ftp.xmission.com

home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search

/ ftp.xmission.com / 2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar / ftp.xmission.com / pub / lists / canslim / archive / v02.n1566 < prev next >

Wrap

Internet Message Format | 2001-07-14 | 61KB

From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #1566 Reply-To: canslim Sender: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-No-Archive: yes canslim-digest Sunday, July 15 2001 Volume 02 : Number 1566 In this issue: [CANSLIM] Commentary by Bernie Schaeffer: Microsoft Manufactures a Tech Rally Re: [CANSLIM] Re:positives from real money. Re: [CANSLIM] Buyers beware (formerly OPTN update) Re: [CANSLIM] Commentary by Bernie Schaeffer: Microsoft Manufactures a Tech Rally Re: [CANSLIM] Re:positives from real money. RE: [CANSLIM] Commentary by Bernie Schaeffer: Microsoft Manufactu res a Tech Rally Re: [CANSLIM] CNTL Re: [CANSLIM] Commentary by Bernie Schaeffer: Microsoft Manufactures a Tech Rally [CANSLIM] Offtopic: Bernie Schaeffer track record [CANSLIM] Possibly OffTopic: Short summary of market commentators I follow. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 08:59:05 -0600 From: DougC <dzc@qwest.net> Subject: [CANSLIM] Commentary by Bernie Schaeffer: Microsoft Manufactures a Tech Rally This isn't a promotion. ;) Bernie S. is one of about 5 market commentators= =20 I find beneficial to follow. I'm including the entire arcticle, it isnt=20 very long, but mostly I found interesting his take on the latest Microsoft= =20 news. And this is legal because Bernie actually invites forwarding his=20 commentary. He does do a lot of self promotion but I forgive him because he= =20 seems to be pretty good at what he does. >Bernie Schaeffer: Microsoft Manufactures a Tech Rally > > >The expression "give the devil his due" is often appropriate in the world= =20 >of trading. This means we must develop a healthy respect for the forces=20 >that may be driving the market against our position, for two=20 >reasons. First, because they may in fact prove to be "right." And=20 >second, regardless of whether they're right, they can wreak havoc with our= =20 >trading performance over the short term. > >The immediate reaction of the market to the May 15 and June 27 Fed rate=20 >cuts was neutral to slightly negative. But in each case, the market=20 >rallied sharply the next day. Are there forces that wished to see a=20 >market liftoff in response to these Fed moves that were dissatisfied with= =20 >the market's initial reaction? Are you kidding? How about all the big=20 >Wall Street firms, all the big banks, as well as the Fed itself? Were=20 >these powers at work manufacturing a rally? I don't know, but note that=20 >each of these rallies had little follow-through and proved to be shorting= =20 >opportunities for the nimble trader. > >And then we have the very curious rally that began the afternoon before=20 >the big Kraft IPO on June 13. A weak market would have caused major=20 >problems for the big Wall Street firms peddling Kraft shares to the=20 >investing public, and late in the day on June 12 the Dow was off by as=20 >much as 144 points to 10,788. But (surprise!) the Dow rallied furiously=20 >in the final 90 minutes to close up 26 points at 10,948. This rally=20 >continued into the following morning as the huge Kraft IPO was being=20 >absorbed, with the Dow peaking at 11,004. A manufactured rally? I don't= =20 >know, but note that since June 13 the Dow has never again seen 11,000 and= =20 >has traded as low as 10,120. > >And last night, with the Nasdaq hanging on by its thumbs, seemingly=20 >destined to test its April lows, Bill Gates steps up to the plate with an= =20 >early announcement of "good earnings news" that sent its shares (and the=20 >big tech stocks) soaring in after-hours trading. So it must be good news,= =20 >right? After all, the headline on TheStreet.com's home page this morning= =20 >screams "Microsoft Shows Why It's Still Tech Heavyweight Champ - Still=20 >swinging in tough times, Mister Softee says revenue will beat forecasts,=20 >and Wall Street loves that." (As an aside, for some reason, some=20 >reporters think it's cool to use the stock nicknames attached by the=20 >grunts on trading desks =AD "Mister Softee" for MSFT, "Glow Worm" for GLW,= =20 >"Slob" for Schlumberger and so on. I personally find this anywhere from=20 >annoying to nauseating. But hey, I'm a contrarian and a grouch, which=20 >will become even clearer as this piece continues.) > >Back to MSFT. Let's stand back for a moment and take a closer look at the= =20 >facts underlying this "good news" as set forth in the more sober article=20 >in this morning's Wall Street Journal. > >MSFT reported a $2.6-billion loss in its investment portfolio that all but= =20 >wipes out its fiscal fourth-quarter profit. According to the Journal,=20 >MSFT "padded its results with investment gains during the bull=20 >market." According to Bernie Schaeffer, this means that much of what MSFT= =20 >has been reporting as earnings in recent years was pure vapor. > >MSFT's revenue will beat forecasts. But by how much? The company says=20 >they will come in at $6.5-6.6 billion for the quarter, compared to Street= =20 >estimates of $6.46 billion. So they will "beat revenue forecasts" by a=20 >"whopping" one to two percent. > >MSFT's earnings will meet, but not beat, Street expectations of 42 cents=20 >per share. But this is down from 44 cents in the comparable quarter last= year. > >Schaeffer addendum: Despite negative quarter-to-quarter earnings growth,=20 >MSFT trades at a forward P/E of about 40. > >How convenient, as the techs are swooning to manufacture some "good news"= =20 >from a tech behemoth that comprises over 10 percent of the Nasdaq 100=20 >Index! I noted to myself yesterday that there was a strong bid for MSFT=20 >all day, and this certainly makes sense now. > >The key right here and now is whether this rally will prove to be as=20 >"durable" as the vapor rallies described above, or whether this will mark= =20 >a potential bottom in the Nasdaq. Those of you who've been reading my=20 >commentaries in this space know I have a strong predisposition toward this= =20 >being yet another vapor rally. If in fact the Nasdaq has just put in a=20 >bottom, it will mark the first market bottom in history where hope, and=20 >not fear, was the byword. > >But let's take a look at MSFT specifically. The shares rallied to a shade= =20 >above 70 last night, but note from the chart below how rallies