InvestorsHub Logo
Boards
News
Market Data
Markets
Discover
Discover
AI Subscribe Login/Register account icon
S&P 500
5,618.26
(
-0.29%
)
US TECH 100
19,022.00
(
0.44%
)
Dow Jones
41,503.10
(
-0.25%
)
Brent Oil
73.30
(
1.27%
)
Bitcoin
61,967.57
(
0.48%
)
Post# of 35337
Next 10
Reply Private New
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (1) Keep Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (1) Next 10 Prev Next

Oakie1

Send PM Follow Ignore
Followers 3
Posts 1421
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 02/09/2011

Oakie1

Re: fadeaway post# 26975

Wednesday, 12/07/2016 4:45:34 PM

Wednesday, December 07, 2016 4:45:34 PM

Post# of 35337
I feel it's apt to describe observable circumstances as circumstantial facts. I don't think this is semantically incorrect. As I said in earlier posts, if the company looks like it could bring a product to market (as people care much more when there's possible value attached) I would likely resume my fact finding to test/build/prove/disprove my hypothesis.
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (1) Keep Last Read Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (1) Next 10 Prev Next
Join InvestorsHub

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.

Sign Up