|
- 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.$ ]; ?8 ^0 x G4 M
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
; l4 M, R, _. Y6 pmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
- {2 B5 X" _5 v$ N3 hmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
) b2 Y3 b; P0 W. X: Xin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
. B! v7 m0 q# ]* T2 d5 WAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency./ T+ d' P! p0 H
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
9 M( j$ V3 V5 }) G+ |* znormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
$ n0 r! W9 |3 e3 Z4 l: d' W* teg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
! t2 z) M$ T) _. }9 r Qbanks 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.: r; v" w7 O$ b* x
8 ~( B0 I2 z, Z; ]) G& _5 g7 W5 ^
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
' Q2 i( j6 N# Y$ ] Z; Lin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
& W, ^, z" B, v* A% o7 l5 |* H3 BFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,* [. b, m/ K( j5 ?: `& a* g% K3 ~ r
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.1 {' u& V" w$ [4 ]* I% W7 A
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. ; a- M, o* S: R s# F7 P
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.) {, c9 t# z+ j$ g" ~7 e
- B e, F3 S6 ^7 c[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
