|
- 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.
3 G* T3 N0 `' M; B% |( W. MCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
. C. i0 Y+ ]( W' j4 d$ v+ Zmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
2 e$ h5 \! R7 ymain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return," s* l( y# A; U
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
* Y, q' Q' b. k2 Y5 h: j5 }Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
% |; B. c3 X0 h) N) psimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
8 H7 l% q6 @( P% l/ E8 dnormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
) c# U9 k& c! Eeg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. ' A5 [/ s1 v' J, L1 B5 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.
. v5 Q# K; S% \$ @0 s, S7 l: [% n5 P6 |# ~$ { x0 j
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
" x# X3 }( K$ p. E6 f* _in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
X4 l8 y/ n% @For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
' H2 s: a8 s; c9 kA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
9 G! U$ L& S- w% oThe 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. # @+ t# ]' x- R6 D C
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
1 L2 K9 H% c- {* H, ?: V/ D; T7 I: y, Q1 W* I
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
