|
  
- 帖子
- 706
- 精華
- 0
- 威望
- 316
- 魅力
- 150
- 讚好
- 0
- 性別
- 男
|
1#
發表於 2008-10-8 07:03 PM
| 顯示全部帖子
i thought it is the reason of rate of return.4 I$ a* _( q0 P
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,. H/ m7 L) V" x$ Z1 [: c# w- m" L
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
, s, Q0 q R- N* W$ ?# s/ ] cmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,4 v7 [# m2 S: |
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.+ i- ?2 i6 p4 A& s3 c
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
4 B2 H" {+ l. L# Q5 ysimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,# m" Y0 F) G- Q) o; N+ Y6 B
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
0 h+ J7 H/ {# oeg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. 5 T" Y6 g4 {0 n
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.7 v# z1 L) l3 t! }3 Q. S
& u, m w! N, \, K: n0 }% _
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
4 \6 ^" Y' E3 f" u1 s) lin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
) w) t% |; Q0 s0 M$ E1 aFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
/ d: m4 T9 A: b" v2 UA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
. z/ Z+ { \9 c _ uThe 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.
: g0 B- `$ o" y4 x$ h6 @8 |) Ebut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.& B: l! W. Z0 x g( u& j
9 T5 s* R( P2 J# `[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|