|
  
- 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.+ Y( Z `' \2 @6 b) {2 X
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F, }" W$ a9 u: Z5 m
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
# A- q" S' s; Vmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return, U+ h9 `: Q# ?0 G
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
+ I8 h: X6 j. y& L- vAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
, i2 _: B! j( q1 d6 m+ d" [4 Gsimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
9 a8 @. d1 b. m3 V: `! Qnormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. 1 z W7 U7 L8 i! {0 X
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
" R- d: R7 R( t. {/ d2 a/ o1 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.2 {* {' K% w. Y; N( l- K) Q
+ Q. T& I/ u& N. |/ fim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.3 }% r2 R- [8 ]3 g i( [* e
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.: ^+ N. A$ K# F/ t6 a
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,0 o' g3 Y# z$ l3 H5 b* l
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
/ C9 k+ l5 `5 n. G' QThe 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.
" Q7 g- E; J; S/ Gbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly./ O9 q) [, X/ o. e; r
! X9 T$ m4 O( {, c ?
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|