|
  
- 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.
+ _. F8 ]6 o$ |( XCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,& K. i' I5 ]! Z' H: d& k( l
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
" e3 A1 p1 C0 R8 Smain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,& A! W5 w4 R4 B0 j9 G
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
# P! m6 A) _; O9 G1 p# y6 T- TAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency. [4 D5 b, i/ ~% t+ D2 n$ @
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
! V# \4 F) b& Z+ Nnormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. 7 x" r9 J: }- s1 G3 F( I8 j& r
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. 8 `0 a3 k, R& ]6 D7 l" d
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.8 J! _ |6 w1 ^% a
1 {, Q5 ^( C- b8 K! W: \
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
6 ]; x( j" c Pin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.0 t% |( C& W+ y7 E! u' w8 M
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,9 Z/ G1 N. R' j7 ^/ C) A+ o
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.7 C6 J P' l8 c$ U
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.
0 M9 k, e4 T0 ?, s3 N# H6 Bbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
% L; f" d' H: l m$ I2 s0 ]/ v7 O: [
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|