|
- 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% ~1 b: V. u. p( m$ t
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,# g6 j( ?7 r2 Y) [- U b
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.) ~- q: n9 M5 m* H
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,1 s# N( C0 w# Z% M9 T
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
* P7 @; a+ V- ?8 kAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.- f B& T* E0 r
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
& V7 _1 m* a7 Y, i6 v' Hnormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. 2 W" Q* R$ l" B- h' l- z8 r' O
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
) w/ q: ~7 ^4 ?7 _0 ~- j3 |6 D/ dbanks 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.0 W2 S% J7 i+ K9 B
- A/ d+ D# ]9 y2 Yim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
% J) \* I0 S1 k5 Kin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
" Z3 ^& f9 ^0 x. S8 a! I# E/ }" xFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
) c, S, x& ^# H; G* `A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.- j/ ^, j& y0 x9 Y* ?/ S+ p" R
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. * o$ B$ k( m9 `. s6 N# N
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
+ k N7 X/ W% W* V' p8 S! _0 A; b3 ]- U9 ?& R* V
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
