|
- 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.
4 k, V: O. X7 F( P& bCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
% j+ W* ^9 r, l1 tmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
$ p r3 T# S( s3 N3 Q3 `main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
' M1 t1 M0 I2 k3 R$ _in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.* o! B7 _: B9 m( t
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.; h. j& L) I6 W- f6 X$ P
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
* a; i# \$ M s+ B5 cnormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
; A5 r, S* J4 I% {& u8 Meg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
) A K0 L# [- [3 r& }, k/ [" i! `2 ubanks 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.
$ A, H7 z Z& P- J( U2 ?. g: }2 W) y$ k8 g
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.5 p# k0 Q w0 n. N0 Z2 {
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
- l" Z1 T6 \3 B9 `) `0 g" a- cFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,# t/ J" o0 \4 n6 {( c }4 S
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
" ]5 k1 p/ x- P+ H( PThe 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.
" k. ] m0 p+ u7 R `6 Ibut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.' V2 J7 l) X( d3 e. t0 F: E( G
9 r$ [8 i. F2 S' T% r9 r[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
