|
- 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.
( w3 {& w0 N: a, |, u* q {# r. {CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,' b: j; n" a" T w% R& n( [
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
9 z# z4 {3 {& P0 Zmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
& A) ~# ^. ]. J, Tin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
7 v: [+ p5 M: NAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
" D% Q/ p5 F3 y9 z* bsimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
6 m: \, F/ V4 J1 y" Rnormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
# w, f( q$ ^- n7 |( zeg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
- T! y) O2 I7 c ybanks 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' V, C* i/ O7 y
, ^1 p% B: T! u: ^# \im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.) _7 V1 n* p: V0 T
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.& |% t( R# d# U, q' f) b+ s, a( F s
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
# H. y: }7 `! x; K' @$ [A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.5 G- V+ @6 ~/ R) {
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.
* e4 n- Y, l" G: m/ N5 \but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
" i: { g1 u! F) [$ u' k9 x5 F, s, y' q. N6 S( L( ?$ D% F. S% [6 W
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
