|
  
- 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.. n( h7 A$ @0 P+ g; |' g
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,) H* r6 r" c2 c" r: C1 P
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.6 S1 }2 x7 V% B {% t
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
& o1 c- @0 q r1 i3 Kin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.* B; k/ \3 x7 m7 l9 Q; u1 @
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency." u* X) {$ R5 d1 c; U" s
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,6 ` W, E+ `- p# O9 F3 ~# K
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
/ ^% \8 a* K: |; G' z( ^eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. $ w H$ s: X* 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.- b( i) a4 b8 {& d+ U& l
/ ]" s% ~$ W. b4 v8 k" M
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
, V5 v4 T* b& I; pin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.5 ~/ \1 ^: s8 J
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,4 I+ J9 e8 q% f" W* V/ I
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.) `8 r; M% L( @, J( ^& t) Z# w
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. / d3 r0 j# D" V( o& m' ?3 g3 l
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.3 w! L. ]9 v8 w% f" W) I
/ R( `) y- K" W& w
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|