None of the astrologers I read says what you said.

Horary is not progressions but horary, by tradition, is not meant to be used and discarded within a few days like a meal box (being tongue-in-cheek here, hope you don't mind). By nature it is not ad-hoc. It is an act of seeking divination (which is a pretty serious matter) on a serious issue that perplexes the querent. The agreed rules of timing for example, is that houses and signs determine if the unit is going to be week, month, or year, when perfection is shown. It is all in Lilly's book. And Bonatti's. I particularly suggest you study William Lilly closely. He really is unavoidable for any serious student.
To quote just some of the modern astrologers, and I did this just from memory and a quick flip of their books/articles: there are example charts that perfect within 2 years in Barbara Dunn's book (page 497 - a querent was offered the job two years later). John Frawley mentioned romance charts that can perfect in years (see page 128). Deb Houlding somewhere on her Skyscript forum disregards second, third charts on the same subject within weeks or months. She always prefers the first chart. John Frawley deals with the issue of repetitive charts with a similar attitude (see his book). He actually went as far as saying that the cosmo would deal you random, cloudy charts because it is fed up.
I also have romance charts that perfect months (close to a year) after the questions are asked. The charts are accurate.
Amelia