0700

Float is too high, no handle technically, and fund ownership would be better
if it was lower. Otherwise fundamentally sound


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 10:48 AM


>
>
> what do you think about ALTR chart?  It is currently breaking out and the
> fundamentals are pretty good.
>
> Anna Sosis
>
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks ready to break out
Date: 06 Jun 2000 17:29:35 -0700

ADI:    Whoa! Float is at 340 million!, ROE is only 15%
DY:    Still forming the right side of the cup
FORR:    Group RS at 63 and cup looks too "V" shaped, handle too deep
SYK:    Debt at 176%!, Float too high 130 million.
TDK:    ROE 9%, no institutional ownership.



----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 3:58 PM


> Here are some stocks I observe are ready to break out. All meet the basic
> CANSLIM requirements:
>
> ADI is forming a handle on a 10-week cup. Up near its 52 week high on
> Friday. Down on lower volume yesterday and today.
>
> DY is close to breaking out of a double-bottom.
>
> FORR has formed a 12-week cup with handle.
>
> SYK 12-week cup with handle.
>
> TDK 23-week cup with handle.
>
> Regards,
> Hugh
>
>
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks ready to break out
Date: 06 Jun 2000 20:39:53 -0400



Joseph, what do you think about ELNT, ANEN, NVDA, NEWP?





"Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]> on 06/06/2000 08:29:35 PM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




ADI:    Whoa! Float is at 340 million!, ROE is only 15%
DY:    Still forming the right side of the cup
FORR:    Group RS at 63 and cup looks too "V" shaped, handle too deep
SYK:    Debt at 176%!, Float too high 130 million.
TDK:    ROE 9%, no institutional ownership.



----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 3:58 PM


> Here are some stocks I observe are ready to break out. All meet the basic
> CANSLIM requirements:
>
> ADI is forming a handle on a 10-week cup. Up near its 52 week high on
> Friday. Down on lower volume yesterday and today.
>
> DY is close to breaking out of a double-bottom.
>
> FORR has formed a 12-week cup with handle.
>
> SYK 12-week cup with handle.
>
> TDK 23-week cup with handle.
>
> Regards,
> Hugh
>
>
>
>
> -
>


-





-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Dave" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks ready to break out
Date: 06 Jun 2000 21:16:46 -0700

Hugh,

Of these, I like ADI the best.(also look at XLNX...similar pattern)  It did
the right side of the cup in basically 4 days...that is great action. Also,
you have many accumulation spikes within the base... a great sign
institutions were buying this stock in the base. I am watching and waiting
to buy. Let's hope it can build a constructive handle before they lunch it
out of the base!

DSquires


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 3:58 PM


> Here are some stocks I observe are ready to break out. All meet the basic
> CANSLIM requirements:
>
> ADI is forming a handle on a 10-week cup. Up near its 52 week high on
> Friday. Down on lower volume yesterday and today.
>
> DY is close to breaking out of a double-bottom.
>
> FORR has formed a 12-week cup with handle.
>
> SYK 12-week cup with handle.
>
> TDK 23-week cup with handle.
>
> Regards,
> Hugh
>
>
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] DGO vs TC2000
Date: 06 Jun 2000 22:37:33 -0400

DGO is the only service I pay for. I have never tried the TC2000,
but recall some members of this group use it and I believe liked
it compared to the cost ($530 / year) of DGO.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 8:17 AM


Tom, I had the DGO.....and liked it but decided to try the
tc2000....I think
that I miss the DGO, I wish that it didn't cost so much...the dgo
helped me
understand and now how to read the canslim stuff...what do you
think about
the tc2000?  I am invested in atml, orcl, csco, xlnx,
qqq........I still have
about 40% still in cash..I have only been trading for about two
months and
really have not made any money or lost any

-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] insider and institutional selling + COGN
Date: 06 Jun 2000 23:19:50 -0400

Hi Anna,

I have never tried to correlate institutional holdings and those
stocks that make either DGO;s overall list, or my hand-picked
list of constructive charts. Interesting that there could be a
correlation. However, if you have only been looking at my lists
for less than two months, it may simply be a reflection of how
the markets traded during April and May, where many institutional
and funds stayed out of the market after dumping much of their
holdings. So the stocks that got hit the worst may have had the
largest institutional holdings. Since data reports trail actual
transactions by 1-3 months, it would take some time to have
accurate reports of their present holdings.

On the stocks you mention, DGO reports the following:

symbol        funds %    banks %        mngmt %
ANEN        35                11                7
LFUS        30                    6                6
ELNT        10                    2                    8

LFUS is currently on the list as of today, don't know if it was
on for Friday. ELNT on Friday was approx 8.8% below its 12 month
high, so would not have been on that list.  ANEN on Friday was 6%
below its recent high, so it too would have failed one of the
criteria.

However, even if they had been closer to their respective 12
month highs, I don't think I would have mentioned them in my
lists as none showed constructive bases, they all look like they
were moving up after a sharp reversal.

Hope this helps.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 11:43 AM




Tom, sorry to go on about this, I am just curious how it happens
that most
of the stocks you end up have low institutional holding.  I use
the paper
and almost anything with good numbers have high institutional %.
e.g,
ANEN, LFUS,  ELNT.....  I agree with you that low institutional
#'s is
better.  I guess the question is: did you see the stocks above in
your
scans?  (I guess I am wondering if I got it all wrong and maybe
am not
seeing the things correctly)

Thank you

Anna Sosis




"Tom Worley" <[e-mail]> on 06/06/2000 06:04:20 AM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




Different sites count institutional nrs differently.  I use DGO,
which shows mutual fund and banks holdings as a percentage of the
float.

I do not look at institutional holdings at all in building my
"DGO List". The full list I start with from DGO consists of those
stocks in the DG books that were within 5% of their 12 month high
during the prior week; and also as of Friday had both RS and EPS
of at least 80.  I then scroll thru the list and identify those
with constructive chart patterns.  As I review the chart, I also
glance at the earnings and sales for the prior 8 qtrs, and may
skip one due to something I don't like there.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 11:22 PM




Tom, thank you for the advice.  I am wondering how you determine
the % of
institutional ownership. I've looked at your watch list that you
so
gratiously provide, and have found that the institutional numbers
are quite
high ( some > 80%)  I use yahoo to determine that.  This makes me
wonder if
I am not interpreting the numbers correctly.

Anna


"Tom Worley" <[e-mail]> on 06/05/2000 09:46:22 PM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




Hi Anna,

As I have posted many times before, I disregard insider selling,
as I have seen little evidence that insiders understand mkt
dynamics. I view insider buying as an almost universal positive,
the exception being where I have evidence it's forced and coerced
(e.g. Amerifirst some years ago).  The exception would be insider
selling on a sustained downtrend, since insiders should sell when
the shares are in demand.

Institutional selling has become more of a short term trading
phenomena, so has less impact to the long term investor. I tend
to avoid stocks with significant (more that 5% or so)
institutional holdings, so the only institutional action that
tends to affect my stocks is buying.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 4:58 PM


Hi everyone.

Do you have an opinion with respect to insider and
institutional selling in the reset breakout stocks.
For example: TECH (insider), XLNX (both insider and
institutional) just to name a couple. It is my
understanding that the first ones to break out go on
to become learders.  However, what about the selling
and what about relatively low EPS ranks (e.g. ANDW,
COGN which broke out on 300% volume)  It seems to me
that at the begining of new bull it is ok to go with
the flow (i.e. break outs) even though they may not be
as fundamentaly sound.  Do you agree
PS:  I have problems with my keyboard and the question
mark character does not work.  Sorry.

Anna

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints!
http://photos.yahoo.com

-



-





-



-





-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ALTR
Date: 06 Jun 2000 23:30:47 -0400

I lose you on ALTR, Tim.  I don't see any sign of a c&h at all,
maybe a funnel for the latest cycle, or a double bottom if you
look back further, tho the second bottom on 5/24 didn't undercut
by much (70.56 vs 71.25 on 4/14), but did it on a sharp reversal
day to close near the high of the day (low of 70.56, high of
80.50 and closed at 80 3/8).

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 2:18 PM


Predictably, the HGS 80/80/80 ABC list has exploded this week.
ALTR is
among these. The following are also within 15% of their high (as
of Friday
close). The oils have come into this list in a big way.

ADI ALTR ASML CHP CPN DFXI DIAN DS DY ELNT EMC ERICY FII HSM IMPH
JBL KP
LFUS LTRE MSS NEWP ORBK PENG PLT PLXS PWAV RHB SANM SHFL SDLI
TECH TLGD TNL WAT

My chart read on ALTR: A very deep C&H with a way too droopy
handle and a
breakout on merely ADV today makes me suspicious. There are
plenty of
other, better, charts out there. Some recent (late last week)
breakouts
were from rock solid bases, i.e. DIAN, LFUS, FII

On 10:48 AM 6/6/00, [e-mail] Said:


>what do you think about ALTR chart?  It is currently breaking
out and the
>fundamentals are pretty good.
>
>Anna Sosis
>
>
>
>-

Tim Fisher
Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites

[e-mail]
WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
See naked fish and rocks!


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fw: [CANSLIM] ALTR
Date: 06 Jun 2000 23:35:13 -0400

note that ALTR was up nearly 7 pts today at least partially
because of an upgrade by ABN Amro.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 11:30 PM


I lose you on ALTR, Tim.  I don't see any sign of a c&h at all,
maybe a funnel for the latest cycle, or a double bottom if you
look back further, tho the second bottom on 5/24 didn't undercut
by much (70.56 vs 71.25 on 4/14), but did it on a sharp reversal
day to close near the high of the day (low of 70.56, high of
80.50 and closed at 80 3/8).

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 2:18 PM


Predictably, the HGS 80/80/80 ABC list has exploded this week.
ALTR is
among these. The following are also within 15% of their high (as
of Friday
close). The oils have come into this list in a big way.

ADI ALTR ASML CHP CPN DFXI DIAN DS DY ELNT EMC ERICY FII HSM IMPH
JBL KP
LFUS LTRE MSS NEWP ORBK PENG PLT PLXS PWAV RHB SANM SHFL SDLI
TECH TLGD TNL WAT

My chart read on ALTR: A very deep C&H with a way too droopy
handle and a
breakout on merely ADV today makes me suspicious. There are
plenty of
other, better, charts out there. Some recent (late last week)
breakouts
were from rock solid bases, i.e. DIAN, LFUS, FII

On 10:48 AM 6/6/00, [e-mail] Said:


>what do you think about ALTR chart?  It is currently breaking
out and the
>fundamentals are pretty good.
>
>Anna Sosis
>
>
>
>-

Tim Fisher
Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites

[e-mail]
WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
See naked fish and rocks!


-




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tim Fisher" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ALTR
Date: 06 Jun 2000 20:40:25 -0700

I lose me too. I assumed the person who asked about it saw a C&H pattern. I
see a no good chart, bottom line.

At 11:30 PM 6/6/00 -0400, you wrote:
>I lose you on ALTR, Tim.  I don't see any sign of a c&h at all,
>maybe a funnel for the latest cycle, or a double bottom if you
>look back further, tho the second bottom on 5/24 didn't undercut
>by much (70.56 vs 71.25 on 4/14), but did it on a sharp reversal
>day to close near the high of the day (low of 70.56, high of
>80.50 and closed at 80 3/8).
>
>Tom Worley
>[e-mail]
>chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
>get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Tim Fisher <[e-mail]>
>To: <[e-mail]>
>Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 2:18 PM
>Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ALTR
>
>
>Predictably, the HGS 80/80/80 ABC list has exploded this week.
>ALTR is
>among these. The following are also within 15% of their high (as
>of Friday
>close). The oils have come into this list in a big way.
>
>ADI ALTR ASML CHP CPN DFXI DIAN DS DY ELNT EMC ERICY FII HSM IMPH
>JBL KP
>LFUS LTRE MSS NEWP ORBK PENG PLT PLXS PWAV RHB SANM SHFL SDLI
>TECH TLGD TNL WAT
>
>My chart read on ALTR: A very deep C&H with a way too droopy
>handle and a
>breakout on merely ADV today makes me suspicious. There are
>plenty of
>other, better, charts out there. Some recent (late last week)
>breakouts
>were from rock solid bases, i.e. DIAN, LFUS, FII
>
>On 10:48 AM 6/6/00, [e-mail] Said:
>
>
> >what do you think about ALTR chart?  It is currently breaking
>out and the
> >fundamentals are pretty good.
> >
> >Anna Sosis
> >

Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists
Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site
PFB Information
mailto:[e-mail]
WWW http://OreRockOn.com


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] On oil producing nations and DOJ
Date: 06 Jun 2000 23:47:42 -0400

So, how much longer before Janet Reno and her band of henchmen
grow weary of chewing at MSFT, and take on the price fixing and
monopolistic practices of OPEC and other oil producers?

From Infobeat's report on oils tonight:
OPEC president Ali Rodriguez of Venezuela added to downward
pressure, saying the cartel would not delay an output increase if
the price of the OPEC oil basket rose over the 20-day, $22-28
price band set up by the group in March.

Maybe we should start a pool on the date when Janet decides to go
global!

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks ready to break out
Date: 07 Jun 2000 01:04:27 -0700

ELNT: Fundamentally perfect although I would like to see higher than 14%
ROE, technically; the stock broke out today from a 10 week base on over 244%
normal volume, the pattern seems to be too wide and loose, and the handle
fell over 31%, it will likely succumb to market fluctuations. However if
Friday's follow through confirmation holds it could be one of the first out
of the gate, in which case we would like to see confirming action in other
stocks of the same industry group. ELNT came up today on my personal nightly
filter.

ANEN: Also an excellent pick, ROE 12%. Float is awesome. Again technically
the "breakouts" on Friday and Monday were not on spectacular volume, the
base has no shape. It may form a bearish 'head n' shoulders' pattern

NVDA: UNBELIEVABLE! Fundamental superman.Consistently increasing sales for
the past 8 quarters, ROE at a super 40%! Great float and good (but not too
high) sponsorship. I would not consider 5/17 a breakout, but it has so far
cleared most of its overhead supply and is forming what may be the beginning
of a handle to a very clear 'U' shaped cup. I own one of their products, we
should keep an eye on this one for the next couple weeks and see the
formation of the handle, day one of which may have been today, also notice
volume tapering off.

NEWP: If you consider 5/30, 5/31 a breakout, than I would say the handle
(5/18 - 5/26) is to deep into the cup, it has cleared it's overhead supply
though which is the problem with premature handles. The "bad" news is that
they had to go ahead and do a 3 for 1 split right in to a nice pattern
(which may have been the cause for the runnup to begin with). The best
stocks are the ones that climb without news.

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 5:39 PM


>
>
> Joseph, what do you think about ELNT, ANEN, NVDA, NEWP?
>
>
>
>
>
> "Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]> on 06/06/2000 08:29:35 PM
>
> Please respond to [e-mail]
>
> To:   [e-mail]
> cc:
> Subject:  Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks ready to break out
>
>
>
>
> ADI:    Whoa! Float is at 340 million!, ROE is only 15%
> DY:    Still forming the right side of the cup
> FORR:    Group RS at 63 and cup looks too "V" shaped, handle too deep
> SYK:    Debt at 176%!, Float too high 130 million.
> TDK:    ROE 9%, no institutional ownership.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Hugh Fader" <[e-mail]>
> To: "CANSLIM Mailing List (E-mail)" <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 3:58 PM
> Subject: [CANSLIM] Stocks ready to break out
>
>
> > Here are some stocks I observe are ready to break out. All meet the
basic
> > CANSLIM requirements:
> >
> > ADI is forming a handle on a 10-week cup. Up near its 52 week high on
> > Friday. Down on lower volume yesterday and today.
> >
> > DY is close to breaking out of a double-bottom.
> >
> > FORR has formed a 12-week cup with handle.
> >
> > SYK 12-week cup with handle.
> >
> > TDK 23-week cup with handle.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Hugh
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
> -
>
>
>
>
>
> -
>




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Walter Stock <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] On oil producing nations and DOJ - Tom
Date: 07 Jun 2000 11:42:18 -0400

Count yourselves lucky in the US, Tom.  Up here in the True North,
I am now paying 75 cents a litre.  Remember that a litre is a little
less
than a quart.

Even adjusting for our poor excuse for a currency (a Canadian dollar
is worth about 67 cents), our gas prices are still a lot steeper than
yours.

I agree Tom.  Time to unleash Janet.

Walter Stock
Oakville, ON, Canada

Tom Worley wrote:

> So, how much longer before Janet Reno and her band of henchmen
> grow weary of chewing at MSFT, and take on the price fixing and
> monopolistic practices of OPEC and other oil producers?
>
> >From Infobeat's report on oils tonight:
> OPEC president Ali Rodriguez of Venezuela added to downward
> pressure, saying the cartel would not delay an output increase if
> the price of the OPEC oil basket rose over the 20-day, $22-28
> price band set up by the group in March.
>
> Maybe we should start a pool on the date when Janet decides to go
> global!
>
> Tom Worley
> [e-mail]
> chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>
> -


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] On oil producing nations and DOJ
Date: 07 Jun 2000 16:46:21 -0700 (PDT)


> So, how much longer before Janet Reno and her band of henchmen
> grow weary of chewing at MSFT, and take on the price fixing and
> monopolistic practices of OPEC and other oil producers?

Since this is an international matter, I think we need to do an economic
blockade against these countries. The US should not buy their products ;)


Regards,
Shah


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] On oil producing nations and DOJ
Date: 08 Jun 2000 00:34:55 -0400

It's all in the power, and the oil producers have the power. Was
a nice juxtaposition to read a report tonight on five chemicals
cos that produce an additive for animal feed. They were fined
over $100 million for price fixing, guess their crime really was
in doing it in secret.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2000 7:46 PM



> So, how much longer before Janet Reno and her band of henchmen
> grow weary of chewing at MSFT, and take on the price fixing and
> monopolistic practices of OPEC and other oil producers?

Since this is an international matter, I think we need to do an
economic
blockade against these countries. The US should not buy their
products ;)


Regards,
Shah


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks ready to break out
Date: 08 Jun 2000 09:15:22 -0700

I remember saying DSPG [&CTSH, NITE, VTSS and others] was [were] ready to break
out after its [their] perfect cup w/ handle just before the M took its nosedive.
It actually DID breakout wonderfully, but this was just as the M topped [or went
into a correction].  I mistakenly assumed the stock would necessarily breakout
just because it met CANSLIM while not paying attention to the GENERAL market
condition.  I've done this at least FOUR times with otherwise "perfect" CANSLIM
candidates ready to breakout.  A lesson I've hopefully learned [never to ignore
overall M direction regardless of the strength of the individual issue].

Jim the-slow-learner

>>Here are some stocks I observe are ready to break out. All meet the basic
>>CANSLIM requirements:

>>ADI is forming a handle on a 10-week cup. Up near its 52 week high on
>>Friday. Down on lower volume yesterday and today.

>>DY is close to breaking out of a double-bottom.

>>FORR has formed a 12-week cup with handle.

>>SYK 12-week cup with handle.

>>TDK 23-week cup with handle.

>>Regards,
>>Hugh


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: [CANSLIM] REAL clean, renewable oil alternative
Date: 08 Jun 2000 09:28:50 -0700

There's a $2000 invention that is supposedly proven to convert any current
gasoline engine into a nuclear engine that runs on water.  It uses the hydrogen in
the H2O and releases O2 [oxygen] into the atmosphere.  Apparently, someone (from
an OPEC country) offered $1,000,000,000 for the patent and the inventor (a retired
millionaire inventor from here in central Ohio) refused to sell.  Yet for some
reason, he also refuses to produce it.  I can't remember his reason (either
waiting for some reason or because of religious beliefs).

Jim off-the-topic


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks ready to break out
Date: 08 Jun 2000 08:37:48 -0700

Take a look at WAT, lets see what the PPI brings on Friday.

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 9:15 AM


> I remember saying DSPG [&CTSH, NITE, VTSS and others] was [were] ready to
break
> out after its [their] perfect cup w/ handle just before the M took its
nosedive.
> It actually DID breakout wonderfully, but this was just as the M topped
[or went
> into a correction].  I mistakenly assumed the stock would necessarily
breakout
> just because it met CANSLIM while not paying attention to the GENERAL
market
> condition.  I've done this at least FOUR times with otherwise "perfect"
CANSLIM
> candidates ready to breakout.  A lesson I've hopefully learned [never to
ignore
> overall M direction regardless of the strength of the individual issue].
>
> Jim the-slow-learner
>
> >>Here are some stocks I observe are ready to break out. All meet the
basic
> >>CANSLIM requirements:
>
> >>ADI is forming a handle on a 10-week cup. Up near its 52 week high on
> >>Friday. Down on lower volume yesterday and today.
>
> >>DY is close to breaking out of a double-bottom.
>
> >>FORR has formed a 12-week cup with handle.
>
> >>SYK 12-week cup with handle.
>
> >>TDK 23-week cup with handle.
>
> >>Regards,
> >>Hugh
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tim Fisher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ELNT B/O
Date: 08 Jun 2000 08:44:41 -0700

ELNT is continuing Tuedsay's B/O today. Extended when you posted and
definitely way extended this AM.

On 01:04 AM 6/7/00, Joseph Weisfish Said:
>ELNT: Fundamentally perfect although I would like to see higher than 14%
>ROE, technically; the stock broke out today from a 10 week base on over 244%
>normal volume, the pattern seems to be too wide and loose, and the handle
>fell over 31%, it will likely succumb to market fluctuations. However if
>Friday's follow through confirmation holds it could be one of the first out
>of the gate, in which case we would like to see confirming action in other
>stocks of the same industry group. ELNT came up today on my personal nightly
>filter.

Tim Fisher
Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites

[e-mail]
WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
See naked fish and rocks!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ELNT B/O
Date: 08 Jun 2000 08:36:43 -0700 (PDT)


Has anyone done any informal research on how high does a breakout stock go
these days before it pulls back down.

I have seen 20% to 30% is the number before it starts basing again and
then 20% to 30% on the second breakout.


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Thu, 8 Jun 2000, Tim Fisher wrote:

> ELNT is continuing Tuedsay's B/O today. Extended when you posted and
> definitely way extended this AM.
>
> On 01:04 AM 6/7/00, Joseph Weisfish Said:
> >ELNT: Fundamentally perfect although I would like to see higher than 14%
> >ROE, technically; the stock broke out today from a 10 week base on over 244%
> >normal volume, the pattern seems to be too wide and loose, and the handle
> >fell over 31%, it will likely succumb to market fluctuations. However if
> >Friday's follow through confirmation holds it could be one of the first out
> >of the gate, in which case we would like to see confirming action in other
> >stocks of the same industry group. ELNT came up today on my personal nightly
> >filter.
>
> Tim Fisher
> Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites
>
> [e-mail]
> WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
> See naked fish and rocks!
>
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks ready to break out
Date: 08 Jun 2000 11:51:59 -0400



Does anyone have an opinion on how to handle "high handles", eg, SANM,
LFUS?   Are they too extended or is it ok to buy when (if :) the high of
the handle is taken out on preferably significant increase in volume?

Anna Sosis


"Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]> on 06/08/2000 11:37:48 AM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




Take a look at WAT, lets see what the PPI brings on Friday.

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 9:15 AM


> I remember saying DSPG [&CTSH, NITE, VTSS and others] was [were] ready to
break
> out after its [their] perfect cup w/ handle just before the M took its
nosedive.
> It actually DID breakout wonderfully, but this was just as the M topped
[or went
> into a correction].  I mistakenly assumed the stock would necessarily
breakout
> just because it met CANSLIM while not paying attention to the GENERAL
market
> condition.  I've done this at least FOUR times with otherwise "perfect"
CANSLIM
> candidates ready to breakout.  A lesson I've hopefully learned [never to
ignore
> overall M direction regardless of the strength of the individual issue].
>
> Jim the-slow-learner
>
> >>Here are some stocks I observe are ready to break out. All meet the
basic
> >>CANSLIM requirements:
>
> >>ADI is forming a handle on a 10-week cup. Up near its 52 week high on
> >>Friday. Down on lower volume yesterday and today.
>
> >>DY is close to breaking out of a double-bottom.
>
> >>FORR has formed a 12-week cup with handle.
>
> >>SYK 12-week cup with handle.
>
> >>TDK 23-week cup with handle.
>
> >>Regards,
> >>Hugh
>
>
> -
>


-





-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks ready to break out
Date: 08 Jun 2000 12:04:41 -0400



Does anyone have numbers (EP, RS, A/D, etc.) for Actel ACTL? I cannot find
it in the paper.

Thank you

Anna Sosis



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Walter Stock <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks ready to break out
Date: 08 Jun 2000 12:21:12 -0400

Hi Anna,

Front page article in today's IBD Investor Corner talks about
stocks that do not pause to create a handle before breaking
to new highs.  Says that although error-prone, these
no-handle stocks "can work at the start of a new rally".

The article also discusses high-handles very briefly, and cites
Altera as an example:  "Altera has pulled back from its high,
and may end up forming a handle at or just above its old high."
Article does not say that this kind of handle will or will not
work the same as more conventional handles.

Hope this helps,

Walter Stock
Oakville, ON, Canada




[e-mail] wrote:

> Does anyone have an opinion on how to handle "high handles", eg, SANM,
> LFUS?   Are they too extended or is it ok to buy when (if :) the high of
> the handle is taken out on preferably significant increase in volume?
>
> Anna Sosis
>
> "Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]> on 06/08/2000 11:37:48 AM
>
> Please respond to [e-mail]
>
> To:   [e-mail]
> cc:
> Subject:  Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks ready to break out
>
> Take a look at WAT, lets see what the PPI brings on Friday.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 9:15 AM
> Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks ready to break out
>
> > I remember saying DSPG [&CTSH, NITE, VTSS and others] was [were] ready to
> break
> > out after its [their] perfect cup w/ handle just before the M took its
> nosedive.
> > It actually DID breakout wonderfully, but this was just as the M topped
> [or went
> > into a correction].  I mistakenly assumed the stock would necessarily
> breakout
> > just because it met CANSLIM while not paying attention to the GENERAL
> market
> > condition.  I've done this at least FOUR times with otherwise "perfect"
> CANSLIM
> > candidates ready to breakout.  A lesson I've hopefully learned [never to
> ignore
> > overall M direction regardless of the strength of the individual issue].
> >
> > Jim the-slow-learner
> >
> > >>Here are some stocks I observe are ready to break out. All meet the
> basic
> > >>CANSLIM requirements:
> >
> > >>ADI is forming a handle on a 10-week cup. Up near its 52 week high on
> > >>Friday. Down on lower volume yesterday and today.
> >
> > >>DY is close to breaking out of a double-bottom.
> >
> > >>FORR has formed a 12-week cup with handle.
> >
> > >>SYK 12-week cup with handle.
> >
> > >>TDK 23-week cup with handle.
> >
> > >>Regards,
> > >>Hugh
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
> -
>
> -


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Walter Stock <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ELNT B/O
Date: 08 Jun 2000 12:34:11 -0400

Have been tracking ELNT for some time.   It is part of the
semiconductor industry group and shows high relative strength
within that industry group, as well as compared to the SP500
and the Nasdaq.

Interestingly, it is involved in manufacturing high performance
integrated circuits for the DSL market, as well as a host of other
electronic products for a variety of markets including video, and
optical storage.

I am hoping for it to be a leader in the new bull market.
Full disclosure:  I bought three positions on Tuesday's
breakout day.

Walter Stock
Oakville, ON, Canada


Tim Fisher wrote:

> ELNT is continuing Tuedsay's B/O today. Extended when you posted and
> definitely way extended this AM.
>
> On 01:04 AM 6/7/00, Joseph Weisfish Said:
> >ELNT: Fundamentally perfect although I would like to see higher than 14%
> >ROE, technically; the stock broke out today from a 10 week base on over 244%
> >normal volume, the pattern seems to be too wide and loose, and the handle
> >fell over 31%, it will likely succumb to market fluctuations. However if
> >Friday's follow through confirmation holds it could be one of the first out
> >of the gate, in which case we would like to see confirming action in other
> >stocks of the same industry group. ELNT came up today on my personal nightly
> >filter.
>
> Tim Fisher
> Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites
>
> [e-mail]
> WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
> See naked fish and rocks!
>
> -


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks ready to break out
Date: 08 Jun 2000 12:33:36 -0400



Thank you, Walter.  I have read about "cups without handles" before and
IBD's opinion is very similar to the one I have heard.
Does anyone have first hand experience with this senario?  What would you
do?  I am itching to buy SANM :)

Anna Sosis



Walter Stock <[e-mail]> on 06/08/2000 12:21:12 PM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




Hi Anna,

Front page article in today's IBD Investor Corner talks about
stocks that do not pause to create a handle before breaking
to new highs.  Says that although error-prone, these
no-handle stocks "can work at the start of a new rally".

The article also discusses high-handles very briefly, and cites
Altera as an example:  "Altera has pulled back from its high,
and may end up forming a handle at or just above its old high."
Article does not say that this kind of handle will or will not
work the same as more conventional handles.

Hope this helps,

Walter Stock
Oakville, ON, Canada




[e-mail] wrote:

> Does anyone have an opinion on how to handle "high handles", eg, SANM,
> LFUS?   Are they too extended or is it ok to buy when (if :) the high of
> the handle is taken out on preferably significant increase in volume?
>
> Anna Sosis
>
> "Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]> on 06/08/2000 11:37:48 AM
>
> Please respond to [e-mail]
>
> To:   [e-mail]
> cc:
> Subject:  Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks ready to break out
>
> Take a look at WAT, lets see what the PPI brings on Friday.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 9:15 AM
> Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks ready to break out
>
> > I remember saying DSPG [&CTSH, NITE, VTSS and others] was [were] ready
to
> break
> > out after its [their] perfect cup w/ handle just before the M took its
> nosedive.
> > It actually DID breakout wonderfully, but this was just as the M topped
> [or went
> > into a correction].  I mistakenly assumed the stock would necessarily
> breakout
> > just because it met CANSLIM while not paying attention to the GENERAL
> market
> > condition.  I've done this at least FOUR times with otherwise "perfect"
> CANSLIM
> > candidates ready to breakout.  A lesson I've hopefully learned [never
to
> ignore
> > overall M direction regardless of the strength of the individual
issue].
> >
> > Jim the-slow-learner
> >
> > >>Here are some stocks I observe are ready to break out. All meet the
> basic
> > >>CANSLIM requirements:
> >
> > >>ADI is forming a handle on a 10-week cup. Up near its 52 week high on
> > >>Friday. Down on lower volume yesterday and today.
> >
> > >>DY is close to breaking out of a double-bottom.
> >
> > >>FORR has formed a 12-week cup with handle.
> >
> > >>SYK 12-week cup with handle.
> >
> > >>TDK 23-week cup with handle.
> >
> > >>Regards,
> > >>Hugh
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
> -
>
> -


-





-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Walter Stock <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks ready to break out
Date: 08 Jun 2000 13:25:21 -0400

Hi Anna,

SANM ?  You and me both !       :-)

Risky, but perhaps do-able.

I am looking to buy it if it makes a strong breakout out of the "high handle"
on high volume in good 'M'.  If  I see it wedging, I won't buy it.
If it sags down out of the handle too much, I won't buy it.
I would also use tight stops.

Interesting nugget:  on April 12 this year, Sanmina had 56 funds in the stock
with a rating of A-, A, or A+  according to IBD.  As of June 5, that number
had increased to 72.

Yes, I know that higher institutional ownership can be a two edged sword,
but the sharp increase in institutions trying to pile in has me interested.

Am watching and waiting.

Walter Stock
Oakville, ON, Canada



[e-mail] wrote:

> Thank you, Walter.  I have read about "cups without handles" before and
> IBD's opinion is very similar to the one I have heard.
> Does anyone have first hand experience with this senario?  What would you
> do?  I am itching to buy SANM :)
>
> Anna Sosis


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks ready to break out
Date: 08 Jun 2000 13:49:02 -0400




>Interesting nugget:  on April 12 this year, Sanmina had 56 funds in the
stock
>with a rating of A-, A, or A+  according to IBD.  As of June 5, that
number
>had increased to 72.

>Yes, I know that higher institutional ownership can be a two edged sword,
>but the sharp increase in institutions trying to pile in has me
interested.

Walter, would you be able to tell me where in IBD this information is
located?

(I usually get Friday's paper)

Thank you so much,

Anna



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Eric Shen <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Holding time for Institutions
Date: 08 Jun 2000 11:01:28 -0700


Hi,

Is there a minimum holding time for institutional investors?
The reason I'm asking is that IBD publishes the top mutual
funds and their purchases in the last quarter.  If they
are not obligated to hold them for any set period, then it
is possible that they may have dumped their shares by the time
they publish their purchases.

Also, does anybody know the average time an institutional
investor holds a stock? Some of these funds have 200% turnover
which implies that a stock could be traded every 6 months.

Thanks,
Eric

--
Eric Shen        MS LOC3-8   / / /    Level One Communications
email: [e-mail]      | | |_/  an Intel company
Tel: [phone]          | |___/  9750 Goethe Road
               ext: 4497     |_____/  Sacramento, CA 95827

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jack Wood" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks ready to break out
Date: 07 Jun 2000 23:40:38 -0700

Anna:

You might consider buying and reading William O'Neil's book, "24 Essential
Lessons for Investment Success."

He answers your questions there. The entire book is also on the web at
http://ibd.infostreet.com/won/.

Jack Wood

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of [e-mail]
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 9:34 AM




Thank you, Walter.  I have read about "cups without handles" before and
IBD's opinion is very similar to the one I have heard.
Does anyone have first hand experience with this senario?  What would you
do?  I am itching to buy SANM :)

Anna Sosis



Walter Stock <[e-mail]> on 06/08/2000 12:21:12 PM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




Hi Anna,

Front page article in today's IBD Investor Corner talks about
stocks that do not pause to create a handle before breaking
to new highs.  Says that although error-prone, these
no-handle stocks "can work at the start of a new rally".

The article also discusses high-handles very briefly, and cites
Altera as an example:  "Altera has pulled back from its high,
and may end up forming a handle at or just above its old high."
Article does not say that this kind of handle will or will not
work the same as more conventional handles.

Hope this helps,

Walter Stock
Oakville, ON, Canada




[e-mail] wrote:

> Does anyone have an opinion on how to handle "high handles", eg, SANM,
> LFUS?   Are they too extended or is it ok to buy when (if :) the high of
> the handle is taken out on preferably significant increase in volume?
>
> Anna Sosis
>
> "Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]> on 06/08/2000 11:37:48 AM
>
> Please respond to [e-mail]
>
> To:   [e-mail]
> cc:
> Subject:  Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks ready to break out
>
> Take a look at WAT, lets see what the PPI brings on Friday.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 9:15 AM
> Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks ready to break out
>
> > I remember saying DSPG [&CTSH, NITE, VTSS and others] was [were] ready
to
> break
> > out after its [their] perfect cup w/ handle just before the M took its
> nosedive.
> > It actually DID breakout wonderfully, but this was just as the M topped
> [or went
> > into a correction].  I mistakenly assumed the stock would necessarily
> breakout
> > just because it met CANSLIM while not paying attention to the GENERAL
> market
> > condition.  I've done this at least FOUR times with otherwise "perfect"
> CANSLIM
> > candidates ready to breakout.  A lesson I've hopefully learned [never
to
> ignore
> > overall M direction regardless of the strength of the individual
issue].
> >
> > Jim the-slow-learner
> >
> > >>Here are some stocks I observe are ready to break out. All meet the
> basic
> > >>CANSLIM requirements:
> >
> > >>ADI is forming a handle on a 10-week cup. Up near its 52 week high on
> > >>Friday. Down on lower volume yesterday and today.
> >
> > >>DY is close to breaking out of a double-bottom.
> >
> > >>FORR has formed a 12-week cup with handle.
> >
> > >>SYK 12-week cup with handle.
> >
> > >>TDK 23-week cup with handle.
> >
> > >>Regards,
> > >>Hugh
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
> -
>
> -


-





-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "walter nusbaum" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Holding time for Institutions
Date: 08 Jun 2000 13:42:52 -0500


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 1:01 PM


>
> Hi,

(Snip)

>Also, does anybody know the average time an institutional
> investor holds a stock? Some of these funds have 200% turnover
> which implies that a stock could be traded every 6 months.
>
> Thanks,
> Eric

Eric,
200% turnover, I believe, refers to the fund's assets, and not the number of
stocks traded.
A fund could have a long term core holding of 50% of its stocks and easily
achieve a 200% turnover of assets by trading the remainder. Both sales and
subsequent buys are included in the 200%.
Best wishes,
Walt




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jack Wood" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] On oil producing nations and DOJ
Date: 08 Jun 2000 00:05:58 -0700

Well, additionally the congress and each state legislature should abolish
the federal and state taxes they impose on gasoline. If I understand it
correctly the feds imposes 18 cents a gallon, and California (my state)
imposes another 18 cents per gallon.

The feds certainly waste enough tax money each year with their pork barrel
spending to cover the upkeep of the federal highway system, particularly
with the budget surplus they have. If the republicans were really serious
about a "tax cut" they can start with the gasoline tax.

I don't like the government, frankly. I'm just sick of their money-grubbing
ways. I was sure sorry that McCain didn't get the Republican vote.

Jack Wood

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Pritish Shah
Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2000 4:46 PM



> So, how much longer before Janet Reno and her band of henchmen
> grow weary of chewing at MSFT, and take on the price fixing and
> monopolistic practices of OPEC and other oil producers?

Since this is an international matter, I think we need to do an economic
blockade against these countries. The US should not buy their products ;)


Regards,
Shah


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Walter Stock <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks ready to break out
Date: 08 Jun 2000 15:35:22 -0400

Hi Anna,

The information is in IBD's daily "Follow the Leader" industry group
analysis, usually on or near page 8.

I cut this section out every day, use a highlighter for the stocks that
meet my buy criteria, and then keep it ready on my desk.
I also keep the old ones for comparison purposes.

In addition to following the number of quality institutions going
in and out of a stock (and yes I know that this information is
not necessarily up to date), it is also very interesting to see exactly
which groups IBD chooses to analyze.

For example, IBD has analyzed the semiconductor manufacturers
no fewer than five times since the end of March.  On the other hand,
a group like Internet-Network Security/Solutions
(one of last year's best groups) has been analyzed a paltry once.

Food for thought.

Walter Stock
Oakville, ON, Canada


[e-mail] wrote:

> >Interesting nugget:  on April 12 this year, Sanmina had 56 funds in the
> stock
> >with a rating of A-, A, or A+  according to IBD.  As of June 5, that
> number
> >had increased to 72.
>
> >Yes, I know that higher institutional ownership can be a two edged sword,
> >but the sharp increase in institutions trying to pile in has me
> interested.
>
> Walter, would you be able to tell me where in IBD this information is
> located?
>
> (I usually get Friday's paper)
>
> Thank you so much,
>
> Anna
>
> -


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "lynn williams" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ELNT B/O
Date: 08 Jun 2000 14:31:01 -0400

I am not sure if I reply to an email if it posts to everyone.. therefore, I
am going to attempt to see if it does. has anyone attended one of WON's
advanced workshop sessions?? He is having another one in LA on the 29th of
July.. if anyone has attended was it worth the 795.00??? Thanks, Lynn



----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 12:34 PM


> Have been tracking ELNT for some time.   It is part of the
> semiconductor industry group and shows high relative strength
> within that industry group, as well as compared to the SP500
> and the Nasdaq.
>
> Interestingly, it is involved in manufacturing high performance
> integrated circuits for the DSL market, as well as a host of other
> electronic products for a variety of markets including video, and
> optical storage.
>
> I am hoping for it to be a leader in the new bull market.
> Full disclosure:  I bought three positions on Tuesday's
> breakout day.
>
> Walter Stock
> Oakville, ON, Canada
>
>
> Tim Fisher wrote:
>
> > ELNT is continuing Tuedsay's B/O today. Extended when you posted and
> > definitely way extended this AM.
> >
> > On 01:04 AM 6/7/00, Joseph Weisfish Said:
> > >ELNT: Fundamentally perfect although I would like to see higher than
14%
> > >ROE, technically; the stock broke out today from a 10 week base on over
244%
> > >normal volume, the pattern seems to be too wide and loose, and the
handle
> > >fell over 31%, it will likely succumb to market fluctuations. However
if
> > >Friday's follow through confirmation holds it could be one of the first
out
> > >of the gate, in which case we would like to see confirming action in
other
> > >stocks of the same industry group. ELNT came up today on my personal
nightly
> > >filter.
> >
> > Tim Fisher
> > Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites
> >
> > [e-mail]
> > WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
> > See naked fish and rocks!
> >
> > -
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Rocky Sanghvi <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] ADCT B/O
Date: 08 Jun 2000 17:46:08 -0400

Any thoughts on the B/O today by ADCT on heavier than usual volume?  I have
the feeling that the M is not out of the woods yet, but I am itching to buy
this one.  Any suggestions and comments will be greatly appreciated.

ADCT will one of the future leaders in Telecomm Infrastructure.

Rakesh



-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 2:31 PM


I am not sure if I reply to an email if it posts to everyone.. therefore, I
am going to attempt to see if it does. has anyone attended one of WON's
advanced workshop sessions?? He is having another one in LA on the 29th of
July.. if anyone has attended was it worth the 795.00??? Thanks, Lynn



----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 12:34 PM


> Have been tracking ELNT for some time.   It is part of the
> semiconductor industry group and shows high relative strength
> within that industry group, as well as compared to the SP500
> and the Nasdaq.
>
> Interestingly, it is involved in manufacturing high performance
> integrated circuits for the DSL market, as well as a host of other
> electronic products for a variety of markets including video, and
> optical storage.
>
> I am hoping for it to be a leader in the new bull market.
> Full disclosure:  I bought three positions on Tuesday's
> breakout day.
>
> Walter Stock
> Oakville, ON, Canada
>
>
> Tim Fisher wrote:
>
> > ELNT is continuing Tuedsay's B/O today. Extended when you posted and
> > definitely way extended this AM.
> >
> > On 01:04 AM 6/7/00, Joseph Weisfish Said:
> > >ELNT: Fundamentally perfect although I would like to see higher than
14%
> > >ROE, technically; the stock broke out today from a 10 week base on over
244%
> > >normal volume, the pattern seems to be too wide and loose, and the
handle
> > >fell over 31%, it will likely succumb to market fluctuations. However
if
> > >Friday's follow through confirmation holds it could be one of the first
out
> > >of the gate, in which case we would like to see confirming action in
other
> > >stocks of the same industry group. ELNT came up today on my personal
nightly
> > >filter.
> >
> > Tim Fisher
> > Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites
> >
> > [e-mail]
> > WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
> > See naked fish and rocks!
> >
> > -
>
>
> -
>


-

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "lynn williams" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ADCT B/O
Date: 08 Jun 2000 14:47:49 -0400

I may buy more ADCT tomorrow.. depending on the PPI report.. although ADCT
sure held up well from mid march to the present. Any thoughts oh whether or
not it is too late to buy into PWER???
Lynn
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 5:46 PM


> Any thoughts on the B/O today by ADCT on heavier than usual volume?  I
have
> the feeling that the M is not out of the woods yet, but I am itching to
buy
> this one.  Any suggestions and comments will be greatly appreciated.
>
> ADCT will one of the future leaders in Telecomm Infrastructure.
>
> Rakesh
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lynn williams [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 2:31 PM
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ELNT B/O
>
>
> I am not sure if I reply to an email if it posts to everyone.. therefore,
I
> am going to attempt to see if it does. has anyone attended one of WON's
> advanced workshop sessions?? He is having another one in LA on the 29th of
> July.. if anyone has attended was it worth the 795.00??? Thanks, Lynn
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Walter Stock" <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 12:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ELNT B/O
>
>
> > Have been tracking ELNT for some time.   It is part of the
> > semiconductor industry group and shows high relative strength
> > within that industry group, as well as compared to the SP500
> > and the Nasdaq.
> >
> > Interestingly, it is involved in manufacturing high performance
> > integrated circuits for the DSL market, as well as a host of other
> > electronic products for a variety of markets including video, and
> > optical storage.
> >
> > I am hoping for it to be a leader in the new bull market.
> > Full disclosure:  I bought three positions on Tuesday's
> > breakout day.
> >
> > Walter Stock
> > Oakville, ON, Canada
> >
> >
> > Tim Fisher wrote:
> >
> > > ELNT is continuing Tuedsay's B/O today. Extended when you posted and
> > > definitely way extended this AM.
> > >
> > > On 01:04 AM 6/7/00, Joseph Weisfish Said:
> > > >ELNT: Fundamentally perfect although I would like to see higher than
> 14%
> > > >ROE, technically; the stock broke out today from a 10 week base on
over
> 244%
> > > >normal volume, the pattern seems to be too wide and loose, and the
> handle
> > > >fell over 31%, it will likely succumb to market fluctuations. However
> if
> > > >Friday's follow through confirmation holds it could be one of the
first
> out
> > > >of the gate, in which case we would like to see confirming action in
> other
> > > >stocks of the same industry group. ELNT came up today on my personal
> nightly
> > > >filter.
> > >
> > > Tim Fisher
> > > Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites
> > >
> > > [e-mail]
> > > WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
> > > See naked fish and rocks!
> > >
> > > -
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
> -
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tim Fisher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ADCT B/O
Date: 08 Jun 2000 15:23:21 -0700

Pivot on PWER was 60+change. It's extended now. A beautiful little chart
though. Give it a couple of weeks. I dunno about y'all but I had a _great_
day today. My stodgy old techs & CANSLIMs are finally whooping the NASDAQ
this week.

On 11:47 AM 6/8/00, lynn williams Said:
>I may buy more ADCT tomorrow.. depending on the PPI report.. although ADCT
>sure held up well from mid march to the present. Any thoughts oh whether or
>not it is too late to buy into PWER???
>Lynn
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Rocky Sanghvi" <[e-mail]>
>To: <[e-mail]>
>Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 5:46 PM
>Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] ADCT B/O
>
>
> > Any thoughts on the B/O today by ADCT on heavier than usual volume?  I
>have
> > the feeling that the M is not out of the woods yet, but I am itching to
>buy
> > this one.  Any suggestions and comments will be greatly appreciated.
> >
> > ADCT will one of the future leaders in Telecomm Infrastructure.
> >
> > Rakesh
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: lynn williams [mailto:[e-mail]]
> > Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 2:31 PM
> > To: [e-mail]
> > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ELNT B/O
> >
> >
> > I am not sure if I reply to an email if it posts to everyone.. therefore,
>I
> > am going to attempt to see if it does. has anyone attended one of WON's
> > advanced workshop sessions?? He is having another one in LA on the 29th of
> > July.. if anyone has attended was it worth the 795.00??? Thanks, Lynn
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Walter Stock" <[e-mail]>
> > To: <[e-mail]>
> > Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 12:34 PM
> > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ELNT B/O
> >
> >
> > > Have been tracking ELNT for some time.   It is part of the
> > > semiconductor industry group and shows high relative strength
> > > within that industry group, as well as compared to the SP500
> > > and the Nasdaq.
> > >
> > > Interestingly, it is involved in manufacturing high performance
> > > integrated circuits for the DSL market, as well as a host of other
> > > electronic products for a variety of markets including video, and
> > > optical storage.
> > >
> > > I am hoping for it to be a leader in the new bull market.
> > > Full disclosure:  I bought three positions on Tuesday's
> > > breakout day.
> > >
> > > Walter Stock
> > > Oakville, ON, Canada
> > >
> > >
> > > Tim Fisher wrote:
> > >
> > > > ELNT is continuing Tuedsay's B/O today. Extended when you posted and
> > > > definitely way extended this AM.
> > > >
> > > > On 01:04 AM 6/7/00, Joseph Weisfish Said:
> > > > >ELNT: Fundamentally perfect although I would like to see higher than
> > 14%
> > > > >ROE, technically; the stock broke out today from a 10 week base on
>over
> > 244%
> > > > >normal volume, the pattern seems to be too wide and loose, and the
> > handle
> > > > >fell over 31%, it will likely succumb to market fluctuations. However
> > if
> > > > >Friday's follow through confirmation holds it could be one of the
>first
> > out
> > > > >of the gate, in which case we would like to see confirming action in
> > other
> > > > >stocks of the same industry group. ELNT came up today on my personal
> > nightly
> > > > >filter.
> > > >
> > > > Tim Fisher
> > > > Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites
> > > >
> > > > [e-mail]
> > > > WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
> > > > See naked fish and rocks!
> > > >
> > > > -
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > >
> >
> >
> > -
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
>-

Tim Fisher
Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites

[e-mail]
WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
See naked fish and rocks!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "james sullivan" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] elon chart
Date: 08 Jun 2000 20:02:19 -0400

Does Echelon's chart appear to be cup and handle? I know the company does
not necessarily meet CANSLIM, but I want a better understanding of the pivot
price and how it relates to a stock that has come down that far and starts
to turn-it-around (maybe?). Could be that this is a bad example, but I've
been trying figure the pivot out and I'm just not confident unless the stock
is going into new high territory. Thanks!!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Hugh Fader" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] REAL clean, renewable oil alternative
Date: 08 Jun 2000 21:03:49 -0400

I work in powertrain engineering in the auto industry. I can tell you that
conspiracy theories like this have been going around for many many years.
Others include a pill that turns water to gasoline and a carburetor which
achieves 150 miles per gallon. Often the theory involves a conspiracy
between the auto companies and the oil companies to keep the invention off
of the market.

I like this one because it sounds like the generator in "Atlas Shrugged"
which converted static electricity in the atmosphere into usable energy.

Regards,
Hugh

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of [e-mail]
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 12:29 PM


There's a $2000 invention that is supposedly proven to convert any current
gasoline engine into a nuclear engine that runs on water.  It uses the
hydrogen in
the H2O and releases O2 [oxygen] into the atmosphere.  Apparently, someone
(from
an OPEC country) offered $1,000,000,000 for the patent and the inventor (a
retired
millionaire inventor from here in central Ohio) refused to sell.  Yet for
some
reason, he also refuses to produce it.  I can't remember his reason (either
waiting for some reason or because of religious beliefs).

Jim off-the-topic


-


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] REAL clean, renewable oil alternative
Date: 08 Jun 2000 18:12:48 -0700 (PDT)


Geez,

I thought that the email was a joke. If someone was really thinking that
it is possible, then I would have given a little physics lesson to the
person.

Ofcourse, it is possible to get cars that run on water but the only way I
can think of is having a little nuclear plant inside the car with heavy
water.

Did you know that nuclear powered aircraft carriers can go for 22 years
before requiring refueling. Just imagine driving a car for 22 years
without requiring to refuel at all.

Now imagine millions of cars with little nuclear reactor running around,
and hundreds of thousands crashing.

Now imagine nuclear winter

Brrr.....
Cold...
Dead.


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Thu, 8 Jun 2000, Hugh Fader wrote:

> I work in powertrain engineering in the auto industry. I can tell you that
> conspiracy theories like this have been going around for many many years.
> Others include a pill that turns water to gasoline and a carburetor which
> achieves 150 miles per gallon. Often the theory involves a conspiracy
> between the auto companies and the oil companies to keep the invention off
> of the market.
>
> I like this one because it sounds like the generator in "Atlas Shrugged"
> which converted static electricity in the atmosphere into usable energy.
>
> Regards,
> Hugh
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail]
> [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of [e-mail]
> Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 12:29 PM
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: [CANSLIM] REAL clean, renewable oil alternative
>
>
> There's a $2000 invention that is supposedly proven to convert any current
> gasoline engine into a nuclear engine that runs on water.  It uses the
> hydrogen in
> the H2O and releases O2 [oxygen] into the atmosphere.  Apparently, someone
> (from
> an OPEC country) offered $1,000,000,000 for the patent and the inventor (a
> retired
> millionaire inventor from here in central Ohio) refused to sell.  Yet for
> some
> reason, he also refuses to produce it.  I can't remember his reason (either
> waiting for some reason or because of religious beliefs).
>
> Jim off-the-topic
>
>
> -
>
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Dave" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] High Handles
Date: 08 Jun 2000 22:45:37 -0700

Hi All,

Some timely comments from Greg Kuhn on high handles. Enjoy!

>Look at Newport Corp (NEWP) and SDL Inc. (SDLI). Two leading stocks already
out of the chute (ah-ha, got it spelled correctly again), but where do you
get on board if you were waiting for a handle to form on their cup
formations?

I'm not sure at this point. Personally, I wouldn't chase them if they just
kept moving higher. However, we can use their strength, and
strength-and-follow-through of other breakouts among leading stocks, as
useful information. If breakouts are working (i.e., breaking out of solid
basing patterns, on healthy volume, and following through to higher levels,
especially after successful tests of the breakout area) then it's telling us
it's okay to go for it. Period!

"Just remember, in a real bull market, leading stocks will break out of
proper basing patterns for up to three months. Time is your friend... use it
to let the market ultimately prove itself to you, day after day."
It appears, for whatever reason, there have been more stocks breaking out
from cup formations without handles over the past couple of years. More than
what I've witnessed over the past 12 years. Nonetheless, in my observations
over this period, these situations have still represented the exceptions.
The vast majority of winning stocks over the past two years have had the
proper handle setup in a cup-with-handle pattern. Just because a couple of
them do it, doesn't mean they're all going to start doing it.

Case in point: There were a number of Internet-related names that broke out
of cups without handles, or one- or two-day handles, heading right into the
Nasdaq Composite's major peak back in March. Names like E Piphany (EPNY) and
RSA Security (RSAS) come to mind. They all failed. There were others that
just shot right into new high ground, rallying straight up off the base lows
over several days. These breakouts also soon failed. This similar
performance occurred in Silicon Storage Tech (SSTI) in late April, as it
drove straight to new highs off its base lows. It soon thereafter crashed
back down. The short, three-week base it broke out from was problematic as
well.

So, it's still been my experience that the best setups, with rare
exceptions, have had the proper basing characteristics that have stood the
test of time.<



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Holding time for Institutions
Date: 08 Jun 2000 22:54:58 -0400

Hi Eric,

There is no minimum holding period for institutionals, they are
freely trading just like us. In fact, most institutionals will
sell their obscene quantities of IPO shares within minutes of it
beginning to trade. On stocks already trading, we go thru a
period (usually in the last week or so) of every qtr called
"window dressing". As the term implies, this is where the
institutionals "dress up" the portfolio that they will report as
their end-of-qtr positions. For those funds that do not report to
their shareholders when or at what cost basis they bought the
positions, it doesn't matter if they only owned the shares for
one day, just so long as they own them at the closing bell on the
final day of the qtr. They are also actively selling shares in
which they have large gains, to boost the qtrly performance
ratings.  Stocks bot for window dressing may well be out of the
portfolio on the first day of the new qtr.

I still remember the days not that many years ago when a mutual
fund's average ownership of a stock was 18 months. Measured
today, I doubt it is even 3 months on most positions. But I have
not seen hard data on this in years.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 2:01 PM



Hi,

Is there a minimum holding time for institutional investors?
The reason I'm asking is that IBD publishes the top mutual
funds and their purchases in the last quarter.  If they
are not obligated to hold them for any set period, then it
is possible that they may have dumped their shares by the time
they publish their purchases.

Also, does anybody know the average time an institutional
investor holds a stock? Some of these funds have 200% turnover
which implies that a stock could be traded every 6 months.

Thanks,
Eric

--
Eric Shen        MS LOC3-8   / / /    Level One Communications
email: [e-mail]      | | |_/  an Intel company
Tel: [phone]          | |___/  9750 Goethe Road
               ext: 4497     |_____/  Sacramento, CA 95827

-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "lynn williams" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Holding time for Institutions
Date: 08 Jun 2000 20:05:35 -0400

Dear Tom,

Thank you for your comments on Institutional trading. This leads me to what
i have long suspected that the Mutual Fund Page in IBD where they list the
funds profiled for the day, their new buys and their sells which are often
several months old, are really useless in so far as info goes..what areyour
opinions about that part of IBD?
Lynn
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 10:54 PM


> Hi Eric,
>
> There is no minimum holding period for institutionals, they are
> freely trading just like us. In fact, most institutionals will
> sell their obscene quantities of IPO shares within minutes of it
> beginning to trade. On stocks already trading, we go thru a
> period (usually in the last week or so) of every qtr called
> "window dressing". As the term implies, this is where the
> institutionals "dress up" the portfolio that they will report as
> their end-of-qtr positions. For those funds that do not report to
> their shareholders when or at what cost basis they bought the
> positions, it doesn't matter if they only owned the shares for
> one day, just so long as they own them at the closing bell on the
> final day of the qtr. They are also actively selling shares in
> which they have large gains, to boost the qtrly performance
> ratings.  Stocks bot for window dressing may well be out of the
> portfolio on the first day of the new qtr.
>
> I still remember the days not that many years ago when a mutual
> fund's average ownership of a stock was 18 months. Measured
> today, I doubt it is even 3 months on most positions. But I have
> not seen hard data on this in years.
>
> Tom Worley
> [e-mail]
> chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Eric Shen <[e-mail]>
> To: CANSLIM <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 2:01 PM
> Subject: [CANSLIM] Holding time for Institutions
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Is there a minimum holding time for institutional investors?
> The reason I'm asking is that IBD publishes the top mutual
> funds and their purchases in the last quarter.  If they
> are not obligated to hold them for any set period, then it
> is possible that they may have dumped their shares by the time
> they publish their purchases.
>
> Also, does anybody know the average time an institutional
> investor holds a stock? Some of these funds have 200% turnover
> which implies that a stock could be traded every 6 months.
>
> Thanks,
> Eric
>
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> Eric Shen        MS LOC3-8   / / /    Level One Communications
> email: [e-mail]      | | |_/  an Intel company
> Tel: [phone]          | |___/  9750 Goethe Road
>                ext: 4497     |_____/  Sacramento, CA 95827
>
> -
>
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Holding time for Institutions
Date: 08 Jun 2000 23:28:54 -0400

Hi Lynn,

It has been so long since I have had the time to read IBD on a
consistent daily basis that I really have no opinion on this. But
on mutual fund (and other institutional) data in general, I have
little interest in stale dated information. If you have a way of
knowing when the data was still current, you may learn something
by looking back and seeing how things looked at that time.

If current institutional data is important to you, I would
suggest finding an online site that daily reports large block
trades (e.g. 50,000 shares or more at a time). That could at
least give you a clue as to which stocks are being bought or sold
on any given day.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 8:05 PM


Dear Tom,

Thank you for your comments on Institutional trading. This leads
me to what
i have long suspected that the Mutual Fund Page in IBD where they
list the
funds profiled for the day, their new buys and their sells which
are often
several months old, are really useless in so far as info
goes..what areyour
opinions about that part of IBD?
Lynn
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 10:54 PM


> Hi Eric,
>
> There is no minimum holding period for institutionals, they are
> freely trading just like us. In fact, most institutionals will
> sell their obscene quantities of IPO shares within minutes of
it
> beginning to trade. On stocks already trading, we go thru a
> period (usually in the last week or so) of every qtr called
> "window dressing". As the term implies, this is where the
> institutionals "dress up" the portfolio that they will report
as
> their end-of-qtr positions. For those funds that do not report
to
> their shareholders when or at what cost basis they bought the
> positions, it doesn't matter if they only owned the shares for
> one day, just so long as they own them at the closing bell on
the
> final day of the qtr. They are also actively selling shares in
> which they have large gains, to boost the qtrly performance
> ratings.  Stocks bot for window dressing may well be out of the
> portfolio on the first day of the new qtr.
>
> I still remember the days not that many years ago when a mutual
> fund's average ownership of a stock was 18 months. Measured
> today, I doubt it is even 3 months on most positions. But I
have
> not seen hard data on this in years.
>
> Tom Worley
> [e-mail]
> chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Eric Shen <[e-mail]>
> To: CANSLIM <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 2:01 PM
> Subject: [CANSLIM] Holding time for Institutions
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Is there a minimum holding time for institutional investors?
> The reason I'm asking is that IBD publishes the top mutual
> funds and their purchases in the last quarter.  If they
> are not obligated to hold them for any set period, then it
> is possible that they may have dumped their shares by the time
> they publish their purchases.
>
> Also, does anybody know the average time an institutional
> investor holds a stock? Some of these funds have 200% turnover
> which implies that a stock could be traded every 6 months.
>
> Thanks,
> Eric
>
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> Eric Shen        MS LOC3-8   / / /    Level One Communications
> email: [e-mail]      | | |_/  an Intel company
> Tel: [phone]          | |___/  9750 Goethe Road
>                ext: 4497     |_____/  Sacramento, CA 95827
>
> -
>
>
>
> -
>


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Dave Massaglia" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Army picks
Date: 08 Jun 2000 22:42:39 CDT

I constructed a mock portfolio from the picks listed on this post. The only
stocks I left out were EMLX, DCLK and SCMR. Since April 14th when the post
was added to the CANSLIM site, these stocks are up 40%! Nice picks ....

Ladies and Gents;

Great posts . It's wonderful to see that the vast majority of participants
here are holding and WILL hold. If you own these  "tech generals" :
CSCO , NOK , EMC , ORCL , AOL , QCOM , SUNW , IBM , HWP , AMAT , WCOM , VOD
, DO NOT TOUCH , you'll do extremely well with them . If you own "colonels"
(generals to be ?) WITH REAL EARNINGS AND GROWING FAST  : JDSU , SDLI , RFMD
, PMCS , VTSS , TQNT , AMCC , NTAP , BRCM
, hold , you'll do very well. "Majors" such as : BVSN , RNWK , SEBL , DIGL
and even EMLX , real earnings , growing fast and leading positions in
respective niches , hold , you'll do very nicely.
Among companies with no earnings (yet) stick to the best  such as : DCLK ,
SCMR . All of these guys are involved in building the internet
infrastructure in all its facets . They will do more and more business .
They will make more and more money . Their stock prices will be higher.
There are other companies out there , of course . Can't mention them all .
Got to go fishing.
P.S. Try to stay away from pure internet plays with no earnings and unproven
business models. From now on , I think that the market will have very little
tolerance for them








________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks ready to break out
Date: 09 Jun 2000 00:26:57 -0400

haven't had time to study the charts, but the fundies on SANM
give me cause to ponder. The sales are growing big time, but
earnings are not keeping up. I would expect to see earnings
accelerating on this revenue growth, much like LFUS.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 11:51 AM




Does anyone have an opinion on how to handle "high handles", eg,
SANM,
LFUS?   Are they too extended or is it ok to buy when (if :) the
high of
the handle is taken out on preferably significant increase in
volume?

Anna Sosis


"Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]> on 06/08/2000 11:37:48
AM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




Take a look at WAT, lets see what the PPI brings on Friday.

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 9:15 AM


> I remember saying DSPG [&CTSH, NITE, VTSS and others] was
[were] ready to
break
> out after its [their] perfect cup w/ handle just before the M
took its
nosedive.
> It actually DID breakout wonderfully, but this was just as the
M topped
[or went
> into a correction].  I mistakenly assumed the stock would
necessarily
breakout
> just because it met CANSLIM while not paying attention to the
GENERAL
market
> condition.  I've done this at least FOUR times with otherwise
"perfect"
CANSLIM
> candidates ready to breakout.  A lesson I've hopefully learned
[never to
ignore
> overall M direction regardless of the strength of the
individual issue].
>
> Jim the-slow-learner
>
> >>Here are some stocks I observe are ready to break out. All
meet the
basic
> >>CANSLIM requirements:
>
> >>ADI is forming a handle on a 10-week cup. Up near its 52 week
high on
> >>Friday. Down on lower volume yesterday and today.
>
> >>DY is close to breaking out of a double-bottom.
>
> >>FORR has formed a 12-week cup with handle.
>
> >>SYK 12-week cup with handle.
>
> >>TDK 23-week cup with handle.
>
> >>Regards,
> >>Hugh
>
>
> -
>


-





-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: ACTL ( was Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks ready to break out)
Date: 09 Jun 2000 01:22:30 -0400

RS = 93, EPS = 93, SMR = A, A/D = A, Timeliness = A, GRS  = 92,
u/d ratio = 1.5, management 3%, funds 18%

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 12:04 PM




Does anyone have numbers (EP, RS, A/D, etc.) for Actel ACTL? I
cannot find
it in the paper.

Thank you

Anna Sosis



-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ADCT B/O
Date: 09 Jun 2000 01:28:43 -0400

Hi Rocky,

Looks to me like it only tagged the 12 month high without
breaking it, and closed down from there. Volume was also below
1.5 ADV, so I would not call this a b/o just yet.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 5:46 PM


Any thoughts on the B/O today by ADCT on heavier than usual
volume?  I have
the feeling that the M is not out of the woods yet, but I am
itching to buy
this one.  Any suggestions and comments will be greatly
appreciated.

ADCT will one of the future leaders in Telecomm Infrastructure.

Rakesh



-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 2:31 PM


I am not sure if I reply to an email if it posts to everyone..
therefore, I
am going to attempt to see if it does. has anyone attended one of
WON's
advanced workshop sessions?? He is having another one in LA on
the 29th of
July.. if anyone has attended was it worth the 795.00??? Thanks,
Lynn



----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 12:34 PM


> Have been tracking ELNT for some time.   It is part of the
> semiconductor industry group and shows high relative strength
> within that industry group, as well as compared to the SP500
> and the Nasdaq.
>
> Interestingly, it is involved in manufacturing high performance
> integrated circuits for the DSL market, as well as a host of
other
> electronic products for a variety of markets including video,
and
> optical storage.
>
> I am hoping for it to be a leader in the new bull market.
> Full disclosure:  I bought three positions on Tuesday's
> breakout day.
>
> Walter Stock
> Oakville, ON, Canada
>
>
> Tim Fisher wrote:
>
> > ELNT is continuing Tuedsay's B/O today. Extended when you
posted and
> > definitely way extended this AM.
> >
> > On 01:04 AM 6/7/00, Joseph Weisfish Said:
> > >ELNT: Fundamentally perfect although I would like to see
higher than
14%
> > >ROE, technically; the stock broke out today from a 10 week
base on over
244%
> > >normal volume, the pattern seems to be too wide and loose,
and the
handle
> > >fell over 31%, it will likely succumb to market
fluctuations. However
if
> > >Friday's follow through confirmation holds it could be one
of the first
out
> > >of the gate, in which case we would like to see confirming
action in
other
> > >stocks of the same industry group. ELNT came up today on my
personal
nightly
> > >filter.
> >
> > Tim Fisher
> > Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites
> >
> > [e-mail]
> > WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
> > See naked fish and rocks!
> >
> > -
>
>
> -
>


-

-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: [CANSLIM] distribution after 'B/O"?
Date: 09 Jun 2000 14:49:52 -0400



Hi.  Sorry about a newbie question, but here it goes:

If you buy on a B/O on HUGE vol and the next day the stock continues going
up on above ave vol, you have are a happy camper. However, what if the next
day the stock turns south (even slightly) on ABOVE AVE volume?  Is this a
"get out" sign?
I know WON says stocks may turn down around the pivot point, but what about
volume?

Anna Sosis


Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




I constructed a mock portfolio from the picks listed on this post. The only
stocks I left out were EMLX, DCLK and SCMR. Since April 14th when the post
was added to the CANSLIM site, these stocks are up 40%! Nice picks ....

Ladies and Gents;

Great posts . It's wonderful to see that the vast majority of participants
here are holding and WILL hold. If you own these  "tech generals" :
CSCO , NOK , EMC , ORCL , AOL , QCOM , SUNW , IBM , HWP , AMAT , WCOM , VOD
, DO NOT TOUCH , you'll do extremely well with them . If you own "colonels"
(generals to be ?) WITH REAL EARNINGS AND GROWING FAST  : JDSU , SDLI ,
RFMD
, PMCS , VTSS , TQNT , AMCC , NTAP , BRCM
, hold , you'll do very well. "Majors" such as : BVSN , RNWK , SEBL , DIGL
and even EMLX , real earnings , growing fast and leading positions in
respective niches , hold , you'll do very nicely.
Among companies with no earnings (yet) stick to the best  such as : DCLK ,
SCMR . All of these guys are involved in building the internet
infrastructure in all its facets . They will do more and more business .
They will make more and more money . Their stock prices will be higher.
There are other companies out there , of course . Can't mention them all .
Got to go fishing.
P.S. Try to stay away from pure internet plays with no earnings and
unproven
business models. From now on , I think that the market will have very
little
tolerance for them








________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com


-





-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kent Norman <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] interesting article
Date: 09 Jun 2000 14:40:48 -0500

take a look at
http://cbs.marketwatch.com/archive/20000602/news/current/charthead.htx?source=blq/yhoo&dist=yhoo

Kent

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Dave Massaglia" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Army picks
Date: 09 Jun 2000 18:01:34 CDT

Does anyone want to claim posting this original message? I'd be interested
(and others are too)in knowing the identity of that person...

