|
  
- 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.5 n. N9 I7 E3 l" K* t
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,, u3 S7 b3 ?& q
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
1 b' H% d( H& ~) nmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,2 x6 {# J2 N) P
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
8 _4 J' z L: g* F6 fAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
+ _9 w* d/ N* V; N( C esimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
; |1 a7 w7 l- B* e* j Unormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. 8 o' J* m# t. D2 q# y, Z
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. 7 E" L! j. V0 n9 P- D1 e4 _1 `% L/ M
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.2 s+ d5 v8 N, A# i; R/ S" j9 x
/ f8 j u2 p, T5 b
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
5 L. j4 c) W4 D. _" R% S$ vin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.- V [& |- u* L! N& m
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,2 [# c3 W7 K# J) j8 z' ?
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.+ W: I5 n6 P- X5 L* v: {
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.
% z- h) w. o7 w; D. J) ibut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
' @: p4 l: L K# H6 I) K* k. E. j$ @+ H4 [) ?
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|