died in the= =20 >mid-70s in August and November 2000 and so far this year. Also note from= =20 >the second chart how the most recent rallied failed at the declining=20 >20-month moving average, and that the stock has not closed above this key= =20 >long-term moving average since March 2000. So from a technical=20 >standpoint, MSFT faces huge resistance just above current levels. > > >Charts courtesy of ILX Systems > >I must also point out that there have been three separate bullish cover=20 >stories on MSFT so far this year, plus a recent bullish Heard on the=20 >Street column in the Journal. The euphoria over last night's "less than=20 >meets the eye" good news is just another example of how the Street gushes= =20 >over MSFT. Unfortunately, weak technicals and excessively bullish=20 >sentiment are often a recipe for disaster for shareholders. > > >Graphs and charts have been removed from this Special Commentary by Bernie= =20 >Schaeffer >To see the complete Special Commentary by Bernie Schaeffer, please go to: >http://www.schaeffersresearch.com/schaeffer/bernie_observations.asp?ID=3D37= 88 - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: 13 Jul 2001 07:06:19 -0700 From: "Tim Fisher" <tim@orerockon.com> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re:positives from real money. Sell it somewhere else, Bill. At 11:52 PM 7/12/2001 +0000, you wrote: >a bunch of self-promoting drivel - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: 13 Jul 2001 07:03:47 -0700 From: "Tim Fisher" <tim@orerockon.com> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Buyers beware (formerly OPTN update) Here is belief, another poster hoped (again). Where is the technical analysis this group is famous for? What signals has M been giving? NASDAQ took out the recent low intraday, isn't that a signal to start counting again? What about follow-through days? Don't we need them anymore? At 10:17 PM 7/12/2001 -0500, you wrote: >Hi Patti, > >Today was a technically good day for M. I believe the intra-day low made >yesterday will hold up, and that we will re-test the recent highs in the >NASDAQ. However, your caveat is certainly valid because the market will >likely remain very volatile. > >E > >---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- >From: "Patti Curry" <curry2@clnk.com> >Reply-To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 18:57:54 -0500 > > >Good for you on your buys of NEOG and OPTN, Dan! I got caught off guard and > >missed the move on AZO; it has had 2 great days. We may even have a few > >more 'up' days going into option expiry next week . Enjoy but be on your > >guard everyone. This is tempory. Alot of what you are seeing is short > >covering which started after hours yesterday. > > > >All the best, Patti > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Dan Forant" <dforant1@nycap.rr.com> > >To: <canslim@lists.xmission.com> > >Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 1:50 PM > >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] OPTN update > > > > > >> Yes, thanks for the info on OPTN. Got it today. Haven't had many stocks > >b/o > >> with that kind of volume lately. NEOG is another. So all you guys (and > >> gals) post, post, post. > >> > >> DanF > > > > > > > >- > >-To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" > >-In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > >-"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. > > > >- >-To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" >-In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or >-"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. Tim Fisher Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site Pacific Fishery Biologists Information mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 11:44:57 -0600 From: esetser <esetser@covad.net> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Commentary by Bernie Schaeffer: Microsoft Manufactures a Tech Rally I found this information quite interesting. The biggest issue for CANSLIMers right now is M, so any opinions that people respect are right on topic for my money. Thanks for the info. At 08:59 AM 7/14/01 -0600, you wrote: >This isn't a promotion. ;) Bernie S. is one of about 5 market commentators >I find beneficial to follow. I'm including the entire arcticle, it isnt >very long, but mostly I found interesting his take on the latest Microsoft >news. And this is legal because Bernie actually invites forwarding his >commentary. He does do a lot of self promotion but I forgive him because he >seems to be pretty good at what he does. > > > - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: 14 Jul 2001 11:04:09 -0700 From: "Tim Fisher" <tim@orerockon.com> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re:positives from real money. Whoops, had written these then the ISP went down, so I re-wrote them from work. At 07:06 AM 7/13/2001 -0700, you wrote: >Sell it somewhere else, Bill. - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 14:57:07 -0500 From: "Dempsey, Chris" <cdempsey@houston.oilfield.slb.com> Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Commentary by Bernie Schaeffer: Microsoft Manufactu res a Tech Rally This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. - ------_=_NextPart_001_01C10C9F.292EA260 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'm curious who the other commentators are that you like and why? - -----Original Message----- From: DougC [mailto:dzc@qwest.net] Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 9:59 AM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Commentary by Bernie Schaeffer: Microsoft Manufactures a Tech Rally This isn't a promotion. ;) Bernie S. is one of about 5 market = commentators=20 I find beneficial to follow. I'm including the entire arcticle, it isnt = very long, but mostly I found interesting his take on the latest = Microsoft=20 news. And this is legal because Bernie actually invites forwarding his=20 commentary. He does do a lot of self promotion but I forgive him = because he=20 seems to be pretty good at what he does. >Bernie Schaeffer: Microsoft Manufactures a Tech Rally > > >The expression "give the devil his due" is often appropriate in the = world=20 >of trading. This means we must develop a healthy respect for the = forces=20 >that may be driving the market against our position, for two=20 >reasons. First, because they may in fact prove to be "right." And=20 >second, regardless of whether they're right, they can wreak havoc with = our=20 >trading performance