|
- 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.
, J+ m+ t/ ]' a/ jCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,6 I4 s- t% V# `$ o$ R
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
R$ S* L2 E4 }+ i- emain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,* |9 G7 S0 E8 `4 V
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
" U5 Y# \+ ~+ r" v5 M% oAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.) |* `# d: }0 |2 d/ b/ u
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
9 x! E/ M' s7 h$ a8 @! L/ Znormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. 4 a I4 t+ R. w6 o' ^/ J
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. 0 l% p+ G0 S# b9 {- S
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 T/ \( t/ n+ x ?9 M
9 l8 | U- q3 O7 {
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
, L5 i6 Z. E, j; ~6 U" S g# Vin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
/ k- a7 m* p3 y& {; \( P$ GFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,* ]$ U/ g1 w& \$ g8 ]+ W1 P
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
7 n5 j/ Q. I- b! q- a6 P* w* VThe 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. 7 a. A( X% |1 G! J
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
. Z, [- O8 q. f! C3 E4 Z6 ~. D
+ v, G6 M, g' A3 m" Y[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
