Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Dave Gore's Trades That Make Sense -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: im a survivor who wrote (8146)	6/16/2002 2:36:51 PM
From: Dave Gore	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 16631

Keep PICKS coming, but do they pass SCREEN #1 & 2? What I was hoping for in creating a list of promising stocks and sectors was to find stocks that are fundamentally sound with a minimal short position, followed by a stock that passed T/A muster. (note: stocks under $5 typically would not fare well here, so they are excluded and fall into the speculative buy category based on promise) SCREEN #1: Fundamentally Sound PE PE of competitors PEG EPS growth EPS growth of competitors Screen #2: Short position analysis The last step if a stock passed #1 and #2, would be this but that would be done later after our list was created. Final Step: T/A to determine timing (Stochastics, MACD, money flow, OBV, etc.) EXAMPLE: ESST Stocks like ESST seem ideal after putting it through the first screen, but one must also use Screen #2. It's short position must always be taken into account. Nevertheless let's look at ESST's fundamentals, since even if there is a short position it may be temporary manipulation based on untrue rumors. If that's the case, a panic sell may result and one may be able to pick up the stock at a very undervalued price (i.e. ESST hit $12+ intraday a few weeks ago). Often when shorts cover, the fundamentals will be the reason the price rre-inflates. So far none of the stock picks mentioned can be analyzed here. That doesn't mean they aren't good picks but are they perhaps a bit more of a gamble when data is not as available? Should we still put them on the LIST? SCREEN #1: Basic Fundamentals earnings.nasdaq.com`&symbol=RANGY`&symbol=CCEL`&symbol=ITGR`&symbol=AIRM`&symbol=ESST`&selected=ESST PE = 13.88 PE of comptetitors = 83.57 PEG = .665 EPS growth = 119% EPS growth of competitors = -13.71 SCREEN #2: Short Interest Short Interest (as of 8-May-2002) biz.yahoo.com Shares Short 16.3M Percent of Float 53.3% Shares Short (Prior Month) 12.5M Short Ratio 4.41 Daily Volume 3.70M The problem here is the out of date information, but it still identifies whether there is a temporary short situation. Remember that sometimes there is a valid reason for a short position. Shorts often do better research than "longs", but lately manipulation and unfounded rumors have been more common. Still TYC has legitimately tanked, while ESST and AGM and ACF were tanked through manipulation, or so it appears.