|
- 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.
/ t7 F2 D' y$ H! u( V! LCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,1 N1 b- L8 ~/ r! a
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
0 V8 ?3 X; ^( g$ Z( Q9 x' p1 cmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
5 v5 R1 d5 C# {/ m9 v$ Rin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.% H+ y2 Y* K5 ], b" X
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
' h7 E% F2 B+ G. P) dsimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,) ^5 c; L3 R3 h. E$ X& `
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. 6 a' H5 K$ c7 V/ ^# [
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. 9 o0 p: ]$ ?9 L+ A4 o5 f
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.
$ ~ w4 E6 B5 @* e' { l/ ]
- M0 X1 C8 K( sim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
2 z$ C2 m1 w# J: `* X, \in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
2 Q- b2 _: ^& ?( eFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
7 k1 K+ ?: D/ ~( @* u* n$ p2 lA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.; T( v4 m9 R0 s( 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.
! {: a4 ]4 n/ k5 V b4 t, Wbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
* a0 I- _- g' ?: R. H/ }
2 E, x- {: @# D D. Q[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
