Semi-Equips - Buy when BLOOD is running in the streets! Message Board

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.

Technology Stocks : Semi-Equips - Buy when BLOOD is running in the streets!

LRCX 175.31

+1.8%

3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Gottfried who wrote (3362)	11/10/1997 7:07:00 PM
From: Iceberg	Read Replies (2) of 10921

> please explain the meaning of secular Gottfried, I didn't have a clue what secular meant either, except as a term used to make a distinction from the sacred. So I went looking for definitions that might have something even remotely related to the stock market. Here's what I found... - -"coming or observed once in an age or a century" - -"existing or continuing through ages or centuries" - -"of or relating to a long-enduring process" - -"of or relating to a long-term indefinite duration" - -"recurring at intervals greater than one year" - -"long-term (10-50 years or more) as distinguished from seasonal or cyclical time frames" The first five definitions came from Webster's unabridged dictionary and the last one came from Barron's Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms. [Reference specifics available upon request.] My opinion is that "secular" is an utterly stupid word to describe "long term". Why not just say long-term, specify how long, and be done with it? Some screwball somewhere apparently wanted to confuse the meaning of long-term by coming up with an off-the-wall word to describe what he/she was too lazy to otherwise describe! Your question was a good one. Unfortunately, the meaning of "secular" seems to be another typical failure of the English language, and serves as an example of the needless ambiguous nature of the English language. You'd think people would have enough common sense to define a word with one and only one meaning - - not 5, 10, 15 or 20+ meanings. BTW, I never got along with my English teachers when I was in school. They pissed me off, and I pissed them off. It was a constant battle. I lost. Ice

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next