over the short term. > >The immediate reaction of the market to the May 15 and June 27 Fed = rate=20 >cuts was neutral to slightly negative. But in each case, the market=20 >rallied sharply the next day. Are there forces that wished to see a=20 >market liftoff in response to these Fed moves that were dissatisfied = with=20 >the market's initial reaction? Are you kidding? How about all the = big=20 >Wall Street firms, all the big banks, as well as the Fed itself? Were = >these powers at work manufacturing a rally? I don't know, but note = that=20 >each of these rallies had little follow-through and proved to be = shorting=20 >opportunities for the nimble trader. > >And then we have the very curious rally that began the afternoon = before=20 >the big Kraft IPO on June 13. A weak market would have caused major=20 >problems for the big Wall Street firms peddling Kraft shares to the=20 >investing public, and late in the day on June 12 the Dow was off by as = >much as 144 points to 10,788. But (surprise!) the Dow rallied = furiously=20 >in the final 90 minutes to close up 26 points at 10,948. This rally=20 >continued into the following morning as the huge Kraft IPO was being=20 >absorbed, with the Dow peaking at 11,004. A manufactured rally? I = don't=20 >know, but note that since June 13 the Dow has never again seen 11,000 = and=20 >has traded as low as 10,120. > >And last night, with the Nasdaq hanging on by its thumbs, seemingly=20 >destined to test its April lows, Bill Gates steps up to the plate with = an=20 >early announcement of "good earnings news" that sent its shares (and = the=20 >big tech stocks) soaring in after-hours trading. So it must be good = news,=20 >right? After all, the headline on TheStreet.com's home page this = morning=20 >screams "Microsoft Shows Why It's Still Tech Heavyweight Champ - Still = >swinging in tough times, Mister Softee says revenue will beat = forecasts,=20 >and Wall Street loves that." (As an aside, for some reason, some=20 >reporters think it's cool to use the stock nicknames attached by the=20 >grunts on trading desks =AD "Mister Softee" for MSFT, "Glow Worm" for = GLW,=20 >"Slob" for Schlumberger and so on. I personally find this anywhere = from=20 >annoying to nauseating. But hey, I'm a contrarian and a grouch, which = >will become even clearer as this piece continues.) > >Back to MSFT. Let's stand back for a moment and take a closer look at = the=20 >facts underlying this "good news" as set forth in the more sober = article=20 >in this morning's Wall Street Journal. > >MSFT reported a $2.6-billion loss in its investment portfolio that all = but=20 >wipes out its fiscal fourth-quarter profit. According to the Journal, = >MSFT "padded its results with investment gains during the bull=20 >market." According to Bernie Schaeffer, this means that much of what = MSFT=20 >has been reporting as earnings in recent years was pure vapor. > >MSFT's revenue will beat forecasts. But by how much? The company = says=20 >they will come in at $6.5-6.6 billion for the quarter, compared to = Street=20 >estimates of $6.46 billion. So they will "beat revenue forecasts" by = a=20 >"whopping" one to two percent. > >MSFT's earnings will meet, but not beat, Street expectations of 42 = cents=20 >per share. But this is down from 44 cents in the comparable quarter = last year. > >Schaeffer addendum: Despite negative quarter-to-quarter earnings = growth,=20 >MSFT trades at a forward P/E of about 40. > >How convenient, as the techs are swooning to manufacture some "good = news"=20 >from a tech behemoth that comprises over 10 percent of the Nasdaq 100=20 >Index! I noted to myself yesterday that there was a strong bid for = MSFT=20 >all day, and this certainly makes sense now. > >The key right here and now is whether this rally will prove to be as=20 >"durable" as the vapor rallies described above, or whether this will = mark=20 >a potential bottom in the Nasdaq. Those of you who've been reading my = >commentaries in this space know I have a strong predisposition toward = this=20 >being yet another vapor rally. If in fact the Nasdaq has just put in = a=20 >bottom, it will mark the first market bottom in history where hope, = and=20 >not fear, was the byword. > >But let's take a look at MSFT specifically. The shares rallied to a = shade=20 >above 70 last night, but note from the chart below how rallies died in = the=20 >mid-70s in August and November 2000 and so far this year. Also note = from=20 >the second chart how the most recent rallied failed at the declining=20 >20-month moving average, and that the stock has not closed above this = key=20 >long-term moving average since March 2000. So from a technical=20 >standpoint, MSFT faces huge resistance just above current levels. > > >Charts courtesy of ILX Systems > >I must also point out that there have been three separate bullish = cover=20 >stories on MSFT so far this year, plus a recent bullish Heard on the=20 >Street column in the Journal. The euphoria over last night's "less = than=20 >meets the eye" good news is just another example of how the Street = gushes=20 >over MSFT. Unfortunately, weak technicals and excessively bullish=20 >sentiment are often a recipe for disaster for shareholders. > > >Graphs and charts have been removed from this Special Commentary by = Bernie=20 >Schaeffer >To see the complete Special Commentary by Bernie Schaeffer, please go = to: >http://www.schaeffersresearch.com/schaeffer/bernie_observations.asp?ID=3D= 3788 - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - ------_=_NextPart_001_01C10C9F.292EA260 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> <META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2653.12"> <TITLE>RE: [CANSLIM] Commentary by Bernie Schaeffer: Microsoft Manufactures a Tech Rally</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY> I'm curious who the other commentators are that you like and why? -----Original Message----- From: DougC [<A HREF="mailto:dzc@qwest.net">mailto:dzc@qwest.net</A>] Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 9:59 AM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Commentary by Bernie Schaeffer: Microsoft Manufactures a Tech Rally This isn't a promotion. ;) Bernie S. is one of about 5 market commentators I find beneficial to follow. I'm including the entire arcticle, it isnt very long, but mostly I found interesting his take on the latest Microsoft news. And this is legal because Bernie actually invites forwarding his commentary. He does do a lot of self promotion but I