|
- 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. O) Y- m* Y! i) O" l: ]2 t
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,* V* t! i2 b+ O, ]
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment., i- {9 V5 D5 V" b
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,/ F1 X/ w+ T4 ]1 S
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
1 G2 m: X) _+ ?; h$ @$ B/ IAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.) {# l) a7 u: e0 d+ i3 ~9 n
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
" J9 n+ ]$ F5 i7 U! fnormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
" v/ H- p6 j* o5 H: d4 t' Aeg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
' a6 _ J7 Z2 t6 m0 ybanks 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.: K( J/ I L+ y8 l3 q. L8 ]
5 C- X* O) Q) z# V8 J3 \
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
- |1 z* X6 p( o" j, |' {7 Ein stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
+ Z7 }+ r# V$ k3 `For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,& o$ ^% Z) v+ f" {+ u: O% H5 X: z
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.6 L0 ~3 R* a8 G
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.
" F- ]. g/ s, d/ Zbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
* D) t6 x% M( P, e/ `
( }( S0 T1 |# e[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