Thanks

Ladies and Gents;
>
>Great posts . It's wonderful to see that the vast majority of participants
>here are holding and WILL hold. If you own these  "tech generals" :
>CSCO , NOK , EMC , ORCL , AOL , QCOM , SUNW , IBM , HWP , AMAT , WCOM , VOD
>, DO NOT TOUCH , you'll do extremely well with them . If you own "colonels"
>(generals to be ?) WITH REAL EARNINGS AND GROWING FAST  : JDSU , SDLI ,
>RFMD
>, PMCS , VTSS , TQNT , AMCC , NTAP , BRCM
>, hold , you'll do very well. "Majors" such as : BVSN , RNWK , SEBL , DIGL
>and even EMLX , real earnings , growing fast and leading positions in
>respective niches , hold , you'll do very nicely.
>Among companies with no earnings (yet) stick to the best  such as : DCLK ,
>SCMR . All of these guys are involved in building the internet
>infrastructure in all its facets . They will do more and more business .
>They will make more and more money . Their stock prices will be higher.
>There are other companies out there , of course . Can't mention them all .
>Got to go fishing.
>P.S. Try to stay away from pure internet plays with no earnings and
>unproven
>business models. From now on , I think that the market will have very
>little
>tolerance for them
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
>-
>

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "lynn williams" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Army picks
Date: 09 Jun 2000 17:46:21 -0400

not a clue as to who posted this message ..sorry
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2000 7:01 PM


> Does anyone want to claim posting this original message? I'd be interested
> (and others are too)in knowing the identity of that person...
>
> Thanks
>
> Ladies and Gents;
> >
> >Great posts . It's wonderful to see that the vast majority of
participants
> >here are holding and WILL hold. If you own these  "tech generals" :
> >CSCO , NOK , EMC , ORCL , AOL , QCOM , SUNW , IBM , HWP , AMAT , WCOM ,
VOD
> >, DO NOT TOUCH , you'll do extremely well with them . If you own
"colonels"
> >(generals to be ?) WITH REAL EARNINGS AND GROWING FAST  : JDSU , SDLI ,
> >RFMD
> >, PMCS , VTSS , TQNT , AMCC , NTAP , BRCM
> >, hold , you'll do very well. "Majors" such as : BVSN , RNWK , SEBL ,
DIGL
> >and even EMLX , real earnings , growing fast and leading positions in
> >respective niches , hold , you'll do very nicely.
> >Among companies with no earnings (yet) stick to the best  such as : DCLK
,
> >SCMR . All of these guys are involved in building the internet
> >infrastructure in all its facets . They will do more and more business .
> >They will make more and more money . Their stock prices will be higher.
> >There are other companies out there , of course . Can't mention them all
.
> >Got to go fishing.
> >P.S. Try to stay away from pure internet plays with no earnings and
> >unproven
> >business models. From now on , I think that the market will have very
> >little
> >tolerance for them
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >________________________________________________________________________
> >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
> >
> >
> >-
> >
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] DGO List - Part 1
Date: 10 Jun 2000 08:59:50 -0400

Thought I'd try to get part 1 out there for those that want it
before I go to work.

The overall list continues to grow, which is a bullish and
healthy sign for me. Total was 169, up from 152 last week, and
121 and 131 the prior weeks.

ADCT - LLUR
SDLI - B1
TBL - B1
NSIT - B4
RHB - B3
AAON - B1+
TWP - B2
AZZ - B1 (missed this one at 12 on a B4, aarrrrggghhhhh!!!)
XLNX - forming a too high handle to the cup, very high mkt
cap/sales ratio, earnings should be growing faster on the strong
sales growth
BBRC - B1, handle to the cup?
NOK - B1, range bound?, at upper limit of range?
SHFL - B5 (small cap)
LLTC - B1
FII B1
SANM - B1
INSUA - B7
MSS - high handle, small cap
RHI - B6
COBR - B1 - small cap
GBCB - B6
GLW - possible handle
CTK - B2
DST - B1+
LLL - B3
LM - B1, handle to the cup?


Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] REAL clean, renewable oil alternative
Date: 10 Jun 2000 12:36:40 -0700

Hugh and Pritish,
Not only is this not a joke, this guy was interviewed on the news.  I saw it with my own two eyes.
His patent and invention history were documented.  He lives within 10 miles of me.  They also
listed an interview with him in one of the national magazines [US News, Time, or something like
that].  The billion dollar offer for his patent was also shown.

Hugh,
Such conspiracies and collusion are documented throughout history.  Consider the original light
bulb invented by Edison that lasted 50 years, but the patent was purchased so we can continue
buying filaments that burn out [since these produce a returning demand for the product].   Also
consider Vitamin companies more recently and their price-fixing.  Consider pharmaceutical companies
relationship with doctors and HMOs, and consider OPEC's recent restrictions to drive oil prices
up.  (Personally, I hope they push prices up so high that we are forced to develop alternate
sources of free, renewable energy.  Technological revolution and innovation is often heralded by
disdain and mockery, especially by those who stand to lose their gravy trains.)  R. Buckminster
Fuller's works [more patents than any other human including Edison] show that real wealth must work
in concert with the good of ALL earth's inhabitants and the planet itself.

Pritish,
Please, give me the physics lesson.  Cold fusion is not nearly as volatile as fission, but I always
appreciate a free tutoring lesson.


Jim for-people-AND-profits


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] DGO List - Part 2
Date: 10 Jun 2000 18:13:00 -0400

FISV - B2, base on base
CGP - B4
SEIC - B2
KP - B1+
GCO - B3
MRX - week 1 handle of a 14 week cup, however both revenues and
earnings have stagnated
JWA - B1
PFE - up on lite vol, 5 weeks of trying to break out of a trading
range
THX - B2, up on lite vol, base on base
EQT - B2
SYK - B7
CBM - B11
WTSC - 2 week handle on a too deep cup
SYY - B2
UNH - B4
ROG - B9, earnings growing but sales stagnant
IAAI - B2
HP - B4
AZR - B2
MLHR - 6 week trading range
AGN - B3
HAVN - B2

Enjoy, and happy hunting

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] REAL clean, renewable oil alternative
Date: 11 Jun 2000 13:00:40 -0600

Add me to the list of skeptics, I'm sorry, people just don't invent
2,000 dollar engines than can run on water.  The US is spending
billions to develop nuclear fusion, its a major engineering and
physics problem, and I think anything that supposedly runs on
water must be using fusion to generate energy (although that is
heavy water, not water water).

On 10 Jun 00, at 12:36, [e-mail] wrote:

> Hugh and Pritish,
> Not only is this not a joke, this guy was interviewed on the news.  I saw it with my own two eyes.
> His patent and invention history were documented.  He lives within 10 miles of me.  They also
> listed an interview with him in one of the national magazines [US News, Time, or something like
> that].  The billion dollar offer for his patent was also shown.
>
> Hugh,
> Such conspiracies and collusion are documented throughout history.  Consider the original light
> bulb invented by Edison that lasted 50 years, but the patent was purchased so we can continue
> buying filaments that burn out [since these produce a returning demand for the product].   Also
> consider Vitamin companies more recently and their price-fixing.  Consider pharmaceutical companies
> relationship with doctors and HMOs, and consider OPEC's recent restrictions to drive oil prices
> up.  (Personally, I hope they push prices up so high that we are forced to develop alternate
> sources of free, renewable energy.  Technological revolution and innovation is often heralded by
> disdain and mockery, especially by those who stand to lose their gravy trains.)  R. Buckminster
> Fuller's works [more patents than any other human including Edison] show that real wealth must work
> in concert with the good of ALL earth's inhabitants and the planet itself.
>
> Pritish,
> Please, give me the physics lesson.  Cold fusion is not nearly as volatile as fission, but I always
> appreciate a free tutoring lesson.
>
>
> Jim for-people-AND-profits
>
>
> -
>

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Steven Ross" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] REAL clean, renewable oil alternative
Date: 11 Jun 2000 13:51:56 -0600

Just curious, did you see this news story on April 1st? : )

Steve
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2000 1:00 PM


> Add me to the list of skeptics, I'm sorry, people just don't invent
> 2,000 dollar engines than can run on water.  The US is spending
> billions to develop nuclear fusion, its a major engineering and
> physics problem, and I think anything that supposedly runs on
> water must be using fusion to generate energy (although that is
> heavy water, not water water).
>
> On 10 Jun 00, at 12:36, [e-mail] wrote:
>
> > Hugh and Pritish,
> > Not only is this not a joke, this guy was interviewed on the news.  I
saw it with my own two eyes.
> > His patent and invention history were documented.  He lives within 10
miles of me.  They also
> > listed an interview with him in one of the national magazines [US News,
Time, or something like
> > that].  The billion dollar offer for his patent was also shown.
> >
> > Hugh,
> > Such conspiracies and collusion are documented throughout history.
Consider the original light
> > bulb invented by Edison that lasted 50 years, but the patent was
purchased so we can continue
> > buying filaments that burn out [since these produce a returning demand
for the product].   Also
> > consider Vitamin companies more recently and their price-fixing.
Consider pharmaceutical companies
> > relationship with doctors and HMOs, and consider OPEC's recent
restrictions to drive oil prices
> > up.  (Personally, I hope they push prices up so high that we are forced
to develop alternate
> > sources of free, renewable energy.  Technological revolution and
innovation is often heralded by
> > disdain and mockery, especially by those who stand to lose their gravy
trains.)  R. Buckminster
> > Fuller's works [more patents than any other human including Edison] show
that real wealth must work
> > in concert with the good of ALL earth's inhabitants and the planet
itself.
> >
> > Pritish,
> > Please, give me the physics lesson.  Cold fusion is not nearly as
volatile as fission, but I always
> > appreciate a free tutoring lesson.
> >
> >
> > Jim for-people-AND-profits
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks ready to break out
Date: 11 Jun 2000 15:21:00 -0600

I buy cups without handles quite a bit.  I try to narrow my candidates down
to the best stocks in the best groups.  Given a smaller pool of stocks,
it's harder to find breakouts with handles.  Of the 5 stocks I purchased
during the last week or so, only 1 actually formed a handle.  I got chased
out of 1 last week, and three of the other four are behaving well so far.

At 12:33 PM 6/8/00 -0400, you wrote:
>
>
>Thank you, Walter.  I have read about "cups without handles" before and
>IBD's opinion is very similar to the one I have heard.
>Does anyone have first hand experience with this senario?  What would you
>do?  I am itching to buy SANM :)
>
>Anna Sosis
>
>
>
>Walter Stock <[e-mail]> on 06/08/2000 12:21:12 PM
>
>Please respond to [e-mail]
>
>To:   [e-mail]
>cc:
>Subject:  Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks ready to break out
>
>
>
>
>Hi Anna,
>
>Front page article in today's IBD Investor Corner talks about
>stocks that do not pause to create a handle before breaking
>to new highs.  Says that although error-prone, these
>no-handle stocks "can work at the start of a new rally".
>
>The article also discusses high-handles very briefly, and cites
>Altera as an example:  "Altera has pulled back from its high,
>and may end up forming a handle at or just above its old high."
>Article does not say that this kind of handle will or will not
>work the same as more conventional handles.
>
>Hope this helps,
>
>Walter Stock
>Oakville, ON, Canada
>
>
>
>
>[e-mail] wrote:
>
>> Does anyone have an opinion on how to handle "high handles", eg, SANM,
>> LFUS?   Are they too extended or is it ok to buy when (if :) the high of
>> the handle is taken out on preferably significant increase in volume?
>>
>> Anna Sosis
>>
>> "Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]> on 06/08/2000 11:37:48 AM
>>
>> Please respond to [e-mail]
>>
>> To:   [e-mail]
>> cc:
>> Subject:  Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks ready to break out
>>
>> Take a look at WAT, lets see what the PPI brings on Friday.
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: <[e-mail]>
>> To: <[e-mail]>
>> Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 9:15 AM
>> Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks ready to break out
>>
>> > I remember saying DSPG [&CTSH, NITE, VTSS and others] was [were] ready
>to
>> break
>> > out after its [their] perfect cup w/ handle just before the M took its
>> nosedive.
>> > It actually DID breakout wonderfully, but this was just as the M topped
>> [or went
>> > into a correction].  I mistakenly assumed the stock would necessarily
>> breakout
>> > just because it met CANSLIM while not paying attention to the GENERAL
>> market
>> > condition.  I've done this at least FOUR times with otherwise "perfect"
>> CANSLIM
>> > candidates ready to breakout.  A lesson I've hopefully learned [never
>to
>> ignore
>> > overall M direction regardless of the strength of the individual
>issue].
>> >
>> > Jim the-slow-learner
>> >
>> > >>Here are some stocks I observe are ready to break out. All meet the
>> basic
>> > >>CANSLIM requirements:
>> >
>> > >>ADI is forming a handle on a 10-week cup. Up near its 52 week high on
>> > >>Friday. Down on lower volume yesterday and today.
>> >
>> > >>DY is close to breaking out of a double-bottom.
>> >
>> > >>FORR has formed a 12-week cup with handle.
>> >
>> > >>SYK 12-week cup with handle.
>> >
>> > >>TDK 23-week cup with handle.
>> >
>> > >>Regards,
>> > >>Hugh
>> >
>> >
>> > -
>> >
>>
>> -
>>
>> -
>
>
>-
>
>
>
>
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: [CANSLIM] Free, renewable energy
Date: 11 Jun 2000 18:56:52 -0700

Patrick,
His invention is a $2000 conversion for EXISTING gasoline engines.  I also think it is fusion and is
what originally prompted many of the fusion experiments [to unsuccessfully duplicate it] that got press
a few years ago.  I'm also skeptical, but I'm more skeptical of the mentality that attempts to block
such breakthroughs than whether it is or will become feasible from an engineering/physics standpoint.  I
look back at all of the things that were supposedly impossible according to the "experts" a 100 years
ago.  IMO, it's just a matter of time, and more a matter of changing cultural assumptions than any thing
else.  Time will tell.

-Jim

"Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>

Add me to the list of skeptics, I'm sorry, people just don't invent
2,000 dollar engines than can run on water.  The US is spending
billions to develop nuclear fusion, its a major engineering and
physics problem, and I think anything that supposedly runs on
water must be using fusion to generate energy (although that is
heavy water, not water water).


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Robert <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Acc/Dis Numbers
Date: 11 Jun 2000 22:57:06 -0400

Here are the latest Acc/Dis Numbers:

Date    A    B    C    D    E    a+b/A:E    E/A:E
5/24/00    815    2501    1371    1268    546    51%    8%
5/25/00    774    2451    1372    1310    565    50%    9%
5/26/00    779    2387    1359    1295    593    49%    9%
5/30/00    735    2377    1396    1303    596    49%    9%
5/31/00    747    2363    1386    1316    601    48%    9%
6/1/00    805    2458    1355    1292    534    51%    8%
6/2/00    834    2450    1378    1264    530    51%    8%
6/5/00    922    2517    1392    1184    472    53%    7%
6/6/00    998    2756    1368    1044    357    58%    5%
6/7/00    978    2828    1372    1026    352    58%    5%
6/8/00    958    2868    1378    1012    352    58%    5%
6/9/00    1007    2878    1358    994    347    59%    5%
6/12/00    1020    2894    1334    977    355    59%    5%


Spreadsheet version:

Date,A,B,C,D,E,a+b/A:E,E/A:E

5/24/00,815,2501,1371,1268,546,51%,8%
5/25/00,774,2451,1372,1310,565,50%,9%
5/26/00,779,2387,1359,1295,593,49%,9%
5/30/00,735,2377,1396,1303,596,49%,9%
5/31/00,747,2363,1386,1316,601,48%,9%
6/1/00,805,2458,1355,1292,534,51%,8%
6/2/00,834,2450,1378,1264,530,51%,8%
6/5/00,922,2517,1392,1184,472,53%,7%
6/6/00,998,2756,1368,1044,357,58%,5%
6/7/00,978,2828,1372,1026,352,58%,5%
6/8/00,958,2868,1378,1012,352,58%,5%
6/9/00,1007,2878,1358,994,347,59%,5%
6/12/00,1020,2894,1334,977,355,59%,5%


Robert








__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Gumpel <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Free, renewable energy
Date: 12 Jun 2000 08:44:17 +0200

This is an amusing (and somewhat worrisome) thread. I suggest that those of
you interested read:

         Dewdney, A. K. (1997). Yes, we have no neutrons: An eye-opening
tour through the twists and turns of bad science. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Check out chapter 6: 'Genie in a Jar: The "Discovery" of cold fusion'


It is about, among other things, the ins and outs of bad science, and deals
nicely with the Pons and Flieshmann fiasco of several years back (cold
fusion in a bottle). Without the enormous release of neutrons, such cold
fusion is impossible, and has eluded scientists for almost 100 years. You
may remember that on March 23, 1989, Martin Fleishmann and Stanley Pons
stood the world of science on its head by announcing that they had achieved
what hundreds of nuclear physicists had failed to achieve: sustainable
nuclear fusion.

The fusion of two atoms into one releases tremendous amounts of energy,
more than the fission of a single atom into two. While understanding how to
split the atom has been around for several decades, the ability to fuse
atoms has eluded nuclear scientists.

Flieshmann and Pons are not nuclear scientists, but chemists. What they had
unknowingly recorded was a chemical reaction; what they had knowingly done
was exaggerate and lie about their results. They were eventually both
disgraced and disappeared from the public and scientific limelight.

By the way, Dewdney was the popular science writer for Scientific American
for many years.

Statement such as: "IMO, it's just a matter of time, and more a matter of
changing cultural assumptions than any thing else" smack of scientific post
modernism and are dangerous for the pursuit of scientific hard data. Some
things are correct, some things are incorrect, and sometimes (more often
than not) there's a clear dichotomy between the two (especially in the
world of the hard sciences)

So, if you want to believe in this magic fusion engine, and big business
attempts to thwart it, without a shred of scientific proof and replication,
be my guest.

I also have a pyramid that you can wear over your head to reduce migraines,
and some crystals that will enable you to release your shakras.

At 06:56 PM 11/6/00 -0700, [e-mail] wrote:
>Patrick,
>His invention is a $2000 conversion for EXISTING gasoline engines.  I also
>think it is fusion and is
>what originally prompted many of the fusion experiments [to unsuccessfully
>duplicate it] that got press
>a few years ago.  I'm also skeptical, but I'm more skeptical of the
>mentality that attempts to block
>such breakthroughs than whether it is or will become feasible from an
>engineering/physics standpoint.  I
>look back at all of the things that were supposedly impossible according
>to the "experts" a 100 years
>ago.  IMO, it's just a matter of time, and more a matter of changing
>cultural assumptions than any thing
>else.  Time will tell.
>
>-Jim
>
>"Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
>Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] REAL clean, renewable oil alternative
>
>Add me to the list of skeptics, I'm sorry, people just don't invent
>2,000 dollar engines than can run on water.  The US is spending
>billions to develop nuclear fusion, its a major engineering and
>physics problem, and I think anything that supposedly runs on
>water must be using fusion to generate energy (although that is
>heavy water, not water water).
>
>
>-


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Gumpel <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Free, renewable energy
Date: 12 Jun 2000 08:44:17 +0200

This is an amusing (and somewhat worrisome) thread. I suggest that those of
you interested read:

         Dewdney, A. K. (1997). Yes, we have no neutrons: An eye-opening
tour through the twists and turns of bad science. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Check out chapter 6: 'Genie in a Jar: The "Discovery" of cold fusion'


It is about, among other things, the ins and outs of bad science, and deals
nicely with the Pons and Flieshmann fiasco of several years back (cold
fusion in a bottle). Without the enormous release of neutrons, such cold
fusion is impossible, and has eluded scientists for almost 100 years. You
may remember that on March 23, 1989, Martin Fleishmann and Stanley Pons
stood the world of science on its head by announcing that they had achieved
what hundreds of nuclear physicists had failed to achieve: sustainable
nuclear fusion.

The fusion of two atoms into one releases tremendous amounts of energy,
more than the fission of a single atom into two. While understanding how to
split the atom has been around for several decades, the ability to fuse
atoms has eluded nuclear scientists.

Flieshmann and Pons are not nuclear scientists, but chemists. What they had
unknowingly recorded was a chemical reaction; what they had knowingly done
was exaggerate and lie about their results. They were eventually both
disgraced and disappeared from the public and scientific limelight.

By the way, Dewdney was the popular science writer for Scientific American
for many years.

Statement such as: "IMO, it's just a matter of time, and more a matter of
changing cultural assumptions than any thing else" smack of scientific post
modernism and are dangerous for the pursuit of scientific hard data. Some
things are correct, some things are incorrect, and sometimes (more often
than not) there's a clear dichotomy between the two (especially in the
world of the hard sciences)

So, if you want to believe in this magic fusion engine, and big business
attempts to thwart it, without a shred of scientific proof and replication,
be my guest.

I also have a pyramid that you can wear over your head to reduce migraines,
and some crystals that will enable you to release your shakras.

At 06:56 PM 11/6/00 -0700, [e-mail] wrote:
>Patrick,
>His invention is a $2000 conversion for EXISTING gasoline engines.  I also
>think it is fusion and is
>what originally prompted many of the fusion experiments [to unsuccessfully
>duplicate it] that got press
>a few years ago.  I'm also skeptical, but I'm more skeptical of the
>mentality that attempts to block
>such breakthroughs than whether it is or will become feasible from an
>engineering/physics standpoint.  I
>look back at all of the things that were supposedly impossible according
>to the "experts" a 100 years
>ago.  IMO, it's just a matter of time, and more a matter of changing
>cultural assumptions than any thing
>else.  Time will tell.
>
>-Jim
>
>"Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
>Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] REAL clean, renewable oil alternative
>
>Add me to the list of skeptics, I'm sorry, people just don't invent
>2,000 dollar engines than can run on water.  The US is spending
>billions to develop nuclear fusion, its a major engineering and
>physics problem, and I think anything that supposedly runs on
>water must be using fusion to generate energy (although that is
>heavy water, not water water).
>
>
>-


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Acc/Dis Numbers
Date: 12 Jun 2000 00:17:42 -0700

What are these?

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2000 7:57 PM


> Here are the latest Acc/Dis Numbers:
>
> Date A B C D E a+b/A:E E/A:E
> 5/24/00 815 2501 1371 1268 546 51% 8%
> 5/25/00 774 2451 1372 1310 565 50% 9%
> 5/26/00 779 2387 1359 1295 593 49% 9%
> 5/30/00 735 2377 1396 1303 596 49% 9%
> 5/31/00 747 2363 1386 1316 601 48% 9%
> 6/1/00 805 2458 1355 1292 534 51% 8%
> 6/2/00 834 2450 1378 1264 530 51% 8%
> 6/5/00 922 2517 1392 1184 472 53% 7%
> 6/6/00 998 2756 1368 1044 357 58% 5%
> 6/7/00 978 2828 1372 1026 352 58% 5%
> 6/8/00 958 2868 1378 1012 352 58% 5%
> 6/9/00 1007 2878 1358 994 347 59% 5%
> 6/12/00 1020 2894 1334 977 355 59% 5%
>
>
> Spreadsheet version:
>
> Date,A,B,C,D,E,a+b/A:E,E/A:E
>
> 5/24/00,815,2501,1371,1268,546,51%,8%
> 5/25/00,774,2451,1372,1310,565,50%,9%
> 5/26/00,779,2387,1359,1295,593,49%,9%
> 5/30/00,735,2377,1396,1303,596,49%,9%
> 5/31/00,747,2363,1386,1316,601,48%,9%
> 6/1/00,805,2458,1355,1292,534,51%,8%
> 6/2/00,834,2450,1378,1264,530,51%,8%
> 6/5/00,922,2517,1392,1184,472,53%,7%
> 6/6/00,998,2756,1368,1044,357,58%,5%
> 6/7/00,978,2828,1372,1026,352,58%,5%
> 6/8/00,958,2868,1378,1012,352,58%,5%
> 6/9/00,1007,2878,1358,994,347,59%,5%
> 6/12/00,1020,2894,1334,977,355,59%,5%
>
>
> Robert
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://im.yahoo.com
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Free, renewable energy
Date: 12 Jun 2000 12:55:03 -0700 (PDT)


Existing gasoline engine works on the principle of combustion. That is why
they are called combustion gas engine. Yes you can convert that same
engine so that the output from it is H(2)O and CO(2). We do that by using
propane. This is possible today and you can go to some specialized stores
to get the conversion.

Second comes the fusion/fission issue. The design of engine does not
allow fusion/fission.

Yes a day will come when we run the engine with water by-products. The way
it will be done is to get heavy water (where hydrogen has one proton and
one or two neutrons), then breakdown the water to hydrogen/oxygen and then
use the hydrogen (in fusion) to create helium which would give out the
energy.

Now for the part on how the fusion will take place. The fusion that we
know of currently (happening in sun) happens at temperatures of about a
million degrees centigrade and at tremendous pressure (something close to
one million metric tons per square centimeter). This is physically
impossible with the current engine.

Cold fusion in a bottle has not been discovered yet. Whether it will
happen in our lifetime is not known but it has not happened yet.

Currently cold fusion is barely able to give back the amount of energy
required to create the cold fusion.

For this to work in future, we have to come up with methods of containing
the fusion (which happens at extremely extremely high temperatures since
it gives out extremely high amount of energy).

Hope this little physics lesson helps.


On Sun, 11 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:

> Patrick,
> His invention is a $2000 conversion for EXISTING gasoline engines.  I also think it is fusion and is
> what originally prompted many of the fusion experiments [to unsuccessfully duplicate it] that got press
> a few years ago.  I'm also skeptical, but I'm more skeptical of the mentality that attempts to block
> such breakthroughs than whether it is or will become feasible from an engineering/physics standpoint.  I
> look back at all of the things that were supposedly impossible according to the "experts" a 100 years
> ago.  IMO, it's just a matter of time, and more a matter of changing cultural assumptions than any thing
> else.  Time will tell.
>
> -Jim
>
> "Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] REAL clean, renewable oil alternative
>
> Add me to the list of skeptics, I'm sorry, people just don't invent
> 2,000 dollar engines than can run on water.  The US is spending
> billions to develop nuclear fusion, its a major engineering and
> physics problem, and I think anything that supposedly runs on
> water must be using fusion to generate energy (although that is
> heavy water, not water water).
>
>
> -
>
>



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: [CANSLIM] troublesome thread
Date: 12 Jun 2000 16:42:31 -0700

Rather than continue to respond from my memory, I will attempt a search of this guy's work and its
documentation.  The general thrust of my responses remains: what has often been considered impossible has
been shown possible over time.  I don't expect those with their minds already made up to suddenly consider
anything outside of their current ossified reality tunnels.  Consensus "reality" has promoted such things as
bloodletting as a conventional therapy and surgery as barbaric, then later leeches and holistic medicine as
barbaric and prescription drugs as civil [which the reverse is now gaining credibility].  Time will tell, but
considering the rate of technological progress, I am open to the unlimited possibilities of innovative
mavricks who refuse to be constricted by the limiting dogmas of their contemporaries.  Again, time will
tell.  (Consider Nikoli Tesla and R. Buckminster Fuller)

Jim searching-for-sources


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: [CANSLIM] Hydrogen combustion engine
Date: 12 Jun 2000 17:04:55 -0700

I haven't found the specific invention yet, but here's a good start explaining the feasibility of hydrogen as
a fuel for our cars.  Here's an exerpt:

"Hydrogen Vehicles Over the Years...
Until recently, nearly all of the hydrogen-powered vehicles in use have run on modified internal combustion
engines.
The earliest testing of hydrogen in internal combustion engines dates back to the late nineteenth century. In
Germany
before World War II, more than a thousand vehicles were modified to run on hydrogen.

In the aftermath of the 1973 oil embargo, dozens of prototype internal combustion vehicles were built in the
United
States, Europe, and Japan to run on hydrogen. These hydrogen programs continue, with many automakers testing
hydrogen vehicles. Fuel cell and electric hybrid vehicles are a much more recent phenomenon: the first fuel
cell
demonstration vehicles took to the road in 1993.

Options for Producing, Distributing, and Storing Hydrogen

Aside from the propulsion system itself, there are other factors affecting the commercialization of hydrogen
vehicles,
including fuel production, distribution to refueling stations, and storage on board the vehicle.

Producing Hydrogen
Most hydrogen produced today is made from natural gas in a process known as steam reforming. Because this is
the
cheapest and most firmly established method of producing hydrogen, it is likely to predominate until
production
technologies based on renewable energy resources become commercially competitive."


http://www.ttcorp.com/nha/harness2.htm

-Jim still-researching


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Hugh Fader" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Hydrogen combustion engine
Date: 12 Jun 2000 19:30:59 -0400

Quoting a local politician, "The facts is beginning to submerge."

Fuel cell-powered vehicles are currently under development. For example,
there is a joint venture between Ford, Daimler, and Ballard. Fuel cells
don't operate by combining hydrogen and oxygen to produce water and
electricity. This is not fusion, and is not new technology. The challenges
are to: 1) Mass produce cheaply something currently handmade by PhDs. 2)
Provide infrastructure to deliver the hydrogen fuel.

Hope this helps.

Hugh

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of [e-mail]
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2000 8:05 PM


I haven't found the specific invention yet, but here's a good start
explaining the feasibility of hydrogen as
a fuel for our cars.  Here's an exerpt:

"Hydrogen Vehicles Over the Years...
Until recently, nearly all of the hydrogen-powered vehicles in use have run
on modified internal combustion
engines.
The earliest testing of hydrogen in internal combustion engines dates back
to the late nineteenth century. In
Germany
before World War II, more than a thousand vehicles were modified to run on
hydrogen.

In the aftermath of the 1973 oil embargo, dozens of prototype internal
combustion vehicles were built in the
United
States, Europe, and Japan to run on hydrogen. These hydrogen programs
continue, with many automakers testing
hydrogen vehicles. Fuel cell and electric hybrid vehicles are a much more
recent phenomenon: the first fuel
cell
demonstration vehicles took to the road in 1993.

Options for Producing, Distributing, and Storing Hydrogen

Aside from the propulsion system itself, there are other factors affecting
the commercialization of hydrogen
vehicles,
including fuel production, distribution to refueling stations, and storage
on board the vehicle.

Producing Hydrogen
Most hydrogen produced today is made from natural gas in a process known as
steam reforming. Because this is
the
cheapest and most firmly established method of producing hydrogen, it is
likely to predominate until
production
technologies based on renewable energy resources become commercially
competitive."


http://www.ttcorp.com/nha/harness2.htm

-Jim still-researching


-


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Hugh Fader" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Hydrogen combustion engine
Date: 12 Jun 2000 19:33:24 -0400

Correction:

Fuel cells DO operate by combining hydrogen and oxygen to produce water and
electricity.

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Hugh Fader
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2000 7:31 PM


Quoting a local politician, "The facts is beginning to submerge."

Fuel cell-powered vehicles are currently under development. For example,
there is a joint venture between Ford, Daimler, and Ballard. Fuel cells
don't operate by combining hydrogen and oxygen to produce water and
electricity. This is not fusion, and is not new technology. The challenges
are to: 1) Mass produce cheaply something currently handmade by PhDs. 2)
Provide infrastructure to deliver the hydrogen fuel.

Hope this helps.

Hugh

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of [e-mail]
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2000 8:05 PM


I haven't found the specific invention yet, but here's a good start
explaining the feasibility of hydrogen as
a fuel for our cars.  Here's an exerpt:

"Hydrogen Vehicles Over the Years...
Until recently, nearly all of the hydrogen-powered vehicles in use have run
on modified internal combustion
engines.
The earliest testing of hydrogen in internal combustion engines dates back
to the late nineteenth century. In
Germany
before World War II, more than a thousand vehicles were modified to run on
hydrogen.

In the aftermath of the 1973 oil embargo, dozens of prototype internal
combustion vehicles were built in the
United
States, Europe, and Japan to run on hydrogen. These hydrogen programs
continue, with many automakers testing
hydrogen vehicles. Fuel cell and electric hybrid vehicles are a much more
recent phenomenon: the first fuel
cell
demonstration vehicles took to the road in 1993.

Options for Producing, Distributing, and Storing Hydrogen

Aside from the propulsion system itself, there are other factors affecting
the commercialization of hydrogen
vehicles,
including fuel production, distribution to refueling stations, and storage
on board the vehicle.

Producing Hydrogen
Most hydrogen produced today is made from natural gas in a process known as
steam reforming. Because this is
the
cheapest and most firmly established method of producing hydrogen, it is
likely to predominate until
production
technologies based on renewable energy resources become commercially
competitive."


http://www.ttcorp.com/nha/harness2.htm

-Jim still-researching


-


-


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Hugh Fader" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] MSS GLW Breakouts
Date: 12 Jun 2000 19:49:48 -0400

Both MSS and GLW broke out of cups with short handles today.

- Hugh

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Alexander T <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
Date: 12 Jun 2000 22:57:41 -0400 (EDT)

Hi,

Could someone help me understand the chart of EMC's recent action?  It sort
of looks like there was a double bottom from end of march to early may, and
then some other cup-like base.

On the other hand, one may think that there is a "Tripple" bottom since the
latest peak did not go over the second peak of the W.  Could someone point
out their view on this?

Thank you

______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "triple" bottom?
Date: 12 Jun 2000 23:21:10 -0400

Interesting chart, Alexander, I hope we can get some discussion
going on it, at least it would be more interesting than a
hypothetical fusion engine that isn't owned by a tradable company
yet.

At a glance, I see four bottoms. What is interesting to me is
that drawing a line along the highs and the lows reveals an
expanding wedge, haven't seen that many of them that still have
good CS elements. Volume is also interesting, the first bottom on
3/15 closed near that day's lows, and on ADV.  The 2nd, on 4/4,
and the 4th, on 5/24, showed strong reversals on nearly twice
ADV.  The first and third were both marked by strong recoveries
on the day following the low, with the third also marked by
nearly twice ADV. On the latest recovery, the stock has moved
from 50 to nearly 70, but only broke ADV 4 times, tho up days
outnumbered down days about 2:1.

If I were trying to play this one, I suspect I would tend to view
it, for now, in a trading range with a lot of support. I would
try to buy it on the lower side of its range, and take profits on
the upper side. But I would also be conscious of the potential to
explode out of this range on volume, so volume would be my
primary indicator, with price secondary.

From a CANSLIM point of view, I cannot shove it into any chart
pattern I recognize, and invite others to comment.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2000 10:57 PM


Hi,

Could someone help me understand the chart of EMC's recent
action?  It sort
of looks like there was a double bottom from end of march to
early may, and
then some other cup-like base.

On the other hand, one may think that there is a "Triple" bottom
since the
latest peak did not go over the second peak of the W.  Could
someone point
out their view on this?

Thank you

______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup


-




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Alexander T <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "triple" bottom?
Date: 13 Jun 2000 10:26:40 -0400 (EDT)

Thanks for your insight on this, Tom.

I am actually reluctant to consider the mid-march bottom as part of the
latest base since around March 20 the stock went into new highs and made an
8% advance.  It seems to me personally that this may be a "base on top of a
base" with tripple bottom on top of whatever base you may see before it (I
don't know if I see a cup).

In HTMMIS WON discusses double bottoms in details, but he also mentions that
tripple bottoms also exists, and he prefers the lows undercutting previous
lows by a nutch, and highs almost reaching previous highs.  He points out
that such pattern is not as constructive as a W.

On EMC currently I like the tightness of the recent days, with decreased
volume, which may qualify as a handle, we'll have to see.

PSEM is another pattern that I am trying to relate to HTMMIS.  I am unsure
wether it can be seen as a cup/sourcer or a double - bottom.  In case of a
double bottom the pivot would be the middle high of the base, but in this
case it seems to be too low?  And the second bottom did not undercut
previous low... how would you analyze this?

Thanks

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

Interesting chart, Alexander, I hope we can get some discussion
going on it, at least it would be more interesting than a
hypothetical fusion engine that isn't owned by a tradable company
yet.

At a glance, I see four bottoms. What is interesting to me is
that drawing a line along the highs and the lows reveals an
expanding wedge, haven't seen that many of them that still have
good CS elements. Volume is also interesting, the first bottom on
3/15 closed near that day's lows, and on ADV.  The 2nd, on 4/4,
and the 4th, on 5/24, showed strong reversals on nearly twice
ADV.  The first and third were both marked by strong recoveries
on the day following the low, with the third also marked by
nearly twice ADV. On the latest recovery, the stock has moved
from 50 to nearly 70, but only broke ADV 4 times, tho up days
outnumbered down days about 2:1.

If I were trying to play this one, I suspect I would tend to view
it, for now, in a trading range with a lot of support. I would
try to buy it on the lower side of its range, and take profits on
the upper side. But I would also be conscious of the potential to
explode out of this range on volume, so volume would be my
primary indicator, with price secondary.

From a CANSLIM point of view, I cannot shove it into any chart
pattern I recognize, and invite others to comment.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2000 10:57 PM


Hi,

Could someone help me understand the chart of EMC's recent
action?  It sort
of looks like there was a double bottom from end of march to
early may, and
then some other cup-like base.

On the other hand, one may think that there is a "Triple" bottom
since the
latest peak did not go over the second peak of the W.  Could
someone point
out their view on this?

Thank you

______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 13 Jun 2000 09:12:03 -0700

WAT (IBD #'s 96 91 AAB) looks like it is breaking out of a
cup and handle pattern on volume that at least as of now is
running about + 50% ahead of ADV.

Ziggy


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 13 Jun 2000 11:11:56 -0700 (PDT)

Ok here is a question for you.

What would you consider the pivot point.

On march 7th (start of the cup), the o/c/h/l was 109/103.5/113/103
Today WAT is 112.875 currently.

Is the pivot point 109 or is the pivot point 113?


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:

> WAT (IBD #'s 96 91 AAB) looks like it is breaking out of a
> cup and handle pattern on volume that at least as of now is
> running about + 50% ahead of ADV.
>
> Ziggy
>
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 13 Jun 2000 14:59:42 -0400



IMHO the proper pivot is 109.75 (as per TA that I have read), which is the
top of the handle, HOWEVER, just to be on the safe side you may want to
wait untill 113 is cleared, since it may prove to be resistance.  I am
quite interested in what others have to say about it.

Btw, few weeks ago I purchased a stock in similar situtation
using 109.75 as pivot just to see it bounce down from the 52 weeks high
resistance of 113 (I am using WAT's numbers to illustrate).  Now I try to
use 52 weeks high as a pivot, especially if it happened recently.


Anna



Pritish Shah <[e-mail]> on 06/13/2000 02:11:56 PM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




Ok here is a question for you.

What would you consider the pivot point.

On march 7th (start of the cup), the o/c/h/l was 109/103.5/113/103
Today WAT is 112.875 currently.

Is the pivot point 109 or is the pivot point 113?


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:

> WAT (IBD #'s 96 91 AAB) looks like it is breaking out of a
> cup and handle pattern on volume that at least as of now is
> running about + 50% ahead of ADV.
>
> Ziggy
>
>
> -
>
>


-





-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 13 Jun 2000 12:49:42 -0700

I calculate the pivot point to be 109 7/8...1/8 higher than the handle high of
109 3/4.

Ziggy

[e-mail] wrote:

> IMHO the proper pivot is 109.75 (as per TA that I have read), which is the
> top of the handle, HOWEVER, just to be on the safe side you may want to
> wait untill 113 is cleared, since it may prove to be resistance.  I am
> quite interested in what others have to say about it.
>
> Btw, few weeks ago I purchased a stock in similar situtation
> using 109.75 as pivot just to see it bounce down from the 52 weeks high
> resistance of 113 (I am using WAT's numbers to illustrate).  Now I try to
> use 52 weeks high as a pivot, especially if it happened recently.
>
> Anna
>
> Pritish Shah <[e-mail]> on 06/13/2000 02:11:56 PM
>
> Please respond to [e-mail]
>
> To:   canslim list <[e-mail]>
> cc:
> Subject:  Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
>
> Ok here is a question for you.
>
> What would you consider the pivot point.
>
> On march 7th (start of the cup), the o/c/h/l was 109/103.5/113/103
> Today WAT is 112.875 currently.
>
> Is the pivot point 109 or is the pivot point 113?
>
> Regards,
> Shah
> 408-525-4263
>
> On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
>
> > WAT (IBD #'s 96 91 AAB) looks like it is breaking out of a
> > cup and handle pattern on volume that at least as of now is
> > running about + 50% ahead of ADV.
> >
> > Ziggy
> >
> >
> > -
> >
> >
>
> -
>
> -


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 13 Jun 2000 12:54:20 -0700 (PDT)


I do not know much but I do not think we are seeing a substantial breakout
today (as far as volume is concerned). We should see around 1.5xWeekly_Avg
or more.

Last week it averaged around 400k/day this week, it is about 450k this
week and thus not a breakout volume.

I am being defensive at the present moment because of the market and am
falling back on weekly (rather than daily) charts.


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:

> I calculate the pivot point to be 109 7/8...1/8 higher than the handle high of
> 109 3/4.
>
> Ziggy
>
> [e-mail] wrote:
>
> > IMHO the proper pivot is 109.75 (as per TA that I have read), which is the
> > top of the handle, HOWEVER, just to be on the safe side you may want to
> > wait untill 113 is cleared, since it may prove to be resistance.  I am
> > quite interested in what others have to say about it.
> >
> > Btw, few weeks ago I purchased a stock in similar situtation
> > using 109.75 as pivot just to see it bounce down from the 52 weeks high
> > resistance of 113 (I am using WAT's numbers to illustrate).  Now I try to
> > use 52 weeks high as a pivot, especially if it happened recently.
> >
> > Anna
> >
> > Pritish Shah <[e-mail]> on 06/13/2000 02:11:56 PM
> >
> > Please respond to [e-mail]
> >
> > To:   canslim list <[e-mail]>
> > cc:
> > Subject:  Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
> >
> > Ok here is a question for you.
> >
> > What would you consider the pivot point.
> >
> > On march 7th (start of the cup), the o/c/h/l was 109/103.5/113/103
> > Today WAT is 112.875 currently.
> >
> > Is the pivot point 109 or is the pivot point 113?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Shah
> > 408-525-4263
> >
> > On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
> >
> > > WAT (IBD #'s 96 91 AAB) looks like it is breaking out of a
> > > cup and handle pattern on volume that at least as of now is
> > > running about + 50% ahead of ADV.
> > >
> > > Ziggy
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > >
> > >
> >
> > -
> >
> > -
>
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 13 Jun 2000 15:44:45 -0700

Hi Shah,

WON uses the 50 day average volume which in the case of WAT is 383,800...today's
volume of 585,300 is 1.52 x ADVor +52% ADV.

XLNX (IBD #'s 94 95 AAA) had a price B/O today to hit a new 52 week high...however
volume wasn't
there...was less than ADV.  May be worth watching tomorrow to see if volume comes
in.

Regards,
Ziggy

Pritish Shah wrote:

> I do not know much but I do not think we are seeing a substantial breakout
> today (as far as volume is concerned). We should see around 1.5xWeekly_Avg
> or more.
>
> Last week it averaged around 400k/day this week, it is about 450k this
> week and thus not a breakout volume.
>
> I am being defensive at the present moment because of the market and am
> falling back on weekly (rather than daily) charts.
>
> Regards,
> Shah
> 408-525-4263
>
> On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
>
> > I calculate the pivot point to be 109 7/8...1/8 higher than the handle high of
> > 109 3/4.
> >
> > Ziggy
> >
> > [e-mail] wrote:
> >
> > > IMHO the proper pivot is 109.75 (as per TA that I have read), which is the
> > > top of the handle, HOWEVER, just to be on the safe side you may want to
> > > wait untill 113 is cleared, since it may prove to be resistance.  I am
> > > quite interested in what others have to say about it.
> > >
> > > Btw, few weeks ago I purchased a stock in similar situtation
> > > using 109.75 as pivot just to see it bounce down from the 52 weeks high
> > > resistance of 113 (I am using WAT's numbers to illustrate).  Now I try to
> > > use 52 weeks high as a pivot, especially if it happened recently.
> > >
> > > Anna
> > >
> > > Pritish Shah <[e-mail]> on 06/13/2000 02:11:56 PM
> > >
> > > Please respond to [e-mail]
> > >
> > > To:   canslim list <[e-mail]>
> > > cc:
> > > Subject:  Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
> > >
> > > Ok here is a question for you.
> > >
> > > What would you consider the pivot point.
> > >
> > > On march 7th (start of the cup), the o/c/h/l was 109/103.5/113/103
> > > Today WAT is 112.875 currently.
> > >
> > > Is the pivot point 109 or is the pivot point 113?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Shah
> > > 408-525-4263
> > >
> > > On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
> > >
> > > > WAT (IBD #'s 96 91 AAB) looks like it is breaking out of a
> > > > cup and handle pattern on volume that at least as of now is
> > > > running about + 50% ahead of ADV.
> > > >
> > > > Ziggy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > -
> > >
> > > -
> >
> >
> > -
> >
> >
>
> -


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] back to investing
Date: 13 Jun 2000 19:08:09 -0700

OK, I've said enough [too much] already on hydrogen as a fuel.  This IS a CANSLIM group, and it's time to get
back on topic:

I was 100% invested a week ago, and I'm now 100% cash (except for mutual funds).  I liked the Nasdaq action
today, closing strong at the end--forgot to check volume though.  So why am I in cash?  I'm chicken; I don't
like having to follow my stocks every day, and I'm on vacation.

Good luck and happy hunting,

-Jim

P.S. My E trade [fake] game portfolio is up 13% in under a week largely because of KEI [Keithley Instruments].
I hope one of you were fortunate enough to latch onto this a few weeks ago or earlier [up over 50% in a few days
off of a decent cup w/ handle--way extended now though].


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "lynn williams" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 13 Jun 2000 16:23:36 -0400

Can someone please tell me if you were to choose between buying ADI, GLW,
ANEN, SGR, SDLI, ADCT, NOK, PLXS, PWER, SEBL, or ORCL, which one would you
buy tomorrow?
Thanks so much all :)
Lynn

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 6:44 PM


> Hi Shah,
>
> WON uses the 50 day average volume which in the case of WAT is
383,800...today's
> volume of 585,300 is 1.52 x ADVor +52% ADV.
>
> XLNX (IBD #'s 94 95 AAA) had a price B/O today to hit a new 52 week
high...however
> volume wasn't
> there...was less than ADV.  May be worth watching tomorrow to see if
volume comes
> in.
>
> Regards,
> Ziggy
>
> Pritish Shah wrote:
>
> > I do not know much but I do not think we are seeing a substantial
breakout
> > today (as far as volume is concerned). We should see around
1.5xWeekly_Avg
> > or more.
> >
> > Last week it averaged around 400k/day this week, it is about 450k this
> > week and thus not a breakout volume.
> >
> > I am being defensive at the present moment because of the market and am
> > falling back on weekly (rather than daily) charts.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Shah
> > 408-525-4263
> >
> > On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
> >
> > > I calculate the pivot point to be 109 7/8...1/8 higher than the handle
high of
> > > 109 3/4.
> > >
> > > Ziggy
> > >
> > > [e-mail] wrote:
> > >
> > > > IMHO the proper pivot is 109.75 (as per TA that I have read), which
is the
> > > > top of the handle, HOWEVER, just to be on the safe side you may want
to
> > > > wait untill 113 is cleared, since it may prove to be resistance.  I
am
> > > > quite interested in what others have to say about it.
> > > >
> > > > Btw, few weeks ago I purchased a stock in similar situtation
> > > > using 109.75 as pivot just to see it bounce down from the 52 weeks
high
> > > > resistance of 113 (I am using WAT's numbers to illustrate).  Now I
try to
> > > > use 52 weeks high as a pivot, especially if it happened recently.
> > > >
> > > > Anna
> > > >
> > > > Pritish Shah <[e-mail]> on 06/13/2000 02:11:56 PM
> > > >
> > > > Please respond to [e-mail]
> > > >
> > > > To:   canslim list <[e-mail]>
> > > > cc:
> > > > Subject:  Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
> > > >
> > > > Ok here is a question for you.
> > > >
> > > > What would you consider the pivot point.
> > > >
> > > > On march 7th (start of the cup), the o/c/h/l was 109/103.5/113/103
> > > > Today WAT is 112.875 currently.
> > > >
> > > > Is the pivot point 109 or is the pivot point 113?
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Shah
> > > > 408-525-4263
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > WAT (IBD #'s 96 91 AAB) looks like it is breaking out of a
> > > > > cup and handle pattern on volume that at least as of now is
> > > > > running about + 50% ahead of ADV.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ziggy
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > >
> > > > -
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > >
> > >
> >
> > -
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "lynn williams" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] back to investing
Date: 13 Jun 2000 16:33:04 -0400

I am so sorry, I forgot to ask if you would sell AMCC. The volume in selling
is mind-boggling yet the analysts keep saying it is a n overeaction. I hae
about 1870 shares and I am not sure whether to sell all or some?
Thanks again all :)
LYnn
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 10:08 PM


> OK, I've said enough [too much] already on hydrogen as a fuel.  This IS a
CANSLIM group, and it's time to get
> back on topic:
>
> I was 100% invested a week ago, and I'm now 100% cash (except for mutual
funds).  I liked the Nasdaq action
> today, closing strong at the end--forgot to check volume though.  So why
am I in cash?  I'm chicken; I don't
> like having to follow my stocks every day, and I'm on vacation.
>
> Good luck and happy hunting,
>
> -Jim
>
> P.S. My E trade [fake] game portfolio is up 13% in under a week largely
because of KEI [Keithley Instruments].
> I hope one of you were fortunate enough to latch onto this a few weeks ago
or earlier [up over 50% in a few days
> off of a decent cup w/ handle--way extended now though].
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 13 Jun 2000 16:59:12 -0700 (PDT)


ADI: breakout on normal volume -- bad
GLW: breakout on normal volume -- bad
ANEN: breakout on heavy volume and went down today on heavy volume -- bad
SGR: LLUR but it is a bit extended. However so far the best stock.
SDLI: strong volume breakout out of 13week base.
ADCT: Nice LLUR but it think it might be a bit overextended
NOK: Would wait for a handle to form. Looks good even if a handle does not
     form
PLXS: Overextended but good LLUR
PWER: overextended but good LLUR
SEBL: forming right side of a cup
ORCL: either double bottom or forming a cup

Of all the stocks listed, probably SDLI/NOK/ORCL/SEBL would probably be
good.

AMCC: well it looks really under heavy distribution. I would sell it. If
you have already taken out profit from it, then hang on.

Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Tue, 13 Jun 2000, lynn williams wrote:

> Can someone please tell me if you were to choose between buying ADI, GLW,
> ANEN, SGR, SDLI, ADCT, NOK, PLXS, PWER, SEBL, or ORCL, which one would you
> buy tomorrow?
> Thanks so much all :)
> Lynn
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 6:44 PM
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
>
>
> > Hi Shah,
> >
> > WON uses the 50 day average volume which in the case of WAT is
> 383,800...today's
> > volume of 585,300 is 1.52 x ADVor +52% ADV.
> >
> > XLNX (IBD #'s 94 95 AAA) had a price B/O today to hit a new 52 week
> high...however
> > volume wasn't
> > there...was less than ADV.  May be worth watching tomorrow to see if
> volume comes
> > in.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ziggy
> >
> > Pritish Shah wrote:
> >
> > > I do not know much but I do not think we are seeing a substantial
> breakout
> > > today (as far as volume is concerned). We should see around
> 1.5xWeekly_Avg
> > > or more.
> > >
> > > Last week it averaged around 400k/day this week, it is about 450k this
> > > week and thus not a breakout volume.
> > >
> > > I am being defensive at the present moment because of the market and am
> > > falling back on weekly (rather than daily) charts.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Shah
> > > 408-525-4263
> > >
> > > On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
> > >
> > > > I calculate the pivot point to be 109 7/8...1/8 higher than the handle
> high of
> > > > 109 3/4.
> > > >
> > > > Ziggy
> > > >
> > > > [e-mail] wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > IMHO the proper pivot is 109.75 (as per TA that I have read), which
> is the
> > > > > top of the handle, HOWEVER, just to be on the safe side you may want
> to
> > > > > wait untill 113 is cleared, since it may prove to be resistance.  I
> am
> > > > > quite interested in what others have to say about it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Btw, few weeks ago I purchased a stock in similar situtation
> > > > > using 109.75 as pivot just to see it bounce down from the 52 weeks
> high
> > > > > resistance of 113 (I am using WAT's numbers to illustrate).  Now I
> try to
> > > > > use 52 weeks high as a pivot, especially if it happened recently.
> > > > >
> > > > > Anna
> > > > >
> > > > > Pritish Shah <[e-mail]> on 06/13/2000 02:11:56 PM
> > > > >
> > > > > Please respond to [e-mail]
> > > > >
> > > > > To:   canslim list <[e-mail]>
> > > > > cc:
> > > > > Subject:  Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
> > > > >
> > > > > Ok here is a question for you.
> > > > >
> > > > > What would you consider the pivot point.
> > > > >
> > > > > On march 7th (start of the cup), the o/c/h/l was 109/103.5/113/103
> > > > > Today WAT is 112.875 currently.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is the pivot point 109 or is the pivot point 113?
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Shah
> > > > > 408-525-4263
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > WAT (IBD #'s 96 91 AAB) looks like it is breaking out of a
> > > > > > cup and handle pattern on volume that at least as of now is
> > > > > > running about + 50% ahead of ADV.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ziggy
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -
> > > > >
> > > > > -
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > -
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
> -
>
>



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 13 Jun 2000 19:23:31 -0600

I set the pivot on this one at 110.  My reasoning is one increment above
the high of the handle (109.75) and I round to the nearest quarter point.
I think WON suggests an eighth.  If so, his pivot would be 109.875.  (BTW,
I purchased this one mid-day today!!)

At 11:11 AM 6/13/00 -0700, you wrote:
>Ok here is a question for you.
>
>What would you consider the pivot point.
>
>On march 7th (start of the cup), the o/c/h/l was 109/103.5/113/103
>Today WAT is 112.875 currently.
>
>Is the pivot point 109 or is the pivot point 113?
>
>
>Regards,
>Shah
>408-525-4263
>
>
>On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
>
>> WAT (IBD #'s 96 91 AAB) looks like it is breaking out of a
>> cup and handle pattern on volume that at least as of now is
>> running about + 50% ahead of ADV.
>>
>> Ziggy
>>
>>
>> -
>>
>>
>
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] back to investing
Date: 13 Jun 2000 19:46:31 -0600

At 07:08 PM 6/13/00 -0700, you wrote:
...
>-Jim
>
>P.S. My E trade [fake] game portfolio is up 13% in under a week largely
because of KEI [Keithley Instruments].
>I hope one of you were fortunate enough to latch onto this a few weeks ago
or earlier [up over 50% in a few days
>off of a decent cup w/ handle--way extended now though].
>
This one (KEI) is SCARING ME TO DEATH!!  I grabbed it Friday a week ago and
I'm showing an 88% gain!!  I certainly have never seen this kind of gain
this fast on any stock ever!!  I put in a stop at 60% gain earlier today,
but I'm thinking of cinching it up a bit.

Does anyone think the action is a "climax top" or what?  I'm gonna look
through the chart tonight and see where I think my hard stop should be.
Good luck all.  (I am 100% invested now.)


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Hugh Fader" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 13 Jun 2000 22:02:13 -0400

Pritish,

I disagree on ADI and GLW. ADI broke out on 52% above average volume on 6/8.
GLW broke out on 57% above average volume on 6/12. I bought both. GLW is now
over-extended, but ADI has pulled back a bit and is still buyable.

I bought SDLI on its pullback, but it is now also is over-extended.

- Hugh

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Pritish Shah
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 7:59 PM



ADI: breakout on normal volume -- bad
GLW: breakout on normal volume -- bad
ANEN: breakout on heavy volume and went down today on heavy volume -- bad
SGR: LLUR but it is a bit extended. However so far the best stock.
SDLI: strong volume breakout out of 13week base.
ADCT: Nice LLUR but it think it might be a bit overextended
NOK: Would wait for a handle to form. Looks good even if a handle does not
     form
PLXS: Overextended but good LLUR
PWER: overextended but good LLUR
SEBL: forming right side of a cup
ORCL: either double bottom or forming a cup

Of all the stocks listed, probably SDLI/NOK/ORCL/SEBL would probably be
good.

AMCC: well it looks really under heavy distribution. I would sell it. If
you have already taken out profit from it, then hang on.

Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Tue, 13 Jun 2000, lynn williams wrote:

> Can someone please tell me if you were to choose between buying ADI, GLW,
> ANEN, SGR, SDLI, ADCT, NOK, PLXS, PWER, SEBL, or ORCL, which one would you
> buy tomorrow?
> Thanks so much all :)
> Lynn
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 6:44 PM
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
>
>
> > Hi Shah,
> >
> > WON uses the 50 day average volume which in the case of WAT is
> 383,800...today's
> > volume of 585,300 is 1.52 x ADVor +52% ADV.
> >
> > XLNX (IBD #'s 94 95 AAA) had a price B/O today to hit a new 52 week
> high...however
> > volume wasn't
> > there...was less than ADV.  May be worth watching tomorrow to see if
> volume comes
> > in.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ziggy
> >
> > Pritish Shah wrote:
> >
> > > I do not know much but I do not think we are seeing a substantial
> breakout
> > > today (as far as volume is concerned). We should see around
> 1.5xWeekly_Avg
> > > or more.
> > >
> > > Last week it averaged around 400k/day this week, it is about 450k this
> > > week and thus not a breakout volume.
> > >
> > > I am being defensive at the present moment because of the market and
am
> > > falling back on weekly (rather than daily) charts.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Shah
> > > 408-525-4263
> > >
> > > On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
> > >
> > > > I calculate the pivot point to be 109 7/8...1/8 higher than the
handle
> high of
> > > > 109 3/4.
> > > >
> > > > Ziggy
> > > >
> > > > [e-mail] wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > IMHO the proper pivot is 109.75 (as per TA that I have read),
which
> is the
> > > > > top of the handle, HOWEVER, just to be on the safe side you may
want
> to
> > > > > wait untill 113 is cleared, since it may prove to be resistance.
I
> am
> > > > > quite interested in what others have to say about it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Btw, few weeks ago I purchased a stock in similar situtation
> > > > > using 109.75 as pivot just to see it bounce down from the 52 weeks
> high
> > > > > resistance of 113 (I am using WAT's numbers to illustrate).  Now I
> try to
> > > > > use 52 weeks high as a pivot, especially if it happened recently.
> > > > >
> > > > > Anna
> > > > >
> > > > > Pritish Shah <[e-mail]> on 06/13/2000 02:11:56 PM
> > > > >
> > > > > Please respond to [e-mail]
> > > > >
> > > > > To:   canslim list <[e-mail]>
> > > > > cc:
> > > > > Subject:  Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
> > > > >
> > > > > Ok here is a question for you.
> > > > >
> > > > > What would you consider the pivot point.
> > > > >
> > > > > On march 7th (start of the cup), the o/c/h/l was 109/103.5/113/103
> > > > > Today WAT is 112.875 currently.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is the pivot point 109 or is the pivot point 113?
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Shah
> > > > > 408-525-4263
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > WAT (IBD #'s 96 91 AAB) looks like it is breaking out of a
> > > > > > cup and handle pattern on volume that at least as of now is
> > > > > > running about + 50% ahead of ADV.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ziggy
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -
> > > > >
> > > > > -
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > -
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
> -
>
>



-


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 13 Jun 2000 20:17:31 -0600

No, absolutely not!!  :-)  But I will share some opinions from a CANSLIM
perspective.  A summary is that I would only consider ADI and NOK tomorrow.
 ADI has broken out and is in range, and NOK is ready to go (maybe).  There
are a couple of others that I'm not following due to Industry Group rank
below an A (as noted below), but they are a B so they could be bought.  IBD
said to concentrate on the top 60 a few days ago.

ADI - I really like the chart on this one, but I haven't bought it (at
least yet).  I have the pivot at 92.25, so it's still buyable at today's
close.  Hmm, I wonder if it's time to trade in my JBL for this one???  Hmmmm.
GLW - I got this one yesterday.  I made the pivot at 220, so I wouldn't
recommend it above 5% or $231.  Good stock.
ANEN - Good stock, way extended.
SGR - Not on my leader list (Steel Pipe and Tubing??), but looks extended
anyway.  (I prefer 7+ week base, and don't even take a second look below 4
weeks)
SDLI - I bought this one after the FT day.  Great stock, but it's too
extended for a purchase now.
ADCT - Strong uptrend, way extended.
NOK - This one is playing with a breakout.  I have the pivot at 59 (closing
basis), but it needs to show at least 1.4 ADV when it makes the price.
Definitely worth watching.
PLXS - Strong uptrend, way extended.
PWER - Industry Group Rank is 62, so it's off my list (top 40 only).
Strong uptrend, way extended anyway.
SEBL - I loved this one early this year!!  However, Industry Group Rank is
65, so it's off my list (top 40 only).  Chart looks like it's forming the
right side of the cup.  You would want to wait for a handle or a new high
to buy this one if you want to risk the group.
ORCL - Great stock.  However, Industry Group Rank is 65, so it's off my
list (top 40 only). This one could be forming a handle right now.



At 04:23 PM 6/13/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Can someone please tell me if you were to choose between buying ADI, GLW,
>ANEN, SGR, SDLI, ADCT, NOK, PLXS, PWER, SEBL, or ORCL, which one would you
>buy tomorrow?
>Thanks so much all :)
>Lynn
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <[e-mail]>
>To: <[e-mail]>
>Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 6:44 PM
>Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
>
>
>> Hi Shah,
>>
>> WON uses the 50 day average volume which in the case of WAT is
>383,800...today's
>> volume of 585,300 is 1.52 x ADVor +52% ADV.
>>
>> XLNX (IBD #'s 94 95 AAA) had a price B/O today to hit a new 52 week
>high...however
>> volume wasn't
>> there...was less than ADV.  May be worth watching tomorrow to see if
>volume comes
>> in.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Ziggy
>>
>> Pritish Shah wrote:
>>
>> > I do not know much but I do not think we are seeing a substantial
>breakout
>> > today (as far as volume is concerned). We should see around
>1.5xWeekly_Avg
>> > or more.
>> >
>> > Last week it averaged around 400k/day this week, it is about 450k this
>> > week and thus not a breakout volume.
>> >
>> > I am being defensive at the present moment because of the market and am
>> > falling back on weekly (rather than daily) charts.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Shah
>> > 408-525-4263
>> >
>> > On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
>> >
>> > > I calculate the pivot point to be 109 7/8...1/8 higher than the handle
>high of
>> > > 109 3/4.
>> > >
>> > > Ziggy
>> > >
>> > > [e-mail] wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > IMHO the proper pivot is 109.75 (as per TA that I have read), which
>is the
>> > > > top of the handle, HOWEVER, just to be on the safe side you may want
>to
>> > > > wait untill 113 is cleared, since it may prove to be resistance.  I
>am
>> > > > quite interested in what others have to say about it.
>> > > >
>> > > > Btw, few weeks ago I purchased a stock in similar situtation
>> > > > using 109.75 as pivot just to see it bounce down from the 52 weeks
>high
>> > > > resistance of 113 (I am using WAT's numbers to illustrate).  Now I
>try to
>> > > > use 52 weeks high as a pivot, especially if it happened recently.
>> > > >
>> > > > Anna
>> > > >
>> > > > Pritish Shah <[e-mail]> on 06/13/2000 02:11:56 PM
>> > > >
>> > > > Please respond to [e-mail]
>> > > >
>> > > > To:   canslim list <[e-mail]>
>> > > > cc:
>> > > > Subject:  Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
>> > > >
>> > > > Ok here is a question for you.
>> > > >
>> > > > What would you consider the pivot point.
>> > > >
>> > > > On march 7th (start of the cup), the o/c/h/l was 109/103.5/113/103
>> > > > Today WAT is 112.875 currently.
>> > > >
>> > > > Is the pivot point 109 or is the pivot point 113?
>> > > >
>> > > > Regards,
>> > > > Shah
>> > > > 408-525-4263
>> > > >
>> > > > On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > WAT (IBD #'s 96 91 AAB) looks like it is breaking out of a
>> > > > > cup and handle pattern on volume that at least as of now is
>> > > > > running about + 50% ahead of ADV.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Ziggy
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > -
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > -
>> > > >
>> > > > -
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > -
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > -
>>
>>
>> -
>>
>
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] back to investing
Date: 13 Jun 2000 20:20:18 -0600

Where did you buy AMCC??  I bought it in April but was promptly chased out
as the NAS rally failed.  You should ALWAYS limit your losses to no more
than 7-8% according to WON.  If you are profiting, then there are many
rules to consider.  I count 4 distribution days in the last 6 days, and I
wouldn't want to hold a stock with that action.  However, when and where
(and why if it wasn't a CANSLIM Breakout) you bought it is a key factor.

At 04:33 PM 6/13/00 -0400, you wrote:
>I am so sorry, I forgot to ask if you would sell AMCC. The volume in selling
>is mind-boggling yet the analysts keep saying it is a n overeaction. I hae
>about 1870 shares and I am not sure whether to sell all or some?
>Thanks again all :)
>LYnn
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <[e-mail]>
>To: <[e-mail]>
>Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 10:08 PM
>Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] back to investing
>
>
>> OK, I've said enough [too much] already on hydrogen as a fuel.  This IS a
>CANSLIM group, and it's time to get
>> back on topic:
>>
>> I was 100% invested a week ago, and I'm now 100% cash (except for mutual
>funds).  I liked the Nasdaq action
>> today, closing strong at the end--forgot to check volume though.  So why
>am I in cash?  I'm chicken; I don't
>> like having to follow my stocks every day, and I'm on vacation.
>>
>> Good luck and happy hunting,
>>
>> -Jim
>>
>> P.S. My E trade [fake] game portfolio is up 13% in under a week largely
>because of KEI [Keithley Instruments].
>> I hope one of you were fortunate enough to latch onto this a few weeks ago
>or earlier [up over 50% in a few days
>> off of a decent cup w/ handle--way extended now though].
>>
>>
>> -
>>
>
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 13 Jun 2000 20:26:56 -0600

At 04:59 PM 6/13/00 -0700, you wrote:

What are you looking for on volume?  I have both ADI and GLW breaking out
on 1.5 X ADV.  IBD has been saying to look for at least 1.4 to 1.5.  Are
you looking for more?

>ADI: breakout on normal volume -- bad

I put the B/O on 6/8 with over 4 M shares traded, 49% over latest 50 day ADV.

>GLW: breakout on normal volume -- bad

I put the B/O yesterday on over 4.5 M shares, 53% over lastest 50 day ADV.




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "lynn williams" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 13 Jun 2000 19:49:49 -0400

I bought AMCC in Sept of 1999 for 27.50 and then again in Nov for 44... so I
still have a great return despite this past week.. however, I am gonna sell
it all.. all 1870 shares...thanks hugh...
I agree on the volume on ADI being low but not the volume on GLW on the
breakout... So am not going to buy ADI because the volume was low on the
breakout...NOK would be good but I already own 1,000 shares....as well
ADCT....ditto a 1,000 shares of SDLI.. only have 55 shares of GLW
though.....problem is that I am going to be out of the country with no phone
beginning Thursday and I am trying to realign my portfolios prior to
leaving.. any other suggestions???
Lynn :)


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 10:02 PM


> Pritish,
>
> I disagree on ADI and GLW. ADI broke out on 52% above average volume on
6/8.
> GLW broke out on 57% above average volume on 6/12. I bought both. GLW is
now
> over-extended, but ADI has pulled back a bit and is still buyable.
>
> I bought SDLI on its pullback, but it is now also is over-extended.
>
> - Hugh
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail]
> [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Pritish Shah
> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 7:59 PM
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
>
>
>
> ADI: breakout on normal volume -- bad
> GLW: breakout on normal volume -- bad
> ANEN: breakout on heavy volume and went down today on heavy volume -- bad
> SGR: LLUR but it is a bit extended. However so far the best stock.
> SDLI: strong volume breakout out of 13week base.
> ADCT: Nice LLUR but it think it might be a bit overextended
> NOK: Would wait for a handle to form. Looks good even if a handle does not
>      form
> PLXS: Overextended but good LLUR
> PWER: overextended but good LLUR
> SEBL: forming right side of a cup
> ORCL: either double bottom or forming a cup
>
> Of all the stocks listed, probably SDLI/NOK/ORCL/SEBL would probably be
> good.
>
> AMCC: well it looks really under heavy distribution. I would sell it. If
> you have already taken out profit from it, then hang on.
>
> Regards,
> Shah
> 408-525-4263
>
>
> On Tue, 13 Jun 2000, lynn williams wrote:
>
> > Can someone please tell me if you were to choose between buying ADI,
GLW,
> > ANEN, SGR, SDLI, ADCT, NOK, PLXS, PWER, SEBL, or ORCL, which one would
you
> > buy tomorrow?
> > Thanks so much all :)
> > Lynn
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <[e-mail]>
> > To: <[e-mail]>
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 6:44 PM
> > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
> >
> >
> > > Hi Shah,
> > >
> > > WON uses the 50 day average volume which in the case of WAT is
> > 383,800...today's
> > > volume of 585,300 is 1.52 x ADVor +52% ADV.
> > >
> > > XLNX (IBD #'s 94 95 AAA) had a price B/O today to hit a new 52 week
> > high...however
> > > volume wasn't
> > > there...was less than ADV.  May be worth watching tomorrow to see if
> > volume comes
> > > in.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Ziggy
> > >
> > > Pritish Shah wrote:
> > >
> > > > I do not know much but I do not think we are seeing a substantial
> > breakout
> > > > today (as far as volume is concerned). We should see around
> > 1.5xWeekly_Avg
> > > > or more.
> > > >
> > > > Last week it averaged around 400k/day this week, it is about 450k
this
> > > > week and thus not a breakout volume.
> > > >
> > > > I am being defensive at the present moment because of the market and
> am
> > > > falling back on weekly (rather than daily) charts.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Shah
> > > > 408-525-4263
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I calculate the pivot point to be 109 7/8...1/8 higher than the
> handle
> > high of
> > > > > 109 3/4.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ziggy
> > > > >
> > > > > [e-mail] wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > IMHO the proper pivot is 109.75 (as per TA that I have read),
> which
> > is the
> > > > > > top of the handle, HOWEVER, just to be on the safe side you may
> want
> > to
> > > > > > wait untill 113 is cleared, since it may prove to be resistance.
> I
> > am
> > > > > > quite interested in what others have to say about it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Btw, few weeks ago I purchased a stock in similar situtation
> > > > > > using 109.75 as pivot just to see it bounce down from the 52
weeks
> > high
> > > > > > resistance of 113 (I am using WAT's numbers to illustrate).  Now
I
> > try to
> > > > > > use 52 weeks high as a pivot, especially if it happened
recently.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Anna
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Pritish Shah <[e-mail]> on 06/13/2000 02:11:56 PM
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please respond to [e-mail]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To:   canslim list <[e-mail]>
> > > > > > cc:
> > > > > > Subject:  Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ok here is a question for you.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What would you consider the pivot point.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On march 7th (start of the cup), the o/c/h/l was
109/103.5/113/103
> > > > > > Today WAT is 112.875 currently.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is the pivot point 109 or is the pivot point 113?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > Shah
> > > > > > 408-525-4263
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > WAT (IBD #'s 96 91 AAB) looks like it is breaking out of a
> > > > > > > cup and handle pattern on volume that at least as of now is
> > > > > > > running about + 50% ahead of ADV.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ziggy
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > -
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > >
> >
> >
> > -
> >
> >
>
>
>
> -
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "lynn williams" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 13 Jun 2000 19:55:01 -0400

According to my daily graphs online PWER has an industry group RS of B?
Ditto for SEBL, ORCL . where did you get the numeric number??
Lynn
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 10:26 PM


> At 04:59 PM 6/13/00 -0700, you wrote:
>
> What are you looking for on volume?  I have both ADI and GLW breaking out
> on 1.5 X ADV.  IBD has been saying to look for at least 1.4 to 1.5.  Are
> you looking for more?
>
> >ADI: breakout on normal volume -- bad
>
> I put the B/O on 6/8 with over 4 M shares traded, 49% over latest 50 day
ADV.
>
> >GLW: breakout on normal volume -- bad
>
> I put the B/O yesterday on over 4.5 M shares, 53% over lastest 50 day ADV.
>
>
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 13 Jun 2000 23:24:42 -0400

might as well wade in with my 2 cents worth.