forgive him because he seems to be pretty good at what he does. >Bernie Schaeffer: Microsoft Manufactures a Tech Rally > > >The expression "give the devil his due" is often appropriate in the world >of trading. This means we must develop a healthy respect for the forces >that may be driving the market against our position, for two >reasons. First, because they may in fact prove to be "right." And >second, regardless of whether they're right, they can wreak havoc with our >trading performance over the short term. > >The immediate reaction of the market to the May 15 and June 27 Fed rate >cuts was neutral to slightly negative. But in each case, the market >rallied sharply the next day. Are there forces that wished to see a >market liftoff in response to these Fed moves that were dissatisfied with >the market's initial reaction? Are you kidding? How about all the big >Wall Street firms, all the big banks, as well as the Fed itself? Were >these powers at work manufacturing a rally? I don't know, but note that >each of these rallies had little follow-through and proved to be shorting >opportunities for the nimble trader. > >And then we have the very curious rally that began the afternoon before >the big Kraft IPO on June 13. A weak market would have caused major >problems for the big Wall Street firms peddling Kraft shares to the >investing public, and late in the day on June 12 the Dow was off by as >much as 144 points to 10,788. But (surprise!) the Dow rallied furiously >in the final 90 minutes to close up 26 points at 10,948. This rally >continued into the following morning as the huge Kraft IPO was being >absorbed, with the Dow peaking at 11,004. A manufactured rally? I don't >know, but note that since June 13 the Dow has never again seen 11,000 and >has traded as low as 10,120. > >And last night, with the Nasdaq hanging on by its thumbs, seemingly >destined to test its April lows, Bill Gates steps up to the plate with an >early announcement of "good earnings news" that sent its shares (and the >big tech stocks) soaring in after-hours trading. So it must be good news, >right? After all, the headline on TheStreet.com's home page this morning >screams "Microsoft Shows Why It's Still Tech Heavyweight Champ - Still >swinging in tough times, Mister Softee says revenue will beat forecasts, >and Wall Street loves that." (As an aside, for some reason, some >reporters think it's cool to use the stock nicknames attached by the >grunts on trading desks ¡ "Mister Softee" for MSFT, "Glow Worm" for GLW, >"Slob" for Schlumberger and so on. I personally find this anywhere from >annoying to nauseating. But hey, I'm a contrarian and a grouch, which >will become even clearer as this piece continues.) > >Back to MSFT. Let's stand back for a moment and take a closer look at the >facts underlying this "good news" as set forth in the more sober article >in this morning's Wall Street Journal. > >MSFT reported a $2.6-billion loss in its investment portfolio that all but >wipes out its fiscal fourth-quarter profit. According to the Journal, >MSFT "padded its results with investment gains during the bull >market." According to Bernie Schaeffer, this means that much of what MSFT >has been reporting as earnings in recent years was pure vapor. > >MSFT's revenue will beat forecasts. But by how much? The company says >they will come in at $6.5-6.6 billion for the quarter, compared to Street >estimates of $6.46 billion. So they will "beat revenue forecasts" by a >"whopping" one to two percent. > >MSFT's earnings will meet, but not beat, Street expectations of 42 cents >per share. But this is down from 44 cents in the comparable quarter last year. > >Schaeffer addendum: Despite negative quarter-to-quarter earnings growth, >MSFT trades at a forward P/E of about 40. > >How convenient, as the techs are swooning to manufacture some "good news" >from a tech behemoth that comprises over 10 percent of the Nasdaq 100 >Index! I noted to myself yesterday that there was a strong bid for MSFT >all day, and this certainly makes sense now. > >The key right here and now is whether this rally will prove to be as >"durable" as the vapor rallies described above, or whether this will mark >a potential bottom in the Nasdaq. Those of you who've been reading my >commentaries in this space know I have a strong predisposition toward this >being yet another vapor rally. If in fact the Nasdaq has just put in a >bottom, it will mark the first market bottom in history where hope, and >not fear, was the byword. > >But let's take a look at MSFT specifically. The shares rallied to a shade >above 70 last night, but note from the chart below how rallies died in the >mid-70s in August and November 2000 and so far this year. Also note from >the second chart how the most recent rallied failed at the declining >20-month moving average, and that the stock has not closed above this key >long-term moving average since March 2000. So from a technical >standpoint, MSFT faces huge resistance just above current levels. > > >Charts courtesy of ILX Systems > >I must also point out that there have been three separate bullish cover >stories on MSFT so far this year, plus a recent bullish Heard on the >Street column in the Journal. The euphoria over last night's "less than >meets the eye" good news is just another example of how the Street gushes >over MSFT. Unfortunately, weak technicals and excessively bullish >sentiment are often a recipe for disaster for shareholders. > > >Graphs and charts have been removed from this Special Commentary by Bernie >Schaeffer >To see the complete Special Commentary by Bernie Schaeffer, please go to: ><A HREF="http://www.schaeffersresearch.com/schaeffer/bernie_observations.asp?ID=3788" TARGET="_blank">http://www.schaeffersresearch.com/schaeffer/bernie_observations.asp?ID=3788</A> - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. </BODY> </HTML> - ------_=_NextPart_001_01C10C9F.292EA260-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 14:41:08 -0600 From: DougC <dzc@qwest.net> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CNTL Another nice pick E. Fundamental wise. I happen to already be in it. Bought at 15.44 back on 04/27 during what I thought was a developing cup. Sold half on the way up to the peak but still hold the second half. My best performer since the followthru of the markets in April. I've got three others that are up 33, 35 and 50% since mid april. All without using a Gann line but just picking good stocks with good fundamentals and good bases. Your Gann line