|
- 帖子
- 706
- 精華
- 0
- 威望
- 316
- 魅力
- 150
- 讚好
- 0
- 性別
- 男
|
12#
發表於 2008-10-8 07:03 PM
| 只看該作者
i thought it is the reason of rate of return.
& T) g: p7 q% q( u; i3 _! A) ECDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
0 r. r7 x3 e7 }+ M4 c! W" Wmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.4 D0 G2 k- K2 ]$ a
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
8 x5 r( D6 `# sin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.2 }1 u4 u3 E3 D R `8 x& k! |
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.6 [6 g0 u- h' G3 J# P- I
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
0 E. c) S6 |& nnormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. 2 U# V S, s3 j- c) K( v
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. % R9 i; {! H: N4 K7 D7 z
banks who sell the CDs, could enjoy a few benefits like, the present value of cash and passing the risk of holding a debt to another party.
; g, d- R- F: F" q, M* f0 {& ?$ n# s, T! `
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.: ^' ? y x0 n) n" r$ _% F
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
% m& y& C. ]/ J R7 uFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
: l# q. B6 T0 tA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.& I# o7 F0 Z, U6 g5 B
The capital loss that ppl suffer nowadays, i believe, most of them does not really suffer a real $ lost yet as long as they dont sell their securities. * k% p/ s" ?. I* i
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.2 Z" k/ u5 z2 X% m. U; x
1 T. q8 Y& ?) m5 ?* i5 Z5 ]# \' W
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