I would mark the pivot as anything over 109.75, the high in the
handle prior today.  I don't see a need to first clear 113, as
that day appears to be an overreaction to the huge move the prior
day on well over 2X ADV.

DGO had the 50 day moving average volume at 377,200 so today it
was 1.55 times ADV, not that impressive given the remarkable
reversal in the mkts.

I also note management has only a small stake in the future at 6%
of the issue, and funds are already reported owning 51% of the
remaining float. Up/down volume ratio is also only 1.5.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 3:54 PM



I do not know much but I do not think we are seeing a substantial
breakout
today (as far as volume is concerned). We should see around
1.5xWeekly_Avg
or more.

Last week it averaged around 400k/day this week, it is about 450k
this
week and thus not a breakout volume.

I am being defensive at the present moment because of the market
and am
falling back on weekly (rather than daily) charts.


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:

> I calculate the pivot point to be 109 7/8...1/8 higher than the
handle high of
> 109 3/4.
>
> Ziggy
>
> [e-mail] wrote:
>
> > IMHO the proper pivot is 109.75 (as per TA that I have read),
which is the
> > top of the handle, HOWEVER, just to be on the safe side you
may want to
> > wait untill 113 is cleared, since it may prove to be
resistance.  I am
> > quite interested in what others have to say about it.
> >
> > Btw, few weeks ago I purchased a stock in similar situtation
> > using 109.75 as pivot just to see it bounce down from the 52
weeks high
> > resistance of 113 (I am using WAT's numbers to illustrate).
Now I try to
> > use 52 weeks high as a pivot, especially if it happened
recently.
> >
> > Anna
> >
> > Pritish Shah <[e-mail]> on 06/13/2000 02:11:56 PM
> >
> > Please respond to [e-mail]
> >
> > To:   canslim list <[e-mail]>
> > cc:
> > Subject:  Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
> >
> > Ok here is a question for you.
> >
> > What would you consider the pivot point.
> >
> > On march 7th (start of the cup), the o/c/h/l was
109/103.5/113/103
> > Today WAT is 112.875 currently.
> >
> > Is the pivot point 109 or is the pivot point 113?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Shah
> > 408-525-4263
> >
> > On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
> >
> > > WAT (IBD #'s 96 91 AAB) looks like it is breaking out of a
> > > cup and handle pattern on volume that at least as of now is
> > > running about + 50% ahead of ADV.
> > >
> > > Ziggy
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > >
> > >
> >
> > -
> >
> > -
>
>
> -
>
>


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 13 Jun 2000 21:47:53 -0600

I got the number from today's IBD by looking at the group for the stock.
About the top 40 get an A, next 40 get a B, etc.

At 07:55 PM 6/13/00 -0400, you wrote:
>According to my daily graphs online PWER has an industry group RS of B?
>Ditto for SEBL, ORCL . where did you get the numeric number??
>Lynn
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Earl Setser" <[e-mail]>
>To: <[e-mail]>
>Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 10:26 PM
>Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
>
>
>> At 04:59 PM 6/13/00 -0700, you wrote:
>>
>> What are you looking for on volume?  I have both ADI and GLW breaking out
>> on 1.5 X ADV.  IBD has been saying to look for at least 1.4 to 1.5.  Are
>> you looking for more?
>>
>> >ADI: breakout on normal volume -- bad
>>
>> I put the B/O on 6/8 with over 4 M shares traded, 49% over latest 50 day
>ADV.
>>
>> >GLW: breakout on normal volume -- bad
>>
>> I put the B/O yesterday on over 4.5 M shares, 53% over lastest 50 day ADV.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>>
>
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
Date: 13 Jun 2000 22:33:11 -0600

Looks pretty good to me, I think you could call a cup on this, it
wasn't too deep, from 71 or so to 53, which I think is around 28%
(approximately) deep, which isn't bad, volume shriveled up a bit for
a few days.

On 12 Jun 00, at 22:57, Alexander T wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Could someone help me understand the chart of EMC's recent action?  It sort
> of looks like there was a double bottom from end of march to early may, and
> then some other cup-like base.
>
> On the other hand, one may think that there is a "Tripple" bottom since the
> latest peak did not go over the second peak of the W.  Could someone point
> out their view on this?
>
> Thank you
>
> ______________________________________________
> FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
> Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
>
>
> -
>



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
Date: 13 Jun 2000 21:42:10 -0700

What's all the fuss about EMC? How can you justify a position in a stock
with a float of almost 2 billion shares?! Are you aware what type of buying
is needed to push this one?

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 9:33 PM


> Looks pretty good to me, I think you could call a cup on this, it
> wasn't too deep, from 71 or so to 53, which I think is around 28%
> (approximately) deep, which isn't bad, volume shriveled up a bit for
> a few days.
>
> On 12 Jun 00, at 22:57, Alexander T wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Could someone help me understand the chart of EMC's recent action?  It
sort
> > of looks like there was a double bottom from end of march to early may,
and
> > then some other cup-like base.
> >
> > On the other hand, one may think that there is a "Tripple" bottom since
the
> > latest peak did not go over the second peak of the W.  Could someone
point
> > out their view on this?
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> > ______________________________________________
> > FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
> > Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
Date: 14 Jun 2000 01:00:13 -0400

yeah, float doesn't seem to matter on this one. Even light volume
of 4 to 8 million shares, well under the ADV, has been
consistently able to move this stock up in its trading range.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 12:42 AM


What's all the fuss about EMC? How can you justify a position in
a stock
with a float of almost 2 billion shares?! Are you aware what type
of buying
is needed to push this one?

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 9:33 PM


> Looks pretty good to me, I think you could call a cup on this,
it
> wasn't too deep, from 71 or so to 53, which I think is around
28%
> (approximately) deep, which isn't bad, volume shriveled up a
bit for
> a few days.
>
> On 12 Jun 00, at 22:57, Alexander T wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Could someone help me understand the chart of EMC's recent
action?  It
sort
> > of looks like there was a double bottom from end of march to
early may,
and
> > then some other cup-like base.
> >
> > On the other hand, one may think that there is a "Tripple"
bottom since
the
> > latest peak did not go over the second peak of the W.  Could
someone
point
> > out their view on this?
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> > ______________________________________________
> > FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
> > Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
>
> -
>


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
Date: 13 Jun 2000 22:25:49 -0700

That may be true, but this is a CANSLIM forum and your forgetting about the
'S'.

Also it's interesting to note the U/D V ratio is a weak 0.8
Other than that there is definite resistance at 72.

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 10:00 PM


> yeah, float doesn't seem to matter on this one. Even light volume
> of 4 to 8 million shares, well under the ADV, has been
> consistently able to move this stock up in its trading range.
>
> Tom Worley
> [e-mail]
> chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Joseph Weisfish <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 12:42 AM
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
>
>
> What's all the fuss about EMC? How can you justify a position in
> a stock
> with a float of almost 2 billion shares?! Are you aware what type
> of buying
> is needed to push this one?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 9:33 PM
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
>
>
> > Looks pretty good to me, I think you could call a cup on this,
> it
> > wasn't too deep, from 71 or so to 53, which I think is around
> 28%
> > (approximately) deep, which isn't bad, volume shriveled up a
> bit for
> > a few days.
> >
> > On 12 Jun 00, at 22:57, Alexander T wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Could someone help me understand the chart of EMC's recent
> action?  It
> sort
> > > of looks like there was a double bottom from end of march to
> early may,
> and
> > > then some other cup-like base.
> > >
> > > On the other hand, one may think that there is a "Tripple"
> bottom since
> the
> > > latest peak did not go over the second peak of the W.  Could
> someone
> point
> > > out their view on this?
> > >
> > > Thank you
> > >
> > > ______________________________________________
> > > FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
> > > Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
> -
>
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
Date: 14 Jun 2000 01:36:30 -0400

"S" went out of style with WON's 26 week series, and remember
that I am still a hard core, fanatic micro and small cap
investor. Haven't owned a single company with more than about 15
million shares in several years.

I like the challenge of beating the odds. Liquidity isn't
everything if you are patient. R2000 is still the best index for
the year.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 1:25 AM


That may be true, but this is a CANSLIM forum and your forgetting
about the
'S'.

Also it's interesting to note the U/D V ratio is a weak 0.8
Other than that there is definite resistance at 72.

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 10:00 PM


> yeah, float doesn't seem to matter on this one. Even light
volume
> of 4 to 8 million shares, well under the ADV, has been
> consistently able to move this stock up in its trading range.
>
> Tom Worley
> [e-mail]
> chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Joseph Weisfish <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 12:42 AM
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
>
>
> What's all the fuss about EMC? How can you justify a position
in
> a stock
> with a float of almost 2 billion shares?! Are you aware what
type
> of buying
> is needed to push this one?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 9:33 PM
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
>
>
> > Looks pretty good to me, I think you could call a cup on
this,
> it
> > wasn't too deep, from 71 or so to 53, which I think is around
> 28%
> > (approximately) deep, which isn't bad, volume shriveled up a
> bit for
> > a few days.
> >
> > On 12 Jun 00, at 22:57, Alexander T wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Could someone help me understand the chart of EMC's recent
> action?  It
> sort
> > > of looks like there was a double bottom from end of march
to
> early may,
> and
> > > then some other cup-like base.
> > >
> > > On the other hand, one may think that there is a "Tripple"
> bottom since
> the
> > > latest peak did not go over the second peak of the W.
Could
> someone
> point
> > > out their view on this?
> > >
> > > Thank you
> > >
> > > ______________________________________________
> > > FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
> > > Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
> -
>
>
>
> -
>


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
Date: 13 Jun 2000 23:45:15 -0700

Isn't that a bit to extreme? There are plenty of great breakouts in the 20m
range.

Also how did the 'S' go out of "style"? Here's an excerpt from week 8:

"Q:  What is volume and why is it important?
A: The law of supply and demand is rampant in the marketplace. Stocks never
go up in price by accident - there must be large buying or demand."

The key words here are supply and demand, supply being the float. The only
reason that specific word, or "shares outstanding" was left out of those
articles is because they were geared to selling the paper. Since you cannot
find those figures anywhere in IBD it's useless for the article to mention
it.

Instead the articles tout what is presented in the paper namely "Vol %
Change", ''Acc.-Dis", and the institutional ''36 Mos. Performance Rank".

Float (supply) is still half the equation.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 10:36 PM


> "S" went out of style with WON's 26 week series, and remember
> that I am still a hard core, fanatic micro and small cap
> investor. Haven't owned a single company with more than about 15
> million shares in several years.
>
> I like the challenge of beating the odds. Liquidity isn't
> everything if you are patient. R2000 is still the best index for
> the year.
>
> Tom Worley
> [e-mail]
> chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Joseph Weisfish <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 1:25 AM
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
>
>
> That may be true, but this is a CANSLIM forum and your forgetting
> about the
> 'S'.
>
> Also it's interesting to note the U/D V ratio is a weak 0.8
> Other than that there is definite resistance at 72.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 10:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
>
>
> > yeah, float doesn't seem to matter on this one. Even light
> volume
> > of 4 to 8 million shares, well under the ADV, has been
> > consistently able to move this stock up in its trading range.
> >
> > Tom Worley
> > [e-mail]
> > chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> > get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Joseph Weisfish <[e-mail]>
> > To: <[e-mail]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 12:42 AM
> > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
> >
> >
> > What's all the fuss about EMC? How can you justify a position
> in
> > a stock
> > with a float of almost 2 billion shares?! Are you aware what
> type
> > of buying
> > is needed to push this one?
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
> > To: <[e-mail]>
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 9:33 PM
> > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
> >
> >
> > > Looks pretty good to me, I think you could call a cup on
> this,
> > it
> > > wasn't too deep, from 71 or so to 53, which I think is around
> > 28%
> > > (approximately) deep, which isn't bad, volume shriveled up a
> > bit for
> > > a few days.
> > >
> > > On 12 Jun 00, at 22:57, Alexander T wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > Could someone help me understand the chart of EMC's recent
> > action?  It
> > sort
> > > > of looks like there was a double bottom from end of march
> to
> > early may,
> > and
> > > > then some other cup-like base.
> > > >
> > > > On the other hand, one may think that there is a "Tripple"
> > bottom since
> > the
> > > > latest peak did not go over the second peak of the W.
> Could
> > someone
> > point
> > > > out their view on this?
> > > >
> > > > Thank you
> > > >
> > > > ______________________________________________
> > > > FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
> > > > Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > >
> >
> >
> > -
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
> -
>
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Gumpel <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] back to investing
Date: 14 Jun 2000 16:17:02 +0200

At 08:20 PM 13/6/00 -0600, Earl Setser wrote:
>Where did you buy AMCC??  I bought it in April but was promptly chased out
>as the NAS rally failed.  You should ALWAYS limit your losses to no more
>than 7-8% according to WON.  If you are profiting, then there are many
>rules to consider.  I count 4 distribution days in the last 6 days, and I
>wouldn't want to hold a stock with that action.  However, when and where
>(and why if it wasn't a CANSLIM Breakout) you bought it is a key factor.

I would disagree with WON in his strategy for taking profits. Weinstein has
a much more accessible strategy which includes defensively winching up
stops as the stock continues on a stage 2 climb, but then allows you to
stop out easily.

This has allowed me 95 - 100% on PCCC and TLGD. If I had followed WON, I'd
be out much, much sooner.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Tom Gumpel
Department of Special Education                         972-2-588-2165
School of Education                                   Fax:    [phone]
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem        in US:  877-258-9406
Jerusalem, ISRAEL 91905
http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msgumpel/main.htm
VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tim Fisher" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 14 Jun 2000 06:59:17 -0700

I own most of these so my opinion would be a bit biased ;}

At 04:23 PM 6/13/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Can someone please tell me if you were to choose between buying ADI, GLW,
>ANEN, SGR, SDLI, ADCT, NOK, PLXS, PWER, SEBL, or ORCL, which one would you
>buy tomorrow?
>Thanks so much all :)
>Lynn

Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists
Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site
PFB Information
mailto:[e-mail]
WWW http://OreRockOn.com


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tim Fisher" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] back to investing
Date: 14 Jun 2000 07:01:35 -0700

I removed my stop & am holding mine - this is one of those situations when
I deviate from WON. No rational reason for the selloff, not even "M", and
it had a flurry of _upgrades_ and EPS revisions upwards to boot! Also MNMD
is in this boat lately too; analysts refuse to budge after it tanked on
barely related news.

At 04:33 PM 6/13/00 -0400, you wrote:
>I am so sorry, I forgot to ask if you would sell AMCC. The volume in selling
>is mind-boggling yet the analysts keep saying it is a n overeaction. I hae
>about 1870 shares and I am not sure whether to sell all or some?
>Thanks again all :)
>LYnn
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <[e-mail]>
>To: <[e-mail]>
>Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 10:08 PM
>Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] back to investing
>
>
> > OK, I've said enough [too much] already on hydrogen as a fuel.  This IS a
>CANSLIM group, and it's time to get
> > back on topic:
> >
> > I was 100% invested a week ago, and I'm now 100% cash (except for mutual
>funds).  I liked the Nasdaq action
> > today, closing strong at the end--forgot to check volume though.  So why
>am I in cash?  I'm chicken; I don't
> > like having to follow my stocks every day, and I'm on vacation.
> >
> > Good luck and happy hunting,
> >
> > -Jim
> >
> > P.S. My E trade [fake] game portfolio is up 13% in under a week largely
>because of KEI [Keithley Instruments].
> > I hope one of you were fortunate enough to latch onto this a few weeks ago
>or earlier [up over 50% in a few days
> > off of a decent cup w/ handle--way extended now though].
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
>-

Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists
Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site
PFB Information
mailto:[e-mail]
WWW http://OreRockOn.com


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tim Fisher" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 14 Jun 2000 07:03:35 -0700

Earl, these are all from the HGS 90/90/90 ABC list. There are some oil
drillers on that list too (the horror!)

At 08:17 PM 6/13/00 -0600, you wrote:
>No, absolutely not!!  :-)  But I will share some opinions from a CANSLIM
>perspective.  A summary is that I would only consider ADI and NOK tomorrow.
>  ADI has broken out and is in range, and NOK is ready to go (maybe).  There
>are a couple of others that I'm not following due to Industry Group rank
>below an A (as noted below), but they are a B so they could be bought.  IBD
>said to concentrate on the top 60 a few days ago.
>
>ADI - I really like the chart on this one, but I haven't bought it (at
>least yet).  I have the pivot at 92.25, so it's still buyable at today's
>close.  Hmm, I wonder if it's time to trade in my JBL for this one???  Hmmmm.
>GLW - I got this one yesterday.  I made the pivot at 220, so I wouldn't
>recommend it above 5% or $231.  Good stock.
>ANEN - Good stock, way extended.
>SGR - Not on my leader list (Steel Pipe and Tubing??), but looks extended
>anyway.  (I prefer 7+ week base, and don't even take a second look below 4
>weeks)
>SDLI - I bought this one after the FT day.  Great stock, but it's too
>extended for a purchase now.
>ADCT - Strong uptrend, way extended.
>NOK - This one is playing with a breakout.  I have the pivot at 59 (closing
>basis), but it needs to show at least 1.4 ADV when it makes the price.
>Definitely worth watching.
>PLXS - Strong uptrend, way extended.
>PWER - Industry Group Rank is 62, so it's off my list (top 40 only).
>Strong uptrend, way extended anyway.
>SEBL - I loved this one early this year!!  However, Industry Group Rank is
>65, so it's off my list (top 40 only).  Chart looks like it's forming the
>right side of the cup.  You would want to wait for a handle or a new high
>to buy this one if you want to risk the group.
>ORCL - Great stock.  However, Industry Group Rank is 65, so it's off my
>list (top 40 only). This one could be forming a handle right now.
>
>
>
>At 04:23 PM 6/13/00 -0400, you wrote:
> >Can someone please tell me if you were to choose between buying ADI, GLW,
> >ANEN, SGR, SDLI, ADCT, NOK, PLXS, PWER, SEBL, or ORCL, which one would you
> >buy tomorrow?
> >Thanks so much all :)
> >Lynn
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: <[e-mail]>
> >To: <[e-mail]>
> >Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 6:44 PM
> >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
> >
> >
> >> Hi Shah,
> >>
> >> WON uses the 50 day average volume which in the case of WAT is
> >383,800...today's
> >> volume of 585,300 is 1.52 x ADVor +52% ADV.
> >>
> >> XLNX (IBD #'s 94 95 AAA) had a price B/O today to hit a new 52 week
> >high...however
> >> volume wasn't
> >> there...was less than ADV.  May be worth watching tomorrow to see if
> >volume comes
> >> in.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Ziggy
> >>
> >> Pritish Shah wrote:
> >>
> >> > I do not know much but I do not think we are seeing a substantial
> >breakout
> >> > today (as far as volume is concerned). We should see around
> >1.5xWeekly_Avg
> >> > or more.
> >> >
> >> > Last week it averaged around 400k/day this week, it is about 450k this
> >> > week and thus not a breakout volume.
> >> >
> >> > I am being defensive at the present moment because of the market and am
> >> > falling back on weekly (rather than daily) charts.
> >> >
> >> > Regards,
> >> > Shah
> >> > 408-525-4263
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > I calculate the pivot point to be 109 7/8...1/8 higher than the handle
> >high of
> >> > > 109 3/4.
> >> > >
> >> > > Ziggy
> >> > >
> >> > > [e-mail] wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > IMHO the proper pivot is 109.75 (as per TA that I have read), which
> >is the
> >> > > > top of the handle, HOWEVER, just to be on the safe side you may want
> >to
> >> > > > wait untill 113 is cleared, since it may prove to be resistance.  I
> >am
> >> > > > quite interested in what others have to say about it.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Btw, few weeks ago I purchased a stock in similar situtation
> >> > > > using 109.75 as pivot just to see it bounce down from the 52 weeks
> >high
> >> > > > resistance of 113 (I am using WAT's numbers to illustrate).  Now I
> >try to
> >> > > > use 52 weeks high as a pivot, especially if it happened recently.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Anna
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Pritish Shah <[e-mail]> on 06/13/2000 02:11:56 PM
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Please respond to [e-mail]
> >> > > >
> >> > > > To:   canslim list <[e-mail]>
> >> > > > cc:
> >> > > > Subject:  Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Ok here is a question for you.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > What would you consider the pivot point.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On march 7th (start of the cup), the o/c/h/l was 109/103.5/113/103
> >> > > > Today WAT is 112.875 currently.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Is the pivot point 109 or is the pivot point 113?
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Regards,
> >> > > > Shah
> >> > > > 408-525-4263
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > WAT (IBD #'s 96 91 AAB) looks like it is breaking out of a
> >> > > > > cup and handle pattern on volume that at least as of now is
> >> > > > > running about + 50% ahead of ADV.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Ziggy
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > -
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > -
> >> > > >
> >> > > > -
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > -
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > -
> >>
> >>
> >> -
> >>
> >
> >
> >-
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>-

Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists
Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site
PFB Information
mailto:[e-mail]
WWW http://OreRockOn.com


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tim Fisher" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
Date: 14 Jun 2000 07:05:27 -0700

Uh, the same type of buying that pushed QCOM to 250?

At 09:42 PM 6/13/00 -0700, you wrote:
>What's all the fuss about EMC? How can you justify a position in a stock
>with a float of almost 2 billion shares?! Are you aware what type of buying
>is needed to push this one?
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
>To: <[e-mail]>
>Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 9:33 PM
>Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
>
>
> > Looks pretty good to me, I think you could call a cup on this, it
> > wasn't too deep, from 71 or so to 53, which I think is around 28%
> > (approximately) deep, which isn't bad, volume shriveled up a bit for
> > a few days.
> >
> > On 12 Jun 00, at 22:57, Alexander T wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Could someone help me understand the chart of EMC's recent action?  It
>sort
> > > of looks like there was a double bottom from end of march to early may,
>and
> > > then some other cup-like base.
> > >
> > > On the other hand, one may think that there is a "Tripple" bottom since
>the
> > > latest peak did not go over the second peak of the W.  Could someone
>point
> > > out their view on this?
> > >
> > > Thank you
> > >
> > > ______________________________________________
> > > FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
> > > Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
>-

Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists
Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site
PFB Information
mailto:[e-mail]
WWW http://OreRockOn.com


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tim Fisher" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
Date: 14 Jun 2000 07:09:00 -0700

Big cap breakouts are here to stay. Why? Liquidity provided by the net. Get
out of the 1986 HTMMIS rut where institutions were the only players & into
the new age where us geeks are the buying force for a breakout.
Capitalization is only relevant to mutual fund geeks with their proprietary
screens. I no longer consider capitalization except I don't want to tread
on Tom's toes so I set a 15M minimum.

At 10:25 PM 6/13/00 -0700, Joseph Weisfish wrote:
>That may be true, but this is a CANSLIM forum and your forgetting about the
>'S'.
>
>Also it's interesting to note the U/D V ratio is a weak 0.8
>Other than that there is definite resistance at 72.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
>To: <[e-mail]>
>Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 10:00 PM
>Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
>
>
> > yeah, float doesn't seem to matter on this one. Even light volume
> > of 4 to 8 million shares, well under the ADV, has been
> > consistently able to move this stock up in its trading range.
> >
> > Tom Worley
> > [e-mail]
> > chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> > get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Joseph Weisfish <[e-mail]>
> > To: <[e-mail]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 12:42 AM
> > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
> >
> >
> > What's all the fuss about EMC? How can you justify a position in
> > a stock
> > with a float of almost 2 billion shares?! Are you aware what type
> > of buying
> > is needed to push this one?
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
> > To: <[e-mail]>
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 9:33 PM
> > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
> >
> >
> > > Looks pretty good to me, I think you could call a cup on this,
> > it
> > > wasn't too deep, from 71 or so to 53, which I think is around
> > 28%
> > > (approximately) deep, which isn't bad, volume shriveled up a
> > bit for
> > > a few days.
> > >
> > > On 12 Jun 00, at 22:57, Alexander T wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > Could someone help me understand the chart of EMC's recent
> > action?  It
> > sort
> > > > of looks like there was a double bottom from end of march to
> > early may,
> > and
> > > > then some other cup-like base.
> > > >
> > > > On the other hand, one may think that there is a "Tripple"
> > bottom since
> > the
> > > > latest peak did not go over the second peak of the W.  Could
> > someone
> > point
> > > > out their view on this?
> > > >
> > > > Thank you
> > > >
> > > > ______________________________________________
> > > > FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
> > > > Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > >
> >
> >
> > -
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
>-

Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists
Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site
PFB Information
mailto:[e-mail]
WWW http://OreRockOn.com


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tim Fisher" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
Date: 14 Jun 2000 07:09:00 -0700

Big cap breakouts are here to stay. Why? Liquidity provided by the net. Get
out of the 1986 HTMMIS rut where institutions were the only players & into
the new age where us geeks are the buying force for a breakout.
Capitalization is only relevant to mutual fund geeks with their proprietary
screens. I no longer consider capitalization except I don't want to tread
on Tom's toes so I set a 15M minimum.

At 10:25 PM 6/13/00 -0700, Joseph Weisfish wrote:
>That may be true, but this is a CANSLIM forum and your forgetting about the
>'S'.
>
>Also it's interesting to note the U/D V ratio is a weak 0.8
>Other than that there is definite resistance at 72.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
>To: <[e-mail]>
>Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 10:00 PM
>Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
>
>
> > yeah, float doesn't seem to matter on this one. Even light volume
> > of 4 to 8 million shares, well under the ADV, has been
> > consistently able to move this stock up in its trading range.
> >
> > Tom Worley
> > [e-mail]
> > chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> > get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Joseph Weisfish <[e-mail]>
> > To: <[e-mail]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 12:42 AM
> > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
> >
> >
> > What's all the fuss about EMC? How can you justify a position in
> > a stock
> > with a float of almost 2 billion shares?! Are you aware what type
> > of buying
> > is needed to push this one?
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
> > To: <[e-mail]>
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 9:33 PM
> > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
> >
> >
> > > Looks pretty good to me, I think you could call a cup on this,
> > it
> > > wasn't too deep, from 71 or so to 53, which I think is around
> > 28%
> > > (approximately) deep, which isn't bad, volume shriveled up a
> > bit for
> > > a few days.
> > >
> > > On 12 Jun 00, at 22:57, Alexander T wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > Could someone help me understand the chart of EMC's recent
> > action?  It
> > sort
> > > > of looks like there was a double bottom from end of march to
> > early may,
> > and
> > > > then some other cup-like base.
> > > >
> > > > On the other hand, one may think that there is a "Tripple"
> > bottom since
> > the
> > > > latest peak did not go over the second peak of the W.  Could
> > someone
> > point
> > > > out their view on this?
> > > >
> > > > Thank you
> > > >
> > > > ______________________________________________
> > > > FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
> > > > Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > >
> >
> >
> > -
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
>-

Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists
Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site
PFB Information
mailto:[e-mail]
WWW http://OreRockOn.com


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tim Fisher" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] back to investing
Date: 14 Jun 2000 07:10:12 -0700

Let's hear it, I'm all ears. Need to protect my AMD and PLXS profits now &
don't want to set a stop at my buy price since I'm only 20-30% up on those.

At 04:17 PM 6/14/00 +0200, you wrote:
>At 08:20 PM 13/6/00 -0600, Earl Setser wrote:
>>Where did you buy AMCC??  I bought it in April but was promptly chased out
>>as the NAS rally failed.  You should ALWAYS limit your losses to no more
>>than 7-8% according to WON.  If you are profiting, then there are many
>>rules to consider.  I count 4 distribution days in the last 6 days, and I
>>wouldn't want to hold a stock with that action.  However, when and where
>>(and why if it wasn't a CANSLIM Breakout) you bought it is a key factor.
>
>I would disagree with WON in his strategy for taking profits. Weinstein has
>a much more accessible strategy which includes defensively winching up
>stops as the stock continues on a stage 2 climb, but then allows you to
>stop out easily.
>
>This has allowed me 95 - 100% on PCCC and TLGD. If I had followed WON, I'd
>be out much, much sooner.
>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>Tom Gumpel
>Department of Special Education                         972-2-588-2165
>School of Education                                   Fax:    [phone]
>The Hebrew University of Jerusalem        in US:  877-258-9406
>Jerusalem, ISRAEL 91905
>http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msgumpel/main.htm
>VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS!
>
>
>-

Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists
Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site
PFB Information
mailto:[e-mail]
WWW http://OreRockOn.com


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] KEI [Keithley Instruments]
Date: 14 Jun 2000 10:18:30 -0700

Earl Setser wrote:
...
>-Jim wrote:
>
>P.S. My E trade [fake] game portfolio is up 13% in under a week largely
>because of KEI [Keithley Instruments].
>I hope one of you were fortunate enough to latch onto this a few weeks ago
or earlier [up over 50% in a few days
>off of a decent cup w/ handle--way extended now though].
>


Earl Setser wrote:

>This one (KEI) is SCARING ME TO DEATH!!  I grabbed it Friday a week ago and
>I'm showing an 88% gain!!  I certainly have never seen this kind of gain
>this fast on any stock ever!!  I put in a stop at 60% gain earlier today,
>but I'm thinking of cinching it up a bit.

>Does anyone think the action is a "climax top" or what?  I'm gonna look
>through the chart tonight and see where I think my hard stop should be.
>Good luck all.  (I am 100% invested now.)

Earl,
I agree w/ your fear.  I've owned a couple stocks that shot up like a climax blow off top just after breaking out
from a nice base [THQI and DSPG].  Although WON says to hold on at least 8 weeks to such rapid advancers, I believe
this is much riskier NOW given the current market conditions [I still think we're merely in the large countertrend
bounce WITHIN a long overdue bear] than if it happened at the BEGINNING of a NEW bull run.  I'm just not convinced
we're in a whole new bull yet.

In the case of both of these stocks I was well served by taking my profits during these climaxes.  Neither have
returned to their lofty heights, and THQI might never recover (it dropped off shortly after I sold near its top).
HTMMIS has so many "when to sell" selling pointers that it seems almost ANY time can be justified under CANSLIM
rules, depending on how you interpret them.  It would be nauseating to either hold on and watch your profit slip
away, OR sell and watch it continue to skyrocket, but having felt both, I'd rather have a conservative profit than
the other way around.

Just my opinion,
-Jim


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Wahl, Patrick" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
Date: 14 Jun 2000 08:27:19 -0600

We kicked float size around on this list a year or two ago, maybe before you
subscribed, quite a few people anyway, if not all, agreed that float size
isn't as relevant as it was when canslim was originated.  Most of the
nineties were big cap years, remember the S&P moving about 35% 2 or 3 years
in a row, those were large cap stocks doing that.  And look at what ORCL has
done in the last year, that wouldn't fit into canslim under the old S rule,
but in spite of its larger size, it has had a very good run.

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 10:42 PM


What's all the fuss about EMC? How can you justify a position in a stock
with a float of almost 2 billion shares?! Are you aware what type of buying
is needed to push this one?

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 9:33 PM


> Looks pretty good to me, I think you could call a cup on this, it
> wasn't too deep, from 71 or so to 53, which I think is around 28%
> (approximately) deep, which isn't bad, volume shriveled up a bit for
> a few days.
>
> On 12 Jun 00, at 22:57, Alexander T wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Could someone help me understand the chart of EMC's recent action?  It
sort
> > of looks like there was a double bottom from end of march to early may,
and
> > then some other cup-like base.
> >
> > On the other hand, one may think that there is a "Tripple" bottom since
the
> > latest peak did not go over the second peak of the W.  Could someone
point
> > out their view on this?
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> > ______________________________________________
> > FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
> > Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
>
> -
>


-

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Gumpel <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] back to investing
Date: 14 Jun 2000 17:28:15 +0200

Tim,
My strategy (taken from Weinstein) may not be yours. I'm hesitant to
describe it, since everyone has different time frames, different levels of
risk they are willing to tolerate, and different long term/short
term/intermediate term needs.

It also depends if you consider yourself a trader or an investor. I'm a bit
of both, depending on the stock's price trajectory and levels of support
and resistance.

You should look at a chart with a 50 MA and a 200 MA. Also, if you can draw
a trendline connecting at least 3 lows.

If you are a trader, look at the trendline, and look at the last reaction
low, and take a stop below the last RL, below a whole or half number.

If you are an intermediate term investor, do the same for the 50 MA,
likewise under the 200 MA for the longer term person.

In such fun days, I adjust my stops every few days. There is absolutely no
reason why you can't mix and match. For instance, for PCCC, I have .5 of my
position under the trendline LRL and the other .5 under the 50 MA.

As of today, I've followed my PCCC up 85.2% and my TLGD up 56.2%. I feel
safe since my stops are defensive (stop at market, gtc) and I don't have to
worry about getting whipsawed. If I would have followed WON, I'd be out at
about 20% each.


At 07:10 AM 14/6/00 -0700, Tim Fisher wrote:
>Let's hear it, I'm all ears. Need to protect my AMD and PLXS profits now &
>don't want to set a stop at my buy price since I'm only 20-30% up on those.
>
>At 04:17 PM 6/14/00 +0200, you wrote:
>>At 08:20 PM 13/6/00 -0600, Earl Setser wrote:
>>>Where did you buy AMCC??  I bought it in April but was promptly chased out
>>>as the NAS rally failed.  You should ALWAYS limit your losses to no more
>>>than 7-8% according to WON.  If you are profiting, then there are many
>>>rules to consider.  I count 4 distribution days in the last 6 days, and I
>>>wouldn't want to hold a stock with that action.  However, when and where
>>>(and why if it wasn't a CANSLIM Breakout) you bought it is a key factor.
>>
>>I would disagree with WON in his strategy for taking profits. Weinstein has
>>a much more accessible strategy which includes defensively winching up
>>stops as the stock continues on a stage 2 climb, but then allows you to
>>stop out easily.
>>
>>This has allowed me 95 - 100% on PCCC and TLGD. If I had followed WON, I'd
>>be out much, much sooner.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Tom Gumpel
Department of Special Education                         972-2-588-2165
School of Education                                   Fax:    [phone]
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem        in US:  877-258-9406
Jerusalem, ISRAEL 91905
http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msgumpel/main.htm
VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Gumpel <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] KEI [Keithley Instruments]
Date: 14 Jun 2000 17:30:45 +0200

I don't see how this could be a problem and scare anyone, if you set your
stops well enough (see my previous post, today).
Just set the stop and let nature take its course.


At 10:18 AM 14/6/00 -0700, [e-mail] wrote:
>Earl Setser wrote:
>...
> >-Jim wrote:
> >
> >P.S. My E trade [fake] game portfolio is up 13% in under a week largely
> >because of KEI [Keithley Instruments].
> >I hope one of you were fortunate enough to latch onto this a few weeks ago
>or earlier [up over 50% in a few days
> >off of a decent cup w/ handle--way extended now though].
> >
>
>
>Earl Setser wrote:
>
> >This one (KEI) is SCARING ME TO DEATH!!  I grabbed it Friday a week ago and
> >I'm showing an 88% gain!!  I certainly have never seen this kind of gain
> >this fast on any stock ever!!  I put in a stop at 60% gain earlier today,
> >but I'm thinking of cinching it up a bit.
>
> >Does anyone think the action is a "climax top" or what?  I'm gonna look
> >through the chart tonight and see where I think my hard stop should be.
> >Good luck all.  (I am 100% invested now.)
>
>Earl,
>I agree w/ your fear.  I've owned a couple stocks that shot up like a
>climax blow off top just after breaking out
>from a nice base [THQI and DSPG].  Although WON says to hold on at least 8
>weeks to such rapid advancers, I believe
>this is much riskier NOW given the current market conditions [I still
>think we're merely in the large countertrend
>bounce WITHIN a long overdue bear] than if it happened at the BEGINNING of
>a NEW bull run.  I'm just not convinced
>we're in a whole new bull yet.
>
>In the case of both of these stocks I was well served by taking my profits
>during these climaxes.  Neither have
>returned to their lofty heights, and THQI might never recover (it dropped
>off shortly after I sold near its top).
>HTMMIS has so many "when to sell" selling pointers that it seems almost
>ANY time can be justified under CANSLIM
>rules, depending on how you interpret them.  It would be nauseating to
>either hold on and watch your profit slip
>away, OR sell and watch it continue to skyrocket, but having felt both,
>I'd rather have a conservative profit than
>the other way around.
>
>Just my opinion,
>-Jim
>
>
>-

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Tom Gumpel
Department of Special Education                         972-2-588-2165
School of Education                                   Fax:    [phone]
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem        in US:  877-258-9406
Jerusalem, ISRAEL 91905
http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msgumpel/main.htm
VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Gumpel <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] KEI [Keithley Instruments]
Date: 14 Jun 2000 17:30:45 +0200

I don't see how this could be a problem and scare anyone, if you set your
stops well enough (see my previous post, today).
Just set the stop and let nature take its course.


At 10:18 AM 14/6/00 -0700, [e-mail] wrote:
>Earl Setser wrote:
>...
> >-Jim wrote:
> >
> >P.S. My E trade [fake] game portfolio is up 13% in under a week largely
> >because of KEI [Keithley Instruments].
> >I hope one of you were fortunate enough to latch onto this a few weeks ago
>or earlier [up over 50% in a few days
> >off of a decent cup w/ handle--way extended now though].
> >
>
>
>Earl Setser wrote:
>
> >This one (KEI) is SCARING ME TO DEATH!!  I grabbed it Friday a week ago and
> >I'm showing an 88% gain!!  I certainly have never seen this kind of gain
> >this fast on any stock ever!!  I put in a stop at 60% gain earlier today,
> >but I'm thinking of cinching it up a bit.
>
> >Does anyone think the action is a "climax top" or what?  I'm gonna look
> >through the chart tonight and see where I think my hard stop should be.
> >Good luck all.  (I am 100% invested now.)
>
>Earl,
>I agree w/ your fear.  I've owned a couple stocks that shot up like a
>climax blow off top just after breaking out
>from a nice base [THQI and DSPG].  Although WON says to hold on at least 8
>weeks to such rapid advancers, I believe
>this is much riskier NOW given the current market conditions [I still
>think we're merely in the large countertrend
>bounce WITHIN a long overdue bear] than if it happened at the BEGINNING of
>a NEW bull run.  I'm just not convinced
>we're in a whole new bull yet.
>
>In the case of both of these stocks I was well served by taking my profits
>during these climaxes.  Neither have
>returned to their lofty heights, and THQI might never recover (it dropped
>off shortly after I sold near its top).
>HTMMIS has so many "when to sell" selling pointers that it seems almost
>ANY time can be justified under CANSLIM
>rules, depending on how you interpret them.  It would be nauseating to
>either hold on and watch your profit slip
>away, OR sell and watch it continue to skyrocket, but having felt both,
>I'd rather have a conservative profit than
>the other way around.
>
>Just my opinion,
>-Jim
>
>
>-

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Tom Gumpel
Department of Special Education                         972-2-588-2165
School of Education                                   Fax:    [phone]
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem        in US:  877-258-9406
Jerusalem, ISRAEL 91905
http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msgumpel/main.htm
VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Eric Shen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] KEI [Keithley Instruments]
Date: 14 Jun 2000 08:34:09 -0700

Earl Setser wrote:

>This one (KEI) is SCARING ME TO DEATH!!  I grabbed it Friday a week ago and
>I'm showing an 88% gain!!  I certainly have never seen this kind of gain
>this fast on any stock ever!!  I put in a stop at 60% gain earlier today,
>but I'm thinking of cinching it up a bit.

>Does anyone think the action is a "climax top" or what?  I'm gonna look
>through the chart tonight and see where I think my hard stop should be.
>Good luck all.  (I am 100% invested now.)

You might want to check today's IBD.  In the investor's corner
section, they mention stocks that have a quick run-up.  KEI
was mentioned.  The article recommends holding the position
for 8 weeks to take advantage of any subsequent run-up.

This was a surprise to me since I also would tend to believe
it would be a climatic top.

Eric


-

--
Eric Shen        MS LOC3-8   / / /    Level One Communications
email: [e-mail]      | | |_/  an Intel company
Tel: [phone]          | |___/  9750 Goethe Road
               ext: 4497     |_____/  Sacramento, CA 95827

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kent Norman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] KEI [Keithley Instruments]
Date: 14 Jun 2000 10:32:56 -0500


Earl

I am notching my stops at least twice a day. I am also concerned about a
climax, so I am setting very tight, to intraday support. After this
years losses, I don't want to let this one get away. I will buy back in
on the dip.

Kent

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> Earl Setser wrote:
> ...
> >-Jim wrote:
> >
> >P.S. My E trade [fake] game portfolio is up 13% in under a week largely
> >because of KEI [Keithley Instruments].
> >I hope one of you were fortunate enough to latch onto this a few weeks ago
> or earlier [up over 50% in a few days
> >off of a decent cup w/ handle--way extended now though].
> >

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] KEI [Keithley Instruments]
Date: 14 Jun 2000 09:45:48 -0700

Hi Earl,

It seems to me that WON would not consider this a climax top...he considers a
climax top for sale if it occurs "after many months of advance" or when the
stock was fairly extended from the base and then the climax action occurs.  Just
recently I read in IBD that if a stock jumps ( like KEI is doing) out of a
proper base, you should hold on as this could be an exceptionally strong stock.

That being said, I personally would be watching this very closely for any sign
of topping...it is not to often you can nail down a quick 88% profit.

I tried to pick up KEI last Friday...but I got a little too cute for my own
good. The stock was trading at
49 3/8 and I decided I could save a little...soo I put in a buy limit for 1000
at 49 1/4...never got it and the stock closed that day at 49 15/16...the rest is
history...a valuable lesson for me that I'm sharing with the rest of the group.
My last B/O buy was at market.

Regards,

Ziggy


Eric Shen wrote:

> Earl Setser wrote:
>
> >This one (KEI) is SCARING ME TO DEATH!!  I grabbed it Friday a week ago and
> >I'm showing an 88% gain!!  I certainly have never seen this kind of gain
> >this fast on any stock ever!!  I put in a stop at 60% gain earlier today,
> >but I'm thinking of cinching it up a bit.
>
> >Does anyone think the action is a "climax top" or what?  I'm gonna look
> >through the chart tonight and see where I think my hard stop should be.
> >Good luck all.  (I am 100% invested now.)
>
> You might want to check today's IBD.  In the investor's corner
> section, they mention stocks that have a quick run-up.  KEI
> was mentioned.  The article recommends holding the position
> for 8 weeks to take advantage of any subsequent run-up.
>
> This was a surprise to me since I also would tend to believe
> it would be a climatic top.
>
> Eric
>
> -
>
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> Eric Shen        MS LOC3-8   / / /    Level One Communications
> email: [e-mail]      | | |_/  an Intel company
> Tel: [phone]          | |___/  9750 Goethe Road
>                ext: 4497     |_____/  Sacramento, CA 95827
>
> -


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable
Date: 14 Jun 2000 11:08:06 -0700 (PDT)


PCS: already over avg volume
NUHC: really blasting through with volume but still catachable


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Alexander T <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks breaking out but still reasonable
Date: 14 Jun 2000 14:49:52 -0400 (EDT)

I would have a little problem with NUHC from the CANSLIM standpoint since
its yearly EPS has been declining until last year... I am not sure what EPS
rank this has earned it (I think I considered it a leader), but I would
consider this EPS deceleration.

______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Rocky Sanghvi <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable
Date: 14 Jun 2000 15:03:54 -0400

I have a question for all CANSLIM followers.  I have always beleived that
one of the most powerful things that WON has said goes something like this:

"Forget about what the market will do tomorrow or in the future.  Focus on
what the market has already done."

Can we start a brief discussion on this?  What has the market already done
as a predictor of the what the market are going to do?  I have seen
utilities and financials convincingly hit bottoms.  I see healthcare and
certain technology stocks doing fairly well.  We have also seen a convincing
follow through twice in the recent past.  Is this a good time to be
investing?

Best Regards
Rakesh

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 2:08 PM



PCS: already over avg volume
NUHC: really blasting through with volume but still catachable


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263



-

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "david lawson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 14 Jun 2000 15:44:53 -0400

In my opinion the top of the right side of the cup was 100 on 5/18. Making
the pivot point 100.125. Breakout was on 6/1.

                                                              Ari

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 2:11 PM


> Ok here is a question for you.
>
> What would you consider the pivot point.
>
> On march 7th (start of the cup), the o/c/h/l was 109/103.5/113/103
> Today WAT is 112.875 currently.
>
> Is the pivot point 109 or is the pivot point 113?
>
>
> Regards,
> Shah
> 408-525-4263
>
>
> On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
>
> > WAT (IBD #'s 96 91 AAB) looks like it is breaking out of a
> > cup and handle pattern on volume that at least as of now is
> > running about + 50% ahead of ADV.
> >
> > Ziggy
> >
> >
> > -
> >
> >
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Eric Shen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable
Date: 14 Jun 2000 13:18:16 -0700

Rocky Sanghvi wrote:
>
> I have a question for all CANSLIM followers.  I have always beleived that
> one of the most powerful things that WON has said goes something like this:
>
> "Forget about what the market will do tomorrow or in the future.  Focus on
> what the market has already done."
>
> Can we start a brief discussion on this?  What has the market already done
> as a predictor of the what the market are going to do?  I have seen
> utilities and financials convincingly hit bottoms.  I see healthcare and
> certain technology stocks doing fairly well.  We have also seen a convincing
> follow through twice in the recent past.  Is this a good time to be
> investing?
>
> Best Regards
> Rakesh
>

The problem with bottom fishing is the amount of overhead supply
waiting when the stock moves back up.  For example, take EGRP.
It's at 16 5/8.  There is resistance at 20, 22, 25, 28, 32.
There is a lot of levels where people would want to sell before
the stock can move higher.  I like looking for stocks have
moved up.  The shareholders are happy and less likely to dump
when the price rises.

Eric

--
Eric Shen        MS LOC3-8   / / /    Level One Communications
email: [e-mail]      | | |_/  an Intel company
Tel: [phone]          | |___/  9750 Goethe Road
               ext: 4497     |_____/  Sacramento, CA 95827

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] What the market has already done
Date: 14 Jun 2000 13:35:01 -0700 (PDT)


Rocky,

Looking at QQQ chart for the last month, here is the info

On May 24th: first rally on above average volume

On May 30th: follow through 2 days later on above average volume

On June 2nd: follow through 6 days later on above average volume

From June 2nd to June 14th, churning (where new leaders are established)

Few good stocks broke out. Eg: KEI and others


This is what the market has done. Is this a new bull market: I do not know
because we did not see the climax selling. What we did see was complacency
and that is bad.

CNBC interviews the money managers. They feel that the market is doing a
little summer rally but will go down after the rally. Why is it important
what these moneymanagers think -- well they work for the institutions that
create the market moves. If they all sell together, the market goes
down. If they all buy together -- the market goes up.

What does that mean: BE DICIPLINED AND CUT LOSSES AFTER 8% otherwise
follow the stock through its rise. Once the stock rises, make sure that
the stock is in its trend channel. If it breaks the upward trend channel,
sell stock and get out.

Hope that helps...

Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, Rocky Sanghvi wrote:

> I have a question for all CANSLIM followers.  I have always beleived that
> one of the most powerful things that WON has said goes something like this:
>
> "Forget about what the market will do tomorrow or in the future.  Focus on
> what the market has already done."
>
> Can we start a brief discussion on this?  What has the market already done
> as a predictor of the what the market are going to do?  I have seen
> utilities and financials convincingly hit bottoms.  I see healthcare and
> certain technology stocks doing fairly well.  We have also seen a convincing
> follow through twice in the recent past.  Is this a good time to be
> investing?
>
> Best Regards
> Rakesh
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pritish Shah [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 2:08 PM
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable
>
>
>
> PCS: already over avg volume
> NUHC: really blasting through with volume but still catachable
>
>
> Regards,
> Shah
> 408-525-4263
>
>
>
> -
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 14 Jun 2000 14:26:04 -0700 (PDT)

Yep depends upon your prespective but generally, larger formations are
taken into account (if you can find one).

In this case, there was a larger formation.

Ofcourse, you can use your own variations with the smaller formations and
that is why sometimes it is good to look at 2 month high or 3 month high.


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, david lawson wrote:

> In my opinion the top of the right side of the cup was 100 on 5/18. Making
> the pivot point 100.125. Breakout was on 6/1.
>
>                                                               Ari
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
> To: canslim list <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 2:11 PM
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
>
>
> > Ok here is a question for you.
> >
> > What would you consider the pivot point.
> >
> > On march 7th (start of the cup), the o/c/h/l was 109/103.5/113/103
> > Today WAT is 112.875 currently.
> >
> > Is the pivot point 109 or is the pivot point 113?
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Shah
> > 408-525-4263
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
> >
> > > WAT (IBD #'s 96 91 AAB) looks like it is breaking out of a
> > > cup and handle pattern on volume that at least as of now is
> > > running about + 50% ahead of ADV.
> > >
> > > Ziggy
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: [CANSLIM] STJ
Date: 14 Jun 2000 19:45:09 -0400



Is STJ too extended to buy?

Anna Sosis



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] STJ
Date: 14 Jun 2000 16:35:40 -0700 (PDT)

It is about 30% from its breakout -- anything beyond 15% of breakout is
considered extended.


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Wed, 14 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:

>
>
> Is STJ too extended to buy?
>
> Anna Sosis
>
>
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 14 Jun 2000 17:18:28 -0700 (PDT)

I looked at yahoo for average volume

I also looked at the weekly average and also the tendency of the stock's
volume when it rises. I noticed that generally when it rises dramatically,
it is usually on a volume of 5 million or higher.

I kind of figure out in my mind what the average volume should look
like. Why do I do that, I feel it has served me better than doing it
mathematically.

GLW:
====
Week of   Open    High    Low     Close    Volume    Adj. Close*
12-Jun-00 229.875 245.625 223     237      3,914,300 237
5-Jun-00  205.50  217     205.125 212      1,889,900 212
29-May-00 177     210.437 175.562 208.875  2,860,100 208.875
22-May-00 182.562 183.50  165.875 168      1,975,000 167.843
15-May-00 186     191.125 179.25  182.4375 1,806,400 182.267
8-May-00  186.50  194.937 182.50  187.7188 1,999,800 187.544
1-May-00  196     200.75  180.625 189.0625 1,799,700 188.886
24-Apr-00 148     201     146.437 197.50   2,430,000 197.316

Someone said 50 day moving average should be calculated. Can someone guess
what is the average volume? It looks to me like it is close to 2
million/day. Ok now this week GLW broke out correct? YES -- I do not know
what I was smoking :) I guess it must have been intraday data and that
probably confused me.

However for ADI, I stand by my statements. I would not buy it.

Hope that helps and btw thanks for correcting me :)


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Tue, 13 Jun 2000, Earl Setser wrote:

> At 04:59 PM 6/13/00 -0700, you wrote:
>
> What are you looking for on volume?  I have both ADI and GLW breaking out
> on 1.5 X ADV.  IBD has been saying to look for at least 1.4 to 1.5.  Are
> you looking for more?
>
> >ADI: breakout on normal volume -- bad
>
> I put the B/O on 6/8 with over 4 M shares traded, 49% over latest 50 day ADV.
>
> >GLW: breakout on normal volume -- bad
>
> I put the B/O yesterday on over 4.5 M shares, 53% over lastest 50 day ADV.
>
>
>
>
> -
>
>



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 14 Jun 2000 17:21:17 -0700 (PDT)


One suggestion lynn,

I notice that you are doing 1000 shares of everything. If I were in your
place, I would same dollar amount for every trade.

The reason for 8% loss is the assumption that your trades are all of equal
amount (not size) and one loss of 8% will be overriden by another gain of
8%.

Hope that helps

Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Tue, 13 Jun 2000, lynn williams wrote:

> I bought AMCC in Sept of 1999 for 27.50 and then again in Nov for 44... so I
> still have a great return despite this past week.. however, I am gonna sell
> it all.. all 1870 shares...thanks hugh...
> I agree on the volume on ADI being low but not the volume on GLW on the
> breakout... So am not going to buy ADI because the volume was low on the
> breakout...NOK would be good but I already own 1,000 shares....as well
> ADCT....ditto a 1,000 shares of SDLI.. only have 55 shares of GLW
> though.....problem is that I am going to be out of the country with no phone
> beginning Thursday and I am trying to realign my portfolios prior to
> leaving.. any other suggestions???
> Lynn :)
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Hugh Fader" <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 10:02 PM
> Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
>
>
> > Pritish,
> >
> > I disagree on ADI and GLW. ADI broke out on 52% above average volume on
> 6/8.
> > GLW broke out on 57% above average volume on 6/12. I bought both. GLW is
> now
> > over-extended, but ADI has pulled back a bit and is still buyable.
> >
> > I bought SDLI on its pullback, but it is now also is over-extended.
> >
> > - Hugh
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [e-mail]
> > [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Pritish Shah
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 7:59 PM
> > To: [e-mail]
> > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
> >
> >
> >
> > ADI: breakout on normal volume -- bad
> > GLW: breakout on normal volume -- bad
> > ANEN: breakout on heavy volume and went down today on heavy volume -- bad
> > SGR: LLUR but it is a bit extended. However so far the best stock.
> > SDLI: strong volume breakout out of 13week base.
> > ADCT: Nice LLUR but it think it might be a bit overextended
> > NOK: Would wait for a handle to form. Looks good even if a handle does not
> >      form
> > PLXS: Overextended but good LLUR
> > PWER: overextended but good LLUR
> > SEBL: forming right side of a cup
> > ORCL: either double bottom or forming a cup
> >
> > Of all the stocks listed, probably SDLI/NOK/ORCL/SEBL would probably be
> > good.
> >
> > AMCC: well it looks really under heavy distribution. I would sell it. If
> > you have already taken out profit from it, then hang on.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Shah
> > 408-525-4263
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 13 Jun 2000, lynn williams wrote:
> >
> > > Can someone please tell me if you were to choose between buying ADI,
> GLW,
> > > ANEN, SGR, SDLI, ADCT, NOK, PLXS, PWER, SEBL, or ORCL, which one would
> you
> > > buy tomorrow?
> > > Thanks so much all :)
> > > Lynn
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: <[e-mail]>
> > > To: <[e-mail]>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 6:44 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi Shah,
> > > >
> > > > WON uses the 50 day average volume which in the case of WAT is
> > > 383,800...today's
> > > > volume of 585,300 is 1.52 x ADVor +52% ADV.
> > > >
> > > > XLNX (IBD #'s 94 95 AAA) had a price B/O today to hit a new 52 week
> > > high...however
> > > > volume wasn't
> > > > there...was less than ADV.  May be worth watching tomorrow to see if
> > > volume comes
> > > > in.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Ziggy
> > > >
> > > > Pritish Shah wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I do not know much but I do not think we are seeing a substantial
> > > breakout
> > > > > today (as far as volume is concerned). We should see around
> > > 1.5xWeekly_Avg
> > > > > or more.
> > > > >
> > > > > Last week it averaged around 400k/day this week, it is about 450k
> this
> > > > > week and thus not a breakout volume.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am being defensive at the present moment because of the market and
> > am
> > > > > falling back on weekly (rather than daily) charts.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Shah
> > > > > 408-525-4263
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I calculate the pivot point to be 109 7/8...1/8 higher than the
> > handle
> > > high of
> > > > > > 109 3/4.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ziggy
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [e-mail] wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > IMHO the proper pivot is 109.75 (as per TA that I have read),
> > which
> > > is the
> > > > > > > top of the handle, HOWEVER, just to be on the safe side you may
> > want
> > > to
> > > > > > > wait untill 113 is cleared, since it may prove to be resistance.
> > I
> > > am
> > > > > > > quite interested in what others have to say about it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Btw, few weeks ago I purchased a stock in similar situtation
> > > > > > > using 109.75 as pivot just to see it bounce down from the 52
> weeks
> > > high
> > > > > > > resistance of 113 (I am using WAT's numbers to illustrate).  Now
> I
> > > try to
> > > > > > > use 52 weeks high as a pivot, especially if it happened
> recently.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Anna
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Pritish Shah <[e-mail]> on 06/13/2000 02:11:56 PM
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please respond to [e-mail]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > To:   canslim list <[e-mail]>
> > > > > > > cc:
> > > > > > > Subject:  Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ok here is a question for you.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What would you consider the pivot point.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On march 7th (start of the cup), the o/c/h/l was
> 109/103.5/113/103
> > > > > > > Today WAT is 112.875 currently.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Is the pivot point 109 or is the pivot point 113?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > Shah
> > > > > > > 408-525-4263
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > WAT (IBD #'s 96 91 AAB) looks like it is breaking out of a
> > > > > > > > cup and handle pattern on volume that at least as of now is
> > > > > > > > running about + 50% ahead of ADV.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Ziggy
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable
Date: 14 Jun 2000 17:32:50 -0700

PCS does not fall into CANSLIM criteria look at the quarter over quarter
earnings

NUHC:    I don't understand why DGO shows it with a -4% growth rate, can
this be a mistake?


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 11:08 AM


>
> PCS: already over avg volume
> NUHC: really blasting through with volume but still catachable
>
>
> Regards,
> Shah
> 408-525-4263
>
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable
Date: 14 Jun 2000 17:32:50 -0700

PCS does not fall into CANSLIM criteria look at the quarter over quarter
earnings

NUHC:    I don't understand why DGO shows it with a -4% growth rate, can
this be a mistake?


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 11:08 AM


>
> PCS: already over avg volume
> NUHC: really blasting through with volume but still catachable
>
>
> Regards,
> Shah
> 408-525-4263
>
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] back to investing
Date: 14 Jun 2000 17:29:15 -0700 (PDT)

Another way of doing it is as follows

If you make 100% profit, sell half of it and keep the rest for a guranteed
profit (nitpickers please do not respond - :) )

This assumes that you are a trader and not an investor. If you are an
investor, then the method below is good but another method is to average
up.

I liken canslim with trading and not investing. Correct me if I am wrong.

Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, Tom Gumpel wrote:

> At 08:20 PM 13/6/00 -0600, Earl Setser wrote:
> >Where did you buy AMCC??  I bought it in April but was promptly chased out
> >as the NAS rally failed.  You should ALWAYS limit your losses to no more
> >than 7-8% according to WON.  If you are profiting, then there are many
> >rules to consider.  I count 4 distribution days in the last 6 days, and I
> >wouldn't want to hold a stock with that action.  However, when and where
> >(and why if it wasn't a CANSLIM Breakout) you bought it is a key factor.
>
> I would disagree with WON in his strategy for taking profits. Weinstein has
> a much more accessible strategy which includes defensively winching up
> stops as the stock continues on a stage 2 climb, but then allows you to
> stop out easily.
>
> This has allowed me 95 - 100% on PCCC and TLGD. If I had followed WON, I'd
> be out much, much sooner.
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> Tom Gumpel
> Department of Special Education                         972-2-588-2165
> School of Education                                   Fax:    [phone]
> The Hebrew University of Jerusalem        in US:  877-258-9406
> Jerusalem, ISRAEL 91905
> http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msgumpel/main.htm
> VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS!
>
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable
Date: 14 Jun 2000 17:48:33 -0700 (PDT)



Sure it does, it follows under the N and it has quarter over quarter
growth in subscribers and revenue. I do not know if that counts.

DISCLAIMER (A BIG ONE) -- I work for sprint ;)

Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, Joseph Weisfish wrote:

> PCS does not fall into CANSLIM criteria look at the quarter over quarter
> earnings
>
> NUHC:    I don't understand why DGO shows it with a -4% growth rate, can
> this be a mistake?
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Pritish Shah" <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 11:08 AM
> Subject: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable
>
>
> >
> > PCS: already over avg volume
> > NUHC: really blasting through with volume but still catachable
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Shah
> > 408-525-4263
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] back to investing
Date: 14 Jun 2000 21:18:30 -0400



Tom, can you explain what mean by last RL?  Would you be able to give a
numeric example using PCCC and/or ELNT?

Thank you

Anna Sosis



Tom Gumpel <[e-mail]> on 06/14/2000 11:28:15 AM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




Tim,
My strategy (taken from Weinstein) may not be yours. I'm hesitant to
describe it, since everyone has different time frames, different levels of
risk they are willing to tolerate, and different long term/short
term/intermediate term needs.

It also depends if you consider yourself a trader or an investor. I'm a bit
of both, depending on the stock's price trajectory and levels of support
and resistance.

You should look at a chart with a 50 MA and a 200 MA. Also, if you can draw
a trendline connecting at least 3 lows.

If you are a trader, look at the trendline, and look at the last reaction
low, and take a stop below the last RL, below a whole or half number.

If you are an intermediate term investor, do the same for the 50 MA,
likewise under the 200 MA for the longer term person.

In such fun days, I adjust my stops every few days. There is absolutely no
reason why you can't mix and match. For instance, for PCCC, I have .5 of my
position under the trendline LRL and the other .5 under the 50 MA.

As of today, I've followed my PCCC up 85.2% and my TLGD up 56.2%. I feel
safe since my stops are defensive (stop at market, gtc) and I don't have to
worry about getting whipsawed. If I would have followed WON, I'd be out at
about 20% each.


At 07:10 AM 14/6/00 -0700, Tim Fisher wrote:
>Let's hear it, I'm all ears. Need to protect my AMD and PLXS profits now &
>don't want to set a stop at my buy price since I'm only 20-30% up on
those.
>
>At 04:17 PM 6/14/00 +0200, you wrote:
>>At 08:20 PM 13/6/00 -0600, Earl Setser wrote:
>>>Where did you buy AMCC??  I bought it in April but was promptly chased
out
>>>as the NAS rally failed.  You should ALWAYS limit your losses to no more
>>>than 7-8% according to WON.  If you are profiting, then there are many
>>>rules to consider.  I count 4 distribution days in the last 6 days, and
I
>>>wouldn't want to hold a stock with that action.  However, when and where
>>>(and why if it wasn't a CANSLIM Breakout) you bought it is a key factor.
>>
>>I would disagree with WON in his strategy for taking profits. Weinstein
has
>>a much more accessible strategy which includes defensively winching up
>>stops as the stock continues on a stage 2 climb, but then allows you to
>>stop out easily.
>>
>>This has allowed me 95 - 100% on PCCC and TLGD. If I had followed WON,
I'd
>>be out much, much sooner.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Tom Gumpel
Department of Special Education                         972-2-588-2165
School of Education                                   Fax:
972-2-588-2045
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem        in US:  877-258-9406
Jerusalem, ISRAEL 91905
http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msgumpel/main.htm
VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS!


-





-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] KEI [Keithley Instruments]
Date: 14 Jun 2000 19:56:18 -0600

Thanks to all that responded.  I decided to use a 15% trailing stop based
on closing prices.  This is my personal compromise between a tight stop and
trying to stay in for 8 weeks.  I was tempted to take profit on half my
position when I saw my gain at 100% this morning, but I paused, and the
stock corrected the rest of the day.  Only time will tell what is the best
approach on this one.  BTW, I was also tempted to take profits when I was
up 33% after one day.  I'm glad I decided to stick with it from there!!!

Of course, I'll also watch M along with the technicals and volume on the
stock.  I wish I felt as good about selling as I do about buying!!  Good
luck all.

At 10:32 AM 6/14/00 -0500, you wrote:
>
>Earl
>
>I am notching my stops at least twice a day. I am also concerned about a
>climax, so I am setting very tight, to intraday support. After this
>years losses, I don't want to let this one get away. I will buy back in
>on the dip.
>
>Kent
>
>[e-mail] wrote:
>>
>> Earl Setser wrote:
>> ...
>> >-Jim wrote:
>> >
>> >P.S. My E trade [fake] game portfolio is up 13% in under a week largely
>> >because of KEI [Keithley Instruments].
>> >I hope one of you were fortunate enough to latch onto this a few weeks ago
>> or earlier [up over 50% in a few days
>> >off of a decent cup w/ handle--way extended now though].
>> >
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] STJ
Date: 14 Jun 2000 20:04:10 -0600

WON suggests that chasing any stock more than 5% from the pivot is a bad
idea.  I think the idea is many (60% I think) stocks will pause and test
the B/O.  If you buy say 10% above the pivot, this normal action will trip
you out of your -8% sell point.  In my year of experience, I have learned
the hard way to follow both of these lessons.  Given the 5% rule, I make
the pivot of STJ at about 38 based on a cup w handle (note this is an
eyeball estimate, but the pivot should be 1/8 above the high of the
handle).  That would set your maximum price at 39.9.  My advice would be
don't chase this one above that price (more or less).  I have had some good
success at catching stocks coming back down a few days later to within my
5% limit.  In fact, my best CANSLIM buy so far (QLGC) was bought with a
limit order that filled on a small dip.  I held that one for several months
and profited something like 150%.

At 07:45 PM 6/14/00 -0400, you wrote:
>
>
>Is STJ too extended to buy?
>
>Anna Sosis
>
>
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable
Date: 14 Jun 2000 20:07:38 -0600

I agree that the market (at least the NASDAQ) has told us to get back in.
I've picked up a few positions each week, and I'm now 100% invested.  This
market could turn at any time, but with good action on a few stocks
(KEI!!), I should profit from this go-around even if it starts back down
tomorrow.

At 03:03 PM 6/14/00 -0400, you wrote:
>I have a question for all CANSLIM followers.  I have always beleived that
>one of the most powerful things that WON has said goes something like this:
>
>"Forget about what the market will do tomorrow or in the future.  Focus on
>what the market has already done."
>
>Can we start a brief discussion on this?  What has the market already done
>as a predictor of the what the market are going to do?  I have seen
>utilities and financials convincingly hit bottoms.  I see healthcare and
>certain technology stocks doing fairly well.  We have also seen a convincing
>follow through twice in the recent past.  Is this a good time to be
>investing?
>
>Best Regards
>Rakesh
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Pritish Shah [mailto:[e-mail]]
>Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 2:08 PM
>To: [e-mail]
>Subject: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable
>
>
>
>PCS: already over avg volume
>NUHC: really blasting through with volume but still catachable
>
>
>Regards,
>Shah
>408-525-4263
>
>
>
>-
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
Date: 14 Jun 2000 20:11:00 -0600

I watched this one with a later handle and called the pivot 110, for a B/O
yesterday.  I guess I thought the lower handle was too low to be considered
a cup w handle.  WON looks for the handle at least 50% from the low.  Just
eyeballing this one at Clearstation, it's not an easy read on where that
lower handle was.

At 03:44 PM 6/14/00 -0400, you wrote:
>In my opinion the top of the right side of the cup was 100 on 5/18. Making
>the pivot point 100.125. Breakout was on 6/1.
>
>                                                              Ari
>-----------------------------------------------------
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
>To: canslim list <[e-mail]>
>Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 2:11 PM
>Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WAT B/O?
>
>
>> Ok here is a question for you.
>>
>> What would you consider the pivot point.
>>
>> On march 7th (start of the cup), the o/c/h/l was 109/103.5/113/103
>> Today WAT is 112.875 currently.
>>
>> Is the pivot point 109 or is the pivot point 113?
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Shah
>> 408-525-4263
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
>>
>> > WAT (IBD #'s 96 91 AAB) looks like it is breaking out of a
>> > cup and handle pattern on volume that at least as of now is
>> > running about + 50% ahead of ADV.
>> >
>> > Ziggy
>> >
>> >
>> > -
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> -
>>
>
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
Date: 14 Jun 2000 23:25:47 -0400

Hey Tim, that's ok, I tread on my own toes all the time!

I definitely don't think my love and obsession for micro and
small caps is anything anyone else should try at home (or at work
or on their laptop or even with, actually especially with, a full
service broker, they know even less than I do).

Owning a stock that doesn't trade for several days, and where the
spread is obscene, and you must schedule an appointment on a
nearby street corner just to trade a few shares, is definitely
not the right road for almost every investor. But then, I found
an interesting one trading with a PE of 3 (that's right, three)
which has increasing sales of 30% or better for over 4 qtrs, and
earnings growth for the same period of over 100%. Year high PE is
only 16, but that's still room for a five bagger. Gotta find
what's wrong with it, there has to be something wrong to trade so
low with a nice chart, maybe Mafia owned or something subtle?
Maybe the 700,000 shares in the float and the ADV of 1,000. Love
the challenge of micros.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 10:09 AM


Big cap breakouts are here to stay. Why? Liquidity provided by
the net. Get
out of the 1986 HTMMIS rut where institutions were the only
players & into
the new age where us geeks are the buying force for a breakout.
Capitalization is only relevant to mutual fund geeks with their
proprietary
screens. I no longer consider capitalization except I don't want
to tread
on Tom's toes so I set a 15M minimum.




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Stocks breaking out but still reasonable
Date: 15 Jun 2000 00:02:33 -0400

All depends on what site you use for your data.  Using legitimate
CANSLIM data from DGO, the EPS is at 81 as of tonight; and the
last 4 qtrs of earnings showed year over year gains of 18%; 73%;
150% and 322%.  Since DG/DGO/CANSLIM weights the two most recent
qtrs heavier than prior qtrs, the EPS makes sense.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 2:49 PM


I would have a little problem with NUHC from the CANSLIM
standpoint since
its yearly EPS has been declining until last year... I am not
sure what EPS
rank this has earned it (I think I considered it a leader), but I
would
consider this EPS deceleration.

