|
- 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 Z6 S) M3 j6 ]
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
" q& D# w/ @+ k3 E* ]" b' ?more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment. x" y$ ]' c7 D, ^7 e( w
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
) W/ b9 P; h3 R/ z) r+ F' @in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
/ i* ]4 J" D' G) jAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
. R9 H, ^3 _4 J4 [ ]6 ?similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
' d8 N8 Q/ V$ ?6 G, \ gnormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. 1 o1 G% }& L; C! D, A$ F
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. L: u0 W2 A+ o5 |9 ?
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.9 i8 t$ v5 |% w" s) j5 S {
$ n: n+ _( `5 g! oim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
1 }2 _. e( z; G2 ^in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.% v3 Z8 j5 L4 r0 b/ G0 Z5 x7 S7 o
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
& g8 ^. q" w6 C' UA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
/ U0 x9 V Z! Q5 l( ]9 fThe 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. 2 c0 w1 J8 h7 J' t
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.0 ~, c) H( x7 X3 t \7 y5 ]
5 J7 k9 Q: G/ T0 d& p[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
