|
- 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.
7 {9 v h; O3 I# n6 J; dCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,9 r" S0 z! N" O) p( f# M
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
6 W, n1 e- v/ ?7 g2 x; S1 bmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
4 L7 d1 v& x" {7 Y1 P6 v1 P! tin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
. u; y2 T& e0 \* x: F, _Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.7 ?4 g6 a3 p+ j* i0 P% P
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,+ D' p3 a; L6 T+ b! g2 x% L. p
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
7 K; ^" a1 d/ Oeg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. , c9 K i, p+ z; 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.
0 P4 P' b; A c N/ E" _& b/ Q, A9 X, n# _
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.4 C, {5 u5 I. \. d2 a$ K
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.7 B6 x$ @9 U# W$ d) T
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
( I3 ^# \6 J* c, WA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
+ H3 F/ E0 x3 JThe 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.
9 I/ v Y3 m) `% ], ~but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
2 Z4 r- u$ w6 b9 k8 s1 o
& k! F7 {% V. R[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