______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable
Date: 15 Jun 2000 00:05:02 -0400

big gains, then consolidation, while the mkt waits for whatever
action the FOMC will take late this month. Lot of money still
sidelined, as shown by volume.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 3:03 PM


I have a question for all CANSLIM followers.  I have always
beleived that
one of the most powerful things that WON has said goes something
like this:

"Forget about what the market will do tomorrow or in the future.
Focus on
what the market has already done."

Can we start a brief discussion on this?  What has the market
already done
as a predictor of the what the market are going to do?  I have
seen
utilities and financials convincingly hit bottoms.  I see
healthcare and
certain technology stocks doing fairly well.  We have also seen a
convincing
follow through twice in the recent past.  Is this a good time to
be
investing?

Best Regards
Rakesh

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 2:08 PM



PCS: already over avg volume
NUHC: really blasting through with volume but still catachable


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263



-

-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] check out this CANSLIM screener, FREE!
Date: 15 Jun 2000 01:36:40 -0700

I always loved stockmaster.com because of their nice LOGARITHMic charts, but now
that I found they have a CANSLIM screener, I feel obligated to promote it.  It's
FREE, too!

http://strategy.stockmaster.com/StockSearchRun.asp?cobrander=stockmaster&gurupage=ONeil&upt=2879§ion=results&WilliamONeil=1&submit1=Click+Here&type=guru




-Jim

P.S. here's it's latest CANSLIM picks.  Keep in mind, it lists the CANSLIM based on
prices given--sometimes a day old so you have to look at current charts to see if
they're still relevant.  Also, I don't think it looks at technicals [chart
formations]:

AAON
        AAON INC


 ADBE
        ADOBE SYSTEMS INC


 ALTR
        ALTERA CORP


 CDWC
        CDW COMPUTER CTRS INC


 CHP
        C&D TECHNOLOGIES INC

CTAC
        1-800 CONTACTS INC


 CTK
        COMPTEK RESEARCH INC


 FORR
        FORRESTER RESEARCH INC


 JKHY
        JACK HENRY & ASSOCIATES


 KEI
        KEITHLEY INSTRUMENTS INC


 LLTC
        LINEAR TECHNOLOGY CORP


 MSS
        MEASUREMENT SPECIALITIES


ORCL
        ORACLE CORPORATION


 PDCO
        PATTERSON DENTAL CO


 PENG
        PRIMA ENERGY CORP


SHFL
        SHUFFLE MASTER INC


 TECH
        TECHNE CORP


 TLGD
        TOLLGRADE COMMUN INC


 TNL
        TECHNITROL INC


 XLNX
        XILINX INC







-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable)
Date: 15 Jun 2000 08:05:27 -0400

Because in the past five years the earnings went from 1.09 to
1.03

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 8:32 PM


NUHC:    I don't understand why DGO shows it with a -4% growth
rate, can
this be a mistake?





-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Salisbury)
Subject: [CANSLIM] Changing your canslim subscription
Date: 15 Jun 2000 08:00:01 -0600

This is a twice monthly posting to the CANLSLIM group.

Frequently, people sign up for the canslim list and then are overwhelmed by
the volume of the email.  There are three remedies for this problem: 1) You
can leave our group. 2) you can switch to the digest version which
"conglomerates" many canslim messages into one large message.  Or, 3) You can
setup customized filters on your own mail client to sort the incoming canslim
messages to its own folder.

If you wish to modify your canslim subscription, email a message to:

    [e-mail]

The remove yourself from the canslim list, write in the body of the email:

    unsubscribe canslim

To add yourself to the digest version of the canslim list, write in the
body of the email:

    subscribe canslim-digest

For general help with majordomo commands, write in the body of the email:

    help

If you need further clarification, write me directly at:

    [e-mail]

Best Regards,

Jeff Salisbury - CANSLIM list admin / owner


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kent Norman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] check out this CANSLIM screener, FREE!
Date: 15 Jun 2000 11:44:41 -0500

You can set the screening criteria at
http://www.stocktables.com

rel str, EPS, Acc/dist, min & max price, vol % change,

Kent


[e-mail] wrote:
>
> I always loved stockmaster.com because of their nice LOGARITHMic charts, but now
> that I found they have a CANSLIM screener, I feel obligated to promote it.  It's
> FREE, too!
>
> http://strategy.stockmaster.com/StockSearchRun.asp?cobrander=stockmaster&gurupage=ONeil&upt=2879§ion=results&WilliamONeil=1&submit1=Click+Here&type=guru
>
> -Jim
>
> P.S. here's it's latest CANSLIM picks.  Keep in mind, it lists the CANSLIM based on
> prices given--sometimes a day old so you have to look at current charts to see if
> they're still relevant.  Also, I don't think it looks at technicals [chart
> formations]:
>
> AAON
>         AAON INC
>
>  ADBE
>         ADOBE SYSTEMS INC
>
>  ALTR
>         ALTERA CORP
>
>  CDWC
>         CDW COMPUTER CTRS INC
>
>  CHP
>         C&D TECHNOLOGIES INC
>
> CTAC
>         1-800 CONTACTS INC
>
>  CTK
>         COMPTEK RESEARCH INC
>
>  FORR
>         FORRESTER RESEARCH INC
>
>  JKHY
>         JACK HENRY & ASSOCIATES
>
>  KEI
>         KEITHLEY INSTRUMENTS INC
>
>  LLTC
>         LINEAR TECHNOLOGY CORP
>
>  MSS
>         MEASUREMENT SPECIALITIES
>
> ORCL
>         ORACLE CORPORATION
>
>  PDCO
>         PATTERSON DENTAL CO
>
>  PENG
>         PRIMA ENERGY CORP
>
> SHFL
>         SHUFFLE MASTER INC
>
>  TECH
>         TECHNE CORP
>
>  TLGD
>         TOLLGRADE COMMUN INC
>
>  TNL
>         TECHNITROL INC
>
>  XLNX
>         XILINX INC
>
> -

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Walter Stock <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Current Canslim Leaders
Date: 15 Jun 2000 14:20:02 -0400

Greg Kuhn in his bi-weekly column at TradingMarkets.com
wrote today that:

      "Of the leaders that have followed through from breakout moves,
      Keithley Instruments (KEI) experienced a heavy distribution day
      Wednesday -- the heaviest-volume day since the breakout to
      new highs -- off of a climax run, Elantec Semiconductor (ELNT)
      pulled back on very light volume in its first downside reaction
      since its breakout move, Corning (GLW), which popped out to
      new highs on heavy turnover Monday, acts great, as does
      Newport Corp (NEWP). So, outside of Keithley's death rattle,
      leading stocks are performing on cue.

      "And while the majority of leaders continue to act fine to this
point,
      other top stocks continue along, building basing patterns.

      "Here are some basing in fine fashion until proven otherwise:
      Brocade Communications (BRCD), Checkpoint Software (CHKP),
      Cephalon (CEPH). Celgene (CELG), Copper Mountain Networks
      (CMTN),Ericcson (ERICY) Flextronics (FLEX), JDS Uniphase (JDSU),
      Koninklijke Philips (PHG), Kopin (KOPN), M Systems (FLSH),
      Medimunne (MEDI), Nokia (NOK), Nortel Networks (NT),
      Nvidia (NVDA), Sapient Corp (SAPE), Siebel Systems (SEBL),
      STMicroelectronics (STM), Telcom Semiconductor(TLCM)
      and Triquint Semiconductor (TQNT)."

Kuhn also notes the false breakouts in some leaders such as ADI and
XLNX, occurences he believes happen because traders jump the gun.

He also mentions that "the intermediate-term-minded trader should be far

from loaded up on stocks in here."

Am about 60% invested myself (and entirely in the stocks above).

Walter Stock
Oakville, ON, Canada






-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tim Fisher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Current Canslim Leaders
Date: 15 Jun 2000 11:39:22 -0700

SEBL is busting to get out of that base today. Volume is not there and the
52-wk hi is one of those blowoff tops but if it gets over this resistance
at 150-ish on volume, I'd consider it to have broken out.

On 11:20 AM 6/15/00, Walter Stock Said:
>Greg Kuhn in his bi-weekly column at TradingMarkets.com
>wrote today that:
>
>       "Of the leaders that have followed through from breakout moves,
>       Keithley Instruments (KEI) experienced a heavy distribution day
>       Wednesday -- the heaviest-volume day since the breakout to
>       new highs -- off of a climax run, Elantec Semiconductor (ELNT)
>       pulled back on very light volume in its first downside reaction
>       since its breakout move, Corning (GLW), which popped out to
>       new highs on heavy turnover Monday, acts great, as does
>       Newport Corp (NEWP). So, outside of Keithley's death rattle,
>       leading stocks are performing on cue.
>
>       "And while the majority of leaders continue to act fine to this
>point,
>       other top stocks continue along, building basing patterns.
>
>       "Here are some basing in fine fashion until proven otherwise:
>       Brocade Communications (BRCD), Checkpoint Software (CHKP),
>       Cephalon (CEPH). Celgene (CELG), Copper Mountain Networks
>       (CMTN),Ericcson (ERICY) Flextronics (FLEX), JDS Uniphase (JDSU),
>       Koninklijke Philips (PHG), Kopin (KOPN), M Systems (FLSH),
>       Medimunne (MEDI), Nokia (NOK), Nortel Networks (NT),
>       Nvidia (NVDA), Sapient Corp (SAPE), Siebel Systems (SEBL),
>       STMicroelectronics (STM), Telcom Semiconductor(TLCM)
>       and Triquint Semiconductor (TQNT)."
>
>Kuhn also notes the false breakouts in some leaders such as ADI and
>XLNX, occurences he believes happen because traders jump the gun.
>
>He also mentions that "the intermediate-term-minded trader should be far
>
>from loaded up on stocks in here."
>
>Am about 60% invested myself (and entirely in the stocks above).
>
>Walter Stock
>Oakville, ON, Canada
>
>
>
>
>
>
>-

Tim Fisher
Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites

[e-mail]
WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
See naked fish and rocks!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: [CANSLIM] Re. Stocks Ready To Break-Out
Date: 15 Jun 2000 14:46:53 EDT

Walter:

     Just a "thanks" from a lurker who never knew, and so overlooked, the
significance of the "Follow the Leaders" column in IBD.  In case others want
to know about the thread, here's the meat of Walter's answer to Anna:

The information is in IBD's daily "Follow the Leader" industry group
analysis, usually on or near page 8.

I cut this section out every day, use a highlighter for the stocks that
meet my buy criteria, and then keep it ready on my desk.
I also keep the old ones for comparison purposes.

In addition to following the number of quality institutions going
in and out of a stock (and yes I know that this information is
not necessarily up to date), it is also very interesting to see exactly
which groups IBD chooses to analyze.

For example, IBD has analyzed the semiconductor manufacturers
no fewer than five times since the end of March.  On the other hand,
a group like Internet-Network Security/Solutions
(one of last year's best groups) has been analyzed a paltry once.

Food for thought.

Walter Stock
Oakville, ON, Canada

jans

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable)
Date: 15 Jun 2000 13:03:08 -0700

Thanks, how do you explain the -4% for CGNX?

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 5:05 AM


> Because in the past five years the earnings went from 1.09 to
> 1.03
>
> Tom Worley
> [e-mail]
> chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Joseph Weisfish <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>; <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 8:32 PM
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable
>
>
> NUHC:    I don't understand why DGO shows it with a -4% growth
> rate, can
> this be a mistake?
>
>
>
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
Date: 15 Jun 2000 14:43:36 -0700

Uh, the total shares outstanding of QCOM before the 4-1 split on 12/31/99
and 2-1 on 5/11/99 was 92 mil. take away % owned by management and your left
with a float of about 80 mil. a far cry from 2 billion!

And the high for QCOM was only 200.

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 7:05 AM


> Uh, the same type of buying that pushed QCOM to 250?
>
> At 09:42 PM 6/13/00 -0700, you wrote:
> >What's all the fuss about EMC? How can you justify a position in a stock
> >with a float of almost 2 billion shares?! Are you aware what type of
buying
> >is needed to push this one?
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
> >To: <[e-mail]>
> >Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 9:33 PM
> >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
> >
> >
> > > Looks pretty good to me, I think you could call a cup on this, it
> > > wasn't too deep, from 71 or so to 53, which I think is around 28%
> > > (approximately) deep, which isn't bad, volume shriveled up a bit for
> > > a few days.
> > >
> > > On 12 Jun 00, at 22:57, Alexander T wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > Could someone help me understand the chart of EMC's recent action?
It
> >sort
> > > > of looks like there was a double bottom from end of march to early
may,
> >and
> > > > then some other cup-like base.
> > > >
> > > > On the other hand, one may think that there is a "Tripple" bottom
since
> >the
> > > > latest peak did not go over the second peak of the W.  Could someone
> >point
> > > > out their view on this?
> > > >
> > > > Thank you
> > > >
> > > > ______________________________________________
> > > > FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
> > > > Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > >
> >
> >
> >-
>
> Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists
> Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site
> PFB Information
> mailto:[e-mail]
> WWW http://OreRockOn.com
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tim Fisher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Nitpicking
Date: 15 Jun 2000 15:22:31 -0700

Your CANSLIM related point being what, exactly? My point was, and continues
to be, that big-to-mega-caps, well over WON's outdated size limit, which
QCOM certainly is (50B market cap argues MEGA-cap, not just big-cap!), can
and do perform as well as or better than small-to-mid-caps which WON
focused on in 1986, when big caps traded in increments of a point each day.
What's the difference between 80 M shares out and 2B shares out? Nothing to
a hedge fund or day trader. All they care about is liquidity. And growth.
EMC routinely moves 10-15% in a day, just like QCOM. So it's easy to push
the price around even with 2B shares.

Face it, if you got more than a point out of your large cap portfolio in a
day way back in HTMMIS' glory days, you bought all your institutional
trader buddies beers after the market closed. Now, you do the same if your
ignored, brain-dead PE 8 (sorry Tom, couldn't resist!) small-cap goes to a
PE of 16. The best performers of 1999 were almost exclusively large,
extremely liquid, high growth big-to-mega-cap technologies.

Interesting that Kuhn's list that Earl reported earlier today has about 90%
overlap with this week's 90/90/90 HGS list. Looks like KUHN, Marder, and
friends have thrown the capitalization cap (cap cap?) out the window.
Indeed, I'd be tempted to use it as a _floor_ these days. The exceptions
like KEI with its pitiful 14M shares out continue to do nicely (boy, what
if they increased their float through a 2:1 split? Wham boom, Alice!), but
their compatriots generally languish in the land of "high growth but
totally ignored" because they are too illiquid for the day, growth fund,
and hedge fund traders that are moving the growth stocks.

P.S. QCOM traded 61M shares today, and I highly doubt it turned over 75% of
its float.

On 02:43 PM 6/15/00, Joseph Weisfish Said:
>Uh, the total shares outstanding of QCOM before the 4-1 split on 12/31/99
>and 2-1 on 5/11/99 was 92 mil. take away % owned by management and your left
>with a float of about 80 mil. a far cry from 2 billion!
>
>And the high for QCOM was only 200.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Tim Fisher" <[e-mail]>
>To: <[e-mail]>
>Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 7:05 AM
>Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
>
>
> > Uh, the same type of buying that pushed QCOM to 250?
> >
> > At 09:42 PM 6/13/00 -0700, you wrote:
> > >What's all the fuss about EMC? How can you justify a position in a stock
> > >with a float of almost 2 billion shares?! Are you aware what type of
>buying
> > >is needed to push this one?
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
> > >To: <[e-mail]>
> > >Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 9:33 PM
> > >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
> > >
> > >
> > > > Looks pretty good to me, I think you could call a cup on this, it
> > > > wasn't too deep, from 71 or so to 53, which I think is around 28%
> > > > (approximately) deep, which isn't bad, volume shriveled up a bit for
> > > > a few days.
> > > >
> > > > On 12 Jun 00, at 22:57, Alexander T wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Could someone help me understand the chart of EMC's recent action?
>It
> > >sort
> > > > > of looks like there was a double bottom from end of march to early
>may,
> > >and
> > > > > then some other cup-like base.
> > > > >
> > > > > On the other hand, one may think that there is a "Tripple" bottom
>since
> > >the
> > > > > latest peak did not go over the second peak of the W.  Could someone
> > >point
> > > > > out their view on this?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you


Tim Fisher
Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites

[e-mail]
WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
See naked fish and rocks!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable)
Date: 15 Jun 2000 19:05:34 -0400

for 1995, they earned 79 cents, for 1999 they earned 70 cents, so
a decline over 5 years. NOTE: for 2000, the forecast is for 1.50!
more than a double, and for Q1 they earned 34 cents, up 386% over
Q1, '99, so they are on track for the forecast. Nice cup with 2
week handle with volume declining until today when it matched
ADV. This stock may be waking up, well worth keeping an eye on.
Only real negative I saw at a quick glance was the 30% ownership
already by funds.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 4:03 PM
still reasonable)


Thanks, how do you explain the -4% for CGNX?

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 5:05 AM
reasonable)


> Because in the past five years the earnings went from 1.09 to
> 1.03
>
> Tom Worley
> [e-mail]
> chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Joseph Weisfish <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>; <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 8:32 PM
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable
>
>
> NUHC:    I don't understand why DGO shows it with a -4% growth
> rate, can
> this be a mistake?
>
>
>
>
>
> -
>


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
Date: 15 Jun 2000 19:12:25 -0400

Joseph, I think the float reference was to EMC, where according
to DGO the float presently is 1.9943 billion, close enough to 2
bil for me.  On QCOM, DGO shows management only owning 9%, with
the remaining float at 671 million, so not sure how you come up
with 80 mil.  It really doesn't matter today what the shares
outstanding was, or mngmt owned, six months ago, the liquidity is
measured today.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 5:43 PM


Uh, the total shares outstanding of QCOM before the 4-1 split on
12/31/99
and 2-1 on 5/11/99 was 92 mil. take away % owned by management
and your left
with a float of about 80 mil. a far cry from 2 billion!

And the high for QCOM was only 200.

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 7:05 AM


> Uh, the same type of buying that pushed QCOM to 250?
>
> At 09:42 PM 6/13/00 -0700, you wrote:
> >What's all the fuss about EMC? How can you justify a position
in a stock
> >with a float of almost 2 billion shares?! Are you aware what
type of
buying
> >is needed to push this one?
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
> >To: <[e-mail]>
> >Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 9:33 PM
> >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
> >
> >
> > > Looks pretty good to me, I think you could call a cup on
this, it
> > > wasn't too deep, from 71 or so to 53, which I think is
around 28%
> > > (approximately) deep, which isn't bad, volume shriveled up
a bit for
> > > a few days.
> > >
> > > On 12 Jun 00, at 22:57, Alexander T wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > Could someone help me understand the chart of EMC's
recent action?
It
> >sort
> > > > of looks like there was a double bottom from end of march
to early
may,
> >and
> > > > then some other cup-like base.
> > > >
> > > > On the other hand, one may think that there is a
"Tripple" bottom
since
> >the
> > > > latest peak did not go over the second peak of the W.
Could someone
> >point
> > > > out their view on this?
> > > >
> > > > Thank you
> > > >
> > > > ______________________________________________
> > > > FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
> > > > Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > >
> >
> >
> >-
>
> Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists
> Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site
> PFB Information
> mailto:[e-mail]
> WWW http://OreRockOn.com
>
>
> -
>


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable)
Date: 15 Jun 2000 16:47:49 -0700

Ya, there's still room for more, what would you call overbought by
institutions?


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 4:05 PM
reasonable)


> for 1995, they earned 79 cents, for 1999 they earned 70 cents, so
> a decline over 5 years. NOTE: for 2000, the forecast is for 1.50!
> more than a double, and for Q1 they earned 34 cents, up 386% over
> Q1, '99, so they are on track for the forecast. Nice cup with 2
> week handle with volume declining until today when it matched
> ADV. This stock may be waking up, well worth keeping an eye on.
> Only real negative I saw at a quick glance was the 30% ownership
> already by funds.
>
> Tom Worley
> [e-mail]
> chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Joseph Weisfish <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 4:03 PM
> Subject: Re: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but
> still reasonable)
>
>
> Thanks, how do you explain the -4% for CGNX?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 5:05 AM
> Subject: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still
> reasonable)
>
>
> > Because in the past five years the earnings went from 1.09 to
> > 1.03
> >
> > Tom Worley
> > [e-mail]
> > chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> > get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Joseph Weisfish <[e-mail]>
> > To: <[e-mail]>; <[e-mail]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 8:32 PM
> > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable
> >
> >
> > NUHC:    I don't understand why DGO shows it with a -4% growth
> > rate, can
> > this be a mistake?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
> -
>
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
Date: 15 Jun 2000 16:51:39 -0700

QCOM was just brought in as an example for stocks that made good advances
with low/high float (depending who you ask). You'll have to read the whole
chain.

Liquidity meaning volume?

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 4:12 PM


> Joseph, I think the float reference was to EMC, where according
> to DGO the float presently is 1.9943 billion, close enough to 2
> bil for me.  On QCOM, DGO shows management only owning 9%, with
> the remaining float at 671 million, so not sure how you come up
> with 80 mil.  It really doesn't matter today what the shares
> outstanding was, or mngmt owned, six months ago, the liquidity is
> measured today.
>
> Tom Worley
> [e-mail]
> chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Joseph Weisfish <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 5:43 PM
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
>
>
> Uh, the total shares outstanding of QCOM before the 4-1 split on
> 12/31/99
> and 2-1 on 5/11/99 was 92 mil. take away % owned by management
> and your left
> with a float of about 80 mil. a far cry from 2 billion!
>
> And the high for QCOM was only 200.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tim Fisher" <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 7:05 AM
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
>
>
> > Uh, the same type of buying that pushed QCOM to 250?
> >
> > At 09:42 PM 6/13/00 -0700, you wrote:
> > >What's all the fuss about EMC? How can you justify a position
> in a stock
> > >with a float of almost 2 billion shares?! Are you aware what
> type of
> buying
> > >is needed to push this one?
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
> > >To: <[e-mail]>
> > >Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 9:33 PM
> > >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EMC - "tripple" bottom?
> > >
> > >
> > > > Looks pretty good to me, I think you could call a cup on
> this, it
> > > > wasn't too deep, from 71 or so to 53, which I think is
> around 28%
> > > > (approximately) deep, which isn't bad, volume shriveled up
> a bit for
> > > > a few days.
> > > >
> > > > On 12 Jun 00, at 22:57, Alexander T wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Could someone help me understand the chart of EMC's
> recent action?
> It
> > >sort
> > > > > of looks like there was a double bottom from end of march
> to early
> may,
> > >and
> > > > > then some other cup-like base.
> > > > >
> > > > > On the other hand, one may think that there is a
> "Tripple" bottom
> since
> > >the
> > > > > latest peak did not go over the second peak of the W.
> Could someone
> > >point
> > > > > out their view on this?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you
> > > > >
> > > > > ______________________________________________
> > > > > FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
> > > > > Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >-
> >
> > Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists
> > Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site
> > PFB Information
> > mailto:[e-mail]
> > WWW http://OreRockOn.com
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
> -
>
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] (Fwd) Re: [quotes-plus] Cup and Handle
Date: 15 Jun 2000 18:57:36 -0600

<color><param>0100,0100,0100</param>This was on the Quotes Plus list, I know there are quite a few QP
users on this list, so perhaps someone will find this useful.  Have
not used it myself.



------- Forwarded message follows -------

</color>To:                 <color><param>0000,0000,8000</param><<[e-mail]></color>


Date sent:          <color><param>0000,0000,8000</param>Thu, 15 Jun 2000 12:01:27 -0400</color>

Send reply to:      <color><param>0000,0000,8000</param>[e-mail]</color>

<bold>Subject:            <color><param>0000,0000,8000</param>Re: [quotes-plus] Cup and Handle</bold></color>


<underline><color><param>0000,8000,0000</param>[ Double-click this line for list subscription options ]</underline></color>


This is the scan. It's flawed, but it does find some cups & handles amidst a

lot of bad hits. The hits are dependent on the time frames, of course.


// Cup and Handle Scan, by Brooke

// based on "Cup-With-Handle and the Computerized Approach

// by Rich Martinelli and Barry Hyman in October 1998 issue of TASC


output="cuph.lst";

input="commplus.lst";

ProcessMS = "d:\meta\cuph\",MSDATA;

DaysRequired=200;

Daystoload=250;


integer i, j, k, l, datea, dateb, datec, dated;

float pointa, pointb, pointc, pointd;


pointd:=min(0,-14,lo);

pointc:=max(-5,-30,hi);

pointb:=min(-8,-55,lo);

pointa:=max(-28,-155,hi);


dated:=0;

datec:=0;

dateb:=0;

datea:=0;

for i = -14 to 0 step 1 do

if low(i)=pointd then

dated:=i;

endif;

next i;

for j = -30 to -5 step 1 do

if high(j)=pointc then

datec:=j;

endif;

next j;

for k = -55 to -8 step 1 do

if low(k)=pointb then

dateb:=k;

endif;

next k;

for l = -155 to -28 step 1 do

if high(l)=pointa then

datea:=l;

endif;

next l;


if pointb<<=.88*pointc then

if pointb>.55*pointc then

if pointb<<=.88*pointa then

if pointb>.55*pointa then


// if pointc>1.12*pointb then

// if pointc<<1.45*pointb then

// if pointa>1.12*pointb then

// if pointa<<1.45*pointb then

if pointc>=.95*pointa then

if pointd<<(.8*pointc)+(.2*pointb) then

if datea<< dateb then;

if dateb<< datec then;

if datec<< dated then;

if datea-dateb<<=-20 then

if datea-dateb>=-120 then

if dateb-datec<<=-3 then

if datec-dated<<=-5 then

println symbol, ", ", pointa:5:2, ", ", pointb:5:2, ", ", pointc:5:2,

 ", ", pointd:5:2, ", ", "Date A: ", date(datea), ", ",

 "Date B: ", date(dateb), ", ", "Date C: ", date(datec), ", ",

 "Date D: ", date(dated), ", ", "Dates A-B: ", datea-dateb,

 ", ", "Dates B-C: ", dateb-datec, ", ", "Dates C-D: ", datec-dated;

endif; endif; endif; endif; endif; endif;

endif; endif; endif; endif; endif; endif;

endif;




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



Sent: Friday, June 09, 2000 1:38 PM




<color><param>7F00,0000,0000</param>> Jeff.

> What you said was completely correct - there is'nt a cup and handle scan

> on that

> website. But if my memory serves me Brooke wrote a brilliant one that a

> number

> of people kicked in with suggestions about two years ago. I don't know

> if it will

> work on QP2, maybe Brooke can tell us, it was on the "other site" around

> the

> message 10000.

>

>

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Want insight into hot IPOs, investing strategies and stocks to watch?

> Red Herring FREE newsletters provide strategic analysis for investors.

> http://click.egroups.com/1/5176/9/_/512950/_/960572291/

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

>

>



</color>------------------------------------------------------------------------

SALESFORCE.COM MAKES SOFTWARE OBSOLETE

Secure, online sales force automation with 5 users FREE for 1 year!

Go to:

http://click.egroups.com/1/5021/9/_/512950/_/961084948/




<color><param>0100,0100,0100</param>------- End of forwarded message -------

<nofill>

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Brian Bellamy <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] List of stocks forming handles
Date: 15 Jun 2000 22:13:24 -0400

My list of stocks to watch for breakout based on positive daily graphs
data and chart patterns. Comments or questions as to why I included on
the list always appreciated. Any additions appreciated. Criteria
included EPS over 90, industry group strength of A or B, chart forming a
handle, prefer accelerating sales and earnings in recent quarters.

ALTR  Altera Corp
AMK   American Tech Ceramics
ADI   Analog Devices
BBRC  Burr Brown Corp
CHKP  Check Point Softwar Tech
CIEN  Ciena Corporation
FLEX  Flextronics Intl Ltd
JBL   Jabil Circuit Inc
MXIM  Maxim Integrated Prods
NOK   Nokia Corp Ads
ORCL  Oracle Corp
PSEM  Pericom Semiconductor
PLT   Plantronics Inc
PWAV  Powerwave Tech Inc
SDLI  S D L Inc
SANM  Sanmina Corp
STM   Stmicroelectronics N V
XLNX  Xilinx Inc



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "mikelu" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable)
Date: 16 Jun 2000 01:28:58 -0700

I believe Kuhn says to sell when fund ownership > 40%. I try to buy fund
ownership < 30%, but can't remember exactly who advised this.

Mike

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Joseph Weisfish
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 4:48 PM
reasonable)


Ya, there's still room for more, what would you call overbought by
institutions?


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 4:05 PM
reasonable)


> for 1995, they earned 79 cents, for 1999 they earned 70 cents, so
> a decline over 5 years. NOTE: for 2000, the forecast is for 1.50!
> more than a double, and for Q1 they earned 34 cents, up 386% over
> Q1, '99, so they are on track for the forecast. Nice cup with 2
> week handle with volume declining until today when it matched
> ADV. This stock may be waking up, well worth keeping an eye on.
> Only real negative I saw at a quick glance was the 30% ownership
> already by funds.
>
> Tom Worley
> [e-mail]
> chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Joseph Weisfish <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 4:03 PM
> Subject: Re: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but
> still reasonable)
>
>
> Thanks, how do you explain the -4% for CGNX?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 5:05 AM
> Subject: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still
> reasonable)
>
>
> > Because in the past five years the earnings went from 1.09 to
> > 1.03
> >
> > Tom Worley
> > [e-mail]
> > chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> > get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Joseph Weisfish <[e-mail]>
> > To: <[e-mail]>; <[e-mail]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 8:32 PM
> > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable
> >
> >
> > NUHC:    I don't understand why DGO shows it with a -4% growth
> > rate, can
> > this be a mistake?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> >
>
>
> -
>
>
>
> -
>


-


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable)
Date: 16 Jun 2000 08:02:07 EDT

where do you find the % of what stock the funds have? bubbet

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable)
Date: 16 Jun 2000 08:02:18 EDT



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Walter Stock <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Voodoo
Date: 16 Jun 2000 14:15:54 -0400

From Gary Smith, technical analyst at theStreet.com,
in a chat on Yahoo last night:

       split_stock asks: Hi Gary, I like your columns,
             but I think TA is mostly voodoo.
             What can you tell me to convince me otherwise?

       gsmith4: Up 377% YTD.

       revo asks: Your strategies include trendlines,
              direction, and volume. Any other
              things to pay detailed attention to?

       gsmith4: Only congestion, support and resistance.

Hmm, that's what cups and handles are made of.

Walter Stock
Oakville, ON, Canada





-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "mikelu" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable)
Date: 16 Jun 2000 13:17:02 -0700

Daily Graphs Online. IBD says it's factored into the Sponsorship ranking.
The ones with fund ownership < 30% are generally A or B ranked, I think. (I
don't use IBD much, but looked into this once.)

Mike

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of [e-mail]
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 5:02 AM
reasonable)


where do you find the % of what stock the funds have? bubbet

-


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Monitoring the leaders
Date: 16 Jun 2000 13:07:53 -0700 (PDT)


Hi,

I was wondering if anyone is using the following strategy:

1) Select the top 40-80 industry groups
2) Select the top 2 stocks from each industry group
3) Daily print out small chart (something similar to the IBD stocks in
news section)
4) Buy or Get ready to buy any stock that is breaking out or about to
breakout.


I know I might get flamed for writing this email because this is exactly
what we are supposed to do so what is different:

For one -- it is focused on some 80 to 160 stocks that are the leaders.


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Monitoring the leaders
Date: 16 Jun 2000 16:37:31 -0400



How do you select the 'top' two stocks using IBD?  Is this ranking
published somewhere?

Thank you,
Anna


Pritish Shah <[e-mail]> on 06/16/2000 04:07:53 PM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:





Hi,

I was wondering if anyone is using the following strategy:

1) Select the top 40-80 industry groups
2) Select the top 2 stocks from each industry group
3) Daily print out small chart (something similar to the IBD stocks in
news section)
4) Buy or Get ready to buy any stock that is breaking out or about to
breakout.


I know I might get flamed for writing this email because this is exactly
what we are supposed to do so what is different:

For one -- it is focused on some 80 to 160 stocks that are the leaders.


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


-





-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Rocky Sanghvi <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Distribution on the NYSE
Date: 16 Jun 2000 17:51:42 -0400

Distribution on the big board.  heavy volume over 1.2 billion.  lost about
2%.  Any thoughts on this?  Will this pull down the other Indices?  Nasdaq
seems to be setting up with a nice cup and handle formation as leading
stocks get in position.

Cheers
Rakesh

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Monitoring the leaders
Date: 16 Jun 2000 15:21:21 -0700 (PDT)


IBD publishes the info regularly but I have never ordered it.


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Fri, 16 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:

>
>
> How do you select the 'top' two stocks using IBD?  Is this ranking
> published somewhere?
>
> Thank you,
> Anna
>
>
> Pritish Shah <[e-mail]> on 06/16/2000 04:07:53 PM
>
> Please respond to [e-mail]
>
> To:   [e-mail]
> cc:
> Subject:  [CANSLIM] Monitoring the leaders
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I was wondering if anyone is using the following strategy:
>
> 1) Select the top 40-80 industry groups
> 2) Select the top 2 stocks from each industry group
> 3) Daily print out small chart (something similar to the IBD stocks in
> news section)
> 4) Buy or Get ready to buy any stock that is breaking out or about to
> breakout.
>
>
> I know I might get flamed for writing this email because this is exactly
> what we are supposed to do so what is different:
>
> For one -- it is focused on some 80 to 160 stocks that are the leaders.
>
>
> Regards,
> Shah
> 408-525-4263
>
>
> -
>
>
>
>
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Eric Shen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Monitoring the leaders
Date: 16 Jun 2000 15:52:06 -0700


I ordered the list of industries once.  Was a bit disappointed.
It was like $15-$20 and all I got was a photocopy of the industries and
the stocks within the industries.  Perhaps one can build an industry
list
using the "New Highs/Lows" section in IBD.

Does DGO have a way to get industry lists?

Eric

Pritish Shah wrote:
>
> IBD publishes the info regularly but I have never ordered it.
>
> Regards,
> Shah
> 408-525-4263
>
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > How do you select the 'top' two stocks using IBD?  Is this ranking
> > published somewhere?
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Anna
> >
> >
> > Pritish Shah <[e-mail]> on 06/16/2000 04:07:53 PM
> >
> > Please respond to [e-mail]
> >
> > To:   [e-mail]
> > cc:
> > Subject:  [CANSLIM] Monitoring the leaders
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was wondering if anyone is using the following strategy:
> >
> > 1) Select the top 40-80 industry groups
> > 2) Select the top 2 stocks from each industry group
> > 3) Daily print out small chart (something similar to the IBD stocks in
> > news section)
> > 4) Buy or Get ready to buy any stock that is breaking out or about to
> > breakout.
> >
> >
> > I know I might get flamed for writing this email because this is exactly
> > what we are supposed to do so what is different:
> >
> > For one -- it is focused on some 80 to 160 stocks that are the leaders.
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Shah
> > 408-525-4263
> >
> -

--
Eric Shen        MS LOC3-8   / / /    Level One Communications
email: [e-mail]      | | |_/  an Intel company
Tel: [phone]          | |___/  9750 Goethe Road
               ext: 4497     |_____/  Sacramento, CA 95827

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Don Canfield" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Distribution on the NYSE
Date: 16 Jun 2000 18:54:02 -0500

Ah --

This brings up something I've been wondering about.  Is it valid to view the
action of an index the same as one would an individual stock, in terms of
cups and handles?  I agree, a very interesting potential handle is forming
on the NAZ, if it's legitimate to see this kind of thing in an index.  What
I've been looking for in this index is a head and shoulders bottom, with the
neckline being right along the current handle.  That would make us still
waiting for the right shoulder.   It makes me nervous to see it sitting
right there.  Is it about to break out as if from a handle, or is it about
to throw itself off the cliff?

Sorry I haven't introduced my self to the list. I've been lurking for about
2 weeks, and studying canslim for about 6 months.  This is on top of
maintaining a decent portfolio with nice gains for about 8 years, thought
mostly ltbh strategy.  I'm intrigued with the canslim approach, have read
O'Neil's book 3 or 4 times (as well as others that support the technical
premise) and feel I have a good grasp on the principles.  I'm lurking here
and other places to get more in tune with the nitty gritty.

Thanks,

Don

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 4:51 PM


> Distribution on the big board.  heavy volume over 1.2 billion.  lost about
> 2%.  Any thoughts on this?  Will this pull down the other Indices?  Nasdaq
> seems to be setting up with a nice cup and handle formation as leading
> stocks get in position.
>
> Cheers
> Rakesh
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Distribution on the NYSE
Date: 16 Jun 2000 20:57:31 -0400

First, Don, thanks for introducing yourself and joining in. I am
pleased to see so many new members (or old lurkers) entering the
fray of our discussions here, it really adds value and content.

I am a firm believer that you can interpret chart patterns of
indexes much like individual stocks, so long as you remember that
they are composites. For example, if I want to look at the NYSE,
I don't even consider the Dow 30, I look at the NYSE Composite
Index chart at DGO (if you want to only focus on big caps, use
the S&P500 instead). It shows that today it dropped 1.18% (well
under the 2% mentioned, but still a notable drop). I also note
that the Financials, which had been showing at least strong
secondary leadership potential to the techs, dropped about 3.6%
on earnings warnings, so news related. But when I look at the
chart of NYSE Comp, I see a consistent and dramatic rise in the
lows, while the highs continue to bump into resistance at 660. So
even with today's drop, another 3% puts this index at an all time
high. The chart gives me a clear wedging up pattern, with the
potential for a full blown breakout. It wants to go up.

When I look at the Naz Comp, I see a chart with a strong uptrend
that was finally broken in early March, followed by a bloody and
expensive selloff (correction). For the past two weeks I see
finally a consolidation. Maybe this is the handle to a cup, tho
the cup at DGO is not that clear. For my part, I just see a two
week consolidation, and on under average volume. Whether this
means it is safe to get back into Naz stocks, looking for a
breakout overall of the index, or just that there are now
individual stocks worth watching or buying remains to be seen.
This two week consolidation does, however, give me confidence
that the worst of the damage has been done, so an individual
stock that is compelling gains greater value and opportunity in
terms of "M".

There is an even greater danger in anticipating what an index
chart will show you as compared to an individual stock chart. It
is far too easy to unconsciously impose your own expectations
onto the ultimate results, and end up misinterpretating the
chart. That is a function of its composite character. But when an
index chart, such as Naz, is clearly showing a base, that means
that some members are breaking out while others are dogging it.
It becomes important to search out those leaders breaking out,
and examine how they are doing individually. If they continue to
move higher, it is likely the rest will soon follow. Likewise
with the NYSE Comp, it is important to identify which ones are
the ones consistently moving this index up to bump the resistance
at 660. They are the potential leaders once the laggards stop
dragging them back (and each time to ever higher levels).

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 7:54 PM


Ah --

This brings up something I've been wondering about.  Is it valid
to view the
action of an index the same as one would an individual stock, in
terms of
cups and handles?  I agree, a very interesting potential handle
is forming
on the NAZ, if it's legitimate to see this kind of thing in an
index.  What
I've been looking for in this index is a head and shoulders
bottom, with the
neckline being right along the current handle.  That would make
us still
waiting for the right shoulder.   It makes me nervous to see it
sitting
right there.  Is it about to break out as if from a handle, or is
it about
to throw itself off the cliff?

Sorry I haven't introduced my self to the list. I've been lurking
for about
2 weeks, and studying canslim for about 6 months.  This is on top
of
maintaining a decent portfolio with nice gains for about 8 years,
thought
mostly ltbh strategy.  I'm intrigued with the canslim approach,
have read
O'Neil's book 3 or 4 times (as well as others that support the
technical
premise) and feel I have a good grasp on the principles.  I'm
lurking here
and other places to get more in tune with the nitty gritty.

Thanks,

Don

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 4:51 PM


> Distribution on the big board.  heavy volume over 1.2 billion.
lost about
> 2%.  Any thoughts on this?  Will this pull down the other
Indices?  Nasdaq
> seems to be setting up with a nice cup and handle formation as
leading
> stocks get in position.
>
> Cheers
> Rakesh
>
> -
>


-




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Monitoring the leaders
Date: 16 Jun 2000 21:22:03 -0400

Not at this time. There is some promise of a future upgrade, but
don't know if this will be included. It likely will depend on
user/subscriber demands for it, as they are responsive to this.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 6:52 PM


Does DGO have a way to get industry lists?

Eric




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Dave" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Distribution on the NYSE
Date: 16 Jun 2000 22:07:42 -0700

Rakesh,

You must take today's NYSE volume liberally since today was a triple
witching. Many trades that occurred today have "other agendas" as they are
unwinding derivative strategies. In fact, this whole funky week had
"strange" trading due to derivative trading. Next week should give a much
clearer trading signal and a likely breakout of the NAZ range.

DSquires


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 2:51 PM


> Distribution on the big board.  heavy volume over 1.2 billion.  lost about
> 2%.  Any thoughts on this?  Will this pull down the other Indices?  Nasdaq
> seems to be setting up with a nice cup and handle formation as leading
> stocks get in position.
>
> Cheers
> Rakesh
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Monitoring the leaders
Date: 16 Jun 2000 23:59:42 EDT

IBD publishes Industry Group and Ticker Symbol Index semiannually.  This book
is in two sections -- one lists stocks by industry group.  Order from IBD's
Investment Library @ 800 815-6300.  Cost?  Maybe $20 or less, not sure.  Very
helpful.

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] DGO List - Part 1
Date: 17 Jun 2000 08:09:02 -0400

Well, the list thinned some this week, not too surprising given
the week's performance, and down to 158 from the prior week's
169. Still in line with the week before that when 152 of the
stocks in DG's books were within 5% of their 12 month high, and
also had RS and EPS of 80 or better.

As always, Bx is my shorthand for Base where x is my opinion of
how many weeks.

ADCT - looking more and more like a LLUR (lower left, upper
right - not pure CANSLIM)
ATMS - another nice breakout by a small cap, now getting into
mainstream pricing, trailing PE at 34 but projected PE only 24
TECH - handle formed too high (I am seeing more of these, BTW),
yet look what it did since!
ANEN - heck of a nice move, even absorbing a split along the way,
now B1
TWP - base on base, nearly B3
SLNX - handle just a touch too high, but volume declining
CVG - B2
ADI - double bottom not quite perfect, didn't undercut, handle a
touch too high, but in 2nd week
NOK - B2 well placed
SANM - B2
SHFL - another small cap doing well, now B2
MEDQ - B4, volume declining
FII - B2
ADBE - sloppy but long trading range/base, latest earnings and
sales just released powerful
RHI - B7
AC - B2
BEIQ - good example of a base below the high, now too extended
MXIM - B2, good CANSLIM
LFUS - B2
LM - trying to break out from a very short handle, possibly
reaction to Lehman's earnings
GBCB - B3
LLL - B3
SEIC - nearly a B3
THX - almost a B3
FISV - base on base
KP - B2+, LLUR??, lot of insider selling
CGP - B5
TEVA - B2
GNWR - b/o failed, back to B4

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DGO List - Part 1
Date: 17 Jun 2000 09:45:32 -0600

Tom, I have been trying to follow WON's advice to buy only stocks with a
minimum of a 7 or 8 week base.  I have noticed that the DGO list you post
is made up of mostly 1-4 week bases.  Do you buy these shorter bases and if
so, how have they performed?  Any general recommendations in this area?

In my limited experience, I bought several 9 day bases after the initial
NASDAQ rally this spring.  These were strong stocks that were back to new
highs after a couple of days of up on the NAS.  I was quickly stopped out
of all of my purchases, and I've tried to not look at anything less than 7
weeks since.  Of course, it was really M rather than the bases that was the
problem for these stocks.  I understand that, but I'm also chalking up some
of the problem to the bases.   I would have expected solid breakouts to
overcome M to some extent for at least some small time frame if they were
good B/Os.  I have seen some stocks perform well with solid B/Os on longer
bases when M has failed later in this correction.


At 08:09 AM 6/17/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Well, the list thinned some this week, not too surprising given
>the week's performance, and down to 158 from the prior week's
>169. Still in line with the week before that when 152 of the
>stocks in DG's books were within 5% of their 12 month high, and
>also had RS and EPS of 80 or better.
>
>As always, Bx is my shorthand for Base where x is my opinion of
>how many weeks.
>
>ADCT - looking more and more like a LLUR (lower left, upper
>right - not pure CANSLIM)
>ATMS - another nice breakout by a small cap, now getting into
>mainstream pricing, trailing PE at 34 but projected PE only 24
>TECH - handle formed too high (I am seeing more of these, BTW),
>yet look what it did since!
>ANEN - heck of a nice move, even absorbing a split along the way,
>now B1
>TWP - base on base, nearly B3
>SLNX - handle just a touch too high, but volume declining
>CVG - B2
>ADI - double bottom not quite perfect, didn't undercut, handle a
>touch too high, but in 2nd week
>NOK - B2 well placed
>SANM - B2
>SHFL - another small cap doing well, now B2
>MEDQ - B4, volume declining
>FII - B2
>ADBE - sloppy but long trading range/base, latest earnings and
>sales just released powerful
>RHI - B7
>AC - B2
>BEIQ - good example of a base below the high, now too extended
>MXIM - B2, good CANSLIM
>LFUS - B2
>LM - trying to break out from a very short handle, possibly
>reaction to Lehman's earnings
>GBCB - B3
>LLL - B3
>SEIC - nearly a B3
>THX - almost a B3
>FISV - base on base
>KP - B2+, LLUR??, lot of insider selling
>CGP - B5
>TEVA - B2
>GNWR - b/o failed, back to B4
>
>Tom Worley
>[e-mail]
>chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
>get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>
>
>
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DGO List - Part 1
Date: 17 Jun 2000 15:03:28 -0400

Hi Earl,

My list is only intended to present some stocks worth watching.
None are necessarily ever going to develop into a "buy"
candidate.

Because I only buy low priced small and micro cap stocks, it is
rare for me to include one that is on my watch list.  I do still
have ATMS on my watch list, but missed my best buy point. SHFL
used to be on my list, I dropped it when it got away from me.

It is highly preferable to buy on a breakout of at least 50%
increased volume from a base of at least six weeks. I think
trying to get that seventh week might make you miss some
otherwise good candidates.  However, that said, this has not been
a good year for stocks to base that long, it has been too
volatile.  In fact, it has been a number of years since I was
able to find many stocks that had six week bases, and also had
top drawer CS elements, and at the same time were at or close to
their 12 month high. Thus, something had to give, and I usually
shortened my base length criteria, then kept a tighter watch and
sell trigger on any new purchase.

Ultimately, it will depend on the individual what they are most
comfortable with, and how determined they are to be invested in a
volatile market.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2000 11:45 AM


Tom, I have been trying to follow WON's advice to buy only stocks
with a
minimum of a 7 or 8 week base.  I have noticed that the DGO list
you post
is made up of mostly 1-4 week bases.  Do you buy these shorter
bases and if
so, how have they performed?  Any general recommendations in this
area?

In my limited experience, I bought several 9 day bases after the
initial
NASDAQ rally this spring.  These were strong stocks that were
back to new
highs after a couple of days of up on the NAS.  I was quickly
stopped out
of all of my purchases, and I've tried to not look at anything
less than 7
weeks since.  Of course, it was really M rather than the bases
that was the
problem for these stocks.  I understand that, but I'm also
chalking up some
of the problem to the bases.   I would have expected solid
breakouts to
overcome M to some extent for at least some small time frame if
they were
good B/Os.  I have seen some stocks perform well with solid B/Os
on longer
bases when M has failed later in this correction.


At 08:09 AM 6/17/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Well, the list thinned some this week, not too surprising given
>the week's performance, and down to 158 from the prior week's
>169. Still in line with the week before that when 152 of the
>stocks in DG's books were within 5% of their 12 month high, and
>also had RS and EPS of 80 or better.
>
>As always, Bx is my shorthand for Base where x is my opinion of
>how many weeks.
>
>ADCT - looking more and more like a LLUR (lower left, upper
>right - not pure CANSLIM)
>ATMS - another nice breakout by a small cap, now getting into
>mainstream pricing, trailing PE at 34 but projected PE only 24
>TECH - handle formed too high (I am seeing more of these, BTW),
>yet look what it did since!
>ANEN - heck of a nice move, even absorbing a split along the
way,
>now B1
>TWP - base on base, nearly B3
>SLNX - handle just a touch too high, but volume declining
>CVG - B2
>ADI - double bottom not quite perfect, didn't undercut, handle a
>touch too high, but in 2nd week
>NOK - B2 well placed
>SANM - B2
>SHFL - another small cap doing well, now B2
>MEDQ - B4, volume declining
>FII - B2
>ADBE - sloppy but long trading range/base, latest earnings and
>sales just released powerful
>RHI - B7
>AC - B2
>BEIQ - good example of a base below the high, now too extended
>MXIM - B2, good CANSLIM
>LFUS - B2
>LM - trying to break out from a very short handle, possibly
>reaction to Lehman's earnings
>GBCB - B3
>LLL - B3
>SEIC - nearly a B3
>THX - almost a B3
>FISV - base on base
>KP - B2+, LLUR??, lot of insider selling
>CGP - B5
>TEVA - B2
>GNWR - b/o failed, back to B4
>
>Tom Worley
>[e-mail]
>chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
>get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>
>
>
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] DGO List - Part 2
Date: 17 Jun 2000 15:28:36 -0400

SPW - less than perfect "W", now B2
MGG - B5
PHG - B2 on a double bottom
HP - B5, base trending up
CBM - B3+
EPG - B5
AZR - B7
MLHR - B6

That's all, folks. Happy hunting,

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Robert <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Acc/Dis Numbers
Date: 17 Jun 2000 23:40:32 -0400

Here are the latest Acc/Dis numbers:

Date    A    B    C    D    E    a+b/A:E    E/A:E
6/8/00    958    2868    1378    1012    352    58%    5%
6/9/00    1007    2878    1358    994    347    59%    5%
6/12/00    1020    2894    1334    977    355    59%    5%
6/13/00    1046    2951    1314    926    350    61%    5%
6/14/00    1062    2874    1355    938    355    60%    5%
6/15/00    1079    2881    1337    941    345    60%    5%
6/16/00    1101    2884    1354    916    333    60%    5%
6/19/00    1076    2874    1331    951    334    60%    5%


Spreadsheet version:

Date,A,B,C,D,E,a+b/A:E,E/A:E

6/7/00,978,2828,1372,1026,352,58%,5%
6/8/00,958,2868,1378,1012,352,58%,5%
6/9/00,1007,2878,1358,994,347,59%,5%
6/12/00,1020,2894,1334,977,355,59%,5%
6/13/00,1046,2951,1314,926,350,61%,5%
6/14/00,1062,2874,1355,938,355,60%,5%
6/15/00,1079,2881,1337,941,345,60%,5%
6/16/00,1101,2884,1354,916,333,60%,5%
6/19/00,1076,2874,1331,951,334,60%,5%


Robert



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Acc/Dis Numbers
Date: 19 Jun 2000 10:06:51 -0700 (PDT)


So it looks like the fund managers are getting into the market
again. Could this lead to a summer rally?

Sometimes, I do not get the stupidity of this whole thing -- I guess most
of the fund manager are just pawns jumping up and down when told to do so.


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Sat, 17 Jun 2000, Robert wrote:

> Here are the latest Acc/Dis numbers:
>
> Date    A    B    C    D    E    a+b/A:E    E/A:E
> 6/8/00    958    2868    1378    1012    352    58%    5%
> 6/9/00    1007    2878    1358    994    347    59%    5%
> 6/12/00    1020    2894    1334    977    355    59%    5%
> 6/13/00    1046    2951    1314    926    350    61%    5%
> 6/14/00    1062    2874    1355    938    355    60%    5%
> 6/15/00    1079    2881    1337    941    345    60%    5%
> 6/16/00    1101    2884    1354    916    333    60%    5%
> 6/19/00    1076    2874    1331    951    334    60%    5%
>
>
> Spreadsheet version:
>
> Date,A,B,C,D,E,a+b/A:E,E/A:E
>
> 6/7/00,978,2828,1372,1026,352,58%,5%
> 6/8/00,958,2868,1378,1012,352,58%,5%
> 6/9/00,1007,2878,1358,994,347,59%,5%
> 6/12/00,1020,2894,1334,977,355,59%,5%
> 6/13/00,1046,2951,1314,926,350,61%,5%
> 6/14/00,1062,2874,1355,938,355,60%,5%
> 6/15/00,1079,2881,1337,941,345,60%,5%
> 6/16/00,1101,2884,1354,916,333,60%,5%
> 6/19/00,1076,2874,1331,951,334,60%,5%
>
>
> Robert
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://im.yahoo.com
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Breakout day for Naz?
Date: 19 Jun 2000 20:29:15 -0400


Anybody else looking at today as a potential breakout day on
NASDAQ?  Up over 3%, tho vol only up 8 mio from Friday, but still
tops ADV despite the summer doldrums. Confirmed by DOW 30's 1+%
rise, and S&P's 1.5% gain (don't have vol figures yet). NYSE
Composite up, but less than 1%. Best close for Naz since 4/11,
and volume since that date has been mostly anemic and less than
that of the past two weeks when Naz managed to hold a very tight
two week base.  First time Naz has shown a decent base in too
many months to count.

Economics supports a summer rally, with the economy slowing but
the Fed rate hikes stopping. Oil production is about to be
increased 1 mio barrels/day by OPEC, lowering energy prices just
in time for the profit hungry refiners to fill up their tanks and
start producing gas for the summer motorists.

Housing starts have slowed measurably, and that has a long term
effect in the economy. Consumer spending has also slowed, and
that's the biggest single component of the GDP. Economies of both
Europe and Japan show growth, tho I suspect Japan's figures were,
once again, "tweaked" by the govt. Four week moving avg of
jobless claims continues to show mild weakening in the labor mkt.

We got a major election coming up, but no one seems to care, so I
don't think it will present much influence, even if the race
tightens up, as neither candidate is likely to have influence
over Mr. G.

After June, next FOMC meeting is in August, and a lot can happen
by then, esp the reports showing the effects of the latest half
pt hike. As I now read the consensus, no one expects any action
by the Feds next week (I still give less than 5% chance of a cut,
and no more than maybe 20% chance of a signal that the bias
shifted towards a future cut, tho that may get expressed during
the two months following this meeting).

Contrary thoughts welcomed. I'm getting too bullish too fast.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Dan Cash
Date: 19 Jun 2000 22:30:53 -0400

Hi Dan,

Please send me a line or two, your email address at
[e-mail] is coming back as no longer valid.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] breakouts
Date: 19 Jun 2000 21:32:25 -0600

The following stocks either broke out to new highs, or broke out of
the right side of a cup like formation where the handle was lower
than the old highs that formed when the nasdaq was going nuts in
March.   I notice many charts are near carbon copies of each
either, showing the influence and importance of the Market and the
sector.

MXIM
INTC
ADI
NOK
ORCL
CIEN
BRCD
JNPR
TXN

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Monitoring the leaders
Date: 19 Jun 2000 22:05:40 -0600

Not exactly, but I am using a form of this.  I am following stocks in
"favored" groups from the top 40 (no Oil and Gas allowed).  I make a list
of those stocks, and then combine the IBD rankings into a single number,
and use the top 100 as my list.  I update the list every few weeks.  This
approach gives me many candidates in a strong group (Semiconductor Mfg) and
few or none in other groups (Computer-Graphics has none I think).  I think
having those strong stocks in the top groups gives me the best of the best
to watch, and I've been pleased with my results over the last 6 months
since I changed to this.


At 01:07 PM 6/16/00 -0700, you wrote:
>
>Hi,
>
>I was wondering if anyone is using the following strategy:
>
>1) Select the top 40-80 industry groups
>2) Select the top 2 stocks from each industry group
>3) Daily print out small chart (something similar to the IBD stocks in
>news section)
>4) Buy or Get ready to buy any stock that is breaking out or about to
>breakout.
>
>
>I know I might get flamed for writing this email because this is exactly
>what we are supposed to do so what is different:
>
>For one -- it is focused on some 80 to 160 stocks that are the leaders.
>
>
>Regards,
>Shah
>408-525-4263
>
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] breakouts
Date: 20 Jun 2000 07:40:26 -0700

TQNT also.

Ziggy

Patrick Wahl wrote:

> The following stocks either broke out to new highs, or broke out of
> the right side of a cup like formation where the handle was lower
> than the old highs that formed when the nasdaq was going nuts in
> March.   I notice many charts are near carbon copies of each
> either, showing the influence and importance of the Market and the
> sector.
>
> MXIM
> INTC
> ADI
> NOK
> ORCL
> CIEN
> BRCD
> JNPR
> TXN
>
> -


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: [CANSLIM] TLCM
Date: 20 Jun 2000 11:07:49 -0400



Hi.

IBD gives TLCM 96 94 AAA ranking.  However, the earnings growth in the last
quater is negative (from .32 to .21) and the prev 3 out of 5 years it had
increasing losses.  Can you explain the ranking?  Is this stock worth
buying?

Anna Sosis



[e-mail] on 06/20/2000 10:40:26 AM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




TQNT also.

Ziggy

Patrick Wahl wrote:

> The following stocks either broke out to new highs, or broke out of
> the right side of a cup like formation where the handle was lower
> than the old highs that formed when the nasdaq was going nuts in
> March.   I notice many charts are near carbon copies of each
> either, showing the influence and importance of the Market and the
> sector.
>
> MXIM
> INTC
> ADI
> NOK
> ORCL
> CIEN
> BRCD
> JNPR
> TXN
>
> -


-





-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable)
Date: 16 Jun 2000 08:55:31 US/Pacific

I use DGO, I think Yahoo shows this info as well

>

where do you find the % of what stock the funds have? bubbet
>
> -
>

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chris dempsey <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM]Specific Industry Group Rankings
Date: 19 Jun 2000 00:14:28 -0400 (EDT)

The following are the industry group rankings from the first and 16th of
each month this year. I try to buy stocks in high and rising rank groups. It
looks like medical groups are moving up.  Does anyone have any prospects for
Medical-Nursing Homes #84 on June 16th? It also looks like tobacco is moving
higher, but I don't think I want to touch that one, anyone else feel that
way?

General industry group is where you would find a stock hitting a new high or
low listed in IBD.

Does anyone have a list of groups they would never buy from, and why?

SpecificIndustryGroup,6i/00,6/00,5i/00,5/00,4i/00,4/00,3i/00,3/00,2i/00,2/00,1i/00,1/00,GeneralIndustryGroup
Oil&Gas-U S Explo&Prod,1,1,4,28,53,78,90,96,112,134,124,113,Energy
Elec-Scientific Instrumn,2,12,12,4,9,19,18,16,20,9,9,14,Electronics
Medical-Generic Drugs,3,4,5,12,18,39,48,47,50,53,74,110,Medical
Oil&Gas-Machinery/Equip,4,2,2,13,20,36,62,66,68,79,85,92,Energy
Oil & Gas-Drilling,5,3,3,9,21,35,60,52,62,62,45,49,Energy
Oil&Gas-Field Services,6,6,10,21,34,56,70,75,102,122,104,106,Energy
Elec-Parts Distributors,7,8,1,5,17,27,38,37,42,41,40,40,Business Svc
Medical-Hospitals,8,7,14,18,29,47,58,63,53,48,41,99,Medical
Elec Products-Misc,9,28,15,7,14,12,16,20,25,24,23,20,Electronics
Elec-Semiconductor Mfg,10,18,9,1,1,5,11,10,8,13,11,12,Electronics
Medical-Hlth Maint Org,11,10,38,62,52,99,151,151,144,169,155,173,Medical
Oil&Gas-Cdn Exp&Prod,12,5,35,78,92,116,122,148,126,137,130,126,Energy
Medical-Ethical Drugs,13,29,28,34,19,21,20,8,13,21,22,29,Medical
Transportation-Ship,14,9,13,29,47,69,78,102,115,96,137,135,Transport
Elec Measrng Instruments,15,25,24,15,25,23,25,23,26,30,32,39,Electronics
Computer-Graphics,16,22,21,6,10,16,23,27,27,29,30,35,Computers
Energy-Other,17,26,57,53,46,44,41,41,43,46,42,62,Energy
Oil&Gas-Prod/Pipeline,18,11,30,75,75,92,96,101,110,126,132,155,Energy
Elec-Misc Componets,19,20,18,10,11,13,17,15,14,16,16,16,Electronics
Leisure-Gaming,20,19,39,85,107,83,82,73,74,74,97,81,Leisure
Medical/Dental/Serv,21,24,23,27,35,38,39,39,49,52,63,69,Medical
Medical-Whsle Drg/Sund,22,33,98,51,89,77,73,70,108,133,118,133,Medical
Finance-Investment Mgmt,23,14,27,20,40,53,63,64,67,70,68,77,Finance
Comml Svcs-Schools,24,30,31,26,37,50,66,69,60,77,117,75,Consumer
Retail-Restaurants,25,15,20,56,81,104,120,111,124,144,169,154,Food/Bev
Elec-Laser Sys/Component,26,32,26,17,6,14,9,7,21,28,27,36,Medical
Medical-Biomed/Genetics,27,31,29,32,5,7,1,1,1,1,1,9,Medical
Retail/Whlsle-Cmptr/Cell,28,34,19,30,68,34,31,33,38,32,43,32,Retail
Real Estate Operations,29,16,51,101,110,142,47,91,90,118,175,130,Real Est
Telecommunications-Equip,30,37,32,16,2,1,4,2,6,6,8,8,Telecomm
Food-Misc Preparation,31,48,83,143,123,153,140,136,134,162,140,140,Food/Bev
Elec-Semiconductor Equip,32,42,11,2,4,10,12,12,9,19,17,19,Electronics
Computer-Memory Devices,33,45,17,3,3,3,7,14,17,15,15,13,Computers
Medical-Products,34,39,33,19,15,26,24,18,24,23,26,34,Medical
Electrical-Control Instr,35,104,79,74,63,48,36,40,35,40,50,61,Electronics
Oil&Gas-Refining/Mktg,36,54,90,86,105,119,127,109,114,117,127,104,Energy
Bldg-Heavy Const,37,13,6,11,38,59,57,65,73,97,95,107,Building
Medical-Instruments,38,49,61,57,28,31,27,25,23,17,29,30,Medical
Leisure-Products,39,17,8,22,36,51,69,79,80,83,114,101,Leisure
Food-Dairy Products,40,21,16,43,72,70,86,81,76,119,126,136,Food/Bev
Pollution Control-Equip,41,74,89,89,93,87,89,97,93,129,136,124,Business Prd
Insurance-Diversified,42,136,103,106,97,121,149,154,143,111,171,171,Insurance
Comml Serv-Business
Svcs,43,91,45,112,155,145,126,123,163,188,187,194,Business Svc
Machinery-Mtl Hdlg/Autmn,44,44,42,25,39,52,64,60,44,64,70,94,Business Prd
Medical/Dental-Supplies,45,73,80,95,121,112,103,92,107,86,94,109,Medical
Comml Svcs-Security/Sfty,46,51,47,58,57,25,29,30,32,36,44,47,Misc
Bldg-A/C & Heating
Prds,47,38,123,117,156,172,172,177,181,186,193,192,Building
Chemicals-Specialty,48,35,40,63,67,90,97,95,111,110,113,119,Chemicals
Oil&Gas-Cdn Integrated,49,27,68,103,106,147,159,153,132,121,116,112,Energy
Medical-Outpnt/Hm Care,50,36,63,94,77,76,61,48,47,45,53,51,Medical
Tobacco,51,111,171,188,194,196,192,189,189,180,181,182,Alcohol/Tob
Machinery-Gen Industrial,52,50,43,49,62,84,76,82,77,82,86,89,Machinery
Computer-Local Networks,53,75,49,38,12,2,3,5,7,8,6,4,Computers
Bldg-Constr Prods/Misc,54,47,53,50,55,89,98,100,100,106,119,108,Building
Transportation-Airline,55,23,41,60,48,85,109,147,150,145,109,100,Transport
Oil & Gas-U S Royalty
Tr,56,77,121,152,157,152,133,118,121,139,128,116,Energy
Metal Proc & Fabrication,57,55,58,90,91,103,100,94,98,78,60,64,Business Prd
Pollution Control-Svcs,58,56,56,81,71,66,55,49,69,81,106,146,Business Prd
Shoes & Rel Apparel,59,66,60,46,79,113,130,137,148,146,158,115,Apparel
Electrical-Connectors,60,95,48,8,16,29,33,36,40,43,34,33,Electronics
Comml Serv-Staffing,61,46,25,37,51,64,51,55,54,47,46,42,Business Svc
Elec-Military Systems,62,64,74,31,41,37,40,35,36,38,33,41,Electronics
Oil&Gas-Intl Specialty,63,53,66,36,45,65,72,90,78,63,51,55,Energy
Computer Softwr-Security,64,81,67,39,8,4,2,6,5,7,4,5,Computers
Insurance-Brokers,65,40,87,179,142,134,158,166,128,87,89,87,Insurance
Finance-Equity Reit,66,65,78,99,114,133,118,114,125,135,141,153,Finance
Aerospace/Defense,67,71,104,114,182,195,197,197,197,197,196,195,Aircraft
Finance-Investment Bkrs,68,100,77,52,43,40,45,56,52,51,76,65,Finance
Retail-Discount&Variety,69,41,7,41,64,91,110,140,137,142,134,149,Retail
Electrical-Equipment,70,84,34,33,44,41,46,42,41,42,47,53,Machinery
Aerospace/Defense Eqp,71,63,70,79,82,80,83,78,85,107,110,118,Aircraft
Auto/Truck-Original Eqp,72,68,64,80,84,106,99,115,140,132,167,175,Auto&Parts
Houshold-Audio/Video,73,52,50,24,31,42,32,31,37,37,36,37,Consumer
Bldg-Cement/Concrt/Ag,74,62,76,97,124,135,134,146,138,148,131,139,Building
Computer Softwr-Enterpse,75,60,46,42,13,8,5,4,2,4,5,3,Computers
Diversified Operations,76,57,44,48,56,73,54,57,56,67,65,74,Misc
Insurance-Life,77,114,175,180,153,160,173,172,174,171,145,122,Insurance
Computer-Optical Recogtn,78,58,52,14,7,11,14,13,16,18,20,18,Computers
Medical-Drug/Diversified,79,83,119,155,133,156,162,175,158,128,129,131,Medical
Computer-Peripheral Eq,80,72,73,44,27,6,8,11,12,12,14,17,Computers
Retail/Wholesale-Food,81,43,85,88,99,131,155,158,171,159,159,168,Food/Bev
Insurance-Prop/Cas/Titl,82,69,88,110,112,122,150,156,159,155,146,137,Insurance
Computer-Integrated Syst,83,79,59,45,54,22,15,21,22,25,24,25,Computers
Medical-Nursing Homes,84,146,130,93,129,194,170,191,192,196,197,197,Medical
Retail-Mail Order&Direct,85,90,143,133,135,79,80,59,61,66,84,59,Retail
Utility-Electric Power,86,87,93,124,134,130,123,113,118,124,133,129,Utility
Metal Prod-Fasteners,87,129,139,146,160,170,168,169,177,167,153,169,Business
Prd
Leisure-Hotels & Motels,88,96,95,105,132,132,145,134,146,151,166,121,Leisure
Bldg-Resident/Commrcl,89,94,94,73,90,107,138,138,154,172,164,141,Building
Computer-Services,90,67,62,40,23,15,19,17,11,11,10,7,Computers
Utility-Gas Distribution,91,80,107,96,104,111,104,104,101,88,92,91,Utility
Financial Services-Misc,92,108,102,113,95,75,71,68,70,56,61,44,Finance
Finance-Publ Inv Fd-Frn,93,93,96,82,49,62,52,51,51,50,49,54,Finance
Retail-Apparel/Shoe,94,59,22,59,61,72,115,125,122,93,90,80,Retail
Internet-Ntwk Sec/Sltns,95,109,81,54,22,9,6,3,4,3,3,2,Internet
Comml Services-Misc,96,61,54,71,58,46,42,43,39,34,35,31,Business Svc
Leisure-Movies & Related,97,98,75,69,65,49,44,53,57,57,72,63,Leisure
Textile-Apparel Mfg,98,76,72,70,66,74,102,108,99,120,96,114,Apparel
Transportation-Truck,99,82,55,76,69,101,107,107,97,116,102,117,Transport
Cosmetics/Personal Care,100,116,105,116,115,105,77,77,94,92,99,147,Consumer
Oil&Gas-U S Integrated,101,78,109,132,147,163,175,193,193,183,157,123,Energy
Chemicals-Plastic,102,88,65,47,50,57,50,46,48,58,83,71,Chemicals
Banks-Super Regional,103,125,162,174,161,155,180,185,176,150,173,160,Banks
Banks-West/Southwest,104,127,154,160,152,143,135,132,133,131,125,102,Banks
Hsehold/Office
Furniture,105,92,122,109,127,124,108,122,130,136,143,156,Consumer
Auto/Truck-Replace
Prts,106,120,114,153,108,68,67,50,66,130,180,185,Auto&Parts
Fin-Pub Trd Inv Fd-Eqt,107,128,117,98,74,63,59,61,58,60,52,52,Finance
Retail-Drug Stores,108,117,128,156,149,176,178,168,160,189,192,188,Retail
Beverages-Soft
Drinks,109,142,108,137,143,150,137,129,117,143,151,167,Food/Bev
Retail-Misc/Diversified,110,110,82,104,98,86,91,106,105,104,120,134,Retail
Beverages-Alcoholic,111,122,125,135,148,157,125,130,129,112,100,105,Alcohol/Tob
Oil&Gas-Intl
Integrated,112,99,137,115,136,137,167,179,175,158,142,120,Energy
Finance-Savings & Loan,113,130,169,166,169,165,156,155,169,166,150,132,Svgs
& Ln
Real Estate Development,114,89,106,118,100,115,101,83,81,80,103,98,Real Est
Leisure-Photo Equip/Rel,115,133,173,83,83,55,56,71,72,115,135,148,Consumer
Steel-Specialty Alloys,116,112,151,178,181,192,191,182,164,165,178,193,Steel
Transportation-Svcs,117,132,91,122,118,123,105,80,89,61,64,78,Transport
Telecommunications-Svcs,118,101,92,66,26,20,21,22,19,22,21,24,Telecomm
Agricultural
Operations,119,147,124,142,128,125,106,105,123,176,152,152,Agriculture
Utility-Telephone,120,97,86,65,60,54,53,58,46,44,39,38,Telecomm
Paper & Paper Products,121,70,71,91,102,120,116,93,88,102,77,84,Misc
Bldg-Maintenance & Svc,122,123,146,172,175,149,124,128,161,175,182,186,Misc
Media-Newspapers,123,107,100,108,138,128,114,112,87,114,101,95,Print/Pub
Computer-Manufacturers,124,168,141,35,32,32,37,44,45,39,38,23,Computers
Leisure-Services,125,131,136,111,116,108,79,86,71,68,55,83,Leisure
Telecommunctns-Cellulr,126,158,115,67,24,24,26,24,18,14,12,10,Telecomm
Food-Confectionery,127,137,177,183,154,154,157,144,109,76,121,128,Food/Bev
Food-Meat Products,128,118,135,176,190,186,171,192,187,192,189,181,Food/Bev
Retail-Super/Mini
Mkts,129,121,129,139,125,141,143,116,116,101,112,111,Retail
Media-Cable TV,130,86,69,55,42,33,30,28,28,27,28,27,Leisure
Fin-Pub Trd Inv
Fd-Bond,131,144,168,154,151,144,128,121,136,156,161,164,Finance
Retail-Consumer Elect,132,103,37,23,70,58,93,119,153,95,75,46,Retail
Finance-Mortgage
Reit,133,140,155,168,176,171,160,164,166,170,165,174,Finance
Consumer Products-Misc,134,139,176,189,173,81,74,54,55,65,79,66,Consumer
Banks-Foreign,135,166,156,128,117,118,95,87,82,84,88,96,Banks
Media-Periodicals,136,159,152,181,120,93,92,84,83,85,123,150,Print/Pub
Banks-Northeast,137,143,150,171,162,151,142,145,155,157,144,138,Banks
Finance-Consumr/Comml,138,153,147,138,140,114,87,85,79,71,80,70,Finance
Machinery-Const/Mining,139,171,172,157,189,177,188,180,179,185,177,190,Machinery
Media-Books,140,157,134,158,126,117,112,103,96,73,87,86,Print/Pub
Containers,141,113,113,123,159,161,164,162,170,164,149,166,Misc
Food-Flour & Grain,142,178,192,194,196,197,195,195,194,193,188,183,Food/Bev
Computer Softwre-Desktop,143,156,84,68,30,17,13,26,10,5,7,6,Computers
Office-Equip & Automatn,144,134,118,77,87,82,81,74,103,152,170,127,Office
Food-Canned,145,155,181,186,180,189,193,194,195,195,194,189,Food/Bev
Machine-Tools & Rel
Prod,146,176,145,129,139,100,88,99,120,125,91,88,Machinery
Bldg-Hand Tools,147,160,148,131,170,185,189,190,191,179,179,180,Misc
Banks-Money Center,148,148,160,161,86,110,136,167,172,147,174,157,Banks
Household-Housewares,149,105,165,177,185,187,176,171,173,177,176,176,Consumer
Comml Svcs-Printing,150,106,133,127,85,94,84,98,92,99,105,103,Print/Pub
Transportation-Rail,151,152,164,175,166,173,183,181,183,181,183,178,Transport
Retail/Whlsle-Bldg Prods,152,85,36,64,59,96,117,88,86,90,98,68,Building
Comml Svcs-Linen
Supply,153,124,163,165,177,191,196,196,196,194,195,196,Business Svc
Metal Ores-Gold/Silver,154,184,187,196,193,179,139,142,139,149,81,93,Mining
Insurance-Acc &
Health,155,138,193,184,186,181,190,183,178,190,184,179,Insurance
Comml Svcs-Advertising,156,102,97,72,88,45,35,32,29,20,18,21,Print/Pub
Utility-Water Supply,157,172,167,169,130,138,119,120,104,72,58,50,Utility
Machinery-Farm,158,151,140,164,163,167,147,133,113,91,66,90,Agriculture
Bldg-Paint & Allied
Prds,159,170,180,150,144,139,153,152,167,161,156,162,Misc
Auto/Truck-Tires &
Misc,160,173,170,170,178,182,184,188,180,187,185,184,Auto&Parts
Banks-Midwest,161,175,186,182,171,174,161,157,162,168,154,125,Banks
Textile-Mill/Hsehold,162,115,111,148,183,178,181,160,149,163,160,170,Consumer
Finance-Mrtg&Rel Svc,163,180,174,185,174,146,129,126,141,153,172,151,Finance
Banks-Southeast,164,177,189,192,188,183,169,165,168,160,148,145,Banks
Media-Radio/TV,165,126,101,84,78,67,49,45,34,31,25,22,Leisure
Computer Software-Fin,166,191,99,61,33,30,28,29,33,33,31,28,Computers
Chemicals-Basic,167,162,131,141,96,126,141,117,127,103,59,72,Chemicals
Transportation-Equip
Mfg,168,164,138,144,164,166,152,170,186,191,190,187,Electronics
Chemicals-Fertilizers,169,119,112,130,172,169,177,161,142,141,111,163,Agriculture
Metal
Prod-Distributor,170,165,179,119,146,127,113,163,152,127,115,158,Business
Svc
Retail-Home
Furnishings,171,161,161,159,150,164,187,186,190,184,191,165,Retail
Household-Appliances,172,145,144,140,145,158,154,149,91,98,138,144,Consumer
Soap & Clng Preparatns,173,169,182,191,165,162,174,173,147,108,56,60,Misc
Transport-Air
Freight,174,163,132,120,158,136,131,150,131,123,71,48,Transport
Office Supplies Mfg,175,135,149,163,137,159,148,131,156,138,147,159,Office
Comml-Leasing Cos,176,150,126,125,103,97,85,76,65,54,62,56,Finance
Auto Mfrs-Foreign,177,141,120,87,76,109,132,135,145,105,108,97,Auto&Parts
Retail-Department
Stores,178,154,157,134,122,140,165,174,165,154,139,143,Retail
Retail/Whlsle-Auto
Parts,179,183,191,190,191,190,194,187,185,174,162,161,Auto&Parts
Bldg-Mobile/Mfg &
RV,180,186,184,162,179,180,185,178,182,173,168,172,Building
Trucks & Parts-Hvy
Duty,181,167,153,149,168,175,186,184,188,178,163,177,Auto&Parts
Funeral Svcs & Rel,182,188,190,193,192,188,179,176,184,182,186,191,Consumer
Bldg Prod-Wood,183,181,158,126,109,129,163,143,151,140,107,73,Building
Mining -Gems,184,179,185,197,197,193,166,141,157,94,93,85,Consumer
Metal Ores-Misc,185,174,166,151,111,98,75,72,64,113,78,82,Mining
Steel-Producers,186,149,110,102,73,88,94,89,84,69,57,57,Steel
Internet-Software,187,196,194,121,113,18,10,9,3,2,2,1,Internet
Retail/Wholesale-Jewelry,188,190,127,107,119,102,121,110,75,55,48,43,Retail
Auto
Mfrs-Domestic,189,182,142,136,131,148,144,139,135,100,122,142,Auto&Parts
Leisure-Toys/Games/Hobby,190,193,195,195,195,184,146,127,106,109,73,58,Consumer
Computer Softw-Educ/Entr,191,194,196,173,184,60,65,67,63,49,37,26,Computers
Retail-Major Disc Chains,192,185,116,92,94,95,111,124,95,75,82,79,Retail
Metal Ores-Non Ferrous,193,189,183,187,187,168,182,159,119,89,67,67,Mining
Retail/Whlse Office Supl,194,192,178,167,80,71,68,62,59,59,69,76,Retail
Internet-ISP/Content,195,195,159,100,101,28,22,19,15,10,13,11,Internet
Computer Software-Med,196,187,188,145,141,61,43,38,30,35,54,45,Computers
Internet-E Commerce,197,197,197,147,167,43,34,34,31,26,19,15,Internet

______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Susan Strouse" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] DV
Date: 20 Jun 2000 11:55:50 -0700

I have been following DV (93 84 AAB) and have seen what I think is a cup and
handle. At the end of the handle (or what I thought to be a handle) it has
started to trend up.  I would appreciate any comments on this chart. I would
like to recommend it to my investment club.