always seems to coincide with the 50dma. I've been considering adding to my position in CNTL because of the base on base it seems to be developing and the fact the 50dma seems to be a good test for support. although the base does look a little sloppy. But I really like the volume dropoff since the end of June. At 09:11 PM 7/12/01 -0500, you wrote: >First the fundamentals 98 98 A B B. In the two most recently reported >quarters the company posted earnings gains of 50% and 53.33% respectively >on sales growth of 24.22% and 21.35% respectively. PE is reasonable at >29.1, valuation is good with a PEG of .40 TTM, ROE 21.83%, improved profit >margins in each of the past three years to its current level of 8.5%, and >no long term debt. > >There are only 4.55 million shares outstanding with a float of only 2.1 >million shares. Insiders own 53.85% of the company with 15 institutions >owning just over 10%. IBD rates the company as best in group. With >institutions owning little more than 10% of the company and the average >institutional ownership for this group being 37.49% I consider this issue >as under owned by institutions. With a very limited supply of this stock >available, it's high rating within the industry, and the fact that it is >relatively under owned by institutions there is strong potential for this >stock to move significantly higher in price. > >What's new, the company released a new product in February, Rapicide a >high level Disinfectant and Sterilant. They have also recently announced >the acquisition of Minntech a developer of disinfection/reprocessing >systems for renal dialysis. And today they announced their largest >international order in the company's history, but there was no disclosure >as to the value of the contract. > >Now the technical side, this is definitely not a WON defined chart >pattern. I feel it is a low risk trade because yesterday the stock price >almost touched the 1x1 line drawn from the low of 6-20. At the same time >there was a convergence of two different Gann line projections made from >recent price action. This convergence strongly suggests that yesterday was >a turning point for this stock and that there is major support at the $23 >level. If the turn was not yesterday then it will very likely be tomorrow, >but the $23 level should hold. The $23 level is also right above the 50 DMA. > >I intend to enter a buy limit order for 24.90 for tomorrow. I chose 24.90 >because this stock may take off tomorrow because it was pretty much left >behind today and I don't want to risk more than 8% on the trade. My sell >stop will be 22.90. > >If there are any questions concerning the technical aspect of this stock >please post them to TI_CANSLIM. > >E > > > >- >-To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" >-In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or >-"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 16:16:08 -0500 From: "walter nusbaum" <wnusbaum@airmail.net> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Commentary by Bernie Schaeffer: Microsoft Manufactures a Tech Rally - ----- Original Message ----- From: "DougC" <dzc@qwest.net> To: <canslim@lists.xmission.com> Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 9:59 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] Commentary by Bernie Schaeffer: Microsoft Manufactures a Tech Rally This isn't a promotion. ;) Bernie S. is one of about 5 market commentators I find beneficial to follow. I'm including the entire arcticle, it isnt very long, but mostly I found interesting his take on the latest Microsoft news. And this is legal because Bernie actually invites forwarding his commentary. He does do a lot of self promotion but I forgive him because he seems to be pretty good at what he does. Doug, Bernie may be interesting, but his performance record is dismal. As editor of "Option Advisor" in the 1/22/01 edition of Forbes, his publication is given a "D" in both Up and Down markets with an annualized gain of -3.9% since 5/31/90. Of the sixty newletters that are rated, Bernie's is one of six that showed negative returns. His annual subscription rate is $99/yr. Caveat emptor! Best wishes, Walt - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 17:08:55 -0600 From: DougC <dzc@qwest.net> Subject: [CANSLIM] Offtopic: Bernie Schaeffer track record Thanks for the info Walter. I have subscribed to his Option Advisor letter for about two months now and have been trying out his 6 picks per month. so far I havent gotten killed by his advice but havent made a bunch of money either. I did feel uneasy when first subscribing since there seemed to be a lack of long term track record for his picks in the Option Advisor. the only record I've seen is for the period back to 1997. Yet the Option Advisor Newsletter is supposed to have been in existence since 1981. The average winning percentage he shows is 47% with avg. win of 80% and avg. loss of 47% over the period from 1997 to mid 2000. But his conservative and educational approach impressed me. So many option experts push complicated and expensive spreads, straddles, etc. Bernie does have a multitude of services. Was Forbes specific about what service they were tracking? I just want some exposure to options as a learning experience. I don't intend to get that heavy into it. At 04:16 PM 7/14/01 -0500, you wrote: >----- Original Message ----- >From: "DougC" <dzc@qwest.net> >To: <canslim@lists.xmission.com> >Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 9:59 AM >Subject: [CANSLIM] Commentary by Bernie Schaeffer: Microsoft Manufactures a >Tech Rally > > >This isn't a promotion. ;) Bernie S. is one of about 5 market commentators >I find beneficial to follow. I'm including the entire arcticle, it isnt >very long, but mostly I found interesting his take on the latest Microsoft >news. And this is legal because Bernie actually invites forwarding his >commentary. He does do a lot of self promotion but I forgive him because he >seems to be pretty good at what he does. > >Doug, >Bernie may be interesting, but his performance record is dismal. As editor >of "Option Advisor" in the 1/22/01 edition of Forbes, his publication is >given a "D" in both Up and Down markets with an annualized gain of -3.9% >since 5/31/90. Of the sixty newletters that are rated, Bernie's is one of >six that showed negative returns. His annual subscription rate is $99/yr. >Caveat emptor! >Best wishes, >Walt > > > > > > >- >-To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" >-In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or >-"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 16:03:50 -0600 From: DougC <dzc@qwest.net> Subject: [CANSLIM] Possibly OffTopic: Short summary of market commentators I follow. - --=====================_123355763==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Chris The four others are all at TradingMarkets.com. So I hope this doesnt seem=20 like I'm promoting the site. I'm sure quite a few other recipients and=20 participants of this site subscribe to TM so I think it wont be taken that= way. 1. Mark Boucher - He only writes a column on Fridays. He's done research at= =20 Stanford that affirms a lot of what WON talks about. His criteria for=20 picking stocks is actually more stringent than WON. He's a Global invester= =20 and uses all kinds of economic and commodity indicators to gauge whether=20 any one market is more optimum than another. He's mostly intermediate term= =20 for stocks. He'll play shorts just as strong as longs depending on the=20 markets. He also plays the commodities. His weekly columns refers to RS/EPS= =20 stock lists on TM. If there is a stock on that list that meets his criteria= =20 he'll buy it and talk about why and also about where his stops are. It's an= =20 excellent way to learn because you know that if he says on Friday that he=20 bought something earlier in the week that you did also based on his=20 teachings then that affirms you're catching on. Basically he's an advanced= =20 version of WON. 2. Dave Landry - he's a swing trader who keeps things simple and helps you= =20 along with excellent real time examples that he keeps following for as long= =20 as they are in play. He plays long and short along obvious trends. Right=20 now he's cautious on the market until a trend in either direction is=20 established. Very entertaining writer. 3. Gary Kaltbaum - he's basically a CANSLIM follower for intermediate term.= =20 He seems to be playing sector rotation rather than wait for the markets to= =20 assert a trend. He talks about shorts sometimes. 4. Goran Yordanoff - a very entertaining and opinionated day trader who has= =20 been bearish for some time now. He uses both economic and technical=20 analysis in his trading decisions. I don't day trade but I think the guy=20 has some deep knowledge about how the markets work and are manipulated and= =20 how this plays against the economic backdrop. 5. Bernie Schaeffer - Mostly an Options advisor. His basic letter is great= =20 way to start in options. He advocates starting with 3 to 6 month in the=20 money options by 1 or 2 strikes. He keeps it simple for beginners with that= =20 advice believe it or not. He advices balancing put and call positions=20 depending on the market. He believes the more complicated and commision=20 generating strategies arent necessary but can be used to advantage for more= =20 experienced players. I've only been trying out his advice for a couple= months. At 02:57 PM 7/14/01 -0500, you wrote: >I'm curious who the other commentators are that you like and why? > >-----Original Message----- >From: DougC [<mailto:dzc@qwest.net>mailto:dzc@qwest.net] >Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 9:59 AM >To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >Subject: [CANSLIM] Commentary by Bernie Schaeffer: Microsoft >Manufactures a Tech Rally > >This isn't a promotion. ;) Bernie S. is one of about 5 market commentators >I find beneficial to follow. I'm including the entire arcticle, it isnt >very long, but mostly I found interesting his take on the latest Microsoft >news. And this is legal because Bernie actually invites forwarding his >commentary. He does do a lot of self promotion but I forgive him because he >seems to be pretty good at what he does. > > > >Bernie Schaeffer: Microsoft Manufactures a Tech Rally > > > > > >The expression "give the devil his due" is often appropriate in the world > >of trading. This means we must develop a healthy respect for the forces > >that may be driving the market against our position, for two > >reasons. First, because they may in fact prove to be "right." And > >second, regardless of whether they're right, they can wreak havoc with= our > >trading performance over the short term. > > > >The immediate reaction of the market to the May 15 and June 27 Fed rate > >cuts was neutral to slightly negative. But in each case, the market > >rallied sharply the next day. Are there forces that wished to see a > >market liftoff in response to these Fed moves that were dissatisfied with > >the market's initial reaction? Are you kidding? How about all the big > >Wall Street firms, all the big banks, as well as the Fed itself? Were > >these powers at work manufacturing a rally? I don't know, but note that > >each of these rallies had little follow-through and proved to be shorting > >opportunities for the nimble trader. > > > >And then we have the very curious rally that began the afternoon before > >the big Kraft IPO on June 13. A weak market would have caused major > >problems for the big Wall Street firms peddling Kraft shares to the > >investing public, and late in the day on June 12 the Dow was off by as > >much as 144 points to 10,788. But (surprise!) the Dow rallied furiously > >in the final 90 minutes to close up 26 points at 10,948. This rally > >continued into the following morning as the huge Kraft IPO was being > >absorbed, with the Dow peaking at 11,004. A manufactured rally? I don't > >know, but note that since June 13 the Dow has never again seen 11,000 and > >has traded as low as 10,120. > > > >And last night, with the Nasdaq hanging on by its thumbs, seemingly > >destined to test its April lows, Bill Gates steps up to the plate with an > >early announcement of "good earnings news" that sent its shares (and the > >big tech stocks) soaring in after-hours trading. So it must be good= news, > >right? After all, the headline on TheStreet.com's home page this morning > >screams "Microsoft Shows Why It's Still Tech Heavyweight Champ - Still > >swinging in tough times, Mister Softee says revenue will beat forecasts, > >and Wall Street loves that." (As an aside, for some reason, some > >reporters think it's cool to use the stock nicknames attached by the > >grunts on trading desks =AD "Mister Softee" for MSFT, "Glow Worm" for= GLW, > >"Slob" for Schlumberger and so on. I personally find this anywhere from > >annoying to nauseating. But hey, I'm a contrarian and a grouch, which > >will become even clearer as this piece continues.) > > > >Back to MSFT. Let's stand back