|
- 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.3 s& x# I1 y# }
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
! j* `1 b4 ^5 s P; u# {+ ?more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
- [) ?4 B+ u$ Imain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
1 ~: | J7 b& `% ein other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
# A) o/ w" w; hAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.7 }+ Y4 s0 }* F# P* z( n: @
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,, g9 |/ S% B" B( {/ I
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
. K$ e: D2 K0 ]7 Reg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. ( k5 b* V8 ~* I7 Q! l. Q
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.
/ U3 J A7 i, {6 r& s1 e+ ?3 O( `6 k0 @0 }
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.# u3 s1 J! c1 G
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.# | w9 z; s5 ]
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,* o, f! W8 i- t" ~# D
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
) B: J5 p( U; d7 ^) v1 W+ \+ tThe 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.
& ]+ ^& @. E* \" @/ U8 ebut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
8 f: l, F# w0 Y! W; ?7 [; z7 H9 _8 [0 }" I4 X
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