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Walter Stock <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] TLCM to buy or not to buy
Date: 20 Jun 2000 17:23:09 -0400

Hi Anna,

Rankings in today's IBD moved up to 97 95 AAA.

In the IBD "Follow the Leader" section today, TLCM is the #7
semiconductor company out of 90 in the group
(ranked by EPS and RS).

Earnings growth last quarter was 260%, as compared to the
same quarter a year earlier.
Quarterly earnings growth the quarter before were up 700%
compared to the same quarter a year earlier.
Maintaining earnings at this level is a nice problem to have!

Sales are up strongly year over year (and also sequentially).

Float is 15.9 million shares - about ideal for me.

On May 31, IBD reported that TLCM
had 3 funds (rated at A+, A, or A-)  in the stock.
On June 8,  IBD reported 4 funds in the stock.
On June 20 (today), IBD reported 6 funds in the stock.
The information may be somewhat out of date by the time IBD
gets to publish it, but I am interested in the sponsorship trend,
not the absolute number.

The chart on this stock is textbook cup-and-handle.
Good volume dry up at the cup lows and at the handle lows.
Also excellent volume clues during the climb on the right hand
side of the cup.

Breakout today on well over 3 times ADV.

Anyway to put my money where my mouth is, I bought
a full position before the close (and before reading this thread).

Re-reading all this, maybe the stock is too good, and
crashes and burns in the morning.  Who knows....
I've been wrong before, and have the elephant tracks all
over my back to prove it.

I put the pivot on the cup-and-handle at 37 1/2
(making it buyable for me up to about 39 3/8).

Hope this helps, Anna.

Walter Stock
Oakville, ON, Canada



[e-mail] wrote:

> Hi.
>
> IBD gives TLCM 96 94 AAA ranking.  However, the earnings growth in the last
> quater is negative (from .32 to .21) and the prev 3 out of 5 years it had
> increasing losses.  Can you explain the ranking?  Is this stock worth
> buying?
>
> Anna Sosis
>
> [e-mail] on 06/20/2000 10:40:26 AM
>
> Please respond to [e-mail]
>
> To:   [e-mail]
> cc:
> Subject:  Re: [CANSLIM] breakouts
>
> TQNT also.
>
> Ziggy
>
> Patrick Wahl wrote:
>
> > The following stocks either broke out to new highs, or broke out of
> > the right side of a cup like formation where the handle was lower
> > than the old highs that formed when the nasdaq was going nuts in
> > March.   I notice many charts are near carbon copies of each
> > either, showing the influence and importance of the Market and the
> > sector.
> >
> > MXIM
> > INTC
> > ADI
> > NOK
> > ORCL
> > CIEN
> > BRCD
> > JNPR
> > TXN
> >
> > -
>
> -
>
> -


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] TLCM to buy or not to buy
Date: 20 Jun 2000 19:12:08 -0400



Hi Walter,

thank you so much for the info..  I use Zacks (www.zacks.com) site to view
yearly and quaterly statements and this is what they have:

YEARLY

         12/31/99 12/31/98 12/31/97 12/31/96 12/31/95

Sales 57.32 54.26 55.44 37.76 39.00   (i.e., from 97 to 98 decrease from
55.44 to 54.26

Diluted EPS Before Non-Recurring Items 0.46 0.25 0.38 (0.04) 0.23

Diluted Net EPS 0.84 (0.22) (0.11) (0.04) 0.23  (i.e, from 96 to 97 to 98
lossess from .04 to .11 to .22)


QUATERLY

3/31/0 12/31/99 9/30/99 6/30/99 3/31/99 12/31/98 9/30/98 6/30/98

Sales 17.20 15.80 14.85 13.87 12.81 12.06 12.70 14.02 (i.e. decrease from
14.02 to 12.81 four quaters ago)

Diluted EPS Before Non-Recurring Items 0.17 0.16 0.14 0.10 0.05 0.03 0.02
0.05

Diluted Net EPS 0.21 0.25 0.14 0.13 0.32 (0.02) (0.38) 0.05  (i.e. DECREASE
 from .32 to .21 in the quater of 3/31/2000)


Btw, could it be that I should be using earnings BEFORE Non-recurring
items?  I tend to use the bottom line (net earnings).
Incidently, I traded my ADI for this one :)

PS: I did not buy SANM after all.  Check out SAWS.  The numbers seems to be
 comparable.....


Anna Sosis



Walter Stock <[e-mail]> on 06/20/2000 05:23:09 PM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




Hi Anna,

Rankings in today's IBD moved up to 97 95 AAA.

In the IBD "Follow the Leader" section today, TLCM is the #7
semiconductor company out of 90 in the group
(ranked by EPS and RS).

Earnings growth last quarter was 260%, as compared to the
same quarter a year earlier.
Quarterly earnings growth the quarter before were up 700%
compared to the same quarter a year earlier.
Maintaining earnings at this level is a nice problem to have!

Sales are up strongly year over year (and also sequentially).

Float is 15.9 million shares - about ideal for me.

On May 31, IBD reported that TLCM
had 3 funds (rated at A+, A, or A-)  in the stock.
On June 8,  IBD reported 4 funds in the stock.
On June 20 (today), IBD reported 6 funds in the stock.
The information may be somewhat out of date by the time IBD
gets to publish it, but I am interested in the sponsorship trend,
not the absolute number.

The chart on this stock is textbook cup-and-handle.
Good volume dry up at the cup lows and at the handle lows.
Also excellent volume clues during the climb on the right hand
side of the cup.

Breakout today on well over 3 times ADV.

Anyway to put my money where my mouth is, I bought
a full position before the close (and before reading this thread).

Re-reading all this, maybe the stock is too good, and
crashes and burns in the morning.  Who knows....
I've been wrong before, and have the elephant tracks all
over my back to prove it.

I put the pivot on the cup-and-handle at 37 1/2
(making it buyable for me up to about 39 3/8).

Hope this helps, Anna.

Walter Stock
Oakville, ON, Canada



[e-mail] wrote:

> Hi.
>
> IBD gives TLCM 96 94 AAA ranking.  However, the earnings growth in the
last
> quater is negative (from .32 to .21) and the prev 3 out of 5 years it had
> increasing losses.  Can you explain the ranking?  Is this stock worth
> buying?
>
> Anna Sosis
>
> [e-mail] on 06/20/2000 10:40:26 AM
>
> Please respond to [e-mail]
>
> To:   [e-mail]
> cc:
> Subject:  Re: [CANSLIM] breakouts
>
> TQNT also.
>
> Ziggy
>
> Patrick Wahl wrote:
>
> > The following stocks either broke out to new highs, or broke out of
> > the right side of a cup like formation where the handle was lower
> > than the old highs that formed when the nasdaq was going nuts in
> > March.   I notice many charts are near carbon copies of each
> > either, showing the influence and importance of the Market and the
> > sector.
> >
> > MXIM
> > INTC
> > ADI
> > NOK
> > ORCL
> > CIEN
> > BRCD
> > JNPR
> > TXN
> >
> > -
>
> -
>
> -


-





-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] XLNX
Date: 20 Jun 2000 19:29:10 -0700

How about XLNX [Xilinx]?

-Jim


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chris dempsey <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 20 Jun 2000 20:33:47 -0400 (EDT)

Just a reminder of a rule by WON on one of his tapes (I don=92t think it=92=
s in
either book). To sell half of all positions getting to a 25% gain.

I have bought 27 positions since 5/24/00. Seven of these have hit the up 25=
%
mark. Four were sold for no other reason than hitting 25%. All of which are
still below where I sold them. Just luck I'm sure. Of the other three one i=
s
above , one at, and one below the 25% mark. I think this is a good rule to
keep you in the money. However all of these stocks hit 25% rather quickly
which takes you to another rule that says you don=92t do anything with thes=
e
positions for eight weeks for further gains. Two stocks were sold at an 8%
and change loss and three stocks were sold at small gains. I think it was
Earl that requested that I keep him posted. Selling is the area I need
improving in and I am hoping this helps, only time will tell.

The seven to hit 25% were:

RFMD
ELNT
FLEX
NUHC
TLGD
TECH
MEDI

Which brings me to another question. Since I don=92t like hard stops and us=
e
clothing values to see if the 7-8% rule has been broken, I got stuck with a
couple of stock that broke this rule and then some while I was at a couple
day seminar. Has anyone calculated a point where it is too late to sell, if
all the reasons you bought the stock still exist including a RS of 80+?

______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=3Dsignup


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chris dempsey <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM]Newsletter subscription request
Date: 20 Jun 2000 19:04:34 -0400 (EDT)

Michael Murphy=92s news letter was recently mentioned here. I keep getting
requests from him to subscribe. In his request he states that he has made
553% over ten years.

My question is the following the correct calculation to find the average
annual return? Sorry I can't write it with better math symbols.

(((number of years) root of (% of return/100))-1)*100

(((10th) root of (553/100))-1)*100

(((10th) root of (5.53))-1)*100

((1.1865)-1)*100

1865*100

18.65% average annual return

Isn=92t that what the market has average over the past ten years? Whoever
answered that post was correct in saying that the news letter was not worth
it.

______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=3Dsignup

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Richard Turner <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Futures
Date: 20 Jun 2000 19:41:57 -0500

Don't shoot me for asking a futures question but I'm interested whether
anyone is thinking the way I have recently. I've been at this investing
thing for two or three years now and frankly I've lost a lot of money.
No I haven't always cut losses but I have also experienced owning stocks
that fall so quickly or gap down at the open that a stop would not have
helped. So, I'm thinking there are too many uncontrollable variables in
the equation for success in investing in stocks. After all, one can be
right on the market, right on fundamentals, right on the charts ,then
Bam, some news comes out, and the stock plunges before stops can be
kicked in. This has happened to me. On the other hand I have a good feel
for the general direction of the averages as I watch the indicators in
IBD closely. So is it reasonable to get into futures as the markets are
coming out of corrections once or twice a year?

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "John Adair" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 20 Jun 2000 20:11:46 -0500

why not buy more and keep a tight trailing stop when it hits 10% gain and
more at 20% gain. Ride the hell out of a winner and immediatly drop a loo=
ser

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of chris dempsey
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 7:34 PM


Just a reminder of a rule by WON on one of his tapes (I don=92t think it=92=
s in
either book). To sell half of all positions getting to a 25% gain.

I have bought 27 positions since 5/24/00. Seven of these have hit the up =
25%
mark. Four were sold for no other reason than hitting 25%. All of which a=
re
still below where I sold them. Just luck I'm sure. Of the other three one=
 is
above , one at, and one below the 25% mark. I think this is a good rule t=
o
keep you in the money. However all of these stocks hit 25% rather quickly
which takes you to another rule that says you don=92t do anything with th=
ese
positions for eight weeks for further gains. Two stocks were sold at an 8=
%
and change loss and three stocks were sold at small gains. I think it was
Earl that requested that I keep him posted. Selling is the area I need
improving in and I am hoping this helps, only time will tell.

The seven to hit 25% were:

RFMD
ELNT
FLEX
NUHC
TLGD
TECH
MEDI

Which brings me to another question. Since I don=92t like hard stops and =
use
clothing values to see if the 7-8% rule has been broken, I got stuck with=
 a
couple of stock that broke this rule and then some while I was at a coupl=
e
day seminar. Has anyone calculated a point where it is too late to sell, =
if
all the reasons you bought the stock still exist including a RS of 80+?

______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=3Dsignup


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]Newsletter subscription request
Date: 20 Jun 2000 17:38:10 -0700 (PDT)

Actually

100*(1+x)^10 =3D 100 + 553
or (1+x)^10 =3D 6.53 (653/100)
or 1+x =3D 1.2064
or x =3D .2064
or x =3D 20.64%

Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Tue, 20 Jun 2000, chris dempsey wrote:

> Michael Murphy=92s news letter was recently mentioned here. I keep gett=
ing
> requests from him to subscribe. In his request he states that he has ma=
de
> 553% over ten years.
>=20
> My question is the following the correct calculation to find the averag=
e
> annual return? Sorry I can't write it with better math symbols.
>=20
> (((number of years) root of (% of return/100))-1)*100
>=20
> (((10th) root of (553/100))-1)*100
>=20
> (((10th) root of (5.53))-1)*100
>=20
> ((1.1865)-1)*100
>=20
> 1865*100
>=20
> 18.65% average annual return
>=20
> Isn=92t that what the market has average over the past ten years? Whoev=
er
> answered that post was correct in saying that the news letter was not w=
orth
> it.
>=20
> ______________________________________________
> FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
> Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=3Dsignup
>=20
> -
>=20
>=20


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] TLCM to buy or not to buy
Date: 20 Jun 2000 22:44:42 -0400

Hi Anna,

I think one of the most important lessons to learn about the
internet and stocks is that you have to find a source of data you
are comfortable with, then stick to it so that data at least is
handled consistently.  I am willing to pay for DGO, and use that
exclusively. At DGO, and similar minded sites, they will normally
exclude "non recurring" items whether they are gains or losses
simply because they are defined as "non recurring".

I took a quick peek at DGO on this one, and there are no losses
shown for the past 8 qtrs.  Likewise, earnings have grown
sequentially for five straight qtrs.  They were notably strong in
the latest two qtrs, and WON's formula for EPS overweighs the
latest two.

Here are the numbers so you can compare them to Zacks:

Annual EPS: (from 1995 thru 1999)
0.23  (0.04)    0.38    0.21    0.46

Latest 8 qtrly earnings (oldest to March '00):
0.05   0.02   0.02   0.05    0.10    0.14    0.16    0.18

Sales latest 8 qtrly (oldest to March '00):
14.0   12.7   12.1   12.8   13.9   14.9   15.8    17.2

Hope this helps,

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 7:12 PM




Hi Walter,

thank you so much for the info..  I use Zacks (www.zacks.com)
site to view
yearly and quaterly statements and this is what they have:

YEARLY

         12/31/99 12/31/98 12/31/97 12/31/96 12/31/95

Sales 57.32 54.26 55.44 37.76 39.00   (i.e., from 97 to 98
decrease from
55.44 to 54.26

Diluted EPS Before Non-Recurring Items 0.46 0.25 0.38 (0.04) 0.23

Diluted Net EPS 0.84 (0.22) (0.11) (0.04) 0.23  (i.e, from 96 to
97 to 98
lossess from .04 to .11 to .22)


QUATERLY

3/31/0 12/31/99 9/30/99 6/30/99 3/31/99 12/31/98 9/30/98 6/30/98

Sales 17.20 15.80 14.85 13.87 12.81 12.06 12.70 14.02 (i.e.
decrease from
14.02 to 12.81 four quaters ago)

Diluted EPS Before Non-Recurring Items 0.17 0.16 0.14 0.10 0.05
0.03 0.02
0.05

Diluted Net EPS 0.21 0.25 0.14 0.13 0.32 (0.02) (0.38) 0.05
(i.e. DECREASE
 from .32 to .21 in the quater of 3/31/2000)


Btw, could it be that I should be using earnings BEFORE
Non-recurring
items?  I tend to use the bottom line (net earnings).
Incidently, I traded my ADI for this one :)

PS: I did not buy SANM after all.  Check out SAWS.  The numbers
seems to be
 comparable.....


Anna Sosis



Walter Stock <[e-mail]> on 06/20/2000 05:23:09 PM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




Hi Anna,

Rankings in today's IBD moved up to 97 95 AAA.

In the IBD "Follow the Leader" section today, TLCM is the #7
semiconductor company out of 90 in the group
(ranked by EPS and RS).

Earnings growth last quarter was 260%, as compared to the
same quarter a year earlier.
Quarterly earnings growth the quarter before were up 700%
compared to the same quarter a year earlier.
Maintaining earnings at this level is a nice problem to have!

Sales are up strongly year over year (and also sequentially).

Float is 15.9 million shares - about ideal for me.

On May 31, IBD reported that TLCM
had 3 funds (rated at A+, A, or A-)  in the stock.
On June 8,  IBD reported 4 funds in the stock.
On June 20 (today), IBD reported 6 funds in the stock.
The information may be somewhat out of date by the time IBD
gets to publish it, but I am interested in the sponsorship trend,
not the absolute number.

The chart on this stock is textbook cup-and-handle.
Good volume dry up at the cup lows and at the handle lows.
Also excellent volume clues during the climb on the right hand
side of the cup.

Breakout today on well over 3 times ADV.

Anyway to put my money where my mouth is, I bought
a full position before the close (and before reading this
thread).

Re-reading all this, maybe the stock is too good, and
crashes and burns in the morning.  Who knows....
I've been wrong before, and have the elephant tracks all
over my back to prove it.

I put the pivot on the cup-and-handle at 37 1/2
(making it buyable for me up to about 39 3/8).

Hope this helps, Anna.

Walter Stock
Oakville, ON, Canada



[e-mail] wrote:

> Hi.
>
> IBD gives TLCM 96 94 AAA ranking.  However, the earnings growth
in the
last
> quater is negative (from .32 to .21) and the prev 3 out of 5
years it had
> increasing losses.  Can you explain the ranking?  Is this stock
worth
> buying?
>
> Anna Sosis
>
> [e-mail] on 06/20/2000 10:40:26 AM
>
> Please respond to [e-mail]
>
> To:   [e-mail]
> cc:
> Subject:  Re: [CANSLIM] breakouts
>
> TQNT also.
>
> Ziggy
>
> Patrick Wahl wrote:
>
> > The following stocks either broke out to new highs, or broke
out of
> > the right side of a cup like formation where the handle was
lower
> > than the old highs that formed when the nasdaq was going nuts
in
> > March.   I notice many charts are near carbon copies of each
> > either, showing the influence and importance of the Market
and the
> > sector.
> >
> > MXIM
> > INTC
> > ADI
> > NOK
> > ORCL
> > CIEN
> > BRCD
> > JNPR
> > TXN
> >
> > -
>
> -
>
> -


-





-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NUHC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Stocks breaking out but still reasonable)
Date: 20 Jun 2000 23:06:38 -0400

Just remember that DGO reports Management ownership as a %age of
the issue, and Funds ownership as a %age of the float.  Where
Management still has a large stake, this can distort the %age
from site to site, esp on stocks with a small overall nr of
shares outstanding.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 4:55 AM
still reasonable)


I use DGO, I think Yahoo shows this info as well

>

where do you find the % of what stock the funds have? bubbet
>
> -
>

-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DV
Date: 20 Jun 2000 23:21:35 -0400

Hi Susan,

Nice looking chart.  If a c&h, pretty flat, but in any case a
nice tight base with declining vol. Ranked # 5 in its group, and
GRS is at 84.  Earnings and sales growth have been steady and
consistent, and forecast for this year (+27%) consistent with the
5 year history of +25%. The slight uptrend does not detract from
the base, and takes it close to a pivot point. Management still
has a 20% stake in the issue, however the one notable neg is that
funds already own 31% of the float.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 2:55 PM


I have been following DV (93 84 AAB) and have seen what I think
is a cup and
handle. At the end of the handle (or what I thought to be a
handle) it has
started to trend up.  I would appreciate any comments on this
chart. I would
like to recommend it to my investment club.


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DV
Date: 20 Jun 2000 21:32:22 -0600

WON suggests that the best pattern is a handle that trends lower in price
on lower volume.  This handle looks good on volume, but the daily lows seem
to be creeping up.  It almost looks more like a flag that a handle at first
glance. A closer look shows that it could be viewed as 3 separate handles
with some price lowering in each.  If this is valid, then you should still
be watching for a B/O above the handle high on at least 1.4X ADV.  This
could work out for this one, but it's a little different than the others
I've been looking at.


At 11:55 AM 6/20/00 -0700, you wrote:
>I have been following DV (93 84 AAB) and have seen what I think is a cup and
>handle. At the end of the handle (or what I thought to be a handle) it has
>started to trend up.  I would appreciate any comments on this chart. I would
>like to recommend it to my investment club.
>
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]Newsletter subscription request
Date: 20 Jun 2000 21:37:14 -0600

I heard an internet interview (II?) with MM about a year ago.  He was big
on tech and the new economy, and pretty much had me convinced that I needed
to overweight tech.  I ran out and checked into his mutual funds, and found
they were pretty much THE WORST tech funds out there.  And I mean BAD!!!!
I know he also has a newsletter, but I'm not sure the performance numbers
are really any better.  They did trumpet something about being on the best
newsletter list, but when I checked the list, they didn't make it at all.
Maybe they were on it once or something.  I would look at anything from
these guys very carefully.

BTW, I did put a big lot of cash into other Tech funds, and have done very
well, thank you.

At 07:04 PM 6/20/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Michael MurphyÆs news letter was recently mentioned here. I keep getting
>requests from him to subscribe. In his request he states that he has made
>553% over ten years.
>
>My question is the following the correct calculation to find the average
>annual return? Sorry I can't write it with better math symbols.
>
>(((number of years) root of (% of return/100))-1)*100
>
>(((10th) root of (553/100))-1)*100
>
>(((10th) root of (5.53))-1)*100
>
>((1.1865)-1)*100
>
>1865*100
>
>18.65% average annual return
>
>IsnÆt that what the market has average over the past ten years? Whoever
>answered that post was correct in saying that the news letter was not worth
>it.
>
>______________________________________________
>FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
>Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 20 Jun 2000 21:40:33 -0600

As far as when to sell, you have to be very careful.  I can sight LGTO and
EMLX as two examples of strong stocks that just got KILLED.  I got out of
both at about 20% losses, but avioded much greater losses.  Looking back, I
don't think the news was really that bad at the time they started moving
down, it just seemed to get worse and worse with time.  I've changed back
to hard stops for this market and I'm managing to stay in most of my
positions.

At 08:33 PM 6/20/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Just a reminder of a rule by WON on one of his tapes (I donÆt think itÆs in
>either book). To sell half of all positions getting to a 25% gain.
>
>I have bought 27 positions since 5/24/00. Seven of these have hit the up 25%
>mark. Four were sold for no other reason than hitting 25%. All of which are
>still below where I sold them. Just luck I'm sure. Of the other three one is
>above , one at, and one below the 25% mark. I think this is a good rule to
>keep you in the money. However all of these stocks hit 25% rather quickly
>which takes you to another rule that says you donÆt do anything with these
>positions for eight weeks for further gains. Two stocks were sold at an 8%
>and change loss and three stocks were sold at small gains. I think it was
>Earl that requested that I keep him posted. Selling is the area I need
>improving in and I am hoping this helps, only time will tell.
>
>The seven to hit 25% were:
>
>RFMD
>ELNT
>FLEX
>NUHC
>TLGD
>TECH
>MEDI
>
>Which brings me to another question. Since I donÆt like hard stops and use
>clothing values to see if the 7-8% rule has been broken, I got stuck with a
>couple of stock that broke this rule and then some while I was at a couple
>day seminar. Has anyone calculated a point where it is too late to sell, if
>all the reasons you bought the stock still exist including a RS of 80+?
>
>______________________________________________
>FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
>Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
>
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 20 Jun 2000 21:44:11 -0600

Here is my new sell approach.  Any comments, jeers, or others are welcome.
The idea is to start with a -8% stop and transition it to a -15% trailing
stop as the stock advances.  I've just started trying this, and I haven't
been chased out of anything based on these rules yet. These are based on
closing numbers:

Closing High    Hard Stop
After buy        Buy-8%
Buy+2%        Buy-7%
Buy+4%        Buy-6%
Buy+6%        Buy-5%
Buy+8%        Buy-4%
Buy+10%        Buy-3%
Buy+12%        Buy-2%
Buy+14%        Buy-1%
Buy+15%        High-15%
or more





At 08:11 PM 6/20/00 -0500, you wrote:
>why not buy more and keep a tight trailing stop when it hits 10% gain and
>more at 20% gain. Ride the hell out of a winner and immediatly drop a looser
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [e-mail]
>[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of chris dempsey
>Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 7:34 PM
>To: [e-mail]
>Subject: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
>
>
>Just a reminder of a rule by WON on one of his tapes (I donÆt think itÆs in
>either book). To sell half of all positions getting to a 25% gain.
>
>I have bought 27 positions since 5/24/00. Seven of these have hit the up 25%
>mark. Four were sold for no other reason than hitting 25%. All of which are
>still below where I sold them. Just luck I'm sure. Of the other three one is
>above , one at, and one below the 25% mark. I think this is a good rule to
>keep you in the money. However all of these stocks hit 25% rather quickly
>which takes you to another rule that says you donÆt do anything with these
>positions for eight weeks for further gains. Two stocks were sold at an 8%
>and change loss and three stocks were sold at small gains. I think it was
>Earl that requested that I keep him posted. Selling is the area I need
>improving in and I am hoping this helps, only time will tell.
>
>The seven to hit 25% were:
>
>RFMD
>ELNT
>FLEX
>NUHC
>TLGD
>TECH
>MEDI
>
>Which brings me to another question. Since I donÆt like hard stops and use
>clothing values to see if the 7-8% rule has been broken, I got stuck with a
>couple of stock that broke this rule and then some while I was at a couple
>day seminar. Has anyone calculated a point where it is too late to sell, if
>all the reasons you bought the stock still exist including a RS of 80+?
>
>______________________________________________
>FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
>Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
>
>
>-
>
>
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] XLNX
Date: 20 Jun 2000 23:40:58 -0400

handle of the cup a tad too high, but we've been seeing a lot of
that. More importantly, rising on low volume, I would watch that
carefully.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 10:29 PM


How about XLNX [Xilinx]?

-Jim


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Futures
Date: 21 Jun 2000 00:00:41 -0400

Hi Richard,

Speaking as a former stock broker, and Options Principal, options
are far more risky than equities. That said, I will add to it by
stating that it is far harder to assess where the broad mkt is
going than where an individual stock is trending. Options
constantly erode your position as time trickles by, doesn't
happen with stocks, you can (and sometimes will) own them for
what seems forever. The cost of owning options (because of the
premium) is far higher than owning stocks.

On the other hand, you get leverage with options that far
surpasses stocks (even on margin). This can substantially
increase your gains (and your losses). Have you looked into
writing covered calls, the most conservative of options
strategies?

Also, have you taken notes at the time of your purchases of
stocks as to why you picked them, and why you bot when you did?
Have you gone back and tried to assess what you might have missed
that led to the gap down? More often, if you have been losing
money in the past several years, it was not the fault of the
stock so much as your decision making. If you don't cure that
problem, options won't change the profits and losses equation.

You might try falling back to some paper trading for a while, and
post your picks once you make a decision. State your reasoning,
and let the group give you some feedback to challenge your
thinking on each. I will try to make the time to respond, and I
am sure others in the group will do so as well.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 8:41 PM


Don't shoot me for asking a futures question but I'm interested
whether
anyone is thinking the way I have recently. I've been at this
investing
thing for two or three years now and frankly I've lost a lot of
money.
No I haven't always cut losses but I have also experienced owning
stocks
that fall so quickly or gap down at the open that a stop would
not have
helped. So, I'm thinking there are too many uncontrollable
variables in
the equation for success in investing in stocks. After all, one
can be
right on the market, right on fundamentals, right on the charts
,then
Bam, some news comes out, and the stock plunges before stops can
be
kicked in. This has happened to me. On the other hand I have a
good feel
for the general direction of the averages as I watch the
indicators in
IBD closely. So is it reasonable to get into futures as the
markets are
coming out of corrections once or twice a year?

-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 21 Jun 2000 00:13:43 -0400

In an article many years old now (about 10), and published in a
trade journal for brokers, WON took a much simpler approach.
Start with a hard (or mental) stop down 8% from your entry point
(after first picking a correct entry as a stock broke out on vol
from a well formed base). This is intended to protect against
major loss of capital. Ideally this stop would allow you to hold
back to the bottom of this well formed base.  Once the stock had
moved up 15% from your entry (no discussion on whether you
included brokerage fees in your cost basis), then move the stop
to down 8% from the prior high closing.  At this point you have
begun to protect profits. If the stock continued to move higher,
then continue to adjust the stop so that it is always 8% below
the prior high closing.  Never adjust the stop down, if you are
stopped out at this point, you still take away a profit.

Course, this was back in the good ole days when a 1% move in a
major index really deserved to be headline news.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 11:44 PM


Here is my new sell approach.  Any comments, jeers, or others are
welcome.
The idea is to start with a -8% stop and transition it to a -15%
trailing
stop as the stock advances.  I've just started trying this, and I
haven't
been chased out of anything based on these rules yet. These are
based on
closing numbers:

Closing High Hard Stop
After buy Buy-8%
Buy+2% Buy-7%
Buy+4% Buy-6%
Buy+6% Buy-5%
Buy+8% Buy-4%
Buy+10% Buy-3%
Buy+12% Buy-2%
Buy+14% Buy-1%
Buy+15% High-15%
or more





At 08:11 PM 6/20/00 -0500, you wrote:
>why not buy more and keep a tight trailing stop when it hits 10%
gain and
>more at 20% gain. Ride the hell out of a winner and immediatly
drop a looser
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [e-mail]
>[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of chris
dempsey
>Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 7:34 PM
>To: [e-mail]
>Subject: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
>
>
>Just a reminder of a rule by WON on one of his tapes (I don't
think it's in
>either book). To sell half of all positions getting to a 25%
gain.
>
>I have bought 27 positions since 5/24/00. Seven of these have
hit the up 25%
>mark. Four were sold for no other reason than hitting 25%. All
of which are
>still below where I sold them. Just luck I'm sure. Of the other
three one is
>above , one at, and one below the 25% mark. I think this is a
good rule to
>keep you in the money. However all of these stocks hit 25%
rather quickly
>which takes you to another rule that says you don't do anything
with these
>positions for eight weeks for further gains. Two stocks were
sold at an 8%
>and change loss and three stocks were sold at small gains. I
think it was
>Earl that requested that I keep him posted. Selling is the area
I need
>improving in and I am hoping this helps, only time will tell.
>
>The seven to hit 25% were:
>
>RFMD
>ELNT
>FLEX
>NUHC
>TLGD
>TECH
>MEDI
>
>Which brings me to another question. Since I don't like hard
stops and use
>clothing values to see if the 7-8% rule has been broken, I got
stuck with a
>couple of stock that broke this rule and then some while I was
at a couple
>day seminar. Has anyone calculated a point where it is too late
to sell, if
>all the reasons you bought the stock still exist including a RS
of 80+?
>
>______________________________________________
>FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
>Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
>
>
>-
>
>
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Futures
Date: 20 Jun 2000 22:48:15 -0600

The margin on the nasdaq futures is pretty steep these days, if that
is what you are talking about, although I think they have a mini
nasdaq contract.  futures are a fairly tough game, and frequently
you will find that on the big up days, the market anticipates a
strong day, so the futures will gap up before the market open, so it
can be hard to realize more than a small part of the gains on even
a large up day.  Of course, if you can jump in there at the start of
the trend, you'll make up for that on the next strong up day,
because then you'll be in there and you'll get the entire move.

Risk control can also be difficult, what might seem like a small
counter trend move in an up market will look pretty large when you
are dealing with the leverage on a futures contract, so you may find
it more difficult to sit through the down days that don't look like a
big deal when you are not in the market in a big way.

I have at times thought that options on nasdaq futures might be a
way to try this, but I haven't made any sort of study of the subject
to see what the time decay does to the price of the option, those
things can be complicated to figure out.

On 20 Jun 00, at 19:41, Richard Turner wrote:

> Don't shoot me for asking a futures question but I'm interested whether
> anyone is thinking the way I have recently. I've been at this investing
> thing for two or three years now and frankly I've lost a lot of money.
> No I haven't always cut losses but I have also experienced owning stocks
> that fall so quickly or gap down at the open that a stop would not have
> helped. So, I'm thinking there are too many uncontrollable variables in
> the equation for success in investing in stocks. After all, one can be
> right on the market, right on fundamentals, right on the charts ,then
> Bam, some news comes out, and the stock plunges before stops can be
> kicked in. This has happened to me. On the other hand I have a good feel
> for the general direction of the averages as I watch the indicators in
> IBD closely. So is it reasonable to get into futures as the markets are
> coming out of corrections once or twice a year?
>
> -
>



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Bill speaks
Date: 20 Jun 2000 22:50:46 -0600

William O'Neil had a column at the cbsmarketwatch site -

http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/current/commentary.htx?source=
htx/http2_mw

or go to the front page and follow the link to his article.

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]Specific Industry Group Rankings
Date: 20 Jun 2000 23:11:33 -0400

Hi Chris,

While I will look at them, and do so every week when I review the
DGO list, I would never personally buy either
medical/drug/biotech stocks (tho will consider med instruments
and equipment as some are tech related) or bank stocks.

Why?  personal experience, I accepted that I will never
understand the significance of developments in the first group,
and the banks can cook their books far too easily, esp in Real
Estate Owned items. I also cannot comprehend why a bank chain of,
say, 4 or 5 branches is even publicly traded.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 19, 2000 12:14 AM

The following are the industry group rankings from the first and
16th of
each month this year. I try to buy stocks in high and rising rank
groups. It
looks like medical groups are moving up.  Does anyone have any
prospects for
Medical-Nursing Homes #84 on June 16th? It also looks like
tobacco is moving
higher, but I don't think I want to touch that one, anyone else
feel that
way?

General industry group is where you would find a stock hitting a
new high or
low listed in IBD.

Does anyone have a list of groups they would never buy from, and
why?

<Snip the stock and statistic list>

-

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]Specific Industry Group Rankings
Date: 20 Jun 2000 21:17:15 -0600

I am presently taking Oil & Gas and Transportation-Ship out of my list.
I'm doing this because I want to focus on groups with strong growth rather
than a more cyclical industry.  I think many of the Oil & Gas stocks are up
based only on the price of oil.  There was a front page article in IBD a
couple days ago that discussed the general idea that some of these "older,
cyclical" groups aren't likely to be leader for long and it was better to
put your money to work elsewhere.  Let's see, ah here it is, Monday's
paper.  Headline reads "Cyclicals Rarely Generate Long-Term Gains".  They
specifically mention Oil and Gas, Railroads, Airlines, Construction, Stell,
and Automobile Mfg.  They also dicussed Oil & Gas in some detail, pointing
out the good performance this year and in 1996, but note not a lot of
growth otherwise.  I've been doing this somewhat for a while, and I'm
changing to a more formal deletion of these kind of groups from my leaders
list.

 At 12:14 AM 6/19/00 -0400, you wrote:
>The following are the industry group rankings from the first and 16th of
>each month this year. I try to buy stocks in high and rising rank groups. It
>looks like medical groups are moving up.  Does anyone have any prospects for
>Medical-Nursing Homes #84 on June 16th? It also looks like tobacco is moving
>higher, but I don't think I want to touch that one, anyone else feel that
>way?
>
>General industry group is where you would find a stock hitting a new high or
>low listed in IBD.
>
>Does anyone have a list of groups they would never buy from, and why?
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] TLCM to buy or not to buy
Date: 21 Jun 2000 10:12:37 -0400



Thank you, Tom.

The numbers "before non-recurring items" in Zacks are identical to DGO.

Anna Sosis


"Tom Worley" <[e-mail]> on 06/20/2000 10:44:42 PM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




Hi Anna,

I think one of the most important lessons to learn about the
internet and stocks is that you have to find a source of data you
are comfortable with, then stick to it so that data at least is
handled consistently.  I am willing to pay for DGO, and use that
exclusively. At DGO, and similar minded sites, they will normally
exclude "non recurring" items whether they are gains or losses
simply because they are defined as "non recurring".

I took a quick peek at DGO on this one, and there are no losses
shown for the past 8 qtrs.  Likewise, earnings have grown
sequentially for five straight qtrs.  They were notably strong in
the latest two qtrs, and WON's formula for EPS overweighs the
latest two.

Here are the numbers so you can compare them to Zacks:

Annual EPS: (from 1995 thru 1999)
0.23  (0.04)    0.38    0.21    0.46

Latest 8 qtrly earnings (oldest to March '00):
0.05   0.02   0.02   0.05    0.10    0.14    0.16    0.18

Sales latest 8 qtrly (oldest to March '00):
14.0   12.7   12.1   12.8   13.9   14.9   15.8    17.2

Hope this helps,

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 7:12 PM




Hi Walter,

thank you so much for the info..  I use Zacks (www.zacks.com)
site to view
yearly and quaterly statements and this is what they have:

YEARLY

         12/31/99 12/31/98 12/31/97 12/31/96 12/31/95

Sales 57.32 54.26 55.44 37.76 39.00   (i.e., from 97 to 98
decrease from
55.44 to 54.26

Diluted EPS Before Non-Recurring Items 0.46 0.25 0.38 (0.04) 0.23

Diluted Net EPS 0.84 (0.22) (0.11) (0.04) 0.23  (i.e, from 96 to
97 to 98
lossess from .04 to .11 to .22)


QUATERLY

3/31/0 12/31/99 9/30/99 6/30/99 3/31/99 12/31/98 9/30/98 6/30/98

Sales 17.20 15.80 14.85 13.87 12.81 12.06 12.70 14.02 (i.e.
decrease from
14.02 to 12.81 four quaters ago)

Diluted EPS Before Non-Recurring Items 0.17 0.16 0.14 0.10 0.05
0.03 0.02
0.05

Diluted Net EPS 0.21 0.25 0.14 0.13 0.32 (0.02) (0.38) 0.05
(i.e. DECREASE
 from .32 to .21 in the quater of 3/31/2000)


Btw, could it be that I should be using earnings BEFORE
Non-recurring
items?  I tend to use the bottom line (net earnings).
Incidently, I traded my ADI for this one :)

PS: I did not buy SANM after all.  Check out SAWS.  The numbers
seems to be
 comparable.....


Anna Sosis



Walter Stock <[e-mail]> on 06/20/2000 05:23:09 PM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




Hi Anna,

Rankings in today's IBD moved up to 97 95 AAA.

In the IBD "Follow the Leader" section today, TLCM is the #7
semiconductor company out of 90 in the group
(ranked by EPS and RS).

Earnings growth last quarter was 260%, as compared to the
same quarter a year earlier.
Quarterly earnings growth the quarter before were up 700%
compared to the same quarter a year earlier.
Maintaining earnings at this level is a nice problem to have!

Sales are up strongly year over year (and also sequentially).

Float is 15.9 million shares - about ideal for me.

On May 31, IBD reported that TLCM
had 3 funds (rated at A+, A, or A-)  in the stock.
On June 8,  IBD reported 4 funds in the stock.
On June 20 (today), IBD reported 6 funds in the stock.
The information may be somewhat out of date by the time IBD
gets to publish it, but I am interested in the sponsorship trend,
not the absolute number.

The chart on this stock is textbook cup-and-handle.
Good volume dry up at the cup lows and at the handle lows.
Also excellent volume clues during the climb on the right hand
side of the cup.

Breakout today on well over 3 times ADV.

Anyway to put my money where my mouth is, I bought
a full position before the close (and before reading this
thread).

Re-reading all this, maybe the stock is too good, and
crashes and burns in the morning.  Who knows....
I've been wrong before, and have the elephant tracks all
over my back to prove it.

I put the pivot on the cup-and-handle at 37 1/2
(making it buyable for me up to about 39 3/8).

Hope this helps, Anna.

Walter Stock
Oakville, ON, Canada



[e-mail] wrote:

> Hi.
>
> IBD gives TLCM 96 94 AAA ranking.  However, the earnings growth
in the
last
> quater is negative (from .32 to .21) and the prev 3 out of 5
years it had
> increasing losses.  Can you explain the ranking?  Is this stock
worth
> buying?
>
> Anna Sosis
>
> [e-mail] on 06/20/2000 10:40:26 AM
>
> Please respond to [e-mail]
>
> To:   [e-mail]
> cc:
> Subject:  Re: [CANSLIM] breakouts
>
> TQNT also.
>
> Ziggy
>
> Patrick Wahl wrote:
>
> > The following stocks either broke out to new highs, or broke
out of
> > the right side of a cup like formation where the handle was
lower
> > than the old highs that formed when the nasdaq was going nuts
in
> > March.   I notice many charts are near carbon copies of each
> > either, showing the influence and importance of the Market
and the
> > sector.
> >
> > MXIM
> > INTC
> > ADI
> > NOK
> > ORCL
> > CIEN
> > BRCD
> > JNPR
> > TXN
> >
> > -
>
> -
>
> -


-





-



-





-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jack Wood" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 21 Jun 2000 08:47:00 -0700

What is the difference between a "hard stop" and a "trailing stop?"

Jack Wood

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of John Adair
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 6:12 PM


why not buy more and keep a tight trailing stop when it hits 10% gain and
more at 20% gain. Ride the hell out of a winner and immediatly drop a looser

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of chris dempsey
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 7:34 PM


Just a reminder of a rule by WON on one of his tapes (I donÆt think itÆs in
either book). To sell half of all positions getting to a 25% gain.

I have bought 27 positions since 5/24/00. Seven of these have hit the up 25%
mark. Four were sold for no other reason than hitting 25%. All of which are
still below where I sold them. Just luck I'm sure. Of the other three one is
above , one at, and one below the 25% mark. I think this is a good rule to
keep you in the money. However all of these stocks hit 25% rather quickly
which takes you to another rule that says you donÆt do anything with these
positions for eight weeks for further gains. Two stocks were sold at an 8%
and change loss and three stocks were sold at small gains. I think it was
Earl that requested that I keep him posted. Selling is the area I need
improving in and I am hoping this helps, only time will tell.

The seven to hit 25% were:

RFMD
ELNT
FLEX
NUHC
TLGD
TECH
MEDI

Which brings me to another question. Since I donÆt like hard stops and use
clothing values to see if the 7-8% rule has been broken, I got stuck with a
couple of stock that broke this rule and then some while I was at a couple
day seminar. Has anyone calculated a point where it is too late to sell, if
all the reasons you bought the stock still exist including a RS of 80+?

______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup


-



-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Eric Shen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 21 Jun 2000 09:27:36 -0700


Tom,

Doesn't keeping a 8% stop when the stock moves up get you
knocked out when there is a pause for profit taking?  For those
10 baggers (ala Peter Lynch), I believe there are some short
reversals on it's way up.  How does one avoid getting out and
watching the stock skyrocket?

Eric


Tom Worley wrote:
>
> In an article many years old now (about 10), and published in a
> trade journal for brokers, WON took a much simpler approach.
> Start with a hard (or mental) stop down 8% from your entry point
> (after first picking a correct entry as a stock broke out on vol
> from a well formed base). This is intended to protect against
> major loss of capital. Ideally this stop would allow you to hold
> back to the bottom of this well formed base.  Once the stock had
> moved up 15% from your entry (no discussion on whether you
> included brokerage fees in your cost basis), then move the stop
> to down 8% from the prior high closing.  At this point you have
> begun to protect profits. If the stock continued to move higher,
> then continue to adjust the stop so that it is always 8% below
> the prior high closing.  Never adjust the stop down, if you are
> stopped out at this point, you still take away a profit.
>
> Course, this was back in the good ole days when a 1% move in a
> major index really deserved to be headline news.
>
> Tom Worley
> [e-mail]
> chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>


--
Eric Shen        MS LOC3-8   / / /    Level One Communications
email: [e-mail]      | | |_/  an Intel company
Tel: [phone]          | |___/  9750 Goethe Road
               ext: 4497     |_____/  Sacramento, CA 95827

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 21 Jun 2000 10:19:12 -0700 (PDT)


Hard stop is a stop loss order with the brokerage so it is executed
automatically when the stock falls down.=20

Trailing stop can be of two types: hard or soft.=20

Soft stop is a mental stop loss order. Lot of people believe that the
market makers can bring down the prices on some securities so they do not
use hard stop. They use soft stop instead. Soft stop: *you* put in a
market order when the stock falls in price.

Trailing stop is basically a movable stop loss order. It is always some
percentage or price below the high of the stock.=20


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Wed, 21 Jun 2000, Jack Wood wrote:

> What is the difference between a "hard stop" and a "trailing stop?"
>=20
> Jack Wood
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail]
> [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of John Adair
> Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 6:12 PM
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: RE: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
>=20
>=20
> why not buy more and keep a tight trailing stop when it hits 10% gain a=
nd
> more at 20% gain. Ride the hell out of a winner and immediatly drop a l=
ooser
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail]
> [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of chris dempsey
> Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 7:34 PM
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
>=20
>=20
> Just a reminder of a rule by WON on one of his tapes (I don=92t think i=
t=92s in
> either book). To sell half of all positions getting to a 25% gain.
>=20
> I have bought 27 positions since 5/24/00. Seven of these have hit the u=
p 25%
> mark. Four were sold for no other reason than hitting 25%. All of which=
 are
> still below where I sold them. Just luck I'm sure. Of the other three o=
ne is
> above , one at, and one below the 25% mark. I think this is a good rule=
 to
> keep you in the money. However all of these stocks hit 25% rather quick=
ly
> which takes you to another rule that says you don=92t do anything with =
these
> positions for eight weeks for further gains. Two stocks were sold at an=
 8%
> and change loss and three stocks were sold at small gains. I think it w=
as
> Earl that requested that I keep him posted. Selling is the area I need
> improving in and I am hoping this helps, only time will tell.
>=20
> The seven to hit 25% were:
>=20
> RFMD
> ELNT
> FLEX
> NUHC
> TLGD
> TECH
> MEDI
>=20
> Which brings me to another question. Since I don=92t like hard stops an=
d use
> clothing values to see if the 7-8% rule has been broken, I got stuck wi=
th a
> couple of stock that broke this rule and then some while I was at a cou=
ple
> day seminar. Has anyone calculated a point where it is too late to sell=
, if
> all the reasons you bought the stock still exist including a RS of 80+?
>=20
> ______________________________________________
> FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
> Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=3Dsignup
>=20
>=20
> -
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -
>=20
>=20


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "mikelu" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 21 Jun 2000 10:41:52 -0700

A trailing stop is one that you move up as your stock moves up.

A hard stop is placed with the broker so that your sell order executes if
the price is touched during the day. If you wanted to use closing prices
only, then you wouldn't use a hard stop, and instead would look at your
stock every night, and place a sell order if it closes below your "mental"
stop.

Mike

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Jack Wood
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2000 8:47 AM


What is the difference between a "hard stop" and a "trailing stop?"

Jack Wood

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of John Adair
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 6:12 PM


why not buy more and keep a tight trailing stop when it hits 10% gain and
more at 20% gain. Ride the hell out of a winner and immediatly drop a looser

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of chris dempsey
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 7:34 PM


Just a reminder of a rule by WON on one of his tapes (I donÆt think itÆs in
either book). To sell half of all positions getting to a 25% gain.

I have bought 27 positions since 5/24/00. Seven of these have hit the up 25%
mark. Four were sold for no other reason than hitting 25%. All of which are
still below where I sold them. Just luck I'm sure. Of the other three one is
above , one at, and one below the 25% mark. I think this is a good rule to
keep you in the money. However all of these stocks hit 25% rather quickly
which takes you to another rule that says you donÆt do anything with these
positions for eight weeks for further gains. Two stocks were sold at an 8%
and change loss and three stocks were sold at small gains. I think it was
Earl that requested that I keep him posted. Selling is the area I need
improving in and I am hoping this helps, only time will tell.

The seven to hit 25% were:

RFMD
ELNT
FLEX
NUHC
TLGD
TECH
MEDI

Which brings me to another question. Since I donÆt like hard stops and use
clothing values to see if the 7-8% rule has been broken, I got stuck with a
couple of stock that broke this rule and then some while I was at a couple
day seminar. Has anyone calculated a point where it is too late to sell, if
all the reasons you bought the stock still exist including a RS of 80+?

______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup


-



-



-


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Dave Rubin" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Chasing breakouts
Date: 21 Jun 2000 15:35:04 -0400

Anyone else continually get burned by the "don't chase breakouts" rule?

I know and understand the rule not to chase breakouts more than 5% past the
pivot.  And I do follow this rule.  But so many times, those stocks turn
around and launch a tremendous gain without ever looking back.

The latest example from my watch list is TLCM which was also mentioned on
this list yesterday. This morning TLCM came as low as 39 1/2.  The pivot is
37 3/8 which means it should not be bought past 39 1/4.

So the stock was not buyable today by a lousy 1/4 point.  It has since
surged 5 points on tremendous volume. Now I'm kicking myself for not
breaking the rule.  Assuming the market stays healthy I don't see this stock
coming back to the pivot any time soon.

It seems that some of WON's hard and fast rules might benefit from some
flexibility. For example, maybe the 5% rule can be broken in rare cases
where the breakout is of very high quality. In TLCM's case the chart is a
near perfect example of a cup-handle breakout.  If only the rule was 6% for
"quality" breakouts, I'd have some nice profits today.

Instead I'll take WON's advice and simply write it off as (yet another)
missed opportunity, and wait for others that will hopefully come...


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "John Adair" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 21 Jun 2000 18:38:25 -0500

I do not know your definition of a hard stop but I would guess it is a fi=
xed
stop.  I define a trailing stop as one that moves up but not down with th=
e
market. I feel you are limiting your chance of hitting a hundy by  removi=
ng
money from a winning stock. I would line to know  what your  rational is =
for
removing half at 25% gain.

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Jack Wood
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2000 10:47 AM


What is the difference between a "hard stop" and a "trailing stop?"

Jack Wood

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of John Adair
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 6:12 PM


why not buy more and keep a tight trailing stop when it hits 10% gain and
more at 20% gain. Ride the hell out of a winner and immediatly drop a loo=
ser

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of chris dempsey
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 7:34 PM


Just a reminder of a rule by WON on one of his tapes (I don=92t think it=92=
s in
either book). To sell half of all positions getting to a 25% gain.

I have bought 27 positions since 5/24/00. Seven of these have hit the up =
25%
mark. Four were sold for no other reason than hitting 25%. All of which a=
re
still below where I sold them. Just luck I'm sure. Of the other three one=
 is
above , one at, and one below the 25% mark. I think this is a good rule t=
o
keep you in the money. However all of these stocks hit 25% rather quickly
which takes you to another rule that says you don=92t do anything with th=
ese
positions for eight weeks for further gains. Two stocks were sold at an 8=
%
and change loss and three stocks were sold at small gains. I think it was
Earl that requested that I keep him posted. Selling is the area I need
improving in and I am hoping this helps, only time will tell.

The seven to hit 25% were:

RFMD
ELNT
FLEX
NUHC
TLGD
TECH
MEDI

Which brings me to another question. Since I don=92t like hard stops and =
use
clothing values to see if the 7-8% rule has been broken, I got stuck with=
 a
couple of stock that broke this rule and then some while I was at a coupl=
e
day seminar. Has anyone calculated a point where it is too late to sell, =
if
all the reasons you bought the stock still exist including a RS of 80+?

______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=3Dsignup


-



-



-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 21 Jun 2000 21:33:59 -0400

Hi Eric,

As I pointed out, WON's suggestion to use an 8% stop all the way
up was made in much calmer (less volatile) times. I think there
are very few, if any, major gainers of the past five years, maybe
even past decade, where this might have worked unless you were
also able to keep a close eye on the mkt and buy back in at the
slightest hint of a reversal. And that's without even considering
most of the internut dot coms, where an 8-10% trading range in a
single day is perfectly normal and acceptable.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2000 12:27 PM



Tom,

Doesn't keeping a 8% stop when the stock moves up get you
knocked out when there is a pause for profit taking?  For those
10 baggers (ala Peter Lynch), I believe there are some short
reversals on it's way up.  How does one avoid getting out and
watching the stock skyrocket?

Eric


Tom Worley wrote:
>
> In an article many years old now (about 10), and published in a
> trade journal for brokers, WON took a much simpler approach.
> Start with a hard (or mental) stop down 8% from your entry
point
> (after first picking a correct entry as a stock broke out on
vol
> from a well formed base). This is intended to protect against
> major loss of capital. Ideally this stop would allow you to
hold
> back to the bottom of this well formed base.  Once the stock
had
> moved up 15% from your entry (no discussion on whether you
> included brokerage fees in your cost basis), then move the stop
> to down 8% from the prior high closing.  At this point you have
> begun to protect profits. If the stock continued to move
higher,
> then continue to adjust the stop so that it is always 8% below
> the prior high closing.  Never adjust the stop down, if you are
> stopped out at this point, you still take away a profit.
>
> Course, this was back in the good ole days when a 1% move in a
> major index really deserved to be headline news.
>
> Tom Worley
> [e-mail]
> chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>


--
Eric Shen        MS LOC3-8   / / /    Level One Communications
email: [e-mail]      | | |_/  an Intel company
Tel: [phone]          | |___/  9750 Goethe Road
               ext: 4497     |_____/  Sacramento, CA 95827

-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Chasing breakouts
Date: 21 Jun 2000 21:59:31 -0400

Hi Dave,

I hear the 5% rule fairly often, which I believe is applied
against a pivot point, where pivot point is defined as the high
trade during a base.  I personally try to stick to a "base
oriented" rule, where I can buy up to 10% above the base. The
idea with this is that I will usually be in much less, and a
pullback to the base, or even its bottom, won't stop me out at
8%. TLCM is a very poor example for this, as it had a very sloppy
two week base/handle. But with hindsight always 20/20, I can now
peg the base at 33-34. One could argue that the reversal, albeit
on extremely light volume (ran out of doomsday sellers, perhaps)
on 6/19 was a perfect buy signal. In any case, if you were
watching closely, you might have reacted to the volume early on
6/20 and bot under 36.30.

Following the 5% rule as I understand it, the high trade of 37.37
on 6/12 meant buying once this price was broken (e.g. no further
resistance or overhead). Thus a buy stop at 37.50 (an eighth
higher) would have been reasonable. DGO shows the low trade today
at 37.26, just at the 5% over this limit.  I suspect a day trader
would likely have paid up and bot this stock today on volume.
Adding 5% to this limit takes you to 39.375, so there is a remote
possibility you could have been executed.

Personally, if I ever again have the time to follow the mkt
closely, I will continue to follow past practice, which is to
apply what may be to others as "rules" for me will be
"guidelines". And when I am wrong and lose money, I will have no
one to blame but myself for not following the "rules". Then
again, I have quite a few decades investing, and over a decade
inside the securities industry, so I tend to view some things
differently.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2000 3:35 PM


Anyone else continually get burned by the "don't chase breakouts"
rule?

I know and understand the rule not to chase breakouts more than
5% past the
pivot.  And I do follow this rule.  But so many times, those
stocks turn
around and launch a tremendous gain without ever looking back.

The latest example from my watch list is TLCM which was also
mentioned on
this list yesterday. This morning TLCM came as low as 39 1/2.
The pivot is
37 3/8 which means it should not be bought past 39 1/4.

So the stock was not buyable today by a lousy 1/4 point.  It has
since
surged 5 points on tremendous volume. Now I'm kicking myself for
not
breaking the rule.  Assuming the market stays healthy I don't see
this stock
coming back to the pivot any time soon.

It seems that some of WON's hard and fast rules might benefit
from some
flexibility. For example, maybe the 5% rule can be broken in rare
cases
where the breakout is of very high quality. In TLCM's case the
chart is a
near perfect example of a cup-handle breakout.  If only the rule
was 6% for
"quality" breakouts, I'd have some nice profits today.

Instead I'll take WON's advice and simply write it off as (yet
another)
missed opportunity, and wait for others that will hopefully
come...


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Chasing breakouts
Date: 21 Jun 2000 21:05:58 -0600

I generally use some flexibility in the rule.  I don't think that's a
problem, as long as you realize the problem.  WON says that many, maybe 60%
of all stocks, return to or near the pivot to test the B/O.  If you bought
at, say 10% above the pivot, and set hard stops, you could be knocked out
of 60% of your purchases.  The rule is intended to prevent this kind of
problem.  I wouldn't recommend ignoring it, but a little bend here and
there is probably okay.  I did buy into TQNT yesterday a little high, so
I'm at risk a bit more.  I didn't plan it that way, but it went up $1 or so
while I was fiddling with the order.  I decided to go for it anyway, and
hopefully it will pay off (but only time will tell).

At 03:35 PM 6/21/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Anyone else continually get burned by the "don't chase breakouts" rule?
>
>I know and understand the rule not to chase breakouts more than 5% past the
>pivot.  And I do follow this rule.  But so many times, those stocks turn
>around and launch a tremendous gain without ever looking back.
>
>The latest example from my watch list is TLCM which was also mentioned on
>this list yesterday. This morning TLCM came as low as 39 1/2.  The pivot is
>37 3/8 which means it should not be bought past 39 1/4.
>
>So the stock was not buyable today by a lousy 1/4 point.  It has since
>surged 5 points on tremendous volume. Now I'm kicking myself for not
>breaking the rule.  Assuming the market stays healthy I don't see this stock
>coming back to the pivot any time soon.
>
>It seems that some of WON's hard and fast rules might benefit from some
>flexibility. For example, maybe the 5% rule can be broken in rare cases
>where the breakout is of very high quality. In TLCM's case the chart is a
>near perfect example of a cup-handle breakout.  If only the rule was 6% for
>"quality" breakouts, I'd have some nice profits today.
>
>Instead I'll take WON's advice and simply write it off as (yet another)
>missed opportunity, and wait for others that will hopefully come...
>
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jim Carr" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Rookie question re: MENT
Date: 22 Jun 2000 00:34:25 -0500

Hi, folks.  Should take this opportunity to introduce myself to the group.  I'm relatively new to CANSLIM, but hope I'm slowly
catching on.  Enjoy the daily education from this group.  Anyway, here's the newbie question.  Bought MENT early last week as it
moved up.  However, since that time, it has gone virtually sideways on above average volume on all days but today.  Should I sit
tight, or consider the breakout failed and eject.  Don't mind being patient if this action looks "normal", but if it's questionable,
could put the capital to better use.  Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Jim


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Rookie question re: MENT
Date: 22 Jun 2000 06:45:02 -0400

Hi Jim,

The heavy volume with no price gain certainly does not look
"normal", esp with such a small move preceding this newest base.
I also note the extreme disparity between sales growth and
earnings growth, and that over half of last year's earnings came
in the 4th qtr.  The last 4 qtrs of earnings also look better by
comparison on a year to year basis as they are compared to very
weak prior qtrs. On the positive, the breakout has not failed, it
simply has paused.  And the RS line has not begun to turn down.
Most of the volume appears to be buying.

Ask yourself the question, if you didn't already own it, would
you   (A) buy it today;   (B) wait for a volume based breakout;
or,  (C) buy something else.  Your answer should resolve your
question of what to do now that you do own it.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2000 1:34 AM


Hi, folks.  Should take this opportunity to introduce myself to
the group.  I'm relatively new to CANSLIM, but hope I'm slowly
catching on.  Enjoy the daily education from this group.  Anyway,
here's the newbie question.  Bought MENT early last week as it
moved up.  However, since that time, it has gone virtually
sideways on above average volume on all days but today.  Should I
sit
tight, or consider the breakout failed and eject.  Don't mind
being patient if this action looks "normal", but if it's
questionable,
could put the capital to better use.  Any thoughts would be
greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Jim


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] NASDAQ
Date: 22 Jun 2000 07:41:13 -0400

As I read the chart, next resistance now is in the 4550-4575
range, set by the highs on 4/7 and 4/10; and the two and a half
week base back in mid Feb. That leaves a lot of room for growth
short term, but it will need to break decisively thru that level
for any further gains.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Gumpel <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 22 Jun 2000 16:16:04 +0200

I have to say that I've never been able to understand the logic behind this
8%/loss- 25%/profit thing.

These things have really to do with 3 concepts that every smart investor
should think about (constantly).
acceptable risk
support
resistance

The market cares not a whit if you set your stop at 8%. You are irrelevant.
All that matters is your tolerance for risk, support and resistance.
Sometimes stops will be tight, sometimes they're wide. But an arbitrary
percent? Why not 7.95?

