|
- 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.6 {6 T, G' A9 l8 t5 Y7 v& _+ H
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,7 W) v- ~# Q* T7 w' _
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
% i* g: K6 d4 A5 a+ K" Hmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,. a" e4 X2 z% d4 K
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.( t( q+ K2 z% h" b
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.( u4 r4 ?& Y. W& }4 P) L; T
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
7 k O& z5 o+ f7 wnormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
; O. K* g, o- x" V$ Peg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
5 \, ~$ R9 c6 w/ V$ Gbanks 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.
1 z5 E; y9 d. O0 ]" m- J7 P4 h" Y5 c: M& h0 {
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.2 D8 k9 z: ], }- v: A/ F
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.) ~; T, [, g. |2 l9 }# i+ ^
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,- m% V! \, t% ]" g6 D% q
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.0 [9 ~" p2 I% A% E1 e1 |; G( }- l
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.
5 R' k ^8 z$ I$ L5 W; ebut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
3 g, b* T" V( Y; E4 C/ H g7 k8 I" X$ ~2 x- D+ S
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