for a moment and take a closer look at= the > >facts underlying this "good news" as set forth in the more sober article > >in this morning's Wall Street Journal. > > > >MSFT reported a $2.6-billion loss in its investment portfolio that all= but > >wipes out its fiscal fourth-quarter profit. According to the Journal, > >MSFT "padded its results with investment gains during the bull > >market." According to Bernie Schaeffer, this means that much of what= MSFT > >has been reporting as earnings in recent years was pure vapor. > > > >MSFT's revenue will beat forecasts. But by how much? The company says > >they will come in at $6.5-6.6 billion for the quarter, compared to Street > >estimates of $6.46 billion. So they will "beat revenue forecasts" by a > >"whopping" one to two percent. > > > >MSFT's earnings will meet, but not beat, Street expectations of 42 cents > >per share. But this is down from 44 cents in the comparable quarter=20 > last year. > > > >Schaeffer addendum: Despite negative quarter-to-quarter earnings growth, > >MSFT trades at a forward P/E of about 40. > > > >How convenient, as the techs are swooning to manufacture some "good news" > >from a tech behemoth that comprises over 10 percent of the Nasdaq 100 > >Index! I noted to myself yesterday that there was a strong bid for MSFT > >all day, and this certainly makes sense now. > > > >The key right here and now is whether this rally will prove to be as > >"durable" as the vapor rallies described above, or whether this will mark > >a potential bottom in the Nasdaq. Those of you who've been reading my > >commentaries in this space know I have a strong predisposition toward= this > >being yet another vapor rally. If in fact the Nasdaq has just put in a > >bottom, it will mark the first market bottom in history where hope, and > >not fear, was the byword. > > > >But let's take a look at MSFT specifically. The shares rallied to a= shade > >above 70 last night, but note from the chart below how rallies died in= the > >mid-70s in August and November 2000 and so far this year. Also note from > >the second chart how the most recent rallied failed at the declining > >20-month moving average, and that the stock has not closed above this key > >long-term moving average since March 2000. So from a technical > >standpoint, MSFT faces huge resistance just above current levels. > > > > > >Charts courtesy of ILX Systems > > > >I must also point out that there have been three separate bullish cover > >stories on MSFT so far this year, plus a recent bullish Heard on the > >Street column in the Journal. The euphoria over last night's "less than > >meets the eye" good news is just another example of how the Street gushes > >over MSFT. Unfortunately, weak technicals and excessively bullish > >sentiment are often a recipe for disaster for shareholders. > > > > > >Graphs and charts have been removed from this Special Commentary by= Bernie > >Schaeffer > >To see the complete Special Commentary by Bernie Schaeffer, please go to: > ><http://www.schaeffersresearch.com/schaeffer/bernie_observations.asp?ID= =3D3=20 > 788>http://www.schaeffersresearch.com/schaeffer/bernie_observations.asp?ID= =20 > =3D3788 > >- >-To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" >-In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or >-"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - --=====================_123355763==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <html> Chris The four others are all at TradingMarkets.com. So I hope this doesnt seem like I'm promoting the site. I'm sure quite a few other recipients and participants of this site subscribe to TM so I think it wont be taken that way. 1. Mark Boucher - He only writes a column on Fridays. He's done research at Stanford that affirms a lot of what WON talks about. His criteria for picking stocks is actually more stringent than WON. He's a Global invester and uses all kinds of economic and commodity indicators to gauge whether any one market is more optimum than another. He's mostly intermediate term for stocks. He'll play shorts just as strong as longs depending on the markets. He also plays the commodities. His weekly columns refers to RS/EPS stock lists on TM. If there is a stock on that list that meets his criteria he'll buy it and talk about why and also about where his stops are. It's an excellent way to learn because you know that if he says on Friday that he bought something earlier in the week that you did also based on his teachings then that affirms you're catching on. Basically he's an advanced version of WON. 2. Dave Landry - he's a swing trader who keeps things simple and helps you along with excellent real time examples that he keeps following for as long as they are in play. He plays long and short along obvious trends. Right now he's cautious on the market until a trend in either direction is established. Very entertaining writer. 3. Gary Kaltbaum - he's basically a CANSLIM follower for intermediate term. He seems to be playing sector rotation rather than wait for the markets to assert a trend. He talks about shorts sometimes. 4. Goran Yordanoff - a very entertaining and opinionated day trader who has been bearish for some time now. He uses both economic and technical analysis in his trading decisions. I don't day trade but I think the guy has some deep knowledge about how the markets work and are manipulated and how this plays against the economic backdrop. 5. Bernie Schaeffer - Mostly an Options advisor. His basic letter is great way to start in options. He advocates starting with 3 to 6 month in the money options by 1 or 2 strikes. He keeps it simple for beginners with that advice believe it or not. He advices balancing put and call positions depending on the market. He believes the more complicated and commision generating strategies arent necessary but can be used to advantage for more experienced players. I've only been trying out his advice for a couple months. At 02:57 PM 7/14/01 -0500, you wrote: <blockquote type=3Dcite cite>I'm curious who the other commentators are that you like and why? -----Original Message----- From: DougC [<a href=3D"mailto:dzc@qwest.net">mailto:dzc@qwest.net</a>] Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 9:59 AM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Commentary by Bernie Schaeffer: Microsoft Manufactures a Tech Rally This isn't a promotion. ;) Bernie S. is one of about 5 market commentators I find beneficial to follow. I'm including the entire arcticle, it isnt very long, but