I recommend supplementing WON with other good reading see the canslim faq:
http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/WorkshopD.htm


Tom (the other one)

At 12:13 AM 21/6/00 -0400, Tom Worley wrote:
>In an article many years old now (about 10), and published in a
>trade journal for brokers, WON took a much simpler approach.
>Start with a hard (or mental) stop down 8% from your entry point
>(after first picking a correct entry as a stock broke out on vol
>from a well formed base). This is intended to protect against
>major loss of capital. Ideally this stop would allow you to hold
>back to the bottom of this well formed base.  Once the stock had
>moved up 15% from your entry (no discussion on whether you
>included brokerage fees in your cost basis), then move the stop
>to down 8% from the prior high closing.  At this point you have
>begun to protect profits. If the stock continued to move higher,
>then continue to adjust the stop so that it is always 8% below
>the prior high closing.  Never adjust the stop down, if you are
>stopped out at this point, you still take away a profit.
>
>Course, this was back in the good ole days when a 1% move in a
>major index really deserved to be headline news.
>
>Tom Worley
>[e-mail]
>chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
>get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
>To: <[e-mail]>
>Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 11:44 PM
>Subject: RE: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
>
>
>Here is my new sell approach.  Any comments, jeers, or others are
>welcome.
>The idea is to start with a -8% stop and transition it to a -15%
>trailing
>stop as the stock advances.  I've just started trying this, and I
>haven't
>been chased out of anything based on these rules yet. These are
>based on
>closing numbers:
>
>Closing High Hard Stop
>After buy Buy-8%
>Buy+2% Buy-7%
>Buy+4% Buy-6%
>Buy+6% Buy-5%
>Buy+8% Buy-4%
>Buy+10% Buy-3%
>Buy+12% Buy-2%
>Buy+14% Buy-1%
>Buy+15% High-15%
>or more
>
>
>
>
>
>At 08:11 PM 6/20/00 -0500, you wrote:
> >why not buy more and keep a tight trailing stop when it hits 10%
>gain and
> >more at 20% gain. Ride the hell out of a winner and immediatly
>drop a looser
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: [e-mail]
> >[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of chris
>dempsey
> >Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 7:34 PM
> >To: [e-mail]
> >Subject: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
> >
> >
> >Just a reminder of a rule by WON on one of his tapes (I don't
>think it's in
> >either book). To sell half of all positions getting to a 25%
>gain.
> >
> >I have bought 27 positions since 5/24/00. Seven of these have
>hit the up 25%
> >mark. Four were sold for no other reason than hitting 25%. All
>of which are
> >still below where I sold them. Just luck I'm sure. Of the other
>three one is
> >above , one at, and one below the 25% mark. I think this is a
>good rule to
> >keep you in the money. However all of these stocks hit 25%
>rather quickly
> >which takes you to another rule that says you don't do anything
>with these
> >positions for eight weeks for further gains. Two stocks were
>sold at an 8%
> >and change loss and three stocks were sold at small gains. I
>think it was
> >Earl that requested that I keep him posted. Selling is the area
>I need
> >improving in and I am hoping this helps, only time will tell.
> >
> >The seven to hit 25% were:
> >
> >RFMD
> >ELNT
> >FLEX
> >NUHC
> >TLGD
> >TECH
> >MEDI
> >
> >Which brings me to another question. Since I don't like hard
>stops and use
> >clothing values to see if the 7-8% rule has been broken, I got
>stuck with a
> >couple of stock that broke this rule and then some while I was
>at a couple
> >day seminar. Has anyone calculated a point where it is too late
>to sell, if
> >all the reasons you bought the stock still exist including a RS
>of 80+?
> >
> >______________________________________________
> >FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
> >Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
> >
> >
> >-
> >
> >
> >
> >-
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>-
>
>
>
>-

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Tom Gumpel
Department of Special Education                         972-2-588-2165
School of Education                                   Fax:    [phone]
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem        in US:  877-258-9406
Jerusalem, ISRAEL 91905
http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msgumpel/main.htm
VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Oli Josefsson <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] TQNT
Date: 22 Jun 2000 11:42:24 -0400


Greetings.  I wonder what people think of TQNT.
A couple of days ago IDB listed that stats as :
TQNT 97 98 A.B

They put in "." for the Sales,pm and ROE number, yet
on yahoo these numbers seem reasonable (calculate-able).
Anybody know what the "." means ?

TQNT broke out a couple of days ago, but seems to be drifting
down to its base again on lower volume which might
present a buying opportunity.  However, I am not
sure what to make of its base, it does not seem
to be a cup and a handle, and certainly can not
be a flat base given the big price differentials.
What do people make of this ?

Thanks,
Oli

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] 8% loss and 25% profit
Date: 22 Jun 2000 09:13:37 -0700 (PDT)


Tom, You are right about the three concepts and that is what CANSLIM tries
to do -- execpt it tells you how to do it with dicipline.

Profit/Loss has been discussed again and again and let me just say it this
way.

7-8% loss requires 7-8% profit to make up for the loss -- period..... I
will let your logic figure out why more than 8% is bad.

20% profit is because a stock generally starts basing after 25% rise in
price.

CANSLIM is about momentum investing. You want to use your money and get a
profit/loss as soon as possible.

CANSLIM is *not* about day trading.


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Thu, 22 Jun 2000, Tom Gumpel wrote:

> I have to say that I've never been able to understand the logic behind this
> 8%/loss- 25%/profit thing.
>
> These things have really to do with 3 concepts that every smart investor
> should think about (constantly).
> acceptable risk
> support
> resistance
>
> The market cares not a whit if you set your stop at 8%. You are irrelevant.
> All that matters is your tolerance for risk, support and resistance.
> Sometimes stops will be tight, sometimes they're wide. But an arbitrary
> percent? Why not 7.95?
>
> I recommend supplementing WON with other good reading see the canslim faq:
> http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/WorkshopD.htm
>
>
> Tom (the other one)
>
> At 12:13 AM 21/6/00 -0400, Tom Worley wrote:
> >In an article many years old now (about 10), and published in a
> >trade journal for brokers, WON took a much simpler approach.
> >Start with a hard (or mental) stop down 8% from your entry point
> >(after first picking a correct entry as a stock broke out on vol
> >from a well formed base). This is intended to protect against
> >major loss of capital. Ideally this stop would allow you to hold
> >back to the bottom of this well formed base.  Once the stock had
> >moved up 15% from your entry (no discussion on whether you
> >included brokerage fees in your cost basis), then move the stop
> >to down 8% from the prior high closing.  At this point you have
> >begun to protect profits. If the stock continued to move higher,
> >then continue to adjust the stop so that it is always 8% below
> >the prior high closing.  Never adjust the stop down, if you are
> >stopped out at this point, you still take away a profit.
> >
> >Course, this was back in the good ole days when a 1% move in a
> >major index really deserved to be headline news.
> >
> >Tom Worley
> >[e-mail]
> >chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> >get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
> >To: <[e-mail]>
> >Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 11:44 PM
> >Subject: RE: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
> >
> >
> >Here is my new sell approach.  Any comments, jeers, or others are
> >welcome.
> >The idea is to start with a -8% stop and transition it to a -15%
> >trailing
> >stop as the stock advances.  I've just started trying this, and I
> >haven't
> >been chased out of anything based on these rules yet. These are
> >based on
> >closing numbers:
> >
> >Closing High Hard Stop
> >After buy Buy-8%
> >Buy+2% Buy-7%
> >Buy+4% Buy-6%
> >Buy+6% Buy-5%
> >Buy+8% Buy-4%
> >Buy+10% Buy-3%
> >Buy+12% Buy-2%
> >Buy+14% Buy-1%
> >Buy+15% High-15%
> >or more
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >At 08:11 PM 6/20/00 -0500, you wrote:
> > >why not buy more and keep a tight trailing stop when it hits 10%
> >gain and
> > >more at 20% gain. Ride the hell out of a winner and immediatly
> >drop a looser
> > >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: [e-mail]
> > >[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of chris
> >dempsey
> > >Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 7:34 PM
> > >To: [e-mail]
> > >Subject: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
> > >
> > >
> > >Just a reminder of a rule by WON on one of his tapes (I don't
> >think it's in
> > >either book). To sell half of all positions getting to a 25%
> >gain.
> > >
> > >I have bought 27 positions since 5/24/00. Seven of these have
> >hit the up 25%
> > >mark. Four were sold for no other reason than hitting 25%. All
> >of which are
> > >still below where I sold them. Just luck I'm sure. Of the other
> >three one is
> > >above , one at, and one below the 25% mark. I think this is a
> >good rule to
> > >keep you in the money. However all of these stocks hit 25%
> >rather quickly
> > >which takes you to another rule that says you don't do anything
> >with these
> > >positions for eight weeks for further gains. Two stocks were
> >sold at an 8%
> > >and change loss and three stocks were sold at small gains. I
> >think it was
> > >Earl that requested that I keep him posted. Selling is the area
> >I need
> > >improving in and I am hoping this helps, only time will tell.
> > >
> > >The seven to hit 25% were:
> > >
> > >RFMD
> > >ELNT
> > >FLEX
> > >NUHC
> > >TLGD
> > >TECH
> > >MEDI
> > >
> > >Which brings me to another question. Since I don't like hard
> >stops and use
> > >clothing values to see if the 7-8% rule has been broken, I got
> >stuck with a
> > >couple of stock that broke this rule and then some while I was
> >at a couple
> > >day seminar. Has anyone calculated a point where it is too late
> >to sell, if
> > >all the reasons you bought the stock still exist including a RS
> >of 80+?
> > >
> > >______________________________________________
> > >FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
> > >Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
> > >
> > >
> > >-
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >-
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >-
> >
> >
> >
> >-
>
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> Tom Gumpel
> Department of Special Education                         972-2-588-2165
> School of Education                                   Fax:    [phone]
> The Hebrew University of Jerusalem        in US:  877-258-9406
> Jerusalem, ISRAEL 91905
> http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msgumpel/main.htm
> VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS!
>
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Eric Shen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 22 Jun 2000 09:39:40 -0700

Tom Worley wrote:
>
> Hi Eric,
>
> As I pointed out, WON's suggestion to use an 8% stop all the way
> up was made in much calmer (less volatile) times. I think there
> are very few, if any, major gainers of the past five years, maybe
> even past decade, where this might have worked unless you were
> also able to keep a close eye on the mkt and buy back in at the
> slightest hint of a reversal. And that's without even considering
> most of the internut dot coms, where an 8-10% trading range in a
> single day is perfectly normal and acceptable.
>
> Tom Worley
> [e-mail]
> chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>

Tom,

Since the market is more volatile, should we use a percentage
that is more relative to the avg. swings for the stock?  What
are your thoughts of looking at the Bollinger bands to determine
a stop point?  This way, the internut dot coms would have more
room to swing before one is stopped out.

Eric

--
Eric Shen        MS LOC3-8   / / /    Level One Communications
email: [e-mail]      | | |_/  an Intel company
Tel: [phone]          | |___/  9750 Goethe Road
               ext: 4497     |_____/  Sacramento, CA 95827

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Cash <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Netscape AND Norton Antivirus
Date: 22 Jun 2000 10:39:56 -0700


If you run Netscape and you use Symantec anti virus and you updated your
antivirus file between the 19th and 21st of June, you may be
experiencing frustrating problems with the communicator program.

Email loads very slowly (15sec+), deletions 30 seconds, program locks up
computer, mail to send being very slow.

It seems that Symantec downloaded a "problem" during this time window.
They posted a new antivirus update that I ran this morning that showed
NO virus isolation.  BUT------- as a result of running the scan, all the
problems disappeared and EVERYTHING is back to normal.

I have no information about this being a problem with other mail
programs.

Dan


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jeff Salisbury <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Netscape AND Norton Antivirus
Date: 22 Jun 2000 16:10:32 -0600

Dan Cash wrote:
>
> If you run Netscape and you use Symantec anti virus and you updated your
> antivirus file between the 19th and 21st of June, you may be
> experiencing frustrating problems with the communicator program.
>
> Email loads very slowly (15sec+), deletions 30 seconds, program locks up
> computer, mail to send being very slow.
>
> It seems that Symantec downloaded a "problem" during this time window.
> They posted a new antivirus update that I ran this morning that showed
> NO virus isolation.  BUT------- as a result of running the scan, all the
> problems disappeared and EVERYTHING is back to normal.
>
> I have no information about this being a problem with other mail
> programs.
>
> Dan
>
> -

I had the same problem!  As a result, I re-formatted and re-installed
everything today (what a waste of a day!).  I just re-installed netscape
and pulled up my email for the day and saw your message.  Oh, well...

Jeff

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] TQNT
Date: 22 Jun 2000 16:35:51 -0600

I purchased TQNT earlier this week on the breakout from the handle.  I was
stopped out today as it dipped below my stop.

At 11:42 AM 6/22/00 -0400, you wrote:
>
>Greetings.  I wonder what people think of TQNT.
>A couple of days ago IDB listed that stats as :
>TQNT 97 98 A.B
>
>They put in "." for the Sales,pm and ROE number, yet
>on yahoo these numbers seem reasonable (calculate-able).
>Anybody know what the "." means ?
>
>TQNT broke out a couple of days ago, but seems to be drifting
>down to its base again on lower volume which might
>present a buying opportunity.  However, I am not
>sure what to make of its base, it does not seem
>to be a cup and a handle, and certainly can not
>be a flat base given the big price differentials.
>What do people make of this ?
>
>Thanks,
>Oli
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] TQNT
Date: 22 Jun 2000 15:25:24 -0700 (PDT)

I think I am starting to see "Stockguru"s way.

Tom basically goes for companies that are small and have very few
institutional investor.

I noticed that on Tuesdays, IBD gives a sponsorship ranking.

Now I am going to find a stock that has

EPS of 95 or higher
RS rank higher than 80 but lower than EPS rank
AAA with sponsorship of C or lower
Stock has to be growth/tech stock

I am going to put that on paper and see how that performs

How easy is it to do it on DGO?


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Thu, 22 Jun 2000, Earl Setser wrote:

> I purchased TQNT earlier this week on the breakout from the handle.  I was
> stopped out today as it dipped below my stop.
>
> At 11:42 AM 6/22/00 -0400, you wrote:
> >
> >Greetings.  I wonder what people think of TQNT.
> >A couple of days ago IDB listed that stats as :
> >TQNT 97 98 A.B
> >
> >They put in "." for the Sales,pm and ROE number, yet
> >on yahoo these numbers seem reasonable (calculate-able).
> >Anybody know what the "." means ?
> >
> >TQNT broke out a couple of days ago, but seems to be drifting
> >down to its base again on lower volume which might
> >present a buying opportunity.  However, I am not
> >sure what to make of its base, it does not seem
> >to be a cup and a handle, and certainly can not
> >be a flat base given the big price differentials.
> >What do people make of this ?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Oli
> >
> >-
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Cash <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Netscape AND Norton Antivirus
Date: 22 Jun 2000 16:04:17 -0700

Sigh, Symantec seems slathered in irony.  Sorry I could not get the info out
sooner.

Dan

Jeff Salisbury wrote:

> Dan Cash wrote:
> >
> > If you run Netscape and you use Symantec anti virus and you updated your
> > antivirus file between the 19th and 21st of June, you may be
> > experiencing frustrating problems with the communicator program.
> >
> > Email loads very slowly (15sec+), deletions 30 seconds, program locks up
> > computer, mail to send being very slow.
> >
> > It seems that Symantec downloaded a "problem" during this time window.
> > They posted a new antivirus update that I ran this morning that showed
> > NO virus isolation.  BUT------- as a result of running the scan, all the
> > problems disappeared and EVERYTHING is back to normal.
> >
> > I have no information about this being a problem with other mail
> > programs.
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > -
>
> I had the same problem!  As a result, I re-formatted and re-installed
> everything today (what a waste of a day!).  I just re-installed netscape
> and pulled up my email for the day and saw your message.  Oh, well...
>
> Jeff
>
> -


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "david lawson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Chasing breakouts
Date: 22 Jun 2000 22:02:19 -0400

 Won say's 5% to 10% above pivot point. Not absolute 5%.

                                                            Ari

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2000 3:35 PM


> Anyone else continually get burned by the "don't chase breakouts" rule?
>
> I know and understand the rule not to chase breakouts more than 5% past
the
> pivot.  And I do follow this rule.  But so many times, those stocks turn
> around and launch a tremendous gain without ever looking back.
>
> The latest example from my watch list is TLCM which was also mentioned on
> this list yesterday. This morning TLCM came as low as 39 1/2.  The pivot
is
> 37 3/8 which means it should not be bought past 39 1/4.
>
> So the stock was not buyable today by a lousy 1/4 point.  It has since
> surged 5 points on tremendous volume. Now I'm kicking myself for not
> breaking the rule.  Assuming the market stays healthy I don't see this
stock
> coming back to the pivot any time soon.
>
> It seems that some of WON's hard and fast rules might benefit from some
> flexibility. For example, maybe the 5% rule can be broken in rare cases
> where the breakout is of very high quality. In TLCM's case the chart is a
> near perfect example of a cup-handle breakout.  If only the rule was 6%
for
> "quality" breakouts, I'd have some nice profits today.
>
> Instead I'll take WON's advice and simply write it off as (yet another)
> missed opportunity, and wait for others that will hopefully come...
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 8% loss and 25% profit
Date: 22 Jun 2000 22:37:05 -0400

Hi Pritish,

Yes, CANSLIM is about momentum investing. But it is also about
fundamentals, that is why RS is # 1, and EPS is # 2, and EPS
while weighted heavier over the latest two quarters (momentum of
earnings growth), it also factors in up to five years of earnings
growth.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2000 12:13 PM



Tom, You are right about the three concepts and that is what
CANSLIM tries
to do -- execpt it tells you how to do it with dicipline.

Profit/Loss has been discussed again and again and let me just
say it this
way.

7-8% loss requires 7-8% profit to make up for the loss --
period..... I
will let your logic figure out why more than 8% is bad.

20% profit is because a stock generally starts basing after 25%
rise in
price.

CANSLIM is about momentum investing. You want to use your money
and get a
profit/loss as soon as possible.

CANSLIM is *not* about day trading.


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Thu, 22 Jun 2000, Tom Gumpel wrote:

> I have to say that I've never been able to understand the logic
behind this
> 8%/loss- 25%/profit thing.
>
> These things have really to do with 3 concepts that every smart
investor
> should think about (constantly).
> acceptable risk
> support
> resistance
>
> The market cares not a whit if you set your stop at 8%. You are
irrelevant.
> All that matters is your tolerance for risk, support and
resistance.
> Sometimes stops will be tight, sometimes they're wide. But an
arbitrary
> percent? Why not 7.95?
>
> I recommend supplementing WON with other good reading see the
canslim faq:
> http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/WorkshopD.htm
>
>
> Tom (the other one)
>
> At 12:13 AM 21/6/00 -0400, Tom Worley wrote:
> >In an article many years old now (about 10), and published in
a
> >trade journal for brokers, WON took a much simpler approach.
> >Start with a hard (or mental) stop down 8% from your entry
point
> >(after first picking a correct entry as a stock broke out on
vol
> >from a well formed base). This is intended to protect against
> >major loss of capital. Ideally this stop would allow you to
hold
> >back to the bottom of this well formed base.  Once the stock
had
> >moved up 15% from your entry (no discussion on whether you
> >included brokerage fees in your cost basis), then move the
stop
> >to down 8% from the prior high closing.  At this point you
have
> >begun to protect profits. If the stock continued to move
higher,
> >then continue to adjust the stop so that it is always 8% below
> >the prior high closing.  Never adjust the stop down, if you
are
> >stopped out at this point, you still take away a profit.
> >
> >Course, this was back in the good ole days when a 1% move in a
> >major index really deserved to be headline news.
> >
> >Tom Worley
> >[e-mail]
> >chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> >get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
> >To: <[e-mail]>
> >Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 11:44 PM
> >Subject: RE: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
> >
> >
> >Here is my new sell approach.  Any comments, jeers, or others
are
> >welcome.
> >The idea is to start with a -8% stop and transition it to
a -15%
> >trailing
> >stop as the stock advances.  I've just started trying this,
and I
> >haven't
> >been chased out of anything based on these rules yet. These
are
> >based on
> >closing numbers:
> >
> >Closing High Hard Stop
> >After buy Buy-8%
> >Buy+2% Buy-7%
> >Buy+4% Buy-6%
> >Buy+6% Buy-5%
> >Buy+8% Buy-4%
> >Buy+10% Buy-3%
> >Buy+12% Buy-2%
> >Buy+14% Buy-1%
> >Buy+15% High-15%
> >or more
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >At 08:11 PM 6/20/00 -0500, you wrote:
> > >why not buy more and keep a tight trailing stop when it hits
10%
> >gain and
> > >more at 20% gain. Ride the hell out of a winner and
immediatly
> >drop a looser
> > >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: [e-mail]
> > >[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of chris
> >dempsey
> > >Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 7:34 PM
> > >To: [e-mail]
> > >Subject: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
> > >
> > >
> > >Just a reminder of a rule by WON on one of his tapes (I
don't
> >think it's in
> > >either book). To sell half of all positions getting to a 25%
> >gain.
> > >
> > >I have bought 27 positions since 5/24/00. Seven of these
have
> >hit the up 25%
> > >mark. Four were sold for no other reason than hitting 25%.
All
> >of which are
> > >still below where I sold them. Just luck I'm sure. Of the
other
> >three one is
> > >above , one at, and one below the 25% mark. I think this is
a
> >good rule to
> > >keep you in the money. However all of these stocks hit 25%
> >rather quickly
> > >which takes you to another rule that says you don't do
anything
> >with these
> > >positions for eight weeks for further gains. Two stocks were
> >sold at an 8%
> > >and change loss and three stocks were sold at small gains. I
> >think it was
> > >Earl that requested that I keep him posted. Selling is the
area
> >I need
> > >improving in and I am hoping this helps, only time will
tell.
> > >
> > >The seven to hit 25% were:
> > >
> > >RFMD
> > >ELNT
> > >FLEX
> > >NUHC
> > >TLGD
> > >TECH
> > >MEDI
> > >
> > >Which brings me to another question. Since I don't like hard
> >stops and use
> > >clothing values to see if the 7-8% rule has been broken, I
got
> >stuck with a
> > >couple of stock that broke this rule and then some while I
was
> >at a couple
> > >day seminar. Has anyone calculated a point where it is too
late
> >to sell, if
> > >all the reasons you bought the stock still exist including a
RS
> >of 80+?
> > >
> > >______________________________________________
> > >FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
> > >Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
> > >
> > >
> > >-
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >-
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >-
> >
> >
> >
> >-
>
>
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
-=-=-=-=
> Tom Gumpel
> Department of Special Education
972-2-588-2165
> School of Education                                   Fax:
972-2-588-2045
> The Hebrew University of Jerusalem        in US:  877-258-9406
> Jerusalem, ISRAEL 91905
> http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msgumpel/main.htm
> VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS!
>
>
> -
>
>


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 22 Jun 2000 22:33:41 -0400

Hi Eric,

I must agree with the point made by Tom Gumbel that rules about
8% stops and selling half positions once up 25% are arbitrary.
With regard to the 8% down selling rule, that was developed by
WON from experimentation. I have heard nothing different from him
in these far more volatile times.  I never did hear of a 25% up
sell half rule, tho he did and does preach selling at a 20% gain,
but this is directed to newcomers to CANSLIM in order to build
their profits and confidence that they know what they are doing.
I doubt that WON, or his staffers, use an arbitrary rule on
selling, they are expected to recognize more subtle signals
including distribution; follow thru; RS and other ranking
changes, etc.

Tom G made a good point when he reminds us that it has a lot to
do with our own personal situation.  If you are able and willing
to take greater risk, then you can buy prematurely, or use a
larger stop loss from your entry.  The beauty of CANSLIM, as I
see it, is that it is a "template" which we each customize to our
own tastes. I personally used Bollinger bands on my charting at
BigCharts for well over a year, without finding that it refined
my decision making at all. I got far more good out of MACD than
Bollinger bands.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2000 12:39 PM


Tom Worley wrote:
>
> Hi Eric,
>
> As I pointed out, WON's suggestion to use an 8% stop all the
way
> up was made in much calmer (less volatile) times. I think there
> are very few, if any, major gainers of the past five years,
maybe
> even past decade, where this might have worked unless you were
> also able to keep a close eye on the mkt and buy back in at the
> slightest hint of a reversal. And that's without even
considering
> most of the internut dot coms, where an 8-10% trading range in
a
> single day is perfectly normal and acceptable.
>
> Tom Worley
> [e-mail]
> chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>

Tom,

Since the market is more volatile, should we use a percentage
that is more relative to the avg. swings for the stock?  What
are your thoughts of looking at the Bollinger bands to determine
a stop point?  This way, the internut dot coms would have more
room to swing before one is stopped out.

Eric

--
Eric Shen        MS LOC3-8   / / /    Level One Communications
email: [e-mail]      | | |_/  an Intel company
Tel: [phone]          | |___/  9750 Goethe Road
               ext: 4497     |_____/  Sacramento, CA 95827

-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Forant <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] MENT
Date: 22 Jun 2000 22:44:26 -0400

HI: From what I can see from the chart, it looks like it made a good move
from the 52 week high. I understand a stock may rest a bit after a
breakout. I use the ClearStation.com charts, they seem to be easy for me to
read with plenty of other info options. Any better charting systems?

>From: Jim Carr <[e-mail]>
>Hi, folks.  Should take this opportunity to introduce myself to
>the group.  I'm relatively new to CANSLIM, but hope I'm slowly
>catching on.  Enjoy the daily education from this group.  Anyway,
>here's the newbie question.  Bought MENT early last week as it
>moved up.  However, since that time, it has gone virtually
>sideways on above average volume on all days but today.  Should I
>sit
>tight, or consider the breakout failed and eject.  Don't mind
>being patient if this action looks "normal", but if it's
>questionable,
>could put the capital to better use.  Any thoughts would be
>greatly appreciated.
>
>Thanks,
>Jim
>
>

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Alexander T <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] cansli[M]
Date: 22 Jun 2000 23:37:38 -0400 (EDT)

After commiting 100% of funds into stocks, I am now watching the M more
closesly.  I personally didn't like today's nasdaq action, which was
confirmed by one of my stocks (TLCM) retracing all of days gain on high
volume.

Is any one else concerned over June's M action?  While I considered recent
sideways movement on nasdaq to be healthy (adding the number of breakouts),
today's distribution day does shed some negative light.  I counted 4 NASDAQ
distributions days in june alone:

6/22
6/15
6/14 (volume slightly up)
6/12 (volume slightly up, but big NAZ drop)

Dow is not that much better
6/22
6/20
6/16
6/6

According to O'Neil that is enough to kill a raging bull.  I don't know how
much more tolerance a fresh bull market may have for such distribution days
over an older one, but these may indicate that professionals are selling.  I
would've liked to see a healthier price-volume action at this point.

I am very interested in hearing what the group and tomorrow's IBD would have
to say about this.  I personally have put a tight stop at DRAM (26 1/8 - top
of handle) and will watch for TLMC's action tomorrow, I see a simularity
between recent days and its last top.

Thanks,
Alex


______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] cansli[M]
Date: 22 Jun 2000 22:05:41 -0600

I am also concerned about today's action, clearly a D-Day in my mind.  It's
interesting that you are counting all those D-Days this month.  IBD has
been relatively silent about D-Days on the Nas for the last week or so.
I'll also look at tomorrow's Big Picture for their take on this.

As far as my take on M, I was stopped out of 2 of my 6 positions today
(TQNT and SDLI).  I took an 8% loss on TQNT, and held onto some of my gains
in SDLI.  I have hard stops on my other holdings also (MU, KEI, GLW, WAT),
but they all behaved relatively better today.  That is, they went down
less, and the drops were on lower volume than recent up days.  MU even
announced a nice surprise on earnings after the close, so maybe that will
help tomorrow (up a little in the after-hours).

I feel that my hard stops are exactly what I want in this kind of market,
and I'll look at tightening them some if Friday is ugly.  I guess I'll have
to see where we are after my golf is over.  :-)  Good luck all.



At 11:37 PM 6/22/00 -0400, you wrote:
>After commiting 100% of funds into stocks, I am now watching the M more
>closesly.  I personally didn't like today's nasdaq action, which was
>confirmed by one of my stocks (TLCM) retracing all of days gain on high
>volume.
>
>Is any one else concerned over June's M action?  While I considered recent
>sideways movement on nasdaq to be healthy (adding the number of breakouts),
>today's distribution day does shed some negative light.  I counted 4 NASDAQ
>distributions days in june alone:
>
>6/22
>6/15
>6/14 (volume slightly up)
>6/12 (volume slightly up, but big NAZ drop)
>
>Dow is not that much better
>6/22
>6/20
>6/16
>6/6
>
>According to O'Neil that is enough to kill a raging bull.  I don't know how
>much more tolerance a fresh bull market may have for such distribution days
>over an older one, but these may indicate that professionals are selling.  I
>would've liked to see a healthier price-volume action at this point.
>
>I am very interested in hearing what the group and tomorrow's IBD would have
>to say about this.  I personally have put a tight stop at DRAM (26 1/8 - top
>of handle) and will watch for TLMC's action tomorrow, I see a simularity
>between recent days and its last top.
>
>Thanks,
>Alex
>
>
>______________________________________________
>FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
>Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
>
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Gumpel <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 8% loss and 25% profit
Date: 23 Jun 2000 13:02:42 +0200



>7-8% loss requires 7-8% profit to make up for the loss -- period..... I
>will let your logic figure out why more than 8% is bad.

Actually, that's not correct.
If you start out with $1000 and lose 8%, you're down to $920.
To get back to $1000 you then need to go up about 8.7%.

Think of it this way: if you have $10 and you lose 33.33% you have $6.66.
To get back to $10 you need to increase your principal by 50%.

tom


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Rocky Sanghvi <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] cansli[M]
Date: 23 Jun 2000 08:52:07 -0400

What did IBD say on yesterday's action?  I didnt get my paper.  I have
noticed significant distribution on the Big Board but yesterday was the 1st
on the Nas, but with 5 days of ups - I am not that concerned....yet.  Invest
in the best only, if you're in.

Some TA say that we may see a triple bottom - either at 3400 or 3000 - very
quickly in the next 2 weeks and then its all clear.  Will see.

Rakesh



-----Original Message-----
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2000 12:06 AM


I am also concerned about today's action, clearly a D-Day in my mind.  It's
interesting that you are counting all those D-Days this month.  IBD has
been relatively silent about D-Days on the Nas for the last week or so.
I'll also look at tomorrow's Big Picture for their take on this.

As far as my take on M, I was stopped out of 2 of my 6 positions today
(TQNT and SDLI).  I took an 8% loss on TQNT, and held onto some of my gains
in SDLI.  I have hard stops on my other holdings also (MU, KEI, GLW, WAT),
but they all behaved relatively better today.  That is, they went down
less, and the drops were on lower volume than recent up days.  MU even
announced a nice surprise on earnings after the close, so maybe that will
help tomorrow (up a little in the after-hours).

I feel that my hard stops are exactly what I want in this kind of market,
and I'll look at tightening them some if Friday is ugly.  I guess I'll have
to see where we are after my golf is over.  :-)  Good luck all.



At 11:37 PM 6/22/00 -0400, you wrote:
>After commiting 100% of funds into stocks, I am now watching the M more
>closesly.  I personally didn't like today's nasdaq action, which was
>confirmed by one of my stocks (TLCM) retracing all of days gain on high
>volume.
>
>Is any one else concerned over June's M action?  While I considered recent
>sideways movement on nasdaq to be healthy (adding the number of breakouts),
>today's distribution day does shed some negative light.  I counted 4 NASDAQ
>distributions days in june alone:
>
>6/22
>6/15
>6/14 (volume slightly up)
>6/12 (volume slightly up, but big NAZ drop)
>
>Dow is not that much better
>6/22
>6/20
>6/16
>6/6
>
>According to O'Neil that is enough to kill a raging bull.  I don't know how
>much more tolerance a fresh bull market may have for such distribution days
>over an older one, but these may indicate that professionals are selling.
I
>would've liked to see a healthier price-volume action at this point.
>
>I am very interested in hearing what the group and tomorrow's IBD would
have
>to say about this.  I personally have put a tight stop at DRAM (26 1/8 -
top
>of handle) and will watch for TLMC's action tomorrow, I see a simularity
>between recent days and its last top.
>
>Thanks,
>Alex
>
>
>______________________________________________
>FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
>Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
>
>
>-
>
>
>


-

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "walter nusbaum" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] cansli[M]
Date: 23 Jun 2000 08:40:46 -0500

From IBD 6/23: "The heaviest selling since the NASDAQ hit bottom swept over
the market on Thursday.......It was the first instance of professional
selling in the past six sessions.....But with NYSE volume rising slightly,
they logged their third day of distribution in the past five sessions......
Stick to your rules and cut losses quickly.....Keep an eye on margin
levels".

FWIW, I see distribution on the NASDAQ on:
5/31
6/6
6/12
6/14
6/20(Slight increase on above average volume)
6/22

On the NYSE I see seven days of distribution beginning on 31 May. A couple
of these days could go either way, as I am "eyeballing" volume,
and calling 6/14 a DD due to the paucity of increase on above average
volume. But whatever,
I'm lightening up today.
Best wishes,
Walt


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2000 7:52 AM


> What did IBD say on yesterday's action?  I didnt get my paper.  I have
> noticed significant distribution on the Big Board but yesterday was the
1st
> on the Nas, but with 5 days of ups - I am not that concerned....yet.
Invest
> in the best only, if you're in.
>
> Some TA say that we may see a triple bottom - either at 3400 or 3000 -
very
> quickly in the next 2 weeks and then its all clear.  Will see.
>
> Rakesh
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Earl Setser [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Friday, June 23, 2000 12:06 AM
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] cansli[M]
>
>
> I am also concerned about today's action, clearly a D-Day in my mind.
It's
> interesting that you are counting all those D-Days this month.  IBD has
> been relatively silent about D-Days on the Nas for the last week or so.
> I'll also look at tomorrow's Big Picture for their take on this.
>
> As far as my take on M, I was stopped out of 2 of my 6 positions today
> (TQNT and SDLI).  I took an 8% loss on TQNT, and held onto some of my
gains
> in SDLI.  I have hard stops on my other holdings also (MU, KEI, GLW, WAT),
> but they all behaved relatively better today.  That is, they went down
> less, and the drops were on lower volume than recent up days.  MU even
> announced a nice surprise on earnings after the close, so maybe that will
> help tomorrow (up a little in the after-hours).
>
> I feel that my hard stops are exactly what I want in this kind of market,
> and I'll look at tightening them some if Friday is ugly.  I guess I'll
have
> to see where we are after my golf is over.  :-)  Good luck all.
>
>
>
> At 11:37 PM 6/22/00 -0400, you wrote:
> >After commiting 100% of funds into stocks, I am now watching the M more
> >closesly.  I personally didn't like today's nasdaq action, which was
> >confirmed by one of my stocks (TLCM) retracing all of days gain on high
> >volume.
> >
> >Is any one else concerned over June's M action?  While I considered
recent
> >sideways movement on nasdaq to be healthy (adding the number of
breakouts),
> >today's distribution day does shed some negative light.  I counted 4
NASDAQ
> >distributions days in june alone:
> >
> >6/22
> >6/15
> >6/14 (volume slightly up)
> >6/12 (volume slightly up, but big NAZ drop)
> >
> >Dow is not that much better
> >6/22
> >6/20
> >6/16
> >6/6
> >
> >According to O'Neil that is enough to kill a raging bull.  I don't know
how
> >much more tolerance a fresh bull market may have for such distribution
days
> >over an older one, but these may indicate that professionals are selling.
> I
> >would've liked to see a healthier price-volume action at this point.
> >
> >I am very interested in hearing what the group and tomorrow's IBD would
> have
> >to say about this.  I personally have put a tight stop at DRAM (26 1/8 -
> top
> >of handle) and will watch for TLMC's action tomorrow, I see a simularity
> >between recent days and its last top.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Alex




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] cansli[M]
Date: 23 Jun 2000 08:27:52 -0600

Hmm, that's interesting.  I didn't get my paper this morning either!!???
I'm in the Salt Lake City area, and I know that when I miss it, it doesn't
come to work either, so it seems it's an IBD issue.  I'm keeping a record
of how many days I miss it (generally it's 1 day late) and I'm gonna ask
for an extension for those days.  At times, it once a week or so, but maybe
twice a month on average.  Still, twice a month is about 10% of the time,
so it's worth making a stink over.

At 08:52 AM 6/23/00 -0400, you wrote:
>What did IBD say on yesterday's action?  I didnt get my paper.  I have
>noticed significant distribution on the Big Board but yesterday was the 1st
>on the Nas, but with 5 days of ups - I am not that concerned....yet.  Invest
>in the best only, if you're in.
>
>Some TA say that we may see a triple bottom - either at 3400 or 3000 - very
>quickly in the next 2 weeks and then its all clear.  Will see.
>
>Rakesh
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Earl Setser [mailto:[e-mail]]
>Sent: Friday, June 23, 2000 12:06 AM
>To: [e-mail]
>Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] cansli[M]
>
>
>I am also concerned about today's action, clearly a D-Day in my mind.  It's
>interesting that you are counting all those D-Days this month.  IBD has
>been relatively silent about D-Days on the Nas for the last week or so.
>I'll also look at tomorrow's Big Picture for their take on this.
>
>As far as my take on M, I was stopped out of 2 of my 6 positions today
>(TQNT and SDLI).  I took an 8% loss on TQNT, and held onto some of my gains
>in SDLI.  I have hard stops on my other holdings also (MU, KEI, GLW, WAT),
>but they all behaved relatively better today.  That is, they went down
>less, and the drops were on lower volume than recent up days.  MU even
>announced a nice surprise on earnings after the close, so maybe that will
>help tomorrow (up a little in the after-hours).
>
>I feel that my hard stops are exactly what I want in this kind of market,
>and I'll look at tightening them some if Friday is ugly.  I guess I'll have
>to see where we are after my golf is over.  :-)  Good luck all.
>
>
>
>At 11:37 PM 6/22/00 -0400, you wrote:
>>After commiting 100% of funds into stocks, I am now watching the M more
>>closesly.  I personally didn't like today's nasdaq action, which was
>>confirmed by one of my stocks (TLCM) retracing all of days gain on high
>>volume.
>>
>>Is any one else concerned over June's M action?  While I considered recent
>>sideways movement on nasdaq to be healthy (adding the number of breakouts),
>>today's distribution day does shed some negative light.  I counted 4 NASDAQ
>>distributions days in june alone:
>>
>>6/22
>>6/15
>>6/14 (volume slightly up)
>>6/12 (volume slightly up, but big NAZ drop)
>>
>>Dow is not that much better
>>6/22
>>6/20
>>6/16
>>6/6
>>
>>According to O'Neil that is enough to kill a raging bull.  I don't know how
>>much more tolerance a fresh bull market may have for such distribution days
>>over an older one, but these may indicate that professionals are selling.
>I
>>would've liked to see a healthier price-volume action at this point.
>>
>>I am very interested in hearing what the group and tomorrow's IBD would
>have
>>to say about this.  I personally have put a tight stop at DRAM (26 1/8 -
>top
>>of handle) and will watch for TLMC's action tomorrow, I see a simularity
>>between recent days and its last top.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Alex
>>
>>
>>______________________________________________
>>FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
>>Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
>>
>>
>>-
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>-
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chris dempsey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re:[CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 23 Jun 2000 10:28:21 -0400 (EDT)

Thanks everyone for all the great discussion on selling =BD of all position=
s
that reach 25%. This is really great, I hope it continues. I've tried to
stir up the conversation before and it hasn't gotten as far as this before.

My interpretation of this rule is to sell (on average) every other (entire)
position that I was fortunate enough to own when it reaches a 25% gain. Not
half of each position. I heard this on one of his tapes I recently
relistened to. I don't believe I ever read this in his books.

I believe that WON states that you must nail down some profits. In WON's 24
lessons book WON also talks about equal dollar positions, (which is the onl=
y
way that I have gotten this CANSLIM to work for me).

A 25% gain wipes out three 7-8% losses. I'm sure that everyone in this grou=
p
understands how a 20% loss completely wipes out a 25% gain.

I believe there is a lot of logic with a 7-8% loss - 25% profit thing. It i=
s
extremely important to not ride losses. They are very damaging. Once a stoc=
k
starts to go down no one knows where it is going to stop. WON states that
good stocks meeting all the criteria we impose can go down 20 to 30%. It is
also important to put money in your pocket. Just like the market could care
less who we are, we should not have a favorite stock. (Ok, I do have one
favorite stock but one day in the future I will never have a favorite
again.)

As for stops I have never gotten them to work well for me. Lets look at a
recent example. I bought NUHC on 6/14 for $22. I sold it on 6/19 for $28
1/8. I sold it for the sole reason that it hit 25%. Why did I pick this one=
?
Because from past experience stocks under $30 seem to fall on their face
faster than stocks over $30. Had I have used stops on this stock what would
have happened? On 6/19 it traded as high as $28 =BD a 15% trailing stop wou=
ld
have taken me out $24 =BC. Very early on 6/20 it traded for $30 =BC. I woul=
d not
have been able to adjust a trailing stop, although if someone could have
they would have been stopped out at $25 11/16. If a stop had not been used
and the stock had not been sold, then WON's rule of never take a loss after
being up 20% would have kicked in somewhere above $22. The stock hit 22 1/8
on 6/20. WON also states not to rebuy a position for the sole reason that i=
t
went down. I've been there, I have done all of the above. I'm trying to
learn from my mistakes. The bottom line is I'm trying to make money. I like
WON's baseball examples. A great ball player hits less than .500. So do I.
I'm making a lot of mistakes and trying to do better. I'd like to hear othe=
r
comments on the above. What can be done to improve our ability to make
money?

I'm surprised that it does not appear that many people in this group have a
goal to shoot for. Let me make a suggestion. Take a spread sheet and enter
the amount of money that is in your account. Copy it down six times. In the
next column put the numbers 18,26,36,42,57.7,101. Use these numbers for the
projected % increase in your account each year. Then take it out 11 years.
It is incredible (let me say this again INCREDIBLE) the difference between
each step in year 11.

I have made my goal 42% each year. I believe that it is a realistic goal
with some hard work. I have been spending about four hours per day on this.
Two before work, one during my lunch hour, and one after work. And probably
four on the weekends. The reason that I picked the above six numbers were:
18 average market gain over the past many years
26 double money in three years
36 double the market averages
42 double money in two years
57.7 the 11 year average of the Texas twins as advertised in IBD
101 the 5 year average of David Ryan winning the US investment championship=
s


I hope this helps many people and keeps the discussion flowing.


______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=3Dsignup


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] cansli[M]
Date: 23 Jun 2000 07:36:06 -0700

Morning Earl,

I'm in the Phoenix area and I didn't get my paper either.

Ziggy

Earl Setser wrote:

> Hmm, that's interesting.  I didn't get my paper this morning either!!???
> I'm in the Salt Lake City area, and I know that when I miss it, it doesn't
> come to work either, so it seems it's an IBD issue.  I'm keeping a record
> of how many days I miss it (generally it's 1 day late) and I'm gonna ask
> for an extension for those days.  At times, it once a week or so, but maybe
> twice a month on average.  Still, twice a month is about 10% of the time,
> so it's worth making a stink over.
>
> At 08:52 AM 6/23/00 -0400, you wrote:
> >What did IBD say on yesterday's action?  I didnt get my paper.  I have
> >noticed significant distribution on the Big Board but yesterday was the 1st
> >on the Nas, but with 5 days of ups - I am not that concerned....yet.  Invest
> >in the best only, if you're in.
> >
> >Some TA say that we may see a triple bottom - either at 3400 or 3000 - very
> >quickly in the next 2 weeks and then its all clear.  Will see.
> >
> >Rakesh
> >
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Earl Setser [mailto:[e-mail]]
> >Sent: Friday, June 23, 2000 12:06 AM
> >To: [e-mail]
> >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] cansli[M]
> >
> >
> >I am also concerned about today's action, clearly a D-Day in my mind.  It's
> >interesting that you are counting all those D-Days this month.  IBD has
> >been relatively silent about D-Days on the Nas for the last week or so.
> >I'll also look at tomorrow's Big Picture for their take on this.
> >
> >As far as my take on M, I was stopped out of 2 of my 6 positions today
> >(TQNT and SDLI).  I took an 8% loss on TQNT, and held onto some of my gains
> >in SDLI.  I have hard stops on my other holdings also (MU, KEI, GLW, WAT),
> >but they all behaved relatively better today.  That is, they went down
> >less, and the drops were on lower volume than recent up days.  MU even
> >announced a nice surprise on earnings after the close, so maybe that will
> >help tomorrow (up a little in the after-hours).
> >
> >I feel that my hard stops are exactly what I want in this kind of market,
> >and I'll look at tightening them some if Friday is ugly.  I guess I'll have
> >to see where we are after my golf is over.  :-)  Good luck all.
> >
> >
> >
> >At 11:37 PM 6/22/00 -0400, you wrote:
> >>After commiting 100% of funds into stocks, I am now watching the M more
> >>closesly.  I personally didn't like today's nasdaq action, which was
> >>confirmed by one of my stocks (TLCM) retracing all of days gain on high
> >>volume.
> >>
> >>Is any one else concerned over June's M action?  While I considered recent
> >>sideways movement on nasdaq to be healthy (adding the number of breakouts),
> >>today's distribution day does shed some negative light.  I counted 4 NASDAQ
> >>distributions days in june alone:
> >>
> >>6/22
> >>6/15
> >>6/14 (volume slightly up)
> >>6/12 (volume slightly up, but big NAZ drop)
> >>
> >>Dow is not that much better
> >>6/22
> >>6/20
> >>6/16
> >>6/6
> >>
> >>According to O'Neil that is enough to kill a raging bull.  I don't know how
> >>much more tolerance a fresh bull market may have for such distribution days
> >>over an older one, but these may indicate that professionals are selling.
> >I
> >>would've liked to see a healthier price-volume action at this point.
> >>
> >>I am very interested in hearing what the group and tomorrow's IBD would
> >have
> >>to say about this.  I personally have put a tight stop at DRAM (26 1/8 -
> >top
> >>of handle) and will watch for TLMC's action tomorrow, I see a simularity
> >>between recent days and its last top.
> >>
> >>Thanks,
> >>Alex
> >>
> >>
> >>______________________________________________
> >>FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
> >>Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
> >>
> >>
> >>-
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >-
> >
> >-
> >
> >
> >
>
> -


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] M
Date: 23 Jun 2000 08:37:36 -0600

More bad action this morning on the NAS isn't what we wanted to see.  I've
been knocked out of another position (KEI) after it plummeted early.  It
will be interesting to see if it and or the NASDAQ recovers later in the
day.  I'm down to 50% invested, and I am considering tightening my stops a
bit more on one or two positions.  I'm not sure yet.  It may be that this
little rally of ours is going to end right here!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] cansli[M]
Date: 23 Jun 2000 08:42:49 -0600

Good morning Ziggy,

I have been guessing that they print these papers somewhere in the West
(Denver maybe?) and then fly them to the other cities with local delivery.
A friend who used to deliver the local paper said they had one customer who
also got IBD, and they hated that it was not consistly at the paper-drop
when they got their main paper.  Maybe Phoenix and Salt Lake both are
supplied by the same printer, and that was the problem today.  I have been
missing (actually one day late) about once every 2 weeks until lately (and
it has been better lately, since May or so).  Do you miss about the same
number of issues?



At 07:36 AM 6/23/00 -0700, you wrote:
>Morning Earl,
>
>I'm in the Phoenix area and I didn't get my paper either.
>
>Ziggy
>



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re:[CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 23 Jun 2000 08:52:15 -0600

I've been playing with a twist on this 25% rule.  My idea was to lock in
gains at 25% increments by placing tight stops.  The plan was as follows:

Stock up 25%, place a stop at 20%
Stock up 50%, place a stop at 40%
Stock up 75%, place a stop at 60%
etc.

I have considered this, but I haven't really tried it.  My idea was to lock
in 80% of the gains, but hang on for further gains.  With this approach,
you would need 1 of 3 stocks to go to +40% or better to match the gains of
just selling.

The real problem I have with the 25% rule, is that WON says to hang onto
stocks that make the 25% in just a few weeks for at least 8 weeks for
larger gains.  I think that covers every stocks I've bought that went up
25%.  I haven't seen a lot of stocks that stumbled around for 6-8 weeks or
more and then went up.  I'm not sure I have the patience in this kind of
market for those.  I'm more likely to sell one and pick up some other tech
high flyer instead.



At 10:28 AM 6/23/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Thanks everyone for all the great discussion on selling =BD of all=
 positions
>that reach 25%. This is really great, I hope it continues. I've tried to
>stir up the conversation before and it hasn't gotten as far as this before.
>
>My interpretation of this rule is to sell (on average) every other (entire)
>position that I was fortunate enough to own when it reaches a 25% gain. Not
>half of each position. I heard this on one of his tapes I recently
>relistened to. I don't believe I ever read this in his books.
>
>I believe that WON states that you must nail down some profits. In WON's 24
>lessons book WON also talks about equal dollar positions, (which is the=
 only
>way that I have gotten this CANSLIM to work for me).
>
>A 25% gain wipes out three 7-8% losses. I'm sure that everyone in this=
 group
>understands how a 20% loss completely wipes out a 25% gain.
>
>I believe there is a lot of logic with a 7-8% loss - 25% profit thing. It=
 is
>extremely important to not ride losses. They are very damaging. Once a=
 stock
>starts to go down no one knows where it is going to stop. WON states that
>good stocks meeting all the criteria we impose can go down 20 to 30%. It is
>also important to put money in your pocket. Just like the market could care
>less who we are, we should not have a favorite stock. (Ok, I do have one
>favorite stock but one day in the future I will never have a favorite
>again.)
>
>As for stops I have never gotten them to work well for me. Lets look at a
>recent example. I bought NUHC on 6/14 for $22. I sold it on 6/19 for $28
>1/8. I sold it for the sole reason that it hit 25%. Why did I pick this=
 one?
>Because from past experience stocks under $30 seem to fall on their face
>faster than stocks over $30. Had I have used stops on this stock what would
>have happened? On 6/19 it traded as high as $28 =BD a 15% trailing stop=
 would
>have taken me out $24 =BC. Very early on 6/20 it traded for $30 =BC. I=
 would not
>have been able to adjust a trailing stop, although if someone could have
>they would have been stopped out at $25 11/16. If a stop had not been used
>and the stock had not been sold, then WON's rule of never take a loss after
>being up 20% would have kicked in somewhere above $22. The stock hit 22 1/8
>on 6/20. WON also states not to rebuy a position for the sole reason that=
 it
>went down. I've been there, I have done all of the above. I'm trying to
>learn from my mistakes. The bottom line is I'm trying to make money. I like
>WON's baseball examples. A great ball player hits less than .500. So do I.
>I'm making a lot of mistakes and trying to do better. I'd like to hear=
 other
>comments on the above. What can be done to improve our ability to make
>money?
>
>I'm surprised that it does not appear that many people in this group have a
>goal to shoot for. Let me make a suggestion. Take a spread sheet and enter
>the amount of money that is in your account. Copy it down six times. In the
>next column put the numbers 18,26,36,42,57.7,101. Use these numbers for the
>projected % increase in your account each year. Then take it out 11 years.
>It is incredible (let me say this again INCREDIBLE) the difference between
>each step in year 11.
>
>I have made my goal 42% each year. I believe that it is a realistic goal
>with some hard work. I have been spending about four hours per day on this.
>Two before work, one during my lunch hour, and one after work. And probably
>four on the weekends. The reason that I picked the above six numbers were:
>18 average market gain over the past many years
>26 double money in three years
>36 double the market averages
>42 double money in two years
>57.7 the 11 year average of the Texas twins as advertised in IBD
>101 the 5 year average of David Ryan winning the US investment=
 championships
>
>
>I hope this helps many people and keeps the discussion flowing.
>
>
>______________________________________________
>FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
>Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=3Dsignup
>
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] cansli[M]
Date: 23 Jun 2000 10:44:10 -0400

Hi all:

I'm a newbie lurker, newbie CANSLIM guy (just got on the list a few days
ago).  Don't have time right now for an intro.

Just wanted to say I live in the Boston area and for what it's worth, I DID
RECEIVE my IBD this morning.

This is a great list.  I hope to contribute in the future,  Sure hope the
market improves today.

- Stuart
---------------------- Forwarded by Stuart Clemons/CAM/Lotus on 06/23/2000
10:56 AM ---------------------------


Earl Setser <[e-mail]>@lists.xmission.com on 06/23/2000
10:42:49 AM

Please respond to [e-mail]

Sent by:  [e-mail]


cc:    (bcc: Stuart Clemons/CAM/Lotus)


Good morning Ziggy,

I have been guessing that they print these papers somewhere in the West
(Denver maybe?) and then fly them to the other cities with local delivery.
A friend who used to deliver the local paper said they had one customer who
also got IBD, and they hated that it was not consistly at the paper-drop
when they got their main paper.  Maybe Phoenix and Salt Lake both are
supplied by the same printer, and that was the problem today.  I have been
missing (actually one day late) about once every 2 weeks until lately (and
it has been better lately, since May or so).  Do you miss about the same
number of issues?



At 07:36 AM 6/23/00 -0700, you wrote:
>Morning Earl,
>
>I'm in the Phoenix area and I didn't get my paper either.
>
>Ziggy
>



-




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "walter nusbaum" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] cansli[M]
Date: 23 Jun 2000 09:52:01 -0500

Earl & Ziggy,
I'm in the Dallas area, and fail to get IBD maybe once/mo. When I call,
[phone], they always extend the subscription one day, regardless
whether the paper is ultimately delivered. Nice gesture, but I'd rather have
the paper on time.
Best wishes,
Walt

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2000 9:36 AM


> Morning Earl,
>
> I'm in the Phoenix area and I didn't get my paper either.
>
> Ziggy
>
> Earl Setser wrote:
>
> > Hmm, that's interesting.  I didn't get my paper this morning either!!???
> > I'm in the Salt Lake City area, and I know that when I miss it, it
doesn't
> > come to work either, so it seems it's an IBD issue.  I'm keeping a
record
> > of how many days I miss it (generally it's 1 day late) and I'm gonna ask
> > for an extension for those days.  At times, it once a week or so, but
maybe
> > twice a month on average.  Still, twice a month is about 10% of the
time,
> > so it's worth making a stink over.
> >
(SNIP)




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dave Cameron <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re:[CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 23 Jun 2000 08:08:21 -0700 (PDT)

Chris Dempsey posts:

> My interpretation of this rule is to sell (on average)
> every other (entire)
> position that I was fortunate enough to own when it
> reaches a 25% gain. Not
> half of each position. I heard this on one of his tapes I
> recently
> relistened to. I don't believe I ever read this in his
> books.
>

Agreed... I heard it on the tape; haven't seen it in print.
 Although I may have just missed it.

> A 25% gain wipes out three 7-8% losses. I'm sure that
> everyone in this group
> understands how a 20% loss completely wipes out a 25%
> gain.
>
> I believe there is a lot of logic with a 7-8% loss - 25%
> profit thing. It is
> extremely important to not ride losses.

Chris, the only point I would add to this is something I've
realized (and maybe others do as well) is that I tend to
reach 8% losses much faster than 25% gains.   Typically, if
a stock goes against me, I have an 8% loss from the buy
point in a week on average.   But, to get a 25% gain takes
several months on average.

So... what does this mean?   I'd typically hold my winners
about 4 months, and my losers about one week.   Let's look
at what the time factor does:

(Assume a 50% success rate):

Start with $40,000:
    Week #1:  Buy 4 stocks  (A,B,C,D)- $10,000 worth
              of each.
    Week #2:  2 stocks (A,B) get stopped out at losses.
              Net cash is now $18400 (with the remainder
              still invested).   Buy 2 new ones at
              $9200 (E,F) each.
    Week #3:  1 stock gets stopped out (E).  Net cash is
              now $8500 - with the rest still invested.
              Buy a new stock (G) with proceeds to replace.
    Week #4:  50-50 chance of getting stopped out, I'll
              give me the benefit of the doubt....
    Stay put until week #17
    Week #17. First stock (C) gets cashed at a 25% gain.
              Net cash:  $12500    Buy a new one (H) with
              the proceeds.
    Week #18. Since we had a 50-50 chance on the stock
              bought on week #17 (H), and we gave ourselves
              the win on the week #4 scenario (G), we give
              a loss on this one.  So... we cash out (H)
              at $11,000.     Let's also say that
              the other stock from week #1 hit its
              25% gain (D).  Sell (D)at $12,500.
              Net result:   we now have $23,500 in cash
              - and 2 stocks (F,G) with money stilli
              invested.   So... we buy $11,750 of each
              of 2 new stocks (I,J).
   Week #19.  Keeping the 50-50 rule, J gets cashed out
              at an 8% loss - say $10,700.  In addition,
              we're due for our 25% gain on F - nets
              us $11,500.   New total:  $22,200 to
              invest in 2 stocks (K,L) at $11,100 each.
   Week #20.  Keeping the 50-50 rule, K takes a loss -
              now at $10,300.   In addition, G is due
              for its 25% gain:  $10,600.   So - we
              have $20,900 in cash to invest - and
              the rest remains in I and L.   So... we
              invest $10,450 in M and N.
   Week #21.  Keeping our 50-50 rule, we cash out M
              at $9700 or so.   N continues on...
              So - now we have $9700 in cash.  We own
              3 stocks, I,L,N.    We buy stock P for
              $9700 - and we get the lucky side of
              the 50-50 split.
   Week #26.  Half way through the year assessment:
              4 stocks (assuming all are on way to
              25% gain):
              I:  Worth about $12,400
              L:  Worth about $11,400
              N:  Worth about $10,600
              P:  Worth about $ 9,900
              Total:  44,300

So, we'd end up with roughly a 10% gain (taking $300 out
for commissions) in 6 months by assuming a 50-50 track
record whereby a loss is 8% and a gain is 25%.   This would
net out to 21% in a year.

Not bad - but not as high as people seem to intuitively
think it would be.

Cheers,

Dave Cameron


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dave Cameron <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Getting the paper
Date: 23 Jun 2000 08:12:53 -0700 (PDT)

When I lived in Chicago, I ALWAYS got IBD - on time, no
problem.   I figured it was the big city effect.   Actually
there were a couple days I didn't get it - but that was
only because the same guy that delivered IBD also delivered
the Chicago Tribune (morning paper there), so I'd get a
copy of the Tribune and one of my neighbors would get my
IBD...

3 months ago, I moved to a more rural area, although not
too far from Baltimore.   Anyway, I've failed to receive
the paper about 6 times.   My experience has been like
Earl's.   I just call 800-831-2525, and they credit me with
a day.   Not ideal, but considering the convenience vs.
cost - worth the small lapses.

Oh yes, I did get the paper today - before I left at 6:45
AM.


Dave Cameron


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Gumpel <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 8% loss and 25% profit
Date: 23 Jun 2000 10:57:57 +0200

Shah,
I'd answer your letter thusly:
1) prices are most likely to come to a rest, either moving upwards or
downwards, as they approach support or resistance. Any successful investor
needs to understand those two concepts. The 8% rule, while derived from
past experience, is only an arbitrary number - a general rule of thumb, if
you will. However, sometimes support will be greater than 8%, sometimes
less. On the other hand, if you have a low tolerance for risk, be
conservative. Remember, the market doesn't know where you entered, or where
you will exit. All it knows is from the combined  psychology of all the
other shmoes out there. And all they are interested in is breaking even (at
least). That's the basic rule of supply and demand.

2) It may be that prices often base at 25%. I don't really care one way or
the other; all I really care about is that MY stocks DON'T base, that they
keep moving beyond 25%. To help them on their merry way, I'll allow them
upward movement, but restrict their downward movements. Why cashier on
something at exactly 25%? Again, how does the market know where you
entered? If the stock has overhead supply - watch out and you'll probably
see that it will slow down as people try to break even. On the other hand,
if you are in new territory (higher highs and higher lows), and there's
nobody that needs to break even, why not try the pot 'o gold? As you
correctly state, this is a momentum strategy, so why not let momentum do
its thing?

Horizontal movement is ok, as long as it's not trending down. You then, at
least, have the ability to move upwards, with limited risk (via stops).

As an example, look at pccc or tlgd. It would have been easy to take
profits at 25%, but I'm now at 95% and 90%, respectively.

Just my 2/100. This is a good thread.

tom

At 09:13 AM 22/6/00 -0700, Pritish Shah wrote:

>Tom, You are right about the three concepts and that is what CANSLIM tries
>to do -- execpt it tells you how to do it with dicipline.
>
>Profit/Loss has been discussed again and again and let me just say it this
>way.
>
>7-8% loss requires 7-8% profit to make up for the loss -- period..... I
>will let your logic figure out why more than 8% is bad.
>
>20% profit is because a stock generally starts basing after 25% rise in
>price.
>
>CANSLIM is about momentum investing. You want to use your money and get a
>profit/loss as soon as possible.
>
>CANSLIM is *not* about day trading.
>
>
>Regards,
>Shah
>408-525-4263
>
>
>On Thu, 22 Jun 2000, Tom Gumpel wrote:
>
> > I have to say that I've never been able to understand the logic behind this
> > 8%/loss- 25%/profit thing.
> >
> > These things have really to do with 3 concepts that every smart investor
> > should think about (constantly).
> > acceptable risk
> > support
> > resistance
> >
> > The market cares not a whit if you set your stop at 8%. You are irrelevant.
> > All that matters is your tolerance for risk, support and resistance.
> > Sometimes stops will be tight, sometimes they're wide. But an arbitrary
> > percent? Why not 7.95?
> >
> > I recommend supplementing WON with other good reading see the canslim faq:
> > http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/WorkshopD.htm
> >
> >
> > Tom (the other one)
> >
> > At 12:13 AM 21/6/00 -0400, Tom Worley wrote:
> > >In an article many years old now (about 10), and published in a
> > >trade journal for brokers, WON took a much simpler approach.
> > >Start with a hard (or mental) stop down 8% from your entry point
> > >(after first picking a correct entry as a stock broke out on vol
> > >from a well formed base). This is intended to protect against
> > >major loss of capital. Ideally this stop would allow you to hold
> > >back to the bottom of this well formed base.  Once the stock had
> > >moved up 15% from your entry (no discussion on whether you
> > >included brokerage fees in your cost basis), then move the stop
> > >to down 8% from the prior high closing.  At this point you have
> > >begun to protect profits. If the stock continued to move higher,
> > >then continue to adjust the stop so that it is always 8% below
> > >the prior high closing.  Never adjust the stop down, if you are
> > >stopped out at this point, you still take away a profit.
> > >
> > >Course, this was back in the good ole days when a 1% move in a
> > >major index really deserved to be headline news.
> > >
> > >Tom Worley
> > >[e-mail]
> > >chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
> > >get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
> > >
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
> > >To: <[e-mail]>
> > >Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 11:44 PM
> > >Subject: RE: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
> > >
> > >
> > >Here is my new sell approach.  Any comments, jeers, or others are
> > >welcome.
> > >The idea is to start with a -8% stop and transition it to a -15%
> > >trailing
> > >stop as the stock advances.  I've just started trying this, and I
> > >haven't
> > >been chased out of anything based on these rules yet. These are
> > >based on
> > >closing numbers:
> > >
> > >Closing High Hard Stop
> > >After buy Buy-8%
> > >Buy+2% Buy-7%
> > >Buy+4% Buy-6%
> > >Buy+6% Buy-5%
> > >Buy+8% Buy-4%
> > >Buy+10% Buy-3%
> > >Buy+12% Buy-2%
> > >Buy+14% Buy-1%
> > >Buy+15% High-15%
> > >or more
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >At 08:11 PM 6/20/00 -0500, you wrote:
> > > >why not buy more and keep a tight trailing stop when it hits 10%
> > >gain and
> > > >more at 20% gain. Ride the hell out of a winner and immediatly
> > >drop a looser
> > > >
> > > >-----Original Message-----
> > > >From: [e-mail]
> > > >[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of chris
> > >dempsey
> > > >Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 7:34 PM
> > > >To: [e-mail]
> > > >Subject: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Just a reminder of a rule by WON on one of his tapes (I don't
> > >think it's in
> > > >either book). To sell half of all positions getting to a 25%
> > >gain.
> > > >
> > > >I have bought 27 positions since 5/24/00. Seven of these have
> > >hit the up 25%
> > > >mark. Four were sold for no other reason than hitting 25%. All
> > >of which are
> > > >still below where I sold them. Just luck I'm sure. Of the other
> > >three one is
> > > >above , one at, and one below the 25% mark. I think this is a
> > >good rule to
> > > >keep you in the money. However all of these stocks hit 25%
> > >rather quickly
> > > >which takes you to another rule that says you don't do anything
> > >with these
> > > >positions for eight weeks for further gains. Two stocks were
> > >sold at an 8%
> > > >and change loss and three stocks were sold at small gains. I
> > >think it was
> > > >Earl that requested that I keep him posted. Selling is the area
> > >I need
> > > >improving in and I am hoping this helps, only time will tell.
> > > >
> > > >The seven to hit 25% were:
> > > >
> > > >RFMD
> > > >ELNT
> > > >FLEX
> > > >NUHC
> > > >TLGD
> > > >TECH
> > > >MEDI
> > > >
> > > >Which brings me to another question. Since I don't like hard
> > >stops and use
> > > >clothing values to see if the 7-8% rule has been broken, I got
> > >stuck with a
> > > >couple of stock that broke this rule and then some while I was
> > >at a couple
> > > >day seminar. Has anyone calculated a point where it is too late
> > >to sell, if
> > > >all the reasons you bought the stock still exist including a RS
> > >of 80+?
> > > >
> > > >______________________________________________
> > > >FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
> > > >Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >-
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >-
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >-
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >-
> >
> > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> > Tom Gumpel
> > Department of Special Education                         972-2-588-2165
> > School of
> Education                                   Fax:    [phone]
> > The Hebrew University of Jerusalem        in US:  877-258-9406
> > Jerusalem, ISRAEL 91905
> > http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msgumpel/main.htm
> > VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS!
> >
> >
> > -
> >
> >
>
>
>-

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Tom Gumpel
Department of Special Education                         972-2-588-2165
School of Education                                   Fax:    [phone]
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem        in US:  877-258-9406
Jerusalem, ISRAEL 91905
http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msgumpel/main.htm
VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS!

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Forant <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] HI
Date: 22 Jun 2000 22:36:47 -0400

Glad I found this group. I read a couple books using the canslim method and
subscribe to the IBD paper. At first being a new to the market I didn't
have faith in the system as I call it. I suffered some. Lately I have been
successful buying and selling using it. It really does work. It's a very
tricky market, but money can be made. NIPNY (NEC) is my latest conquest.

Dan

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chris dempsey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re:[CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 23 Jun 2000 13:28:09 -0400 (EDT)

Great post Dave. Definitely the losses come quicker than the gains. But to
these you should say thank you very much (for being quick) sell and go on.
When I first started I did what you have below only on week #17 day 1 MER
downgrades stock C, sell it for a loss. Then on week #17 day 2 PWJ
downgrades stock D and I sell it for a loss. I don't believe it was week 17,
actually I think that it was a bit longer. But this did truly happen to me
on back to back days after several months. So be thankful when it happens
quickly and move on.

I then new that something had to change. I didn't change over night but over
time I realized that the dollar figure needed to be equal each time I enter
an order. This means that when I lose money on a position the next position
does not have to be more to offset the loss.

In order to do this the number of positions has to be greater than 4. I have
since come up with twenty. Its hard to hold twenty stocks as they
continually get stopped out and brokerage firm down grades, but at the same
time you just keep buying the stocks on your list that are breaking out of
areas that you believe have great potential for profit. This is what keeps
me busy four hours per day.

Now when the big brokerage firms speak they are only messing with 5% of my
portfolio and really only a portion of that.

Sent: Friday, June 23, 2000 10:08 AM


Chris, the only point I would add to this is something I've
realized (and maybe others do as well) is that I tend to
reach 8% losses much faster than 25% gains.   Typically, if
a stock goes against me, I have an 8% loss from the buy
point in a week on average.   But, to get a 25% gain takes
several months on average.

So... what does this mean?   I'd typically hold my winners
about 4 months, and my losers about one week.   Let's look
at what the time factor does:

(Assume a 50% success rate):

Start with $40,000:
Week #1:  Buy 4 stocks  (A,B,C,D)- $10,000 worth
of each.
Week #2:  2 stocks (A,B) get stopped out at losses.
Net cash is now $18400 (with the remainder
still invested).   Buy 2 new ones at
$9200 (E,F) each.
Week #3:  1 stock gets stopped out (E).  Net cash is
now $8500 - with the rest still invested.
Buy a new stock (G) with proceeds to replace.
Week #4:  50-50 chance of getting stopped out, I'll
give me the benefit of the doubt....
Stay put until week #17
Week #17. First stock (C) gets cashed at a 25% gain.
Net cash:  $12500    Buy a new one (H) with
the proceeds.
...


______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Forant <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] HI
Date: 23 Jun 2000 13:07:11 -0400

Posting to my own post, hope some of you jumped on NIPNY. Up 6 1/8 Fri, 1
pm Eastern.

At 10:36 PM 6/22/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Glad I found this group. I read a couple books using the canslim method and
>subscribe to the IBD paper. At first being a new to the market I didn't
>have faith in the system as I call it. I suffered some. Lately I have been
>successful buying and selling using it. It really does work. It's a very
>tricky market, but money can be made. NIPNY (NEC) is my latest conquest.
>
>Dan
>
>-
>
>

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chris dempsey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re:[CANSLIM]DV & Investment Club
Date: 23 Jun 2000 13:42:30 -0400 (EDT)

Susan I would question why you picked DV. On June 16 (the last time I
documented the group rank) the rank was 24. This is the best I've ever seen
this group and this is great news. However what type of investment club do
you have. Are you using the CANSLIM method? It is very easy to get stopped
out of a stock and your timing has to be perfect. How often do you get
together? This could hamper your buy timing! Does your group have an exit
strategy? I would think that this stock needs an exit strategy.

I, and others I'm sure would like to hear more about your investment club!!

Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 1:56 PM

I have been following DV (93 84 AAB) and have seen what I think is a cup and
handle. At the end of the handle (or what I thought to be a handle) it has
started to trend up.  I would appreciate any comments on this chart. I would
like to recommend it to my investment club.


______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] cansli[M] Re TLCM
Date: 23 Jun 2000 14:52:37 -0400



So how about that 12% drop on 300%+ volume?
I am new to this and did not know how to handle it.  So I sold and took a
little loss, about a couple %.  Why you ask?  Well, fear is one.  (I know,
this is BAD).  But the stock did violate the first line of support, namely
the high of the handle.  It did not go past the 33-34 base support. It
seems to be stable around the B/O level now.  So here's the question: Do I
buy back?

Anna Sosis


Alexander T <[e-mail]> on 06/22/2000 11:37:38 PM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




After commiting 100% of funds into stocks, I am now watching the M more
closesly.  I personally didn't like today's nasdaq action, which was
confirmed by one of my stocks (TLCM) retracing all of days gain on high
volume.

Is any one else concerned over June's M action?  While I considered recent
sideways movement on nasdaq to be healthy (adding the number of breakouts),
today's distribution day does shed some negative light.  I counted 4 NASDAQ
distributions days in june alone:

6/22
6/15
6/14 (volume slightly up)
6/12 (volume slightly up, but big NAZ drop)

Dow is not that much better
6/22
6/20
6/16
6/6

According to O'Neil that is enough to kill a raging bull.  I don't know how
much more tolerance a fresh bull market may have for such distribution days
over an older one, but these may indicate that professionals are selling.
I
would've liked to see a healthier price-volume action at this point.

