|
- 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.
, i' Z' W7 i( F3 f* JCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
. ~) }% w J0 ?# i5 x7 q5 P Dmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
$ O6 A9 v" o- c' cmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,; z! O+ I/ m' ]. s3 L/ B
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.! h/ r+ R v& i/ k
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency. j$ @: r# H, F; G. I6 x% m
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,' k% M1 v! T/ t1 X/ e- k; {2 v
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. ' S M: N5 X* E6 W \
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. $ P* {& c- G, N* n; G9 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. }" ?1 W5 ~" o4 j2 ?7 y
. n" R2 b. \) I: |
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
: C: k/ ]' O: w% i, nin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
+ }% {$ b# V* {% @% @0 [% iFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,7 {. X- |1 r, p9 z, k. M- U" W
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.5 x$ Z1 u3 H [+ G- D
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.
! C( C- \) {" K Y% }+ dbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.6 G. W( K% Z. @8 I
4 _! _- B/ x A7 z7 l3 w, K[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
