Q-4: What financial assumptions are built into the "growth"-line?

A-4: The assumption is made that incremental returns are re-invested to an identical growth stream instantly on the point of return. In many cases this actually occurs, but there is no allowance for any special discounting applied where such re-investment schemes are implemented. In most cases there will be some inaccuracy in the assumption, but averaging out to relative insignificance or optionally broken at an investor's discretion. The most exaggerated distortion introduced by this assumption would be in the case where a return rate was so huge that a match for re-investment simply could not be found. But even this case is offset on average by all those cases where a better return-rate for re-investment can be found, given the attractive opportunity for re-assessment in the light of advanced knowledge. So, all in all, it is considered to be a conservative working assumption.

Q-5: What is "growth" that goes down, and why is it sectionally divided into what is characterised as nominal and real?

A-5: While something of a misnomer, the term "growth" is used in a technical sense that may be positive or negative. There should be nothing misleading about that metaphorical usage, as it is perfectly clear what "growth" descending or going down means for charted lines. The nominal portion of a "growth" vertical is in general unrealised (except for those few, if any, who actually completed sales at that precise juncture). When the juncture in question is the most recently mapped, or quite close to the present time, there is still no guarantee that this growth element can be realised at the quoted consideration, which is always historical. In contrast, the real growth (that section in the gap between the nominal and growth lines) is beyond question -- it has been realised.

Q-6: You say somewhere the exceptions to the IC-RR-line's accuracy in representing the buy-in value at the Y-intersection are not germane. Please explain?

A-6: The exceptions for the IC-RR arise in only those cases of the most dramatic downwardly plunging or upwardly climbing courses, where the growth line is itself already sufficiently visually revealing, does not oscillate wildly and so does not need averaging out. Additionally, the numericals will also be plain to see and self-explanatory. In these few cases, the IC-RR line acts as an auxiliary visual token of that obvious trend. Also see Q-6.