I am very interested in hearing what the group and tomorrow's IBD would
have
to say about this.  I personally have put a tight stop at DRAM (26 1/8 -
top
of handle) and will watch for TLMC's action tomorrow, I see a simularity
between recent days and its last top.

Thanks,
Alex


______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup


-





-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] nvda/xlnx
Date: 23 Jun 2000 15:03:01 EDT

 I bought NVDA at $135. I really don't know why I bought it and should I sell
or hold...I bought XLNX at 66 and 85........selling or holding are the
hardest things...I really haven't lost any but I have not made any $....hope
to hear bubbet

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] cansli[M] Re TLCM
Date: 23 Jun 2000 13:08:52 -0600

Generally, the two WON sell rules should be somewhat of a guide.  The first
is the -7-8% loss limit.  The second, it to not let a stock that's gone up
15-20% get back into negative territory.  I don't know exactly where you
bought, but I would guess this stock was probably up 15% at some point.  I
use closing numbers to watch these gains, so that gets closer.  If it was
up well from your buy, you probably should have exited.  If not, I think
you were still wise to exit when you did.  The stock looked very weak at
the time, and whether it will turn is always anyones guess.

As far as buying back, that's not clear to me.  I've been kicked out of 1/2
my positions yesterday and today, and all three stocks are up since my
sell.  However, I think this M action is very suspect, and personally, I'm
okay with staying partially invested right now.  I want to see at least one
good solid volume up day on the NAS before I put this cash back at risk.


o At 02:52 PM 6/23/00 -0400, you wrote:
>
>
>So how about that 12% drop on 300%+ volume?
>I am new to this and did not know how to handle it.  So I sold and took a
>little loss, about a couple %.  Why you ask?  Well, fear is one.  (I know,
>this is BAD).  But the stock did violate the first line of support, namely
>the high of the handle.  It did not go past the 33-34 base support. It
>seems to be stable around the B/O level now.  So here's the question: Do I
>buy back?
>
>Anna Sosis
>
>
>Alexander T <[e-mail]> on 06/22/2000 11:37:38 PM
>
>Please respond to [e-mail]
>
>To:   [e-mail]
>cc:
>Subject:  [CANSLIM] cansli[M]
>
>
>
>
>After commiting 100% of funds into stocks, I am now watching the M more
>closesly.  I personally didn't like today's nasdaq action, which was
>confirmed by one of my stocks (TLCM) retracing all of days gain on high
>volume.
>
>Is any one else concerned over June's M action?  While I considered recent
>sideways movement on nasdaq to be healthy (adding the number of breakouts),
>today's distribution day does shed some negative light.  I counted 4 NASDAQ
>distributions days in june alone:
>
>6/22
>6/15
>6/14 (volume slightly up)
>6/12 (volume slightly up, but big NAZ drop)
>
>Dow is not that much better
>6/22
>6/20
>6/16
>6/6
>
>According to O'Neil that is enough to kill a raging bull.  I don't know how
>much more tolerance a fresh bull market may have for such distribution days
>over an older one, but these may indicate that professionals are selling.
>I
>would've liked to see a healthier price-volume action at this point.
>
>I am very interested in hearing what the group and tomorrow's IBD would
>have
>to say about this.  I personally have put a tight stop at DRAM (26 1/8 -
>top
>of handle) and will watch for TLMC's action tomorrow, I see a simularity
>between recent days and its last top.
>
>Thanks,
>Alex
>
>
>______________________________________________
>FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
>Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
>
>
>-
>
>
>
>
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] cansli[M] Re TLCM
Date: 23 Jun 2000 15:22:17 -0400



Thank you, Earl.

I was up on it about 15% and the only reason I did not break even on exit
is because I did not have a hard stop on it.  By the time I sold it it was
slightly below my purchase price. I have to admit selling is a difficult
business. I am very grateful to the members of this group who share their
wisdom and past experiences.


Anna Sosis



Earl Setser <[e-mail]> on 06/23/2000 03:08:52 PM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




Generally, the two WON sell rules should be somewhat of a guide.  The first
is the -7-8% loss limit.  The second, it to not let a stock that's gone up
15-20% get back into negative territory.  I don't know exactly where you
bought, but I would guess this stock was probably up 15% at some point.  I
use closing numbers to watch these gains, so that gets closer.  If it was
up well from your buy, you probably should have exited.  If not, I think
you were still wise to exit when you did.  The stock looked very weak at
the time, and whether it will turn is always anyones guess.

As far as buying back, that's not clear to me.  I've been kicked out of 1/2
my positions yesterday and today, and all three stocks are up since my
sell.  However, I think this M action is very suspect, and personally, I'm
okay with staying partially invested right now.  I want to see at least one
good solid volume up day on the NAS before I put this cash back at risk.


o At 02:52 PM 6/23/00 -0400, you wrote:
>
>
>So how about that 12% drop on 300%+ volume?
>I am new to this and did not know how to handle it.  So I sold and took a
>little loss, about a couple %.  Why you ask?  Well, fear is one.  (I know,
>this is BAD).  But the stock did violate the first line of support, namely
>the high of the handle.  It did not go past the 33-34 base support. It
>seems to be stable around the B/O level now.  So here's the question: Do I
>buy back?
>
>Anna Sosis
>
>
>Alexander T <[e-mail]> on 06/22/2000 11:37:38 PM
>
>Please respond to [e-mail]
>
>To:   [e-mail]
>cc:
>Subject:  [CANSLIM] cansli[M]
>
>
>
>
>After commiting 100% of funds into stocks, I am now watching the M more
>closesly.  I personally didn't like today's nasdaq action, which was
>confirmed by one of my stocks (TLCM) retracing all of days gain on high
>volume.
>
>Is any one else concerned over June's M action?  While I considered recent
>sideways movement on nasdaq to be healthy (adding the number of
breakouts),
>today's distribution day does shed some negative light.  I counted 4
NASDAQ
>distributions days in june alone:
>
>6/22
>6/15
>6/14 (volume slightly up)
>6/12 (volume slightly up, but big NAZ drop)
>
>Dow is not that much better
>6/22
>6/20
>6/16
>6/6
>
>According to O'Neil that is enough to kill a raging bull.  I don't know
how
>much more tolerance a fresh bull market may have for such distribution
days
>over an older one, but these may indicate that professionals are selling.
>I
>would've liked to see a healthier price-volume action at this point.
>
>I am very interested in hearing what the group and tomorrow's IBD would
>have
>to say about this.  I personally have put a tight stop at DRAM (26 1/8 -
>top
>of handle) and will watch for TLMC's action tomorrow, I see a simularity
>between recent days and its last top.
>
>Thanks,
>Alex
>
>
>______________________________________________
>FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
>Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
>
>
>-
>
>
>
>
>
>-
>
>
>


-





-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kent Norman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 23 Jun 2000 15:18:47 -0500

Earl

I like the 80% idea and am going to try it. You reminded me of the Pareto (sp?)
80/20 rule [you get 80% of the gain for 20% of the effort, from there on you get
diminishing returns.]

I used tight stops to prevent loss. Now I am shifting focus to gains.

Regards
Kent

Earl Setser wrote:

> I've been playing with a twist on this 25% rule.  My idea was to lock in
> gains at 25% increments by placing tight stops.  The plan was as follows:
>
> Stock up 25%, place a stop at 20%
> Stock up 50%, place a stop at 40%
> Stock up 75%, place a stop at 60%
> etc.
>
> I have considered this, but I haven't really tried it.  My idea was to lock
> in 80% of the gains, but hang on for further gains.  With this approach,
> you would need 1 of 3 stocks to go to +40% or better to match the gains of
> just selling.
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] cansli[M] Re TLCM
Date: 23 Jun 2000 14:25:07 -0600

I must admit, that I am on my 3rd, or is it 4th?  Ah hell, let's call it
5th selling approach since I started with CANSLIM about a year ago.  The
rules for buying seem to be much easier to grasp and follow successfully.
The selling rules are a struggle for many of us.  I read some of the
selling data at the site Tom G posted, and it made a lot of sense.  In
fact, if I would have set my stop on KEI just a little below that 13 day
EMA, I would have stayed in today.  Unfortunately, those one example
lessons don't seem to get you to a good selling approach either.  It's
really a balance between gains and risk (haha, surprise).  If you stay in
to let the profits run, there will usually be dips/corrections that test
you mettle.  In fact, we count on this psychology as a part of the cup w
handle pattern.  The best selling decisions are probably selling on strong
runups like KEI last week.  The temptation is to hold for greater gains,
and I'm never sure whether that is logic or greed talking.  Here is a quick
summary of some approaches I've tried, although I'm not sure where I'll end
up or even which I was most happy with right now.

1 - Hard stop at -8%, Change to hard stop at purchase when stock hits +15%
2 - Hard stops based on the stocks average volatility - more volatile
stocks get more room.
3 - Soft stops based on the stocks average volatility, using only the
closing price.
4 - Same as 3, but give the stock 15 minutes in the AM to bounce
5 - Same as 4 in approach, but using -8%, then purchase, then trend lines
6 - Back to hard stops, this time based on a rolling number that
transitions from -8% to 15% below the highest close.  The 15% starts after
the stock closes above the purchase price (this is the one I posted a
couple days ago).

I like 6 right now because it's hard, totally disciplined, and takes little
thought or emotion to follow.  I just check the closing prices every day,
and set a higher stops for those stocks that hit new closing highs.  This
approach HAS taken me out of 3 of my 6 holdings over yesterday and today.
It DID lock in a nice gain (over 80%) on KEI.

Overall, I think that number 6 may be a good start, and some adjustments on
the numbers based on trendlines and support may be a good idea.  I.e., if
the 13 day EMA or 50 day EMA is very close my stop, maybe I should move it
down a little.  I also think using some of WONs rules for rapid runups
should be a part of my strategy.  The real advantage is I can go to work
and not hover over my computer stock screen all day.  The stops are set,
and all I need to do is update them at night.  I need a good 5 years or so
of profits before I won't need the job!!!

and At 03:22 PM 6/23/00 -0400, you wrote:
>
>
>Thank you, Earl.
>
>I was up on it about 15% and the only reason I did not break even on exit
>is because I did not have a hard stop on it.  By the time I sold it it was
>slightly below my purchase price. I have to admit selling is a difficult
>business. I am very grateful to the members of this group who share their
>wisdom and past experiences.
>
>
>Anna Sosis
>
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Forant <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] cansli[M] Re TLCM
Date: 23 Jun 2000 19:01:55 -0400

I would have sold earlier and taken some crumbs. I read all these theories
but you still have to go with guts no matter what style of selling is used.
I wonder how most keep in touch with their stocks when away from the PC.
Looks like the stock started showing weakness the 3rd day from the break.
The next day would have been the day to sell while profits were still
available. Also didn't the company's EPS come down 11 cents 1st 1/4 2000.

Dan

At 02:52 PM 6/23/00 -0400, you wrote:
>
>
>So how about that 12% drop on 300%+ volume?
>I am new to this and did not know how to handle it.  So I sold and took a
>little loss, about a couple %.  Why you ask?  Well, fear is one.  (I know,
>this is BAD).  But the stock did violate the first line of support, namely
>the high of the handle.  It did not go past the 33-34 base support. It
>seems to be stable around the B/O level now.  So here's the question: Do I
>buy back?
>
>Anna Sosis
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 8% loss and 25% profit
Date: 23 Jun 2000 17:52:26 -0700 (PDT)



Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Fri, 23 Jun 2000, Tom Gumpel wrote:

>
>
> >7-8% loss requires 7-8% profit to make up for the loss -- period..... I
> >will let your logic figure out why more than 8% is bad.
>
> Actually, that's not correct.
> If you start out with $1000 and lose 8%, you're down to $920.
> To get back to $1000 you then need to go up about 8.7%.
>
> Think of it this way: if you have $10 and you lose 33.33% you have $6.66.
> To get back to $10 you need to increase your principal by 50%.
>
> tom
>
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 8% loss and 25% profit
Date: 23 Jun 2000 17:53:31 -0700 (PDT)


Ok make that 7-8% loss requires 7.5%-9% profit -- hope that makes you
happy
:)

Regards,
Shah

On Fri, 23 Jun 2000, Tom Gumpel wrote:

>
>
> >7-8% loss requires 7-8% profit to make up for the loss -- period..... I
> >will let your logic figure out why more than 8% is bad.
>
> Actually, that's not correct.
> If you start out with $1000 and lose 8%, you're down to $920.
> To get back to $1000 you then need to go up about 8.7%.
>
> Think of it this way: if you have $10 and you lose 33.33% you have $6.66.
> To get back to $10 you need to increase your principal by 50%.
>
> tom
>
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kent Norman <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Cup with Handle non CANSLIM
Date: 23 Jun 2000 23:33:11 -0500

Has any one looked at the performance of C&H stocks that don't meet
CANSILM ? Is there much difference between the haves and have nots?

Kent

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] TLCM woes
Date: 23 Jun 2000 17:08:29 -0700

Add me to the list of TLCM owners.  I interpreted the breakout at 40, however (40
was the 52 week high at the beginning of the cup).  I bought in at 42 [limit
order] after it had already extended too far above the original B/O.  Today's
plummet triggered my limit buy.  I almost had to sell [at 38], but it quickly
popped above [my 8% loss].  If my stop loss is triggered, this will mean that so
far **every single one** of my losses will have been caused by overall Market
declines [all but one being short corrections during an upward run].

Any suggestions?

-Jim the-impeccable-market-MIStimer

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] TLCM woes
Date: 24 Jun 2000 10:04:36 -0400

Sorry, Jim, sounds like you're being taught an expensive lesson
in the importance of "M".

Volume is light, exaggerating volatility, as everyone waits to
see what the Feds do by Wednesday. If they take no action, which
is the widespread expectation, then the mkts will continue to
trade on economic news and earnings reports, waiting to see what
FOMC does at the August meeting. If the Feds signal a possible
future rate cut, which I still consider possible, then we should
see the markets strengthen, tho the summer doldrums are still
likely to be the committing factor. Watch volume, both on major
indexes as well as your candidates. That will still be the best
clue. Concentrate on volume coming out of decent bases.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2000 8:08 PM


Add me to the list of TLCM owners.  I interpreted the breakout at
40, however (40
was the 52 week high at the beginning of the cup).  I bought in
at 42 [limit
order] after it had already extended too far above the original
B/O.  Today's
plummet triggered my limit buy.  I almost had to sell [at 38],
but it quickly
popped above [my 8% loss].  If my stop loss is triggered, this
will mean that so
far **every single one** of my losses will have been caused by
overall Market
declines [all but one being short corrections during an upward
run].

Any suggestions?

-Jim the-impeccable-market-MIStimer

-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] DGO List - Part 1 / 2
Date: 24 Jun 2000 10:21:07 -0400

Despite the small decline in the markets this week, the overall
list grew slightly to 164 from 158 last week. Prior to that it
was 169 and 152, so essentially stable now for four weeks.

For the new members: the list is drawn from stocks in WON's Daily
Graphs books that were within 5% (or at) their 12 month high
during the past week; and also as of Friday had an RS and EPS of
at least 80.  Bx below is my shorthand for Base = x nr of weeks
(IMO).

ADCT - LLUR
ORCL - B3
ANEN - B2, trying to break out
DRAM - possible handle forming to the cup
LTRE - LLUR, tho sloppy
NSIT - B1+
PLXS - recovered Friday back to a B2 after the light vol selloff
on Thu
XLNX - B3
FWRD - B2
MSS - B1+
FII - LLUR
SHFL - B5, volume down
GLW - B1+
MEDQ - B4+



Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Forant <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DGO List - Part 1 / 2
Date: 24 Jun 2000 11:55:38 -0400

Does Won's Daily have a site, couldn't find it. IBD's subscription is a
little pricey. Especially when the information is available for free from
sites like Clearstation.com.

At 10:21 AM 6/24/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Despite the small decline in the markets this week, the overall
>list grew slightly to 164 from 158 last week. Prior to that it
>was 169 and 152, so essentially stable now for four weeks.
>
>For the new members: the list is drawn from stocks in WON's Daily
>Graphs books that were within 5% (or at) their 12 month high
>during the past week; and also as of Friday had an RS and EPS of
>at least 80.  Bx below is my shorthand for Base = x nr of weeks
>(IMO).
>
>ADCT - LLUR
>ORCL - B3
>ANEN - B2, trying to break out
>DRAM - possible handle forming to the cup
>LTRE - LLUR, tho sloppy
>NSIT - B1+
>PLXS - recovered Friday back to a B2 after the light vol selloff
>on Thu
>XLNX - B3
>FWRD - B2
>MSS - B1+
>FII - LLUR
>SHFL - B5, volume down
>GLW - B1+
>MEDQ - B4+
>
>
>
>Tom Worley
>[e-mail]
>chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
>get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>
>
>
>
>-
>
>

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "james sullivan" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DGO List - Part 1 / 2
Date: 24 Jun 2000 16:55:09 -0400

dan,

i believe it to be http://www.investors.com/

jim

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


>Does Won's Daily have a site, couldn't find it.


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DGO List - Part 1 / 2
Date: 24 Jun 2000 17:39:32 -0400

Daily Graphs is a subscription service, but you can read about it
and get a trial at

http://www.dailygraphs.com/home.htm


Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2000 11:55 AM


Does Won's Daily have a site, couldn't find it. IBD's
subscription is a
little pricey. Especially when the information is available for
free from
sites like Clearstation.com.

At 10:21 AM 6/24/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Despite the small decline in the markets this week, the overall
>list grew slightly to 164 from 158 last week. Prior to that it
>was 169 and 152, so essentially stable now for four weeks.
>
>For the new members: the list is drawn from stocks in WON's
Daily
>Graphs books that were within 5% (or at) their 12 month high
>during the past week; and also as of Friday had an RS and EPS of
>at least 80.  Bx below is my shorthand for Base = x nr of weeks
>(IMO).
>
>ADCT - LLUR
>ORCL - B3
>ANEN - B2, trying to break out
>DRAM - possible handle forming to the cup
>LTRE - LLUR, tho sloppy
>NSIT - B1+
>PLXS - recovered Friday back to a B2 after the light vol selloff
>on Thu
>XLNX - B3
>FWRD - B2
>MSS - B1+
>FII - LLUR
>SHFL - B5, volume down
>GLW - B1+
>MEDQ - B4+
>
>
>
>Tom Worley
>[e-mail]
>chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
>get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>
>
>
>
>-
>
>

-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Gumpel <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 8% loss and 25% profit
Date: 25 Jun 2000 10:54:43 +0200

Actually, I'm sure that you will understand that the point of this little
exercise was NOT to discuss how many fairies dance on the head of a pin,
but rather to show that if you go down 8% it takes more than 8% to come
back. This is especially important if you let your security go down 30% (as
many do) with the thought that it will come back. It may, but for it to get
back to your break-even it will have to come up more than 30% (42.86%).

So the moral of the story. Don't hope. Don't wait. Make a rule and stick
with it.

Specifically, for your amusement:

loss            required gain to break even
5%              5.26%
7%              7.53%
8%              8.7%
10%             11.11%
25%             33.33%
50%             100%
75%             300%

You see, the more you lose of your stock, the longer it takes to make it back.

That's the logic behind WON's 8% rule. You can never use any rule correctly
if you don't understand the rationale behind it.

A competing rule, and one that makes even more intuitive sense, is not to
set your stops by any specific percentage point, but rather to look for
logical levels of support and resistance. (This makes sense since the
market doesn't know or care where your 8% is, but it sure does care about
support and resistance).

At 05:53 PM 23/6/00 -0700, Pritish Shah wrote:

>Ok make that 7-8% loss requires 7.5%-9% profit -- hope that makes you
>happy
>:)

The problem with what you wrote is that you used a range, which may allow
people to think that a 7% loss requires a 7% advance (as your first post
implied). This is simply inaccurate.

>On Fri, 23 Jun 2000, Tom Gumpel wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > >7-8% loss requires 7-8% profit to make up for the loss -- period..... I
> > >will let your logic figure out why more than 8% is bad.
> >
> > Actually, that's not correct.
> > If you start out with $1000 and lose 8%, you're down to $920.
> > To get back to $1000 you then need to go up about 8.7%.
> >
> > Think of it this way: if you have $10 and you lose 33.33% you have $6.66.
> > To get back to $10 you need to increase your principal by 50%.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Tom Gumpel
Department of Special Education                         972-2-588-2165
School of Education                                   Fax:    [phone]
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem        in US:  877-258-9406
Jerusalem, ISRAEL 91905
http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msgumpel/main.htm
VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Gumpel <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re:[CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 25 Jun 2000 11:08:52 +0200

Let me ask you all a simple question:

would you rather have your stock go up 75% or 25%?

That's the only question you need to answer.

Selling everything at 25% doesn't make sense, nor does selling
every-other-thing at 25%. Some stocks go higher, some don't. Why not take
advantage of that?

What's to stop anyone from setting stops so that well-made profits are
locked in? Isn't that smarter than a blanket selling rule?

But it's your money, and I don't really care one way or another. Just be
aware that what you are doing makes very little business or intuitive sense.

Lock in profits, sure. Take yourself out of the game and lose huge
potential profits? You've got to be kidding.

An example. I bought TGLD way back when it was 65 along with a friend. It
floundered a bit, got close to my 8% stop, but didn't pass it. Then it shot
up to 79 (about 25%). My friend sold, I kept on, but moved my stop up to
support level. TLGD went up, and up, and up. I have my stop set at about
85% above my buy-in price (but I never set stops by percentage points,
rather by support/resistance), and my friend has his 25% profit in hand.
Using protective stops, my profits are also locked in.

Think of it this way:

100 shares @65 sold at 79 = 7900-6500 or a $1400 profit. Nice.

100 shares @65 sold at $136 = 13600-6500 or a $7100 profit. Nicer.

why would anybody EVER want to do anything else?

but it's your money, you can throw it away if you want.

enough said.

tom


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Tom Gumpel
Department of Special Education                         972-2-588-2165
School of Education                                   Fax:    [phone]
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem        in US:  877-258-9406
Jerusalem, ISRAEL 91905
http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msgumpel/main.htm
VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] DGO List - Part 2/2
Date: 25 Jun 2000 06:54:31 -0400

AC - B3, base possibly failing
JBL - B2+
GBL - tight B2, would be a nice c&h except handle formed too high
LFUS - B3
THX - B3+
SPW - B3
ELF - B3+
MGG - B6+, volume declining
MFC - B3
OMI - B2
EVER - B4+
AAS - B2
COO - B2
UNH - B2
TECD - sloppy B5, trending up, vol declining
BRL - B3
CBM - B4
AZR - B4
CECO - B2
AGN - B2
BOCB - B3
XRAY - B4

Happy hunting,

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Forant <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Handle
Date: 25 Jun 2000 08:20:51 -0400

Can the handle be on the left side of the cup? I have done well with this
type also. Or am I just picking saucer or cup w/o handle types?

Dan

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Forant <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Handle follow up
Date: 25 Jun 2000 08:28:10 -0400

I guess in general I have been buying stocks that resemble the base pattern
in the book, and buying 1/8 above the pivot of a 52 week high without much
regard to the handle. Any input?

>Can the handle be on the left side of the cup? I have done well with this
type also. Or am I just picking saucer or cup w/o handle types?
>
>

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Handle follow up
Date: 25 Jun 2000 08:47:34 -0400

Hi Dan,

The purpose of the handle (in a cup and handle formation) is to
create a sideways base during which the owners who held at the
highs, and held on thru the bottom of the cup, can bail out at a
break even point, as there are many that still think that way. It
also permits the more aggressive risk takers who bot at the
bottom of the cup, or as it began building the right side of the
cup, to take their well earned profits (hey, without them there
wouldn't be a "right side", right?).

During the handle, it allows CANSLIMers, and other like minded
investors, to monitor behavior and volume, and establish what the
pivot point is.  When volume increases to at least 1.5X ADV, and
other characteristics are in place, we can implement our buying
strategy, knowing that as the pivot point is passed there is
little if any overhead resistance to prevent the breakout from
continuing.

Thus, any basing on the left side of the cup is immaterial, to
the best of my experience, in analyzing a c&h formation. The
pattern is measured strictly from the left rim, to the bottom, to
the right rim, and out onto the handle.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2000 8:28 AM


I guess in general I have been buying stocks that resemble the
base pattern
in the book, and buying 1/8 above the pivot of a 52 week high
without much
regard to the handle. Any input?

>Can the handle be on the left side of the cup? I have done well
with this
type also. Or am I just picking saucer or cup w/o handle types?
>
>

-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Erik Harris" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Work gets in the way
Date: 25 Jun 2000 10:14:22 -0400

Hi,

I've been investing for just under a year and have been trying to buy
"Canslim Stocks" at their pivot points on increases in volume.  I am
begining to become frustrated because I am missing a lot of breakouts while
at work, etc.

How do those of you who can't follow the market during the day handle timing
your purchases?

I've considered setting a limit order at the pivot point to trigger the
purchase, however, that really doesn't account for volume.  Also, with the
volitility, daily price swings could trigger the purchase.

Any suggestions would be helpful.

Thanks,
Erik


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Work gets in the way
Date: 25 Jun 2000 10:44:33 -0400

Hi Erik,

While I have access to live quotes during the work day, I usually
am too busy to monitor a stock as it approaches a pivot point. I
have compensated by trying to "buy cheap", and use limit orders
while it is still basing, trusting (hoping) that the breakout
past the pivot will eventually happen if I am patient. I do most
of my work on my portfolio at night, or in the morning before
market open.

Since I only buy thinly traded micros and small caps, I would
have to use limits in any case, so this does not have a big
effect on my strategy.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2000 10:14 AM


Hi,

I've been investing for just under a year and have been trying to
buy
"Canslim Stocks" at their pivot points on increases in volume.  I
am
begining to become frustrated because I am missing a lot of
breakouts while
at work, etc.

How do those of you who can't follow the market during the day
handle timing
your purchases?

I've considered setting a limit order at the pivot point to
trigger the
purchase, however, that really doesn't account for volume.  Also,
with the
volitility, daily price swings could trigger the purchase.

Any suggestions would be helpful.

Thanks,
Erik


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Erik Harris" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Web site
Date: 25 Jun 2000 10:53:55 -0400

Hi,
I found an interesting site today that allows one to rate a stock based on a
"guru's" criteria (such as O'Neil, Lynch, Graham, Fisher, etc.)

For example, choose W. O'Neil and enter a stock symbol and the site will
rate the stock as pass or fail based on O'Neils criteria such as Annual
Earnings growth, Earnings Consistency, ROE, Shares Outstanding, Insider
Ownership, Etc.

http://strategy.stockmaster.com/SMStrategies.asp?cobrander=StockMaster&upt=8
947§ion=guru&Ticker=ORCL&gurupage=ONeil

It's nice to see that a stock gets all "Passes" but it's still best perform
your own research.

Erik


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re:[CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 25 Jun 2000 10:35:14 -0600

One problem with your comparison is that it assumes your friend sold and
then held cash for the remainder of the time.  He COULD have bought 2 other
stocks, both of which he made another 25% on while you held.  Then again,
he may have bought 2 other stocks that he lost 8% each on.  There is no way
to know.

I do agree that it's questionable to jump out of stocks just based on the
gain.  I think most if not every stock I've had that has made 25% did so
before the first eight weeks, so it's not supposed to be sold anyway.

I'm beginning to reformulate my latest selling formula (LOL).  I like WON's
8% rule as an absolute limit of the risk of each purchase.  I also like the
rule that a 15% gain won't be allowed to go to a loss.  I used these 2
rules and a 15% trailing stop to formulate a hard stop strategy.  The
weakness of this strategy is that it ignores trendlines and support.  I
think I need to adjust the approach to use trendlines and support when they
fall into certain ranges. For instance, I was stopped out of KEI on Friday
right at the 13 day EMA.  If I had used the 13 day instead of a 15%
trailing stop, I would have risked only a few % more, but would have been
more likely to stay in.

This HAS been an excellent thread and thanks to all for the opinions!!


At 11:08 AM 6/25/00 +0200, you wrote:
>Let me ask you all a simple question:
>
>would you rather have your stock go up 75% or 25%?
>
>That's the only question you need to answer.
>
>Selling everything at 25% doesn't make sense, nor does selling
>every-other-thing at 25%. Some stocks go higher, some don't. Why not take
>advantage of that?
>
>What's to stop anyone from setting stops so that well-made profits are
>locked in? Isn't that smarter than a blanket selling rule?
>
>But it's your money, and I don't really care one way or another. Just be
>aware that what you are doing makes very little business or intuitive sense.
>
>Lock in profits, sure. Take yourself out of the game and lose huge
>potential profits? You've got to be kidding.
>
>An example. I bought TGLD way back when it was 65 along with a friend. It
>floundered a bit, got close to my 8% stop, but didn't pass it. Then it shot
>up to 79 (about 25%). My friend sold, I kept on, but moved my stop up to
>support level. TLGD went up, and up, and up. I have my stop set at about
>85% above my buy-in price (but I never set stops by percentage points,
>rather by support/resistance), and my friend has his 25% profit in hand.
>Using protective stops, my profits are also locked in.
>
>Think of it this way:
>
>100 shares @65 sold at 79 = 7900-6500 or a $1400 profit. Nice.
>
>100 shares @65 sold at $136 = 13600-6500 or a $7100 profit. Nicer.
>
>why would anybody EVER want to do anything else?
>
>but it's your money, you can throw it away if you want.
>
>enough said.
>
>Tom Gumpel



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Handle follow up
Date: 25 Jun 2000 10:40:02 -0600

This is a cup pattern, where you set the pivot to 1/8 above the 52 week
high.  In very strong markets, many of the leaders can shoot up the right
side of the cup and break out without forming a handle.  I saw many of
these patterns late last year, and I profited from many of them.  IBD has
discussed this pattern as a possible buying pattern, but they warn that
they are more failure prone than a cup with handle.  I think the volume is
even a more important factor on these patterns, so watch it carefully.  And
as always, LIMIT THOSE LOSSES!!


At 08:28 AM 6/25/00 -0400, you wrote:
>I guess in general I have been buying stocks that resemble the base pattern
>in the book, and buying 1/8 above the pivot of a 52 week high without much
>regard to the handle. Any input?
>
>>Can the handle be on the left side of the cup? I have done well with this
>type also. Or am I just picking saucer or cup w/o handle types?
>>
>>
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Work gets in the way
Date: 25 Jun 2000 11:05:54 -0600

Here's a couple of things you can do.

1-I watch the markets at intervals when I can.  I have a watch list set up
and a spreadsheet with the price and volume I'm looking for.  This makes it
pretty quick to check.  Yes, you miss many, but I catch a good one
occasionally.  Even then, many times you're guessig whether the volume will
continue and the price hold up.

2-Look at each day's close.  Check the volume and price action, and you'll
know which of your candidates had a valid B/O.  In addition to the pivot
point, keep a record of the pivot + 5%.  This is your maximum buy point.
You will find that there are quite a few breakouts that are still within 5%
at the close.  In fact, many times a very strong breakout (TQNT last week)
will shoot well beyond 5% in just a few minutes, but fall back into range
later in the day.  You can buy these either in the after-market,
pre-market, or on the open.

3-According to WON, about 40% of the breakouts will test the pivot several
days or a week after the breakout.  If there is a stock you really like,
you can put in a limit order at 4 or 5% above the pivot, and wait to see if
it dips for you.  I got into QLGC (my best CANSLIM purchase so far) that
way last November a day or two after the breakout.  In these cases, it's
probably wise to watch the volume signals carefully, because you want to
see the pullback on lighter volume.  It may be that a market dip (like
Thursday/Friday) is causing some great stocks to come back into range (like
TLCM).  (Note I'm NOT recommending that last weeks pullback is a buying
opp.  It MAY be, but I'm not treating it that way myself!)

At 10:14 AM 6/25/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I've been investing for just under a year and have been trying to buy
>"Canslim Stocks" at their pivot points on increases in volume.  I am
>begining to become frustrated because I am missing a lot of breakouts while
>at work, etc.
>
>How do those of you who can't follow the market during the day handle timing
>your purchases?
>
>I've considered setting a limit order at the pivot point to trigger the
>purchase, however, that really doesn't account for volume.  Also, with the
>volitility, daily price swings could trigger the purchase.
>
>Any suggestions would be helpful.
>
>Thanks,
>Erik
>
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Walter Stock <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] TLCM woes
Date: 25 Jun 2000 14:02:53 -0400

Hi Anna & Jim,

I bought TLCM very close to the pivot so am still sitting
on a (very slender) profit.

My belief is that the current problems with TLCM are more to
do with 'M' than 'CANSLI'.

TLCM broke out on higher volume than it pulled back on,
on Friday.  It also recovered nicely to finish about halfway
up on its daily range and well above pivot point.

As for the suggestions you request, it would really depend
on how you view 'M' at present, and also how fully invested
you are and whether you are on margin..  We have now had six
distribution days over the last four weeks on the Nasdaq.  Very ugly.
Sentiment is still too bullish, although if the increased put buying
is any indication, this may be changing.  Still ugly.

On the plus side, the Nasdaq has support in the trading range
that it is back in, and additional support from the 200 day MA
at 3734, about 110 points down from where we are right now.

So what to do Monday morning?  Well I can only tell you what I
am going to do.  Right now, I am fully invested, and have been
for two weeks. Am also margined.  Am up 12% for the period.

My three biggest positions are ELNT, NT (non-canslim), and
TLCM, and in that order.  All profitable at the moment..

I also own half-positions in WAT, NVDA, MEDI, and TQNT
in my trading account, of which TQNT is in bad shape (my fault,
I had chased it).

Monday morning, I am eliminating three of the latter four to
get me well off margin ( and regardless of whether they are
profitable).

My three big positions I will be watching like a hawk, and will
not hesitate to pull the trigger (even above my stops if necessary)
if 'M' looks to be collapsing.  Otherwise I hold.

Only you can decide what is right for you.  Hope this helps.

Walter Stock
Oakville, ON, Canada


[e-mail] wrote:

> Add me to the list of TLCM owners.  I interpreted the breakout at 40, however (40
> was the 52 week high at the beginning of the cup).  I bought in at 42 [limit
> order] after it had already extended too far above the original B/O.  Today's
> plummet triggered my limit buy.  I almost had to sell [at 38], but it quickly
> popped above [my 8% loss].  If my stop loss is triggered, this will mean that so
> far **every single one** of my losses will have been caused by overall Market
> declines [all but one being short corrections during an upward run].
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> -Jim the-impeccable-market-MIStimer
>
> -


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Forant <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Handle follow up
Date: 25 Jun 2000 15:33:38 -0400

Yes, I do limit my loses, and I also don't expect much in the way of high
profits in my winning stocks with this marke so I grab them often. Can a
handle form on the left of the cup and form a base and pivot on the right
side. Or is the handle stronger on the right side?

At 10:40 AM 6/25/00 -0600, you wrote:
>This is a cup pattern, where you set the pivot to 1/8 above the 52 week
>high.  In very strong markets, many of the leaders can shoot up the right
>side of the cup and break out without forming a handle.  I saw many of
>these patterns late last year, and I profited from many of them.  IBD has
>discussed this pattern as a possible buying pattern, but they warn that
>they are more failure prone than a cup with handle.  I think the volume is
>even a more important factor on these patterns, so watch it carefully.  And
>as always, LIMIT THOSE LOSSES!!
>
>
>At 08:28 AM 6/25/00 -0400, you wrote:
>>I guess in general I have been buying stocks that resemble the base pattern
>>in the book, and buying 1/8 above the pivot of a 52 week high without much
>>regard to the handle. Any input?
>>
>>>Can the handle be on the left side of the cup? I have done well with this
>>type also. Or am I just picking saucer or cup w/o handle types?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>-
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>-
>
>

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kent Norman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Work gets in the way
Date: 25 Jun 2000 14:37:18 -0500

Earl

I use the Yahoo instant messenger to alert me to volume and price triggers. You
can give it a portfolio with individual $ or % thresholds. The alerts are 20
minute delayed, but may be better than occasionally checking as time permits
during work.

Good hunting
Kent

Earl Setser wrote:

> Here's a couple of things you can do.
>
> 1-I watch the markets at intervals when I can.  I have a watch list set up
> and a spreadsheet with the price and volume I'm looking for.  This makes it
> pretty quick to check.  Yes, you miss many, but I catch a good one
> occasionally.  Even then, many times you're guessig whether the volume will
> continue and the price hold up.


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kent Norman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Web site
Date: 25 Jun 2000 14:49:33 -0500

A somewhat similar site is http://www.barchart.com/
type the symbol and hit "OPINION" to get several technical ratings.

some of the recent 100% buys are:
NOVT PRKR HSII ACV CXY BEIQ BED CCS CHK XLTC CVTY KO

some of the recent 96% buys are:
PWER AVZ PME EI AD SESI BRH TMR

Happy hunting
Kent

Erik Harris wrote:

> Hi,
> I found an interesting site today that allows one to rate a stock based on a
> "guru's" criteria (such as O'Neil, Lynch, Graham, Fisher, etc.)
>
> For example, choose W. O'Neil and enter a stock symbol and the site will
> rate the stock as pass or fail based on O'Neils criteria such as Annual
> Earnings growth, Earnings Consistency, ROE, Shares Outstanding, Insider
> Ownership, Etc.
>
> http://strategy.stockmaster.com/SMStrategies.asp?cobrander=StockMaster&upt=8
> 947§ion=guru&Ticker=ORCL&gurupage=ONeil
>
> It's nice to see that a stock gets all "Passes" but it's still best perform
> your own research.
>
> Erik
>
> -


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Handle follow up
Date: 25 Jun 2000 16:48:11 -0600

I'm not sure what you mean about are handle on the left side.  I guess this
would be a handle formed from a downtrend without forming a bottom?  WON
suggests only buying handles at least 50% up from the bottom to reduce the
impact of overhead resistance.  I would think that a handle on the
downtrend would be dangerous for this reason.

At 03:33 PM 6/25/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Yes, I do limit my loses, and I also don't expect much in the way of high
>profits in my winning stocks with this marke so I grab them often. Can a
>handle form on the left of the cup and form a base and pivot on the right
>side. Or is the handle stronger on the right side?
>
>At 10:40 AM 6/25/00 -0600, you wrote:
>>This is a cup pattern, where you set the pivot to 1/8 above the 52 week
>>high.  In very strong markets, many of the leaders can shoot up the right
>>side of the cup and break out without forming a handle.  I saw many of
>>these patterns late last year, and I profited from many of them.  IBD has
>>discussed this pattern as a possible buying pattern, but they warn that
>>they are more failure prone than a cup with handle.  I think the volume is
>>even a more important factor on these patterns, so watch it carefully.  And
>>as always, LIMIT THOSE LOSSES!!
>>
>>
>>At 08:28 AM 6/25/00 -0400, you wrote:
>>>I guess in general I have been buying stocks that resemble the base pattern
>>>in the book, and buying 1/8 above the pivot of a 52 week high without much
>>>regard to the handle. Any input?
>>>
>>>>Can the handle be on the left side of the cup? I have done well with this
>>>type also. Or am I just picking saucer or cup w/o handle types?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>-
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>-
>>
>>
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Forant <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Work gets in the way
Date: 25 Jun 2000 19:11:49 -0400

I deal with Ameritrade and they have an excellent phone system, so I check
2-3 times in the morning and afternoon, it only takes a minute. I'm am
deciding which device to use for even better control, so far I'm leaning
towards a digital cell phone and linking to the net with it. It's fairly
reasonably priced. This way I can get alerts and make the decisions. I do
use stop limits to protect against big losses, I don't care if the bounces
back, I may re-buy. This is not a healthy  market to mess with.

Dan

At 10:14 AM 6/25/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I've been investing for just under a year and have been trying to buy
>"Canslim Stocks" at their pivot points on increases in volume.  I am
>begining to become frustrated because I am missing a lot of breakouts while
>at work, etc.
>
>How do those of you who can't follow the market during the day handle timing
>your purchases?
>
>I've considered setting a limit order at the pivot point to trigger the
>purchase, however, that really doesn't account for volume.  Also, with the
>volitility, daily price swings could trigger the purchase.
>
>Any suggestions would be helpful.
>
>Thanks,
>Erik
>
>
>-
>
>

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Anna Sosis <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] fundamental q
Date: 25 Jun 2000 16:51:52 -0700 (PDT)

Hi.

Does anyone know if WON has a limit on debt %?
E.g., WAT has 54% debt and EPS, RS and other numbers
are all > 95 and A's.
One system (similar to CANSLIM) recommends debt% to be
< 30%.  Does anyone have an opinion on that?

Also, the same system recommended to have PE to be
<70% of the earnings growth rate.  That makes sense to
me but severely limits stock selection.  Any opinions?

Anna


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Anna Sosis <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] TLCM woes
Date: 25 Jun 2000 16:55:15 -0700 (PDT)

Hi Walter!

Funny, I was stopped out of MEDI and WAT on Friday.
I still have NVDA but I am also thinking to sell it on
Monday.  I am pretty much out of the market at this
point.
I will tighten stops on ELNT and NEWP and will monitor
TLCM for a buying opportunity.

Thank you for the advice.

Anna

--- Walter Stock <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Hi Anna & Jim,
>
> I bought TLCM very close to the pivot so am still
> sitting
> on a (very slender) profit.
>
> My belief is that the current problems with TLCM are
> more to
> do with 'M' than 'CANSLI'.
>
> TLCM broke out on higher volume than it pulled back
> on,
> on Friday.  It also recovered nicely to finish about
> halfway
> up on its daily range and well above pivot point.
>
> As for the suggestions you request, it would really
> depend
> on how you view 'M' at present, and also how fully
> invested
> you are and whether you are on margin..  We have now
> had six
> distribution days over the last four weeks on the
> Nasdaq.  Very ugly.
> Sentiment is still too bullish, although if the
> increased put buying
> is any indication, this may be changing.  Still
> ugly.
>
> On the plus side, the Nasdaq has support in the
> trading range
> that it is back in, and additional support from the
> 200 day MA
> at 3734, about 110 points down from where we are
> right now.
>
> So what to do Monday morning?  Well I can only tell
> you what I
> am going to do.  Right now, I am fully invested, and
> have been
> for two weeks. Am also margined.  Am up 12% for the
> period.
>
> My three biggest positions are ELNT, NT
> (non-canslim), and
> TLCM, and in that order.  All profitable at the
> moment..
>
> I also own half-positions in WAT, NVDA, MEDI, and
> TQNT
> in my trading account, of which TQNT is in bad shape
> (my fault,
> I had chased it).
>
> Monday morning, I am eliminating three of the latter
> four to
> get me well off margin ( and regardless of whether
> they are
> profitable).
>
> My three big positions I will be watching like a
> hawk, and will
> not hesitate to pull the trigger (even above my
> stops if necessary)
> if 'M' looks to be collapsing.  Otherwise I hold.
>
> Only you can decide what is right for you.  Hope
> this helps.
>
> Walter Stock
> Oakville, ON, Canada
>
>
> [e-mail] wrote:
>
> > Add me to the list of TLCM owners.  I interpreted
> the breakout at 40, however (40
> > was the 52 week high at the beginning of the cup).
>  I bought in at 42 [limit
> > order] after it had already extended too far above
> the original B/O.  Today's
> > plummet triggered my limit buy.  I almost had to
> sell [at 38], but it quickly
> > popped above [my 8% loss].  If my stop loss is
> triggered, this will mean that so
> > far **every single one** of my losses will have
> been caused by overall Market
> > declines [all but one being short corrections
> during an upward run].
> >
> > Any suggestions?
> >
> > -Jim the-impeccable-market-MIStimer
> >
> > -
>
>
> -
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Forant <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Work gets in the way
Date: 25 Jun 2000 20:38:51 -0400

Lately with the jumpy market I'm lucky if I hold onto a stock more than a
week. I take what profits I can and move on, with no conscience about the
stock running up more. Many times in between that 4-5% past the pivot. This
is not really day trading is it?

Dan

At 11:05 AM 6/25/00 -0600, you wrote:
>Here's a couple of things you can do.
>
>1-I watch the markets at intervals when I can.  I have a watch list set up
>and a spreadsheet with the price and volume I'm looking for.  This makes it
>pretty quick to check.  Yes, you miss many, but I catch a good one
>occasionally.  Even then, many times you're guessig whether the volume will
>continue and the price hold up.
>
>2-Look at each day's close.  Check the volume and price action, and you'll
>know which of your candidates had a valid B/O.  In addition to the pivot
>point, keep a record of the pivot + 5%.  This is your maximum buy point.
>You will find that there are quite a few breakouts that are still within 5%
>at the close.  In fact, many times a very strong breakout (TQNT last week)
>will shoot well beyond 5% in just a few minutes, but fall back into range
>later in the day.  You can buy these either in the after-market,
>pre-market, or on the open.
>
>3-According to WON, about 40% of the breakouts will test the pivot several
>days or a week after the breakout.  If there is a stock you really like,
>you can put in a limit order at 4 or 5% above the pivot, and wait to see if
>it dips for you.  I got into QLGC (my best CANSLIM purchase so far) that
>way last November a day or two after the breakout.  In these cases, it's
>probably wise to watch the volume signals carefully, because you want to
>see the pullback on lighter volume.  It may be that a market dip (like
>Thursday/Friday) is causing some great stocks to come back into range (like
>TLCM).  (Note I'm NOT recommending that last weeks pullback is a buying
>opp.  It MAY be, but I'm not treating it that way myself!)
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: rolatzi <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Work gets in the way
Date: 25 Jun 2000 17:38:12 -0700 (PDT)

If you are working on a computer during the day, you can
watch and/or get alerts from quotetracker.  The program is
excellent and if you have an account at one of the many
brokers that supply real time quotes and an account that
qualifies, you can create lists, make alerts and be alerted
by the program from this site.  This is one of the very
best programs I have come across for investing and it is
free.
Ciao,
rolatzi


--- Dan Forant <[e-mail]> wrote:
> I deal with Ameritrade and they have an excellent phone
> system, so I check
> 2-3 times in the morning and afternoon, it only takes a
> minute. I'm am
> deciding which device to use for even better control, so
> far I'm leaning
> towards a digital cell phone and linking to the net with
> it. It's fairly
> reasonably priced. This way I can get alerts and make the
> decisions. I do
> use stop limits to protect against big losses, I don't
> care if the bounces
> back, I may re-buy. This is not a healthy  market to mess
> with.
>
> Dan
>
> At 10:14 AM 6/25/00 -0400, you wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >I've been investing for just under a year and have been
> trying to buy
> >"Canslim Stocks" at their pivot points on increases in
> volume.  I am
> >begining to become frustrated because I am missing a lot
> of breakouts while
> >at work, etc.
> >
> >How do those of you who can't follow the market during
> the day handle timing
> >your purchases?
> >
> >I've considered setting a limit order at the pivot point
> to trigger the
> >purchase, however, that really doesn't account for
> volume.  Also, with the
> >volitility, daily price swings could trigger the
> purchase.
> >
> >Any suggestions would be helpful.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Erik
> >
> >
> >-
> >
> >
>
> -
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Hugh Fader" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Work gets in the way
Date: 25 Jun 2000 20:47:34 -0400

Another one like this is www.stock-alerts.com. You set up price thresholds
and it emails you when the stock crosses them. I have been experimenting
with having this service send the email to my text pager. It seems to work
well -- except that I got junk mail sent to my pager!

Hugh

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of rolatzi
Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2000 8:38 PM


If you are working on a computer during the day, you can
watch and/or get alerts from quotetracker.  The program is
excellent and if you have an account at one of the many
brokers that supply real time quotes and an account that
qualifies, you can create lists, make alerts and be alerted
by the program from this site.  This is one of the very
best programs I have come across for investing and it is
free.
Ciao,
rolatzi


--- Dan Forant <[e-mail]> wrote:
> I deal with Ameritrade and they have an excellent phone
> system, so I check
> 2-3 times in the morning and afternoon, it only takes a
> minute. I'm am
> deciding which device to use for even better control, so
> far I'm leaning
> towards a digital cell phone and linking to the net with
> it. It's fairly
> reasonably priced. This way I can get alerts and make the
> decisions. I do
> use stop limits to protect against big losses, I don't
> care if the bounces
> back, I may re-buy. This is not a healthy  market to mess
> with.
>
> Dan
>
> At 10:14 AM 6/25/00 -0400, you wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >I've been investing for just under a year and have been
> trying to buy
> >"Canslim Stocks" at their pivot points on increases in
> volume.  I am
> >begining to become frustrated because I am missing a lot
> of breakouts while
> >at work, etc.
> >
> >How do those of you who can't follow the market during
> the day handle timing
> >your purchases?
> >
> >I've considered setting a limit order at the pivot point
> to trigger the
> >purchase, however, that really doesn't account for
> volume.  Also, with the
> >volitility, daily price swings could trigger the
> purchase.
> >
> >Any suggestions would be helpful.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Erik
> >
> >
> >-
> >
> >
>
> -
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/

-


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Forant <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Handle follow up
Date: 25 Jun 2000 20:57:01 -0400

I originally misconstrued the understanding of where the handle is formed.
Here's an example of my ignorance in interpreting the O'Neil book. ACV,
Alberto Culver, formed what I thought was a handle in Dec 99, then a very
loose base, the break was around 27.50. It is up to 29.38 since Friday with
good volume. No more speed reading for me.

Dan

At 04:48 PM 6/25/00 -0600, you wrote:
>I'm not sure what you mean about are handle on the left side.  I guess this
>would be a handle formed from a downtrend without forming a bottom?  WON
>suggests only buying handles at least 50% up from the bottom to reduce the
>impact of overhead resistance.  I would think that a handle on the
>downtrend would be dangerous for this reason.
>
>At 03:33 PM 6/25/00 -0400, you wrote:
>>Yes, I do limit my loses, and I also don't expect much in the way of high
>>profits in my winning stocks with this marke so I grab them often. Can a
>>handle form on the left of the cup and form a base and pivot on the right
>>side. Or is the handle stronger on the right side?
>>
>>At 10:40 AM 6/25/00 -0600, you wrote:
>>>This is a cup pattern, where you set the pivot to 1/8 above the 52 week
>>>high.  In very strong markets, many of the leaders can shoot up the right
>>>side of the cup and break out without forming a handle.  I saw many of
>>>these patterns late last year, and I profited from many of them.  IBD has
>>>discussed this pattern as a possible buying pattern, but they warn that
>>>they are more failure prone than a cup with handle.  I think the volume is
>>>even a more important factor on these patterns, so watch it carefully.  And
>>>as always, LIMIT THOSE LOSSES!!
>>>
>>>
>>>At 08:28 AM 6/25/00 -0400, you wrote:
>>>>I guess in general I have been buying stocks that resemble the base
pattern
>>>>in the book, and buying 1/8 above the pivot of a 52 week high without much
>>>>regard to the handle. Any input?
>>>>
>>>>>Can the handle be on the left side of the cup? I have done well with this
>>>>type also. Or am I just picking saucer or cup w/o handle types?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>-
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>-
>>>
>>>
>>
>>-
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>-
>
>

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Robert <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Acc/Dis Numbers
Date: 26 Jun 2000 00:07:40 -0400

Here Are the latest Acc/Dis numbers:

Date    A    B    C    D    E    a+b/A:E    E/A:E
6/14/00    1062    2874    1355    938    355    60%    5%
6/15/00    1079    2881    1337    941    345    60%    5%
6/16/00    1101    2884    1354    916    333    60%    5%
6/19/00    1076    2874    1331    951    334    60%    5%
6/20/00    1039    2851    1348    960    361    59%    6%
6/21/00    1046    2857    1336    958    358    60%    5%
6/22/00    1039    2869    1287    968    359    60%    6%
6/23/00    1047    2865    1306    947    368    60%    6%
6/26/00    973    2831    1361    976    387    58%    6%


Spreadsheet version:

Date,A,B,C,D,E,a+b/A:E,E/A:E

6/14/00,1062,2874,1355,938,355,60%,5%
6/15/00,1079,2881,1337,941,345,60%,5%
6/16/00,1101,2884,1354,916,333,60%,5%
6/19/00,1076,2874,1331,951,334,60%,5%
6/20/00,1039,2851,1348,960,361,59%,6%
6/21/00,1046,2857,1336,958,358,60%,5%
6/22/00,1039,2869,1287,968,359,60%,6%
6/23/00,1047,2865,1306,947,368,60%,6%
6/26/00,973,2831,1361,976,387,58%,6%

Robert


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Joseph Weisfish" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] cansli[M]
Date: 26 Jun 2000 07:17:04 -0700

When I don't get my paper I call them and tell them to mail me the missing
copy.

They always do.


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2000 7:52 AM


> Earl & Ziggy,
> I'm in the Dallas area, and fail to get IBD maybe once/mo. When I call,
> [phone], they always extend the subscription one day, regardless
> whether the paper is ultimately delivered. Nice gesture, but I'd rather
have
> the paper on time.
> Best wishes,
> Walt
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Friday, June 23, 2000 9:36 AM
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] cansli[M]
>
>
> > Morning Earl,
> >
> > I'm in the Phoenix area and I didn't get my paper either.
> >
> > Ziggy
> >
> > Earl Setser wrote:
> >
> > > Hmm, that's interesting.  I didn't get my paper this morning
either!!???
> > > I'm in the Salt Lake City area, and I know that when I miss it, it
> doesn't
> > > come to work either, so it seems it's an IBD issue.  I'm keeping a
> record
> > > of how many days I miss it (generally it's 1 day late) and I'm gonna
ask
> > > for an extension for those days.  At times, it once a week or so, but
> maybe
> > > twice a month on average.  Still, twice a month is about 10% of the
> time,
> > > so it's worth making a stink over.
> > >
> (SNIP)
>
>
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re:[CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 26 Jun 2000 11:21:13 -0400



Tom, what do you use to determine support/resistance?  E.g., do you use 13
day MA, the low of the last pivot, etc.?  If you have a choice, do you use
the lower/higher one?  E.g,  NEWP: 13 MA at 85, the prior high of the base
is about 86 (happens to be very close to the MA in this case, but what if
it is not?) and the low if the prior base is about 74.  Which one do you
recommend using?  And what does one consider 'break of support': when price
moves 1/2 below the chosen support, 1/16, 1 point?   Clearly you want to
give more room to more volitile stocks, but is there a systematic way to do
it? (as opposed to same arbitrary decision?)
Sorry for asking so many questions.
Does anyone have an opinion of that?

Anna Sosis



Tom Gumpel <[e-mail]> on 06/25/2000 05:08:52 AM

Please respond to [e-mail]

cc:




Let me ask you all a simple question:

would you rather have your stock go up 75% or 25%?

That's the only question you need to answer.

Selling everything at 25% doesn't make sense, nor does selling
every-other-thing at 25%. Some stocks go higher, some don't. Why not take
advantage of that?

What's to stop anyone from setting stops so that well-made profits are
locked in? Isn't that smarter than a blanket selling rule?

But it's your money, and I don't really care one way or another. Just be
aware that what you are doing makes very little business or intuitive
sense.

Lock in profits, sure. Take yourself out of the game and lose huge
potential profits? You've got to be kidding.

An example. I bought TGLD way back when it was 65 along with a friend. It
floundered a bit, got close to my 8% stop, but didn't pass it. Then it shot
up to 79 (about 25%). My friend sold, I kept on, but moved my stop up to
support level. TLGD went up, and up, and up. I have my stop set at about
85% above my buy-in price (but I never set stops by percentage points,
rather by support/resistance), and my friend has his 25% profit in hand.
Using protective stops, my profits are also locked in.

Think of it this way:

100 shares @65 sold at 79 = 7900-6500 or a $1400 profit. Nice.

100 shares @65 sold at $136 = 13600-6500 or a $7100 profit. Nicer.

why would anybody EVER want to do anything else?

but it's your money, you can throw it away if you want.

enough said.

tom


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Tom Gumpel
Department of Special Education                         972-2-588-2165
School of Education                                   Fax:
972-2-588-2045
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem        in US:  877-258-9406
Jerusalem, ISRAEL 91905
http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msgumpel/main.htm
VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS!


-





-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kent Norman <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] CECO break out
Date: 26 Jun 2000 10:38:51 -0500

CECO is at 46 3/8 prev 52 week high was 46
avg daily volume is 48,600
current vol 19,800 2 hrs into the day

Kent

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kent Norman <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] AGN break out
Date: 26 Jun 2000 12:04:26 -0500

AGN is at 71 1/4
prev 52 wk high 71
avg daily vol 730,000
current vol 588,200 3 1/2 hours into the day

Kent

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chris dempsey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re:[CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 26 Jun 2000 18:20:55 -0400 (EDT)

One thing that WON recommends is to chart and review previous positions.
When I did this, the first thing that I noticed was that the positions that
I had bought stalled at 25%. From there they went both up and down. It was
after I listened to WON's tape again that I really think that nailing down
some gains using the sell =BD of all positions reaching 25% makes since to =
me,
and I'm going to try it for a while. Tom, you gave one example below. What
about your other experiences? Have you ever had a 25% gain melt away? I
have. It only takes a 20% drop to melt away a 25% gain in a position. When
you have a 25% gain you are not out of the woods yet!

Other than the 7-8% initial loss rule WON is very vague about sell rules. I=
n
fact this rule is on his tape and not in either book. Some sell rules that
WON has written are often slightly different in each of his books. Tom, I
don't believe that you can say selling a stock at a 25% gain is throwing
money away. Protective stops don't always protect the way you want them to.
Have you ever owned a stock that a brokerage firm decided to downgrade? The
question here is picking the correct half to keep. I will never get this
right, but if I can get it right some of the time then I will be in good
shape. Does anyone know the maximum draw down % (top to bottom) on CSCO,
MSFT, SUNW, or any other of the elite?

Remember all stocks are bad unless they go up. Someone recently posted that
they were dying to buy a stock, I'm not dying to buy any stock but I am
dying to make money.

Earl, I'm curious why you are (LOL) laughing out loud as you reformulate
your latest selling formula? This appears to be an area we would all like t=
o
get better at.

Dallas CANSLIM Saturday morning group, Have you discussed this in any of
your meetings with any good results?

I agree with you Earl that this HAS been an excellent thread and thanks to
all for the opinions. Let's keep it going.


Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2000 11:35 AM

<snip>

I'm beginning to reformulate my latest selling formula (LOL).  I like WON's
8% rule as an absolute limit of the risk of each purchase.  I also like the
rule that a 15% gain won't be allowed to go to a loss.  I used these 2
rules and a 15% trailing stop to formulate a hard stop strategy.  The
weakness of this strategy is that it ignores trendlines and support.

<snip>

At 11:08 AM 6/25/00 +0200, Tom wrote:
>Let me ask you all a simple question:
>
>would you rather have your stock go up 75% or 25%?
>
>That's the only question you need to answer.
>
>Selling everything at 25% doesn't make sense, nor does selling
>every-other-thing at 25%. Some stocks go higher, some don't. Why not take
>advantage of that?
>
>What's to stop anyone from setting stops so that well-made profits are
>locked in? Isn't that smarter than a blanket selling rule?
>
>But it's your money, and I don't really care one way or another. Just be
>aware that what you are doing makes very little business or intuitive
sense.
>
>Lock in profits, sure. Take yourself out of the game and lose huge
>potential profits? You've got to be kidding.
>
>An example. I bought TGLD way back when it was 65 along with a friend. It
>floundered a bit, got close to my 8% stop, but didn't pass it. Then it sho=
t
>up to 79 (about 25%). My friend sold, I kept on, but moved my stop up to
>support level. TLGD went up, and up, and up. I have my stop set at about
>85% above my buy-in price (but I never set stops by percentage points,
>rather by support/resistance), and my friend has his 25% profit in hand.
>Using protective stops, my profits are also locked in.
>
>Think of it this way:
>
>100 shares @65 sold at 79 =3D 7900-6500 or a $1400 profit. Nice.
>
>100 shares @65 sold at $136 =3D 13600-6500 or a $7100 profit. Nicer.
>
>why would anybody EVER want to do anything else?
>
>but it's your money, you can throw it away if you want.
>
>enough said.
>
>Tom Gumpel


______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=3Dsignup


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re:[CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 26 Jun 2000 15:06:14 -0700 (PDT)



> An example. I bought TGLD way back when it was 65 along with a friend. It
> floundered a bit, got close to my 8% stop, but didn't pass it. Then it shot
> up to 79 (about 25%). My friend sold, I kept on, but moved my stop up to
> support level. TLGD went up, and up, and up. I have my stop set at about
> 85% above my buy-in price (but I never set stops by percentage points,
> rather by support/resistance), and my friend has his 25% profit in hand.
> Using protective stops, my profits are also locked in.
>

Your profits are somewhat locked in -- they are never locked in.

With stop loss, the order becomes a market order once the stop is
triggered. In this case if the stock takes a dive, you are left with a
larger loss than you anticipated.

With stop limit, the order is set at a fixed price and so becomes a limit
order once the stop is triggered. In this case if the stock takes a dive,
you are left holding the stock.

Now, the method mentioned above is extremely good and I would use this
only but I wanted to clarify that is no such sure thing in the stock
market that limits your loss. They all potentially limit the loss.

Regards,
Shah



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 26 Jun 2000 22:09:03 EDT

I'm starting to understand stops...I have the AX online broker who has the
stop on the nasq at a good price?

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re:[CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 26 Jun 2000 20:52:26 -0600

Just LOL at my self-imposed trials and tribulations.  Try this, okay how
about, no, well maybe, etc., etc.  It's wouldn't be funny if I weren't
doing very well anyway!!

This "selling thang" has been ellusive.  I keep telling myself that there
is no perfect approach, and selling at a gain is the goal.  Still, I see
KEI and SDLI scream up after being stopped out last week, and I find myself
wishing I was still in them.  Oh well, I did get gains out of both.

At 06:20 PM 6/26/00 -0400, you wrote:
>...

>Earl, I'm curious why you are (LOL) laughing out loud as you reformulate
>your latest selling formula? This appears to be an area we would all like to
>get better at.
>
....
>
>



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 26 Jun 2000 23:12:26 EDT

I have nvda at 135 and it is up at 165....I think that I will sell tomorrow
and that the gains...but will keep xlnx that I bought at 77 and 85........I
think that i will sell csco and orcl too..they are not doing
anythin.........I bought mot at 32 and will keep will loss too much..any
thoughts

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: MOT (was Re: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%)
Date: 26 Jun 2000 23:52:35 -0400

Anytime you examine a losing position, I think the first and most
important rule is to ask yourself if you would buy it (or buy
more) at its current depressed price. If the answer is a solid
"no", then you must ask yourself why you are keeping capital tied
up in it, since obviously you are not expecting a swift rebound.

With two gaps down, and one gap up, just in the past three
months, and an RS of 20, it is hardly likely to be a money maker
for you, even from 32.  Dropping from 34 and change to under 30
in just three trading days might mean that it could bounce back
to the low 30s, and permit you to escape with a break even. Or it
might also mean that the RS and the gap downs signals further
erosion. Take your pick, eat the loss now and move on with the
remaining capital in something with better prospects; hold and
hope to recoup your loss; risk an even greater loss of capital.
It's all in what your risk tolerance, and patience, is.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2000 11:12 PM


.........I bought mot at 32 and will keep will loss too much..any
thoughts

-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: MOT (was Re: [CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%)
Date: 26 Jun 2000 23:56:18 -0400

Anytime you examine a losing position, I think the first and most
important rule is to ask yourself if you would buy it (or buy
more) at its current depressed price. If the answer is a solid
"no", then you must ask yourself why you are keeping capital tied
up in it, since obviously you are not expecting a swift rebound.

With two gaps down, and one gap up, just in the past three
months, and an RS of 20, it is hardly likely to be a money maker
for you, even from 32.  Dropping from 34 and change to under 30
in just three trading days might mean that it could bounce back
to the low 30s, and permit you to escape with a break even. Or it
might also mean that the RS and the gap downs signals further
erosion. Take your pick, eat the loss now and move on with the
remaining capital in something with better prospects; hold and
hope to recoup your loss; risk an even greater loss of capital.
It's all in what your risk tolerance, and patience, is.

I took a sizable loss on a small cap stock because I accepted its
fundies had changed for the worse.  Had I fought the trend, and
held on only a few more weeks, my loss would have increased from
50% or so to over 90%.  I didn't like admitting I screwed up by
holding as long as I did, but I was at least proud of the fact
that I finally admitted I screwed up, and did something about it.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2000 11:12 PM


.........I bought mot at 32 and will keep will loss too much..any
thoughts

-




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Gumpel <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: NVDA or Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 27 Jun 2000 08:41:23 +0200


The other Tom has already discussed MOT, so I won't go into that.
But why on earth you would ever sell NVDA now escapes me.
Look at the chart; this is what you'll see:
connect the intraday lows of 5/15 and 6/15 and you'll see a nice up-trend.
even though you have about 40% more volume in the last week, it has been
divided between accumulation and distribution. There is no market consensus
yet regarding where it will go next. But since there is now overhead
supply, nobody has any reason to jump ship just yet.
What's to stop you from setting a stop at support around 145 3/8 (which has
been tested twice, a minor source of support) for half your position, and
then again at 117 7/8 (which has more major support, having lasted longer
(2 weeks) and has been tested half a dozen times).
That way you are giving some downward leeway, but not too much, and a lot
of upward room. You have nothing really to lose. But if you sell now, you
have a lot to potentially lose.



At 11:12 PM 26/6/00 -0400, [e-mail] wrote:
>I have nvda at 135 and it is up at 165....I think that I will sell tomorrow
>and that the gains...but will keep xlnx that I bought at 77 and 85........I
>think that i will sell csco and orcl too..they are not doing
>anythin.........I bought mot at 32 and will keep will loss too much..any
>thoughts
>
>-

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Tom Gumpel
Department of Special Education                         972-2-588-2165
School of Education                                   Fax:    [phone]
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem        in US:  877-258-9406
Jerusalem, ISRAEL 91905
http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msgumpel/main.htm
VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Gumpel <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re:[CANSLIM]Sell 1/2 of all positions that reach 25%
Date: 27 Jun 2000 08:52:38 +0200

Chris,
No, I have never lost my entire gain. But, that being said, I have lost=20
some of it. For example, I bought PCCC a while back at about 22. I was=20
itching to sell, and so was my wife, when it hit 25%. It then continued to=
=20
climb until at one point it got to 57. My stops now are set under 47 and=20
43. Does that mean that I will lose some from 57 (I have potentially lost=20
that, already)? Yes. Does that mean that in the gamble to limit downside=20
but not to limit upside, I may deny myself the very top? Yes. Will I be=20
able to stay with PCCC if it continues (hopefully) to move up? Yes. Do I=20
think that will happen? No, not really. I think that it's a done deal; but=
=20
why limit it?

but, again, it's your money and your tolerance of risk. I can only use=20
logic, which is the way decisions should be made. Not by fear or greed.


At 06:20 PM 26/6/00 -0400, chris dempsey wrote:
>One thing that WON recommends is to chart and review previous positions.
>When I did this, the first thing that I noticed was that the positions that
>I had bought stalled at 25%. From there they went both up and down. It was
>after I listened to WON's tape again that I really think that nailing down
>some gains using the sell =BD of all positions reaching 25% makes since to=
 me,
>and I'm going to try it for a while. Tom, you gave one example below. What
>about your other experiences? Have you ever had a 25% gain melt away? I
>have. It only takes a 20% drop to melt away a 25% gain in a position. When
>you have a 25% gain you are not out of the woods yet!
>
>Other than the 7-8% initial loss rule WON is very vague about sell rules.=
 In
>fact this rule is on his tape and not in either book. Some sell rules that
>WON has written are often slightly different in each of his books. Tom, I
>don't believe that you can say selling a stock at a 25% gain is throwing
>money away. Protective stops don't always protect the way you want them to.
>Have you ever owned a stock that a brokerage firm decided to downgrade? The
>question here is picking the correct half to keep. I will never get this
>right, but if I can get it right some of the time then I will be in good
>shape. Does anyone know the maximum draw down % (top to bottom) on CSCO,
>MSFT, SUNW, or any other of the elite?

=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=
=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D
Tom Gumpel
Department of Special Education                         972-2-588-2165
School of Education                                   Fax:    [phone]
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem        in US:  877-258-9406
Jerusalem, ISRAEL 91905
http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msgumpel/main.htm
VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS!=20


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: [CANSLIM] DRAM cup/w handle
Date: 27 Jun 2000 09:46:44 -0500 (CDT)

Hi guys I'm somewhat new to  CANSLIM. DRAM looks to me to be in a cup
formation starting about 7-8 weeks ago. Any opinions and comments are
appreciated.


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Forant <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DRAM cup/w handle
Date: 27 Jun 2000 11:32:32 -0400

I'm new also and have no complaints about the system at all. It has worked
for me quite well for 5 month's now with no prior market knowledge. So I'm
here to learn.

I would have bought this stock at 31 or 1/8 above the March previous high.
There is no handle yet. It did bottom out below the recommended 33% and the
double bottom didn't form correctly. Revenues and earnings per share are
up. Volume good.

How about rating this critique: A B C D.

Dan

At 09:46 AM 6/27/00 -0500, you wrote:
>Hi guys I'm somewhat new to  CANSLIM. DRAM looks to me to be in a cup
>formation starting about 7-8 weeks ago. Any opinions and comments are
>appreciated.
>
>
>-
>
>

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DRAM cup/w handle
Date: 27 Jun 2000 08:38:30 -0700 (PDT)

It is a cup. It has not formed a handle yet. It should form one soon or
might not form.

Remember in a good handle, the volume dries up and price goes down and
that it should not be more than half the distance between the top and
bottom edges. The pivot point will be top of the start of the handle and
generally (my observation), the upward movement will start at or near a
support point (usually 50dma).

Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Tue, 27 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:

> Hi guys I'm somewhat new to  CANSLIM. DRAM looks to me to be in a cup
> formation starting about 7-8 weeks ago. Any opinions and comments are
> appreciated.
>
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DRAM cup/w handle
Date: 27 Jun 2000 12:54:55 EDT

what charts do you use?

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Forant <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DRAM cup/w handle
Date: 27 Jun 2000 13:10:08 -0400

ClearStation.com........the interactive graph tool one. They also link to a
Profile and Fundamentals section with loads of info.

At 12:54 PM 6/27/00 EDT, you wrote:
>what charts do you use?
>
>-
>
>

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DRAM cup/w handle
Date: 27 Jun 2000 10:34:43 -0700 (PDT)

I use yahoo 3 month and one year.


Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Tue, 27 Jun 2000 [e-mail] wrote:

> what charts do you use?
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: [CANSLIM] split adjusted price
Date: 27 Jun 2000 17:42:28 -0400



Hello

I am wondering if someone has ever heard of the following situation:  ANEN
split sometime ago on 3-2 basis.  I had an odd number of shares, so my
broker credited my account for the 0.5 share that I should have had.  The
problem is that my broker claims that ANEN's price for partial shares was
fixed by the company at $66 per share (i.e, for $33 for 0.5 shares).  The
day before the split the stock traded at $149, almost double.

Do you know if a company can do something like this or should I persue this
issue with my broker?

Anna Sosis



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DRAM cup/w handle
Date: 27 Jun 2000 19:20:58 -0400

Main flaw in the chart is the total lack of a handle. Not the
stocks fault, heavy volume came in just where the handle should
have started to form. Excellent CS elements (RS 97, EPS 97,
A/A/A/A, ROE 30%, Management owns 30% of the issue while funds
only own 4% of the float so far).

Trailing PE @ 37 is in line with the S&P, and projected PE even
lower. Mkt cap/sales ratio only slightly over 2.0, and up/down
ratio a strong 3.8. At 31.81 not too extended for a fresh buy,
however the lack of a handle makes the risk of a slide back to 25
that much greater.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2000 10:46 AM


Hi guys I'm somewhat new to  CANSLIM. DRAM looks to me to be in a
cup
formation starting about 7-8 weeks ago. Any opinions and comments
are
appreciated.


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] split adjusted price
Date: 27 Jun 2000 19:48:22 -0400

Hi Anna,

While the post split trading price is not changed until the stock
trades post split, the cash value of fractional shares is set
some time before, often if not always as of the record date.
This date is established in the original split announcement. I
was unable to find the announcement in a quick search, but do
note that the stock closed 5/24 at $66, so I would not be
surprised to find that this is the record date that was set. The
actual announcement was in March, and the split took effect 6/12.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2000 5:42 PM




Hello

I am wondering if someone has ever heard of the following
situation:  ANEN
split sometime ago on 3-2 basis.  I had an odd number of shares,
so my
broker credited my account for the 0.5 share that I should have
had.  The
problem is that my broker claims that ANEN's price for partial
shares was
fixed by the company at $66 per share (i.e, for $33 for 0.5
shares).  The
day before the split the stock traded at $149, almost double.

Do you know if a company can do something like this or should I
persue this
issue with my broker?

Anna Sosis



-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DRAM cup/w handle
Date: 27 Jun 2000 21:18:44 EDT

If you are just starting and want to get better that average quality charts
for free, you might want to check on prophetfinance.com/ -- Within that site
I use Javacharts as it is quick, allows one to zoom in on a specific time
frame (with a click & drag motion of the mouse), and it's free!  It will not
print on AOL but will on most other providers.  I access through Microsoft
Internet Explorer which prints nicely.

Good hunting.

Howard

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dennis Jun <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] DRAM cup/w handle
Date: 27 Jun 2000 18:36:52 -0700 (PDT)

--- [e-mail] wrote:
> what charts do you use?

Another very good charting service is MetaStock's Online version:
http://www.equis.com/java/


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Forant <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Meanings
Date: 27 Jun 2000 21:43:06 -0400

Tom Worley, what do the letter and numbers mean? And LLUR?


Thanks Dan Forant


>>>>

<excerpt>ADCT - LLUR

ORCL - B3

ANEN - B2, trying to break out

DRAM - possible handle forming to the cup

LTRE - LLUR, tho sloppy

NSIT - B1+

PLXS - recovered Friday back to a B2 after the light vol selloff

on Thu

XLNX - B3

FWRD - B2

MSS - B1+

FII - LLUR

SHFL - B5, volume down

GLW - B1+

MEDQ - B4+


</excerpt><<<<<<<<




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Pritish Shah <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Meanings
Date: 27 Jun 2000 18:24:47 -0700 (PDT)



LLUR: lower left upper right (chart pattern)
B3: basing for 3 weeks

Regards,
Shah
408-525-4263


On Tue, 27 Jun 2000, Dan Forant wrote:

> Tom Worley, what do the letter and numbers mean? And LLUR?
>
>
> Thanks Dan Forant
>
>
> >>>>
>
> <excerpt>ADCT - LLUR
>
> ORCL - B3
>
> ANEN - B2, trying to break out
>
> DRAM - possible handle forming to the cup
>
> LTRE - LLUR, tho sloppy
>
> NSIT - B1+
>
> PLXS - recovered Friday back to a B2 after the light vol selloff
>
> on Thu
>
> XLNX - B3
>
> FWRD - B2
>
> MSS - B1+
>
> FII - LLUR
>
> SHFL - B5, volume down
>
> GLW - B1+
>
> MEDQ - B4+
>
>
> </excerpt><<<<<<<<
>
>
>
>
> -
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kent Norman <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] earnings calendar for Toms list
Date: 27 Jun 2000 21:24:33 -0500

earnings announce date

AC 7/28
JBL 9/14
GBL n/a
LFUS 7/20
THX 7/26
SPW 7/25
ELF n/a
MGG 7/20
MFC 8/18
OMI 7/13
EVER 7/28
AAS 7/28
COO 8/25
UNH 8/4
TECD 8/31
BRL 8/8
CBM 7/19
AZR 7/19
CECO 8/1
AGN 7/27
BOCB 8/3
XRAY 7/21

Kent

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Forant <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Double Bottom
Date: 27 Jun 2000 22:44:08 -0400

Does MGG have the makings of a good double bottom so far?

Dan

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Double Bottom
Date: 27 Jun 2000 22:43:38 -0400

no, not nearly severe enough.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2000 10:44 PM


Does MGG have the makings of a good double bottom so far?

Dan

-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Ed Wile" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Intro: Ed Wile
Date: 28 Jun 2000 00:11:57 -0700

Hey gang,
      My name is Ed and I've been interested in the stock market since the
beginning of April.  I live on Long Island, and had to take the train into
the city for 3 days straight. Quite frankly I was drawn to buy a copy of IBD
after seeing their advertisements at EVERY SINGLE Long Island Rail Road
station, and the ads looked cool.  So I bought a copy in Penn Station for
the ride home.  I've not missed an issue since.
    It took a while to digest the CANSLIM method and the concept of
integrating fundimental and technical data to pick stocks, and my first 3
buys were duds.  But as WON points out, it's a small price to pay for the
education.  At the beginning of June, I decided to hone my skills by signing
up for the Bloomberg investing challenge as a way to practice without my own
money on the line.  That's when things started to click and I've managed to
maintain a nice prophet for the whole month.  Picks that did well for me
include sanm, iaai, Linear Technology, twp and several others that I can't
recall right now.
    Bolstered by almost a month of solid picking and practice, yesterday I
ventured back in the market with real cash yesterday and bought a few shares
of dram, which has certainly been featured prominently in the past several
issues of IBD.
    I had been watching ericy but it seems to have lost most of it's steam
(anyone have any thoughts on ericy at this point?)
    Anyway, a bit about me.  I'm a licensed clinical/school Psychologist and
I specialize in work with oppositional adolescents (I don't know, I have a
way with them) I also do well with ADHD kids and children 3-7 years old who
have been traumatized in some way.  I'm taking the first steps of starting a
private practice so that I can get away from some of the red tape involved
in clinical settings (and so that I can make more money!)
    Also I'm a rabid music fan and a total Deadhead and Springsteen fanatic.
    Anyway, I'm glad I found this group and I have a feeling that this will
be a very fulfilling relationship.

Cutting losses at 8%,
Dr. Ed Wile


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Ed Wile" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Dram
Date: 28 Jun 2000 00:50:40 -0700

I bought dram yesterday at 30.18 and thought that I was actually a litttle
late.  I thought that I had identified a handle, albiet a short one, that
went from about 26 down to about 23 just prior to the big jump last week.

Was I mistaken?  I'm actually considering picking up a few more shares
tomorrow, so I was glad to see that someone here felt that it is not too far
overextended.

Ed


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dennis Jun <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Dram
Date: 27 Jun 2000 22:18:30 -0700 (PDT)

--- Ed Wile <[e-mail]> wrote:
> I bought dram yesterday at 30.18 and thought that I was actually a litttle
> late.  I thought that I had identified a handle, albiet a short one, that
> went from about 26 down to about 23 just prior to the big jump last week.
>
> Was I mistaken?  I'm actually considering picking up a few more shares
> tomorrow, so I was glad to see that someone here felt that it is not too far
> overextended.
>
> Ed

O'neil says on page 55 in "24 Essential Lessons for Investment Success",
"Don't cahse it up more than 5% its pivot. If you do, you will be buying
more extended in price." Now, DRAM's pivot point was on June 20th at
$24.75. Assuming that $24.75 is 100%, then $30.18 is almost 22% past the
pivot point. Now, I'm a complete neophyte myself, but I thought I'd add
my 2 cents analysis :) Can someone more experienced in CANSLIM enlighten
us further?


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Intro: Ed Wile
Date: 28 Jun 2000 06:13:39 -0400

Welcome to the group, Ed, and thanks for the intro.

I wouldn't rush to buy ERICY just yet, tho its CANSLIM report
card is still very attractive (89/94/A/A/B/B).  Overall GRS is
still 91.  Sales and earnings growth has been inconsistent, but
it is positioned to take advantage of new business in China, and
that could hype expectations long term. Chart wise, looks like it
is consolidating, but there is not a clear base as I see it.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2000 3:11 AM


Hey gang,
      My name is Ed and I've been interested in the stock market
since the
beginning of April.  I live on Long Island, and had to take the
train into
the city for 3 days straight. Quite frankly I was drawn to buy a
copy of IBD
after seeing their advertisements at EVERY SINGLE Long Island
Rail Road
station, and the ads looked cool.  So I bought a copy in Penn
Station for
the ride home.  I've not missed an issue since.
    It took a while to digest the CANSLIM method and the concept
of
integrating fundimental and technical data to pick stocks, and my
first 3
buys were duds.  But as WON points out, it's a small price to pay
for the
education.  At the beginning of June, I decided to hone my skills
by signing
up for the Bloomberg investing challenge as a way to practice
without my own
money on the line.  That's when things started to click and I've
managed to
maintain a nice prophet for the whole month.  Picks that did well
for me
include sanm, iaai, Linear Technology, twp and several others
that I can't
recall right now.
    Bolstered by almost a month of solid picking and practice,
yesterday I
ventured back in the market with real cash yesterday and bought a
few shares
of dram, which has certainly been featured prominently in the
past several
issues of IBD.
    I had been watching ericy but it seems to have lost most of
it's steam
(anyone have any thoughts on ericy at this point?)
    Anyway, a bit about me.  I'm a licensed clinical/school
Psychologist and
I specialize in work with oppositional adolescents (I don't know,
I have a
way with them) I also do well with ADHD kids and children 3-7
years old who
have been traumatized in some way.  I'm taking the first steps of
starting a
private practice so that I can get away from some of the red tape
involved
in clinical settings (and so that I can make more money!)
    Also I'm a rabid music fan and a total Deadhead and
Springsteen fanatic.
    Anyway, I'm glad I found this group and I have a feeling that
this will
be a very fulfilling relationship.

Cutting losses at 8%,
Dr. Ed Wile


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Dram
Date: 28 Jun 2000 06:17:05 -0400

It's "not too far extended" if you are placing the pivot point
around 30.25, where the left rim started.  If you call the two
week base around 25 the handle, however, then it is way too far
extended. Note also that the second low did not undercut the
first in the bottom of the cup.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2000 3:50 AM


I bought dram yesterday at 30.18 and thought that I was actually
a litttle
late.  I thought that I had identified a handle, albiet a short
one, that
went from about 26 down to about 23 just prior to the big jump
last week.

Was I mistaken?  I'm actually considering picking up a few more
shares
tomorrow, so I was glad to see that someone here felt that it is
not too far
overextended.

Ed


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Gumpel <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Dram
Date: 28 Jun 2000 14:55:58 +0200

Tom,
Is that what Sperandeo calls a 2-B?


At 06:17 AM 28/6/00 -0400, Tom Worley wrote:
>It's "not too far extended" if you are placing the pivot point
>around 30.25, where the left rim started.  If you call the two
>week base around 25 the handle, however, then it is way too far
>extended. Note also that the second low did not undercut the
>first in the bottom of the cup.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Tom Gumpel
Department of Special Education                         972-2-588-2165
School of Education                                   Fax:    [phone]
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem        in US:  877-258-9406
Jerusalem, ISRAEL 91905
http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msgumpel/main.htm
VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Gumpel <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Dram
Date: 28 Jun 2000 14:55:58 +0200

Tom,
Is that what Sperandeo calls a 2-B?


At 06:17 AM 28/6/00 -0400, Tom Worley wrote:
>It's "not too far extended" if you are placing the pivot point
>around 30.25, where the left rim started.  If you call the two
>week base around 25 the handle, however, then it is way too far
>extended. Note also that the second low did not undercut the
>first in the bottom of the cup.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Tom Gumpel
Department of Special Education                         972-2-588-2165
School of Education                                   Fax:    [phone]
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem        in US:  877-258-9406
Jerusalem, ISRAEL 91905
http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msgumpel/main.htm
VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Dram
Date: 28 Jun 2000 08:03:45 -0400

don't know Sperandeo, just O'Neil

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2000 8:55 AM


Tom,
Is that what Sperandeo calls a 2-B?


At 06:17 AM 28/6/00 -0400, Tom Worley wrote:
>It's "not too far extended" if you are placing the pivot point
>around 30.25, where the left rim started.  If you call the two
>week base around 25 the handle, however, then it is way too far
>extended. Note also that the second low did not undercut the
>first in the bottom of the cup.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
-=-=-=-=
Tom Gumpel
Department of Special Education
972-2-588-2165
School of Education                                   Fax:
972-2-588-2045
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem        in US:  877-258-9406
Jerusalem, ISRAEL 91905
http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msgumpel/main.htm
VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS!


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tim Fisher <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] HGS list for 6/23
Date: 28 Jun 2000 08:16:42 -0700

Just got around to looking these up, from the HGS scans at ranord's site
(80/80/80 A/A):

NVLS EV APA AUDC IMPH LFUS LLY BLK SHFL NUHC EVER NSIT PWER THX CDWC KP
PLXT CCMP PCCC DRAM DIOD ELNT JDSU SANM TLGD VTSS XLTC PENG TECH WAT QGENF
MCRL PLXS TNL CHP TLCM KEI SDLI

I haven't trimmed these for 15% from 52-wk high like I usually do.

Tim Fisher
Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites

[e-mail]
WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
See naked fish and rocks!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Dr. DiGirolamo)
Subject: [CANSLIM] New stocks to the Russell 2000
Date: 28 Jun 2000 23:07:50 -0400

This is a little off CANSLIM directly, but may be helpful to all ..

  Does anyone know where to find a listing of the new stocks going into the
Russell 2000 on Friday?

Regards,

Mike


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] New stocks to the Russell 2000
Date: 29 Jun 2000 00:26:16 -0400

Here's the list of possible adds to the Russell 3000.

http://www.russell.com/us/indexes/us/membership/radd3000.asp

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2000 11:07 PM


This is a little off CANSLIM directly, but may be helpful to all
..

  Does anyone know where to find a listing of the new stocks
going into the
Russell 2000 on Friday?

Regards,

Mike


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Dram
Date: 28 Jun 2000 22:57:07 -0600



On 28 Jun 00, at 0:50, Ed Wile wrote:

> I bought dram yesterday at 30.18 and thought that I was actually a litttle
> late.  I thought that I had identified a handle, albiet a short one, that
> went from about 26 down to about 23 just prior to the big jump last week.
>
> Was I mistaken?  I'm actually considering picking up a few more shares
> tomorrow, so I was glad to see that someone here felt that it is not too far
> overextended.

I'd day 30 was too extended.  Buy point was approximately 25.25,
and even allowing 10 percent on top of that as the limit rather than
5%, that would mean not buying it past 27.75.

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Patrick Wahl" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] buy candidates
Date: 28 Jun 2000 23:03:02 -0600

Here are a few stocks that look interesting for one reason or
another -

SEPR - breakout, not canslim because no earnings, but a good
chart, a leading industry.

JNPR, nice chart, similar to JDSU, but maybe completed a better
looking C&H with a buy signal today.
BRCD ditto
JDSU might be completing a C&H, but right side is a bit lower than
the left side, maybe someone can comment on this.

HAKI sort of a flat base, or recently an ascending triangle type
thing if you consider a shorter time frame, I guess the pivot point is
just over 30.

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]
Date: 29 Jun 2000 09:59:14 -0700

How about additions to the S&P500, Nasdaq 100, Nasdaq Composite, and the Russel
2000 [not Russel 3000]?  Anyone know where these are posted?

-Jim waiting-to-get-out-of-TLCM-and-be-100%-cash-again


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: S&P500 listing URL
Date: 29 Jun 2000 11:16:32 -0700

Chris D. mailed the following URL:

http://www.spglobal.com/ssindexmain500indchange.html

Thanks

-Jim


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Rocky Sanghvi <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM]  Another day of Distribution?
Date: 29 Jun 2000 11:30:43 -0400

Are we logging another day of distribution on the Nas?

Volume is almost .6 billion at 11:30am

Rakesh



-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 12:59 PM


How about additions to the S&P500, Nasdaq 100, Nasdaq Composite, and the
Russel
2000 [not Russel 3000]?  Anyone know where these are posted?

-Jim waiting-to-get-out-of-TLCM-and-be-100%-cash-again


-

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Roger Kraus <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Intro: Roger Kraus
Date: 29 Jun 2000 12:25:28 -0400

Hello,

I've been investing for a few years.  I've been getting IBD for a those
years and have found it to be very informative as I've kicked myself over
and over again for buying lousy stocks instead of those highlighted by IBD.
 TIME TO DO IT RIGHT !!

I'm a mechanical engineer working for an aerospace firm in the DC area.  I
primarily work on the Hubble Space Telescope project.

Roger

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Ed Wile" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Now I Need
Date: 29 Jun 2000 13:09:05 -0700

DRAMamine...

Holding on,
Ed


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tim Fisher <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM]  Another day of Distribution?
Date: 29 Jun 2000 10:40:53 -0700

3880 has been mentioned by several technical gurus as the
support/resistance line for the NASDAQ. We're toying with it today (from
the upper side), as we did (from the underside) for the first 4 days of
last week. If we close below it I'd say that tomorrow could be pretty ugly.
If we close above it then tomorrow still could be ugly because it's the end
of the quarter, but I think window dressing will kick in, and many are
looking to that number for guidance anyway. Regardless, there's another
month of Fed watching that will probably kill any attempts to break 5000
again in short order. I have been and still am churning (not churning
stocks anymore, thankfully) away at my 12/31/99 closing account values.
IOW, I've gone nowhere and don't expect to get anywhere before the Aug.
FOMC meeting.

P.S. At least half of the HGS stocks I posted yesterday are up so far
today. Therefore I think the leaders are not distributing significantly.
Weaker stocks are getting hit for now.

On 08:30 AM 6/29/00, Rocky Sanghvi Said:
>Are we logging another day of distribution on the Nas?
>
>Volume is almost .6 billion at 11:30am
>
>Rakesh
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
>Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 12:59 PM
>To: [e-mail]
>Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]
>
>
>How about additions to the S&P500, Nasdaq 100, Nasdaq Composite, and the
>Russel
>2000 [not Russel 3000]?  Anyone know where these are posted?
>
>-Jim waiting-to-get-out-of-TLCM-and-be-100%-cash-again
>
>
>-
>
>-

Tim Fisher
Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites

[e-mail]
WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
See naked fish and rocks!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kent Norman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]  Another day of Distribution?
Date: 29 Jun 2000 12:45:02 -0500

I am back to 100% cash, +11% for the week and time to check out.
Kent

Rocky Sanghvi wrote:
>
> Are we logging another day of distribution on the Nas?
>
> Volume is almost .6 billion at 11:30am
>
> Rakesh
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 12:59 PM
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]
>
> How about additions to the S&P500, Nasdaq 100, Nasdaq Composite, and the
> Russel
> 2000 [not Russel 3000]?  Anyone know where these are posted?
>
> -Jim waiting-to-get-out-of-TLCM-and-be-100%-cash-again
>
> -
>
> -

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Rocky Sanghvi <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM]  Another day of Distribution?
Date: 29 Jun 2000 19:13:18 -0400

Tim:

We closed at 3877.  Are you expecting more ugliness tomorrow?  Volume was
1.5B

Best Regards,
Rakesh



-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 1:41 PM


3880 has been mentioned by several technical gurus as the
support/resistance line for the NASDAQ. We're toying with it today (from
the upper side), as we did (from the underside) for the first 4 days of
last week. If we close below it I'd say that tomorrow could be pretty ugly.
If we close above it then tomorrow still could be ugly because it's the end
of the quarter, but I think window dressing will kick in, and many are
looking to that number for guidance anyway. Regardless, there's another
month of Fed watching that will probably kill any attempts to break 5000
again in short order. I have been and still am churning (not churning
stocks anymore, thankfully) away at my 12/31/99 closing account values.
IOW, I've gone nowhere and don't expect to get anywhere before the Aug.
FOMC meeting.

P.S. At least half of the HGS stocks I posted yesterday are up so far
today. Therefore I think the leaders are not distributing significantly.
Weaker stocks are getting hit for now.

On 08:30 AM 6/29/00, Rocky Sanghvi Said:
>Are we logging another day of distribution on the Nas?
>
>Volume is almost .6 billion at 11:30am
>
>Rakesh
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
>Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 12:59 PM
>To: [e-mail]
>Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]
>
>
>How about additions to the S&P500, Nasdaq 100, Nasdaq Composite, and the
>Russel
>2000 [not Russel 3000]?  Anyone know where these are posted?
>
>-Jim waiting-to-get-out-of-TLCM-and-be-100%-cash-again
>
>
>-
>
>-

Tim Fisher
Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites

[e-mail]
WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
See naked fish and rocks!


-

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]  Another day of Distribution?
Date: 29 Jun 2000 18:35:17 -0600

Hmmm, well it's good to see we are all still on the same page!! Hehe!!  I'm
100% invested after picking up 2 more stocks earlier this week.  My stocks
did hold up pretty well today for the most part, so maybe some "Window
Dressing" will help out tomorrow.  Anyone hold onto KEI through the dip to
64 last week?  I didn't. If you did, congrats on another big jump!!

At 12:45 PM 6/29/00 -0500, you wrote:
>I am back to 100% cash, +11% for the week and time to check out.
>Kent
>



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tim Fisher" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]  Another day of Distribution?
Date: 29 Jun 2000 18:12:34 -0700

Also, PLXS made a nice B/O on great vol today.

Disc: I own it.

At 06:35 PM 6/29/00 -0600, you wrote:
>Hmmm, well it's good to see we are all still on the same page!! Hehe!!  I'm
>100% invested after picking up 2 more stocks earlier this week.  My stocks
>did hold up pretty well today for the most part, so maybe some "Window
>Dressing" will help out tomorrow.  Anyone hold onto KEI through the dip to
>64 last week?  I didn't. If you did, congrats on another big jump!!
>
>At 12:45 PM 6/29/00 -0500, you wrote:
> >I am back to 100% cash, +11% for the week and time to check out.
> >Kent
> >
>
>
>
>-

Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists
Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site
PFB Information
mailto:[e-mail]
WWW http://OreRockOn.com


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tim Fisher" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM]  Another day of Distribution?
Date: 29 Jun 2000 18:15:16 -0700

Right on the cusp. Guess we'll have to wait to see where it opens tomorrow.
There was a failed mini-rally late in the day which doesn't bode well for
tomorrow.

At 07:13 PM 6/29/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Tim:
>
>We closed at 3877.  Are you expecting more ugliness tomorrow?  Volume was
>1.5B
>
>Best Regards,
>Rakesh
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Tim Fisher [mailto:[e-mail]]
>Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 1:41 PM
>To: [e-mail]
>Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Another day of Distribution?
>
>
>3880 has been mentioned by several technical gurus as the
>support/resistance line for the NASDAQ. We're toying with it today (from
>the upper side), as we did (from the underside) for the first 4 days of
>last week. If we close below it I'd say that tomorrow could be pretty ugly.
>If we close above it then tomorrow still could be ugly because it's the end
>of the quarter, but I think window dressing will kick in, and many are
>looking to that number for guidance anyway. Regardless, there's another
>month of Fed watching that will probably kill any attempts to break 5000
>again in short order. I have been and still am churning (not churning
>stocks anymore, thankfully) away at my 12/31/99 closing account values.
>IOW, I've gone nowhere and don't expect to get anywhere before the Aug.
>FOMC meeting.
>
>P.S. At least half of the HGS stocks I posted yesterday are up so far
>today. Therefore I think the leaders are not distributing significantly.
>Weaker stocks are getting hit for now.
>
>On 08:30 AM 6/29/00, Rocky Sanghvi Said:
> >Are we logging another day of distribution on the Nas?
> >
> >Volume is almost .6 billion at 11:30am
> >
> >Rakesh
> >
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
> >Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 12:59 PM
> >To: [e-mail]
> >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]
> >
> >
> >How about additions to the S&P500, Nasdaq 100, Nasdaq Composite, and the
> >Russel
> >2000 [not Russel 3000]?  Anyone know where these are posted?
> >
> >-Jim waiting-to-get-out-of-TLCM-and-be-100%-cash-again
> >
> >
> >-
> >
> >-
>
>Tim Fisher
>Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites
>
>[e-mail]
>WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
>See naked fish and rocks!
>
>
>-
>
>-

Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists
Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site
PFB Information
mailto:[e-mail]
WWW http://OreRockOn.com


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Intro: Roger Kraus
Date: 29 Jun 2000 21:16:35 -0400

Welcome to the group, Roger, and thanks for the intro.

If you can point the Hubble earthward and spot a few rising
stars, let us know!

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 12:25 PM


Hello,

I've been investing for a few years.  I've been getting IBD for a
those
years and have found it to be very informative as I've kicked
myself over
and over again for buying lousy stocks instead of those
highlighted by IBD.
 TIME TO DO IT RIGHT !!

I'm a mechanical engineer working for an aerospace firm in the DC
area.  I
primarily work on the Hubble Space Telescope project.

Roger

-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Forant <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Stocktables
Date: 29 Jun 2000 21:57:10 -0400

Anyone use stocktables.com? Still doing well with nipny and cah, the latter
has over 1100 institutions, wild ride. I don't believe in going cash,
there's always some pickins out there. I may be half cash for a day or two.
I track about 80 stocks with alerts on Medved Quote Tracker, always action.
Anything better out there than Quote Tracker? Lots of questions tonite ;-)

The handle according to todays paper states it should form in the upper
left half of the cup or base, so it's a sliding rule sort of?

Dan

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] NEW SELL RULES
Date: 29 Jun 2000 20:52:50 -0600

Here is some sell rules from a CANSLIM friend of mine.  He refers to his
"joint account" and this is an account he keeps spending money in to pull
some short term gains.  The rather tight stops he discusses would be for
this account, and not his retirement account (I think).  I thought this
would be some more fuel for the fire of our selling thread!!

Comments and suggestions are very welcome.


>From: "Steve Mlaker" <[e-mail]>
>To: "Earl Setser" <[e-mail]>
>Subject: NEW SELL RULES
>Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 20:06:27 -0600
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
>X-RCPT-TO: <[e-mail]>
>
>     The difference is that Patton  beat Rommel in North Africa but the
>market is soundly beating me this year, so  far.            Admittedly, I
>don't want to hold a stock if it finishes  the day below 8% of my buy point
>anyway, but we need to figure out how to  protect ourselves at 8%, while
>giving the stock room to move during the day, at  least to the 13-day EMA.
>     those above 13-day EMA   Those below the 13-day EMA - WAT, KSU, CPN,
>GLW   What this tells me is that we are in real danger of losing our
>positions in the first four stocks (several of those only affect me, of
>course),  if they try to test the support level, after a day or two of
>small  increases.     Do we not use hard stops until the 8% limit floats
>above the 13-day  EMA or do we watch the stocks manually but set hard stops
>at some prescribed  level below the 13-day EMA, say 3%, to prevent a
>catastrophic day (like CYTC had  today), yet give the stock room to bounce
>off it's natural support level,  intraday.      Your comments  appreciated.
>     If 8% is good at the  time of purchase, it should be good until a
>break-even point is  reached.       For those with steeper slopes, 3% below
>the 13-day provides a good  support level.      To me this is bad Karma
>and I wantto take my gains, however meager, and run.     Sell if two days
>of closing lower in a row occurs on  volume above the 50-day average.
>I'll take the smaller losses or  smaller gains and move on to something
>like WAT, which has a tighter standard  deviation and hasn't been
>threatened by a single rule above.     If MRX and DRAM  finish lower
>tomorrow, they would get the boot anyway, assuming the volume is  above the
>50-day EMA or they hit the 13-day - 3% stop limit.     Can't continue the
>way I'm going.   Steve


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Walter Stock <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]  Another day of Distribution?
Date: 29 Jun 2000 22:54:13 -0400

Am also 100% invested, plus some margin.

Presently own ELNT, NT, WAT, MEDI, and TLCM.

Had dumped TQNT and NVDA before they got  ugly.

Added GSLI today.

Walter Stock
Oakville, ON, Canada


Earl Setser wrote:

> Hmmm, well it's good to see we are all still on the same page!! Hehe!!  I'm
> 100% invested after picking up 2 more stocks earlier this week.  My stocks
> did hold up pretty well today for the most part, so maybe some "Window
> Dressing" will help out tomorrow.  Anyone hold onto KEI through the dip to
> 64 last week?  I didn't. If you did, congrats on another big jump!!
>
> At 12:45 PM 6/29/00 -0500, you wrote:
> >I am back to 100% cash, +11% for the week and time to check out.
> >Kent
> >
>
> -


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] New Sell Rules - Corrected Post
Date: 29 Jun 2000 20:56:37 -0600

Sorry, but my forward button screwed up some of the message somehow.  It's
pasted below in whole form (I hope).

Here is some sell rules from a CANSLIM friend of mine.  He refers to his
"joint account" and this is an account he keeps spending money in to pull
some short term gains.  The rather tight stops he discusses would be for
this account, and not his retirement account (I think).  I thought this
would be some more fuel for the fire of our selling thread!!

Comments and suggestions are very welcome.

Earl


"This is from Steve"

We've developed more new sell rules than Patton had battle plans during the
North African campaign.  The difference is that Patton beat Rommel in North
Africa but the market is soundly beating me this year, so far.

I've looked at the charts for DRAM and MRX and made a few calculations.
Also looked at the 13-day for all stocks I currently own and have found
something interesting.  The nearer the breakout the stocks are, the steeper
the curve.  (Surprise!  Surprise!)  This means that, in order to stay
within an 8% loss range, the stops we are setting are well above the 13-day
EMA.  In some cases, as much as 5%.  This really seems self-defeating,
since so many stocks are going to test the 13-day EMA, at least intraday.
Admittedly, I don't want to hold a stock if it finishes the day below 8% of
my buy point anyway, but we need to figure out how to protect ourselves at
8%, while giving the stock room to move during the day, at least to the
13-day EMA.

Note:  Our current stop losses are as follows:  those above 13-day EMA -
PLXT, VARI, TKLC AND AUDC.  Those below the 13-day EMA - WAT, KSU, CPN, GLW

What this tells me is that we are in real danger of losing our positions in
the first four stocks (several of those only affect me, of course), if they
try to test the support level, after a day or two of small increases.

Perhaps you can run this information by the discussion group.  Do we not
use hard stops until the 8% limit floats above the 13-day EMA or do we
watch the stocks manually but set hard stops at some prescribed level below
the 13-day EMA, say 3%, to prevent a catastrophic day (like CYTC had
today), yet give the stock room to bounce off it's natural support level,
intraday.

At least I'm going to institute the following rules for my joint account to
minimize losses for the time being.  Hopefully this won't be needed
permanently, but we'll see.  Your comments appreciated.

1)  Set a stop at 8% below the buy price and move the stop up 1% for every
percent increase in the value.  If 8% is good at the time of purchase, it
should be good until a break-even point is reached.

2)  At the break-even point, begin setting the stops @ 3% below the 13-day
EMA or 8% below the day's closing value, whichever is lower.  For stocks
which have a gradual slope, this should give plenty of room.  For those
with steeper slopes, 3% below the 13-day provides a good support level.

3)  Sell if one day of closing lower occurs on volume above the 50-day
average and the stock closes in the bottom quartile of the days price range
(this is near the low for the day).  To me this is bad Karma and I wantto
take my gains, however meager, and run.

4)  Sell if two days of closing lower in a row occurs on volume above the
50-day average.

I realize these rules are not good for all stocks and I am going to get
booted out of those that wander around a lot.  I'd just as soon not own
those in this account anyway.  I'll take the smaller losses or smaller
gains and move on to something like WAT, which has a tighter standard
deviation and hasn't been threatened by a single rule above.

I need to run these through my mind for a day or two, but they would have
kept me in DRAM, KEI and MRX (had I owned it).  If MRX and DRAM finish
lower tomorrow, they would get the boot anyway, assuming the volume is
above the 50-day EMA or they hit the 13-day - 3% stop limit.

Pretty complicated, but I need something different to happen here.  Can't
continue the way I'm going.

Steve






-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Erik Harris" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Work gets in the way
Date: 29 Jun 2000 22:56:49 -0400

Hi,
Thanks to everyone for the comments/suggestions about ways to track
breakouts while at work.  I'm looking forward to trying some of the email
alert sites that were suggested.

Erik

PS.  Can anyone comment on ADIC's  CANSLIM status.  It has been trading in a
base for a few weeks but I haven't seen it on anyones list.  I realize that
price-performance wise it is not looking good.  Thanks


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: ADIC (was Re: [CANSLIM] Work gets in the way)
Date: 29 Jun 2000 23:10:14 -0400

Hi Erik,

ADIC is not CANSLIM quality, IMO.  There is a reason why WON
wants both RS AND EPS to be over 80. In this stock, its industry
group RS is at 86 while ADIC is at 39.  The top five in the group
are all 97 or better. Clearly, it is not a leader.  It has
declined so far that it will have substantial overhead resistance
to overcome, unless it bases for the next six to nine months,
tying up capital.

Additionally, I note that earnings have stagnated sequentially
for the past two qtrs, and sales for the past three qtrs. Not a
sign of heightened expectations, thus the low RS. I could pick on
it on other points as well, like an ROE of 9% or an up/down ratio
of 0.7, but why bother.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 10:56 PM


Hi,
Thanks to everyone for the comments/suggestions about ways to
track
breakouts while at work.  I'm looking forward to trying some of
the email
alert sites that were suggested.

Erik

PS.  Can anyone comment on ADIC's  CANSLIM status.  It has been
trading in a
base for a few weeks but I haven't seen it on anyones list.  I
realize that
price-performance wise it is not looking good.  Thanks


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "david lawson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ADIC
Date: 29 Jun 2000 23:16:41 -0400

ADIC only has a 39 RS and tremendous overhead supply. Not a CANSLIM stock.
                         Ari

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 10:56 PM


> Hi,
> Thanks to everyone for the comments/suggestions about ways to track
> breakouts while at work.  I'm looking forward to trying some of the email
> alert sites that were suggested.
>
> Erik
>
> PS.  Can anyone comment on ADIC's  CANSLIM status.  It has been trading in
a
> base for a few weeks but I haven't seen it on anyones list.  I realize
that
> price-performance wise it is not looking good.  Thanks
>
>
> -
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Earl Setser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]  Another day of Distribution?
Date: 29 Jun 2000 21:32:33 -0600

I'm in MU, GLW, WAT (these 3 for a little while) KSU, CPN, and TKLC (these
I bot this week, TKLC was yesterday.)

BTW, if anyone is really interested in my purchases, I try to keep
ClearStation up-to-date on my portfolio as much as I can.  You can find me
under "esetser" recommend.


 and At 10:54 PM 6/29/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Am also 100% invested, plus some margin.
>
>Presently own ELNT, NT, WAT, MEDI, and TLCM.
>
>Had dumped TQNT and NVDA before they got  ugly.
>
>Added GSLI today.
>
>Walter Stock
>Oakville, ON, Canada
>
>
>Earl Setser wrote:
>
>> Hmmm, well it's good to see we are all still on the same page!! Hehe!!  I'm
>> 100% invested after picking up 2 more stocks earlier this week.  My stocks
>> did hold up pretty well today for the most part, so maybe some "Window
>> Dressing" will help out tomorrow.  Anyone hold onto KEI through the dip to
>> 64 last week?  I didn't. If you did, congrats on another big jump!!
>>
>> At 12:45 PM 6/29/00 -0500, you wrote:
>> >I am back to 100% cash, +11% for the week and time to check out.
>> >Kent
>> >
>>
>> -
>
>
>-
>
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kent Norman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Work gets in the way
Date: 30 Jun 2000 00:52:40 -0500

for one thing, It has been closing near the bottom of the days range for
8 days straight.

My 2 cents

Kent

Erik Harris wrote:
>
> PS.  Can anyone comment on ADIC's  CANSLIM status.  It has been trading in a
> base for a few weeks but I haven't seen it on anyones list.  I realize that
> price-performance wise it is not looking good.  Thanks
>
> -

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Index additions
Date: 29 Jun 2000 21:03:12 -0400

For the Russell 2000, you'll have to browse around at the Russell
site, I've found it there before once, but had to search.  After
June 30, I think they make it easier to find.

The other indexes only pre-announce a few days ahead of an
addition or deletion. One solution would be to check (or
subscribe to a news alert service) news on the individual index
symbols daily.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 12:59 PM

How about additions to the S&P500, Nasdaq 100, Nasdaq Composite,
and the Russel
2000 [not Russel 3000]?  Anyone know where these are posted?

-Jim waiting-to-get-out-of-TLCM-and-be-100%-cash-again

-

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Cash <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] A question on trendlessness and trending
Date: 30 Jun 2000 06:58:26 -0700

I read and see that stocks and markets spend a great deal of time trendless.
Could it be said, that MEDI, for example, is trendless between 6-19 and now?  Or
is this stretching the concept somewhat?

Dan

Walter Stock wrote:

> Am also 100% invested, plus some margin.
>
> Presently own ELNT, NT, WAT, MEDI, and TLCM.
>
> Had dumped TQNT and NVDA before they got  ugly.
>
> Added GSLI today.
>
> Walter Stock
> Oakville, ON, Canada
>
> Earl Setser wrote:
>
> > Hmmm, well it's good to see we are all still on the same page!! Hehe!!  I'm
> > 100% invested after picking up 2 more stocks earlier this week.  My stocks
> > did hold up pretty well today for the most part, so maybe some "Window
> > Dressing" will help out tomorrow.  Anyone hold onto KEI through the dip to
> > 64 last week?  I didn't. If you did, congrats on another big jump!!
> >
> > At 12:45 PM 6/29/00 -0500, you wrote:
> > >I am back to 100% cash, +11% for the week and time to check out.
> > >Kent
> > >
> >
> > -
>
> -


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tim Fisher <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] PLXS
Date: 30 Jun 2000 09:53:04 -0700

...is doing it again....nice follow-through on yesterday's b/o from a short
base. Lots of stocks giving you plenty of time to get in...i.e. WAT, LFUS.
Congrats to anyone who held onto KEI...bang zoom! I like the looks of this
market today.

Discl: I still own PLXS!

Tim Fisher
Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites

[e-mail]
WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
See naked fish and rocks!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Forant <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Mini Cup & Handles
Date: 30 Jun 2000 13:12:56 -0400

Would you say CAH has two mini cup and handles?

Dan

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Rocky Sanghvi <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] EXDS Cup & Handle
Date: 30 Jun 2000 17:15:14 -0400

Is EXDS forming a nice cup and handle?  Look at the 1 year and the 3 month
charts...  While it is not close to its all time high of 89, it sure seems
to be forming a sweet handle. Volume is drying up nicely.  Thoughts?

By the way I love the volume today.....  1st large confirmation after Jun
2nd I think with almost 1.9 B traded.

Disc:  I am working with EXDS on a business deal.

Rakesh

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 1:13 PM


Would you say CAH has two mini cup and handles?

Dan

-

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Rocky Sanghvi <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Over 2 B in volume
Date: 30 Jun 2000 17:16:36 -0400

Over 2 B in volume

http://www.nasdaq.com

Very impressive action.

Rakesh



-----Original Message-----
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 5:15 PM


Is EXDS forming a nice cup and handle?  Look at the 1 year and the 3 month
charts...  While it is not close to its all time high of 89, it sure seems
to be forming a sweet handle. Volume is drying up nicely.  Thoughts?

By the way I love the volume today.....  1st large confirmation after Jun
2nd I think with almost 1.9 B traded.

Disc:  I am working with EXDS on a business deal.

Rakesh

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 1:13 PM


Would you say CAH has two mini cup and handles?

Dan

-

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tim Fisher <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Over 2 B in volume
Date: 30 Jun 2000 14:37:23 -0700

Unlike yesterday, the leaders (with the exception of PLXS and KEI) did not
fare well. Several false breakouts occurred early on. This does not bode
well for Monday which being a 1/2 day and a virtual holiday will be
dominated by volatility on light volume. Wednesday should be real
interesting. There seems to be no real support between 3880 and infinity
that hasn't been broken on the way down, so we need some basing in the low
4000s to build it up. I'd like to see the 50d cross back up over the 200d
before we shoot the moon again.

On 02:16 PM 6/30/00, Rocky Sanghvi Said:
>Over 2 B in volume
>
>http://www.nasdaq.com
>
>Very impressive action.
>
>Rakesh
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Rocky Sanghvi
>Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 5:15 PM
>To: '[e-mail]'
>Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] EXDS Cup & Handle
>
>
>Is EXDS forming a nice cup and handle?  Look at the 1 year and the 3 month
>charts...  While it is not close to its all time high of 89, it sure seems
>to be forming a sweet handle. Volume is drying up nicely.  Thoughts?
>
>By the way I love the volume today.....  1st large confirmation after Jun
>2nd I think with almost 1.9 B traded.
>
>Disc:  I am working with EXDS on a business deal.
>
>Rakesh
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Dan Forant [mailto:[e-mail]]
>Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 1:13 PM
>To: [e-mail]
>Subject: [CANSLIM] Mini Cup & Handles
>
>
>Would you say CAH has two mini cup and handles?
>
>Dan

Tim Fisher
Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites

[e-mail]
WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
See naked fish and rocks!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] workshop????
Date: 30 Jun 2000 18:05:52 EDT

I would like to take a workshop on either a charting program or canslim....I
have read and read the information ..having a hard time comprehending the
information....

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Walter Stock <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] A question on trendlessness and trending
Date: 30 Jun 2000 19:05:16 -0400

Hi Dan,

I would say that it is in a normal pullback since breaking out
on June 19.

I will continue to hold it unless it breaks down below its pivot
of about 70 3/8, or unless some more compelling stock comes
along.  The technicals that I follow all confirm the breakout.

Walter Stock
Oakville, ON, Canada


Dan Cash wrote:

> I read and see that stocks and markets spend a great deal of time trendless.
> Could it be said, that MEDI, for example, is trendless between 6-19 and now?  Or
> is this stretching the concept somewhat?
>
> Dan
>
> Walter Stock wrote:
>
> > Am also 100% invested, plus some margin.
> >
> > Presently own ELNT, NT, WAT, MEDI, and TLCM.
> >
> > Had dumped TQNT and NVDA before they got  ugly.
> >
> > Added GSLI today.
> >
> > Walter Stock
> > Oakville, ON, Canada
> >
> > Earl Setser wrote:
> >
> > > Hmmm, well it's good to see we are all still on the same page!! Hehe!!  I'm
> > > 100% invested after picking up 2 more stocks earlier this week.  My stocks
> > > did hold up pretty well today for the most part, so maybe some "Window
> > > Dressing" will help out tomorrow.  Anyone hold onto KEI through the dip to
> > > 64 last week?  I didn't. If you did, congrats on another big jump!!
> > >
> > > At 12:45 PM 6/29/00 -0500, you wrote:
> > > >I am back to 100% cash, +11% for the week and time to check out.
> > > >Kent
> > > >
> > >
> > > -
> >
> > -
>
> -


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] A question on trendlessness and trending
Date: 30 Jun 2000 20:44:22 -0400

Hi Dan,

I think from 6/19 to 6/30 is simply too short a period to
identify a trend, in any case.  In this particular one, if you
only expand the time period to the full month of June, you have a
strong rise in the first half, followed by consolidation in the
second half. The rise in the first half is what makes it a
consolidation (or base). During the 10 days of basing, it has had
5 up days, and 5 down days. Three of the five up days closed
close to that day's high. Two of the down days were in very
narrow ranges close to the high side of the base. One of the down
days closed above the high side of the base forming, leaving only
two down days that traded under the high side of the base. Volume
has declined steadily for two weeks.  All of that says
consolidation of a recent price gain, to me.  So short term the
trend is up, not trendless, IMHO.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 9:58 AM


I read and see that stocks and markets spend a great deal of time
trendless.
Could it be said, that MEDI, for example, is trendless between
6-19 and now?  Or
is this stretching the concept somewhat?

Dan

Walter Stock wrote:

> Am also 100% invested, plus some margin.
>
> Presently own ELNT, NT, WAT, MEDI, and TLCM.
>
> Had dumped TQNT and NVDA before they got  ugly.
>
> Added GSLI today.
>
> Walter Stock
> Oakville, ON, Canada
>
> Earl Setser wrote:
>
> > Hmmm, well it's good to see we are all still on the same
page!! Hehe!!  I'm
> > 100% invested after picking up 2 more stocks earlier this
week.  My stocks
> > did hold up pretty well today for the most part, so maybe
some "Window
> > Dressing" will help out tomorrow.  Anyone hold onto KEI
through the dip to
> > 64 last week?  I didn't. If you did, congrats on another big
jump!!
> >
> > At 12:45 PM 6/29/00 -0500, you wrote:
> > >I am back to 100% cash, +11% for the week and time to check
out.
> > >Kent
> > >
> >
> > -
>
> -


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Forant <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] EXDS Cup & Handle
Date: 30 Jun 2000 21:12:43 -0400

I keep looking at EXDS and don't see your view. The low has broken the 33%
mark from 90. Handle should form in the upper top 1/3 across from left
edge. might be working on a double bottom but a ways to go. Lot's of
institutions 655. Comments?

Dan

At 05:15 PM 6/30/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Is EXDS forming a nice cup and handle?  Look at the 1 year and the 3 month
>charts...  While it is not close to its all time high of 89, it sure seems
>to be forming a sweet handle. Volume is drying up nicely.  Thoughts?
>
>By the way I love the volume today.....  1st large confirmation after Jun
>2nd I think with almost 1.9 B traded.
>
>Disc:  I am working with EXDS on a business deal.
>
>Rakesh
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Dan Forant [mailto:[e-mail]]
>Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 1:13 PM
>To: [e-mail]
>Subject: [CANSLIM] Mini Cup & Handles
>
>
>Would you say CAH has two mini cup and handles?
>
>Dan
>
>-
>
>-
>
>

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] EXDS Cup & Handle
Date: 30 Jun 2000 21:15:02 -0400

EPS of 6 would keep it off my list.

Be careful if you are in a position to have "insider" knowledge
or awareness, depending on the impact of the business deal you
are working on.  If it is a deal that could mean a one year
contract worth $10 mio, then no big deal. But if it is an
acquisition of a company doing $500 mio in annual sales, or other
large scale impact, then the SEC might frown, and fine.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 5:15 PM


Is EXDS forming a nice cup and handle?  Look at the 1 year and
the 3 month
charts...  While it is not close to its all time high of 89, it
sure seems
to be forming a sweet handle. Volume is drying up nicely.
Thoughts?

By the way I love the volume today.....  1st large confirmation
after Jun
2nd I think with almost 1.9 B traded.

Disc:  I am working with EXDS on a business deal.

Rakesh

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 1:13 PM


Would you say CAH has two mini cup and handles?

Dan

-

-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Forant <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Over 2 B in volume
Date: 30 Jun 2000 21:28:17 -0400

So what's so interesting about Wednesday, every day this year has been
interesting. I listen to analysts on CNBC in the AM and they all have one
thing in common, nothing. This week I bought, NIPNY @150.1/2 (stopped out
yesterday) @159.1/2 and CAH @ 70 1/4 and it's still going (74). I always
use stops, so if Monday or Wednesday bombs I'll take the crumbs and move
on. I have 80 stocks on my Quote Tracker Watch List, and it's always firing
off alerts with new break outs.

Dan

At 02:37 PM 6/30/00 -0700, you wrote:
>Unlike yesterday, the leaders (with the exception of PLXS and KEI) did not
>fare well. Several false breakouts occurred early on. This does not bode
>well for Monday which being a 1/2 day and a virtual holiday will be
>dominated by volatility on light volume. Wednesday should be real
>interesting. There seems to be no real support between 3880 and infinity
>that hasn't been broken on the way down, so we need some basing in the low
>4000s to build it up. I'd like to see the 50d cross back up over the 200d
>before we shoot the moon again.
>
>On 02:16 PM 6/30/00, Rocky Sanghvi Said:
>>Over 2 B in volume
>>
>>http://www.nasdaq.com
>>
>>Very impressive action.
>>
>>Rakesh
>>
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Rocky Sanghvi
>>Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 5:15 PM
>>To: '[e-mail]'
>>Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] EXDS Cup & Handle
>>
>>
>>Is EXDS forming a nice cup and handle?  Look at the 1 year and the 3 month
>>charts...  While it is not close to its all time high of 89, it sure seems
>>to be forming a sweet handle. Volume is drying up nicely.  Thoughts?
>>
>>By the way I love the volume today.....  1st large confirmation after Jun
>>2nd I think with almost 1.9 B traded.
>>
>>Disc:  I am working with EXDS on a business deal.
>>
>>Rakesh
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Dan Forant [mailto:[e-mail]]
>>Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 1:13 PM
>>To: [e-mail]
>>Subject: [CANSLIM] Mini Cup & Handles
>>
>>
>>Would you say CAH has two mini cup and handles?
>>
>>Dan
>
>Tim Fisher
>Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites
>
>[e-mail]
>WWW: http://OreRockOn.com
>See naked fish and rocks!
>
>
>-
>
>

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Forant <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] workshop????
Date: 30 Jun 2000 21:42:01 -0400

Try going to http://www.stocktables.com/ and register free and go to cup
and handle section, click on "About" it has 2 pdf files (need acrobat
reader). I found it to be an excellent source with many charts to view and
learn from. Make sure you read WON's book again, eventually with practice
it will come along. Set up a portfolio and work it for practice with a few
stocks. I breezed through the book too casually and started looking for
handles on the *left* side of the cup ;-) After several readings it's been
lucrative.

Dan

At 06:05 PM 6/30/00 EDT, you wrote:
>I would like to take a workshop on either a charting program or canslim....I
>have read and read the information ..having a hard time comprehending the
>information....
>
>-
>
>

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tim Fisher" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Over 2 B in volume
Date: 30 Jun 2000 18:45:15 -0700

What's interesting is that the market technicians give advice to the
institutional and hedge fund traders, and their advice right now is
probably split 50/50. We are sitting on some thin ice (support at 3880) and
don't have any close support levels on which to rest on the way up.
Wednesday's action, just like this past weeks', could determine whether
this summer rally continues or dies a swift death. This week was not very
decisive as far as setting a trend for the summer. The typical pattern
would be for light volume, increased volatility, and lots of churning until
school is back in session.

At 09:28 PM 6/30/00 -0400, you wrote:
>So what's so interesting about Wednesday, every day this year has been
>interesting. I listen to analysts on CNBC in the AM and they all have one
>thing in common, nothing. This week I bought, NIPNY @150.1/2 (stopped out
>yesterday) @159.1/2 and CAH @ 70 1/4 and it's still going (74). I always
>use stops, so if Monday or Wednesday bombs I'll take the crumbs and move
>on. I have 80 stocks on my Quote Tracker Watch List, and it's always firing
>off alerts with new break outs.
>
>Dan
>
>At 02:37 PM 6/30/00 -0700, you wrote:
> >Unlike yesterday, the leaders (with the exception of PLXS and KEI) did not
> >fare well. Several false breakouts occurred early on. This does not bode
> >well for Monday which being a 1/2 day and a virtual holiday will be
> >dominated by volatility on light volume. Wednesday should be real
> >interesting. There seems to be no real support between 3880 and infinity
> >that hasn't been broken on the way down, so we need some basing in the low
> >4000s to build it up. I'd like to see the 50d cross back up over the 200d
> >before we shoot the moon again.
> >
> >On 02:16 PM 6/30/00, Rocky Sanghvi Said:
> >>Over 2 B in volume
> >>
> >>http://www.nasdaq.com
> >>
> >>Very impressive action.
> >>
> >>Rakesh
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Rocky Sanghvi
> >>Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 5:15 PM
> >>To: '[e-mail]'
> >>Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] EXDS Cup & Handle
> >>
> >>
> >>Is EXDS forming a nice cup and handle?  Look at the 1 year and the 3 month
> >>charts...  While it is not close to its all time high of 89, it sure seems
> >>to be forming a sweet handle. Volume is drying up nicely.  Thoughts?
> >>
> >>By the way I love the volume today.....  1st large confirmation after Jun
> >>2nd I think with almost 1.9 B traded.
> >>
> >>Disc:  I am working with EXDS on a business deal.
> >>
> >>Rakesh
> >>
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Dan Forant [mailto:[e-mail]]
> >>Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 1:13 PM
> >>To: [e-mail]
> >>Subject: [CANSLIM] Mini Cup & Handles
> >>
> >>
> >>Would you say CAH has two mini cup and handles?
> >>
> >>Dan
> >

Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists
Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site
PFB Information
mailto:[e-mail]
WWW http://OreRockOn.com


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Worley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Naz Trends (was Re: [CANSLIM] Over 2 B in volume)
Date: 30 Jun 2000 22:26:18 -0400

Hi Tim,

As I should have remarked on my comments about "trendlessness" in
an earlier post on an individual stock, the trend (or lack
thereof) is often in the eye of the beholder. But I would
disagree that one week can set a "trend". Looking at Nasdaq for
the month of June, I see 13 up days compared to 8 down days. And
avg volume overall surpassed the month of May, where I see the
exact opposite: 13 down days to 8 up days. And ADV was definitely
lower in May than June, as was the price as well.  This
observation alone gives me a short term view that the trend is
up.  Combine that with May marked by the latest short term low,
and June marked by a solid basing action (and badly needed, IMHO,
after all the volatility recently), and I continue to see a
positive trend in the short term chart.

Friday's volume is highly suspect, and I read little into it
other than a LOT of fund mgrs and institutionals (pension funds
and the like) were caught with their knickers down on what they
might have to report to their shareholders as portfolio holdings.
Rarely does a "window dressing" purchase last more than a day or
two into the new quarter, and with Monday's expected light volume
on half day trading hours (and even less staffing), a lot of
shares bot today will find their way back into the marketplace in
the next several days.

But I still find the short term trend ("M") to be up, and see no
evidence of an imminent failure.

Tom Worley
[e-mail]
chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 9:45 PM


What's interesting is that the market technicians give advice to
the
institutional and hedge fund traders, and their advice right now
is
probably split 50/50. We are sitting on some thin ice (support at
3880) and
don't have any close support levels on which to rest on the way
up.
Wednesday's action, just like this past weeks', could determine
whether
this summer rally continues or dies a swift death. This week was
not very
decisive as far as setting a trend for the summer. The typical
pattern
would be for light volume, increased volatility, and lots of
churning until
school is back in session.

At 09:28 PM 6/30/00 -0400, you wrote:
>So what's so interesting about Wednesday, every day this year
has been
>interesting. I listen to analysts on CNBC in the AM and they all
have one
>thing in common, nothing. This week I bought, NIPNY @150.1/2
(stopped out
>yesterday) @159.1/2 and CAH @ 70 1/4 and it's still going (74).
I always
>use stops, so if Monday or Wednesday bombs I'll take the crumbs
and move
>on. I have 80 stocks on my Quote Tracker Watch List, and it's
always firing
>off alerts with new break outs.
>
>Dan
>
>At 02:37 PM 6/30/00 -0700, you wrote:
> >Unlike yesterday, the leaders (with the exception of PLXS and
KEI) did not
> >fare well. Several false breakouts occurred early on. This
does not bode
> >well for Monday which being a 1/2 day and a virtual holiday
will be
> >dominated by volatility on light volume. Wednesday should be
real
> >interesting. There seems to be no real support between 3880
and infinity
> >that hasn't been broken on the way down, so we need some
basing in the low
> >4000s to build it up. I'd like to see the 50d cross back up
over the 200d
> >before we shoot the moon again.
> >
> >On 02:16 PM 6/30/00, Rocky Sanghvi Said:
> >>Over 2 B in volume
> >>
> >>http://www.nasdaq.com
> >>
> >>Very impressive action.
> >>
> >>Rakesh
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Rocky Sanghvi
> >>Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 5:15 PM
> >>To: '[e-mail]'
> >>Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] EXDS Cup & Handle
> >>
> >>
> >>Is EXDS forming a nice cup and handle?  Look at the 1 year
and the 3 month
> >>charts...  While it is not close to its all time high of 89,
it sure seems
> >>to be forming a sweet handle. Volume is drying up nicely.
Thoughts?
> >>
> >>By the way I love the volume today.....  1st large
confirmation after Jun
> >>2nd I think with almost 1.9 B traded.
> >>
> >>Disc:  I am working with EXDS on a business deal.
> >>
> >>Rakesh
> >>
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Dan Forant [mailto:[e-mail]]
> >>Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 1:13 PM
> >>To: [e-mail]
> >>Subject: [CANSLIM] Mini Cup & Handles
> >>
> >>
> >>Would you say CAH has two mini cup and handles?
> >>
> >>Dan
> >

Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists
Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site
PFB Information
mailto:[e-mail]
WWW http://OreRockOn.com


-



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Forant <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Over 2 B in volume
Date: 30 Jun 2000 22:46:57 -0400

So the news from the Fed wasn't that conclusive. I wonder how many
investors have been spoiled by 1999's action. Unfortunately or maybe
fortunately I wasn't in it. If it weren't for this system, I'd have lost my
investment for sure. I'm profiting to date but don't know any different
from this years actions of volatility. So I'm very conservative. With
volumes down and the Nasdaq slightly above the 200 day line and the Dow
below it, many  investors from last year are either in cash or scared out.
I can't believe I found something more interesting than golf. My cell phone
and I have become buddies. Your advice is well taken, it makes me more
careful of charts and fundamentals.

Dan

At 06:45 PM 6/30/00 -0700, you wrote:
>What's interesting is that the market technicians give advice to the
>institutional and hedge fund traders, and their advice right now is
>probably split 50/50. We are sitting on some thin ice (support at 3880) and
>don't have any close support levels on which to rest on the way up.
>Wednesday's action, just like this past weeks', could determine whether
>this summer rally continues or dies a swift death. This week was not very
>decisive as far as setting a trend for the summer. The typical pattern
>would be for light volume, increased volatility, and lots of churning until
>school is back in session.
>
>At 09:28 PM 6/30/00 -0400, you wrote:
>>So what's so interesting about Wednesday, every day this year has been
>>interesting. I listen to analysts on CNBC in the AM and they all have one
>>thing in common, nothing. This week I bought, NIPNY @150.1/2 (stopped out
>>yesterday) @159.1/2 and CAH @ 70 1/4 and it's still going (74). I always
>>use stops, so if Monday or Wednesday bombs I'll take the crumbs and move
>>on. I have 80 stocks on my Quote Tracker Watch List, and it's always firing
>>off alerts with new break outs.
>>
>>Dan
>>
>>At 02:37 PM 6/30/00 -0700, you wrote:
>> >Unlike yesterday, the leaders (with the exception of PLXS and KEI) did not
>> >fare well. Several false breakouts occurred early on. This does not bode
>> >well for Monday which being a 1/2 day and a virtual holiday will be
>> >dominated by volatility on light volume. Wednesday should be real
>> >interesting. There seems to be no real support between 3880 and infinity
>> >that hasn't been broken on the way down, so we need some basing in the low
>> >4000s to build it up. I'd like to see the 50d cross back up over the 200d
>> >before we shoot the moon again.
>> >
>> >On 02:16 PM 6/30/00, Rocky Sanghvi Said:
>> >>Over 2 B in volume
>> >>
>> >>http://www.nasdaq.com
>> >>
>> >>Very impressive action.
>> >>
>> >>Rakesh
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>-----Original Message-----
>> >>From: Rocky Sanghvi
>> >>Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 5:15 PM
>> >>To: '[e-mail]'
>> >>Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] EXDS Cup & Handle
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Is EXDS forming a nice cup and handle?  Look at the 1 year and the 3
month
>> >>charts...  While it is not close to its all time high of 89, it sure
seems
>> >>to be forming a sweet handle. Volume is drying up nicely.  Thoughts?
>> >>
>> >>By the way I love the volume today.....  1st large confirmation after Jun
>> >>2nd I think with almost 1.9 B traded.
>> >>
>> >>Disc:  I am working with EXDS on a business deal.
>> >>
>> >>Rakesh
>> >>
>> >>-----Original Message-----
>> >>From: Dan Forant [mailto:[e-mail]]
>> >>Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 1:13 PM
>> >>To: [e-mail]
>> >>Subject: [CANSLIM] Mini Cup & Handles
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Would you say CAH has two mini cup and handles?
>> >>
>> >>Dan
>> >
>
>Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists
>Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site
>PFB Information
>mailto:[e-mail]
>WWW http://OreRockOn.com
>
>
>-
>
>

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Rogers <[e-mail]>
Subject: [CANSLIM] Intro: Tom Rogers
Date: 28 Jun 2000 12:42:25 -0400

Hi,

I'm a professional woodworker living outside of Boston.  I have been
self employed for 23 years, with many employees and some major clients.
I found the business to be unprofitable, probably because I gave my
clients too much quality for the price.   I recently moved out of
Boston, and eventually closed down my shop.  In the last year or so,
I've been building an addition on my house as well as a major landscape
project which in the end has provided my wife with so many gardens to
fill with flowers that we had to hire someone to help.  Along the way I
have been selling custom made wooden doors which I have made for me by
shops in New Hampshire and New Jersey.  I guess I'm going through a mid
life change (not a crisis), and I have to thank my wife for being so
patient with me as I find my way to a new occupation.

A few months ago we decided that I would take over management of all of
our investments.  I have learned so much in a short period of time, and
I must admit, that I'm somewhat addicted to the stock market.  I have
been bopping around the internet from site to site trying to find what
is most useful for me.

At first I made investments in my own IRA and at the time I had no clue
about canslim, I didn't know how to read the charts, I just went by what
analysts were recommending along with gut instinct.  Right after the
correction in March I bought shares in AOL, CMGI, AMZN, MOT, OMKT.  I
was very pleased with myself as they were all going up, but time would
prove me to be a novice, as most are in negative territory now.

My second batch of investments was for my wife including CTXS. SNDK,
INTC, PENG, NITE, CMVT, ELNT.  The first blow was CTXS diving to 22 from
my entry at 42.75, and they now have about 12 shareholder lawsuits
against them.  Then I find that OMKT is in the same boat with the law
suits.  Luckily I bought OMKT at around 8, so I think I'm pretty safe,
but what really kills me is that it was up by 125% and I watched it
slide down to around 50%.  Lately I was overjoyed by ELNT which in a
short period of time was up 25%, but the stochastic and momentum graphs
that I enjoy at ClearStation showed that it was itching for a drop, and
so I freaked out on Thursday with the turmoil in the late morning I
thought I was going to loose my profit so I sold it locking in 16%, of
course by the end of the day it was up and today it was up again!  Now
I'm uptight about PENG which is up 21.47%.

Long story short, I need to find a program that will help me with the
selection, and timing to enter and exit without wasting a ton of time.
I get IBD and am hooked on the canslim concept, and have looked at a few
programs including: Pitbull, Indigo, Growth Stock Analytics, Pinpoint
Market Timing.  I can't hang around my computer all day wondering what's
going to happen next!

I'm looking for suggestions, can anyone help me find a decent system
that isn't too expensive (say $15 per month)?

Thanks in advance

Tom Rogers




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tim Fisher" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Naz Trends (was Re: [CANSLIM] Over 2 B in volume)
Date: 30 Jun 2000 21:16:25 -0700

Neither do I see evidence for an imminent failure. Read my comments
carefully. I see churning and failure to make any headway, but support
forming. I just don't think it's much of a base. I agree Monday should be
ugly, and Wednesday may not be much better as those institutionals that
will be gone Monday sell out.

At 10:26 PM 6/30/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Hi Tim,
>
>As I should have remarked on my comments about "trendlessness" in
>an earlier post on an individual stock, the trend (or lack
>thereof) is often in the eye of the beholder. But I would
>disagree that one week can set a "trend". Looking at Nasdaq for
>the month of June, I see 13 up days compared to 8 down days. And
>avg volume overall surpassed the month of May, where I see the
>exact opposite: 13 down days to 8 up days. And ADV was definitely
>lower in May than June, as was the price as well.  This
>observation alone gives me a short term view that the trend is
>up.  Combine that with May marked by the latest short term low,
>and June marked by a solid basing action (and badly needed, IMHO,
>after all the volatility recently), and I continue to see a
>positive trend in the short term chart.
>
>Friday's volume is highly suspect, and I read little into it
>other than a LOT of fund mgrs and institutionals (pension funds
>and the like) were caught with their knickers down on what they
>might have to report to their shareholders as portfolio holdings.
>Rarely does a "window dressing" purchase last more than a day or
>two into the new quarter, and with Monday's expected light volume
>on half day trading hours (and even less staffing), a lot of
>shares bot today will find their way back into the marketplace in
>the next several days.
>
>But I still find the short term trend ("M") to be up, and see no
>evidence of an imminent failure.
>
>Tom Worley
>[e-mail]
>chat with me at ICQ # 5568838
>get ICQ software at http://www.icq.com/icqhomepage.html
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Tim Fisher <[e-mail]>
>To: <[e-mail]>
>Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 9:45 PM
>Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Over 2 B in volume
>
>
>What's interesting is that the market technicians give advice to
>the
>institutional and hedge fund traders, and their advice right now
>is
>probably split 50/50. We are sitting on some thin ice (support at
>3880) and
>don't have any close support levels on which to rest on the way
>up.
>Wednesday's action, just like this past weeks', could determine
>whether
>this summer rally continues or dies a swift death. This week was
>not very
>decisive as far as setting a trend for the summer. The typical
>pattern
>would be for light volume, increased volatility, and lots of
>churning until
>school is back in session.
>
>At 09:28 PM 6/30/00 -0400, you wrote:
> >So what's so interesting about Wednesday, every day this year
>has been
> >interesting. I listen to analysts on CNBC in the AM and they all
>have one
> >thing in common, nothing. This week I bought, NIPNY @150.1/2
>(stopped out
> >yesterday) @159.1/2 and CAH @ 70 1/4 and it's still going (74).
>I always
> >use stops, so if Monday or Wednesday bombs I'll take the crumbs
>and move
> >on. I have 80 stocks on my Quote Tracker Watch List, and it's
>always firing
> >off alerts with new break outs.
> >
> >Dan
> >
> >At 02:37 PM 6/30/00 -0700, you wrote:
> > >Unlike yesterday, the leaders (with the exception of PLXS and
>KEI) did not
> > >fare well. Several false breakouts occurred early on. This
>does not bode
> > >well for Monday which being a 1/2 day and a virtual holiday
>will be
> > >dominated by volatility on light volume. Wednesday should be
>real
> > >interesting. There seems to be no real support between 3880
>and infinity
> > >that hasn't been broken on the way down, so we need some
>basing in the low
> > >4000s to build it up. I'd like to see the 50d cross back up
>over the 200d
> > >before we shoot the moon again.
> > >
> > >On 02:16 PM 6/30/00, Rocky Sanghvi Said:
> > >>Over 2 B in volume
> > >>
> > >>http://www.nasdaq.com
> > >>
> > >>Very impressive action.
> > >>
> > >>Rakesh
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>-----Original Message-----
> > >>From: Rocky Sanghvi
> > >>Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 5:15 PM
> > >>To: '[e-mail]'
> > >>Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] EXDS Cup & Handle
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>Is EXDS forming a nice cup and handle?  Look at the 1 year
>and the 3 month
> > >>charts...  While it is not close to its all time high of 89,
>it sure seems
> > >>to be forming a sweet handle. Volume is drying up nicely.
>Thoughts?
> > >>
> > >>By the way I love the volume today.....  1st large
>confirmation after Jun
> > >>2nd I think with almost 1.9 B traded.
> > >>
> > >>Disc:  I am working with EXDS on a business deal.
> > >>
> > >>Rakesh
> > >>
> > >>-----Original Message-----
> > >>From: Dan Forant [mailto:[e-mail]]
> > >>Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 1:13 PM
> > >>To: [e-mail]
> > >>Subject: [CANSLIM] Mini Cup & Handles
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>Would you say CAH has two mini cup and handles?
> > >>
> > >>Dan
> > >
>
>Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists
>Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site
>PFB Information
>mailto:[e-mail]
>WWW http://OreRockOn.com
>
>
>-
>
>
>
>-

Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists
Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site
PFB Information
mailto:[e-mail]
WWW http://OreRockOn.com


-