|
- 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.1 {; J( z" I7 h" H
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,/ t7 d/ {. J" g y
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
5 N0 [ d! g# g$ s; Pmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
2 L% M5 [7 {4 e# C8 Tin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
! _3 h- a) x5 nAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
* l! m2 `" c' vsimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,2 V/ ^9 N3 M2 ~, s4 W
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
& J: e6 J, a8 [9 j q! O1 P) b) zeg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. ' C* h. S! d/ A7 E& y
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.5 X ]" B. ^) x4 V$ j, M- A
2 ~1 \& c; B, |- Eim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.4 _+ K/ r) z [- O& l$ t1 j' P9 P7 P
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
: \+ T" B0 K4 S# j) BFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
- g" k+ V8 G+ NA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.1 ~6 P$ q+ P; {: S
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. * A) h! d) k2 ~5 [" m6 o
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.! Q: O( ^4 Z$ o9 K3 O
% S, M$ c- `0 U0 S( y[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
