|
  
- 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.
; _* d! [% H7 J# uCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,7 x9 y# J, k9 V G
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.7 K5 w: I' J0 i8 R" Q
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,, {" v3 u. q4 v" J; Y# n% A
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.+ b0 B' ~. C2 B7 l
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.* G" W; I1 p1 U4 a& ~" N Z3 S
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,7 K2 G' y9 B/ ^- n4 }
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
e8 M6 W! V7 ^& R- l" L2 r$ zeg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. ( _& T6 E* P6 l' K
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.- X# R/ d5 @, P, O5 E) F
( X: s& ~" X1 ?7 N, z7 e
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
7 U6 l* R% v/ O# {- n* ]in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.- M: g7 p. V+ M) h2 ?4 m
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,4 W0 ]" u7 r4 R$ { t) A
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction. ^" d7 x% q7 a9 W
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.
% J6 {, R# h/ }& ^5 ybut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
( ^ M+ d* j9 U, B( J! ]( W4 } x. {/ f: @6 B
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|