mostly I found interesting his take on the latest Microsoft news. And this is legal because Bernie actually invites forwarding his commentary. He does do a lot of self promotion but I forgive him because he seems to be pretty good at what he does. >Bernie Schaeffer: Microsoft Manufactures a Tech Rally > > >The expression "give the devil his due" is often appropriate in the world >of trading. This means we must develop a healthy respect for the forces >that may be driving the market against our position, for two >reasons. First, because they may in fact prove to be "right." And >second, regardless of whether they're right, they can wreak havoc with our >trading performance over the short term. > >The immediate reaction of the market to the May 15 and June 27 Fed rate >cuts was neutral to slightly negative. But in each case, the market >rallied sharply the next day. Are there forces that wished to see a >market liftoff in response to these Fed moves that were dissatisfied with >the market's initial reaction? Are you kidding? How about all the big >Wall Street firms, all the big banks, as well as the Fed itself? Were >these powers at work manufacturing a rally? I don't know, but note that >each of these rallies had little follow-through and proved to be shorting >opportunities for the nimble trader. > >And then we have the very curious rally that began the afternoon before >the big Kraft IPO on June 13. A weak market would have caused major >problems for the big Wall Street firms peddling Kraft shares to the >investing public, and late in the day on June 12 the Dow was off by as >much as 144 points to 10,788. But (surprise!) the Dow rallied furiously >in the final 90 minutes to close up 26 points at 10,948. This rally >continued into the following morning as the huge Kraft IPO was being >absorbed, with the Dow peaking at 11,004. A manufactured rally? I don't >know, but note that since June 13 the Dow has never again seen 11,000 and >has traded as low as 10,120. > >And last night, with the Nasdaq hanging on by its thumbs, seemingly >destined to test its April lows, Bill Gates steps up to the plate with an >early announcement of "good earnings news" that sent its shares (and the >big tech stocks) soaring in after-hours trading. So it must be good news, >right? After all, the headline on TheStreet.com's home page this morning >screams "Microsoft Shows Why It's Still Tech Heavyweight Champ - Still >swinging in tough times, Mister Softee says revenue will beat forecasts, >and Wall Street loves that." (As an aside, for some reason, some >reporters think it's cool to use the stock nicknames attached by the >grunts on trading desks =AD "Mister Softee" for MSFT, "Glow Worm" for GLW, >"Slob" for Schlumberger and so on. I personally find this anywhere from >annoying to nauseating. But hey, I'm a contrarian and a grouch, which >will become even clearer as this piece continues.) > >Back to MSFT. Let's stand back for a moment and take a closer look at the >facts underlying this "good news" as set forth in the more sober article >in this morning's Wall Street Journal. > >MSFT reported a $2.6-billion loss in its investment portfolio that all but >wipes out its fiscal fourth-quarter profit. According to the Journal, >MSFT "padded its results with investment gains during the bull >market." According to Bernie Schaeffer, this means that much of what MSFT >has been reporting as earnings in recent years was pure vapor. > >MSFT's revenue will beat forecasts. But by how much? The company says >they will come in at $6.5-6.6 billion for the quarter, compared to Street >estimates of $6.46 billion. So they will "beat revenue forecasts" by a >"whopping" one to two percent. > >MSFT's earnings will meet, but not beat, Street expectations of 42 cents >per share. But this is down from 44 cents in the comparable quarter last year. > >Schaeffer addendum: Despite negative quarter-to-quarter earnings growth, >MSFT trades at a forward P/E of about 40. > >How convenient, as the techs are swooning to manufacture some "good news" >from a tech behemoth that comprises over 10 percent of the Nasdaq 100 >Index! I noted to myself yesterday that there was a strong bid for MSFT >all day, and this certainly makes sense now. > >The key right here and now is whether this rally will prove to be as >"durable" as the vapor rallies described above, or whether this will mark >a potential bottom in the Nasdaq. Those of you who've been reading my >commentaries in this space know I have a strong predisposition toward this >being yet another vapor rally. If in fact the Nasdaq has just put in a >bottom, it will mark the first market bottom in history where hope, and >not fear, was the byword. > >But let's take a look at MSFT specifically. The shares rallied to a shade >above 70 last night, but note from the chart below how rallies died in the >mid-70s in August and November 2000 and so far this year. Also note from >the second chart how the most recent rallied failed at the declining >20-month moving average, and that the stock has not closed above this key >long-term moving average since March 2000. So from a technical >standpoint, MSFT faces huge resistance just above current levels. > > >Charts courtesy of ILX Systems > >I must also point out that there have been three separate bullish cover >stories on MSFT so far this year, plus a recent bullish Heard on the >Street column in the Journal. The euphoria over last night's "less than >meets the eye" good news is just another example of how the Street gushes >over MSFT. Unfortunately, weak technicals and excessively bullish >sentiment are often a recipe for disaster for shareholders. > > >Graphs and charts have been removed from this Special Commentary by Bernie >Schaeffer >To see the complete Special Commentary by Bernie Schaeffer, please go to: ><a href=3D"http://www.schaeffersresearch.com/schaeffer/be= rnie_observations.asp?ID=3D3788">http://www.schaeffersresearch.com/schaeffer= /bernie_observations.asp?ID=3D3788</a> - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email= "majordomo@xmission.com" -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim"= or -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in= your email. </blockquote></html> - --=====================_123355763==_.ALT-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #1566 ****************************** To unsubscribe to canslim-digest, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe canslim-digest" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message.