|
- 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.- B3 D" K7 X5 M3 {3 ^8 k
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
! p( T( D9 T# _8 Kmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment. `; \9 X5 e+ G7 D$ O/ \
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,8 V6 w2 n3 R% Q7 D
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.3 a0 B- n& V4 y/ m6 S
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
9 a5 t7 x) E# H7 m) osimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
9 g: O& x* v. [$ {: Knormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. , @3 E" T: [" x
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. T) x: }, Q" G# }8 U4 e( U
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.
* N" C8 y* m" w" N9 J+ f) Q% A) S. D% N& `7 T) K% [
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
6 j; }7 V4 V; X' Q: A+ T6 g/ |/ Iin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.9 [9 w, n% M5 g
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,; j1 B( U5 G* U, M3 ]( F$ Y
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.6 |& H) }2 u. ]" B9 y, z. |
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. 5 Z7 \. L3 f8 E R/ |- m
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly. L* K+ z: ^8 P6 _
* h( l# x0 A+ k, Q* i1 b' X
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
