|
  
- 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 {6 l) M' p0 BCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,0 P( U8 T9 Y, Z$ t- t' u9 W
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
4 c! p, S2 i" r6 s6 ]6 dmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
2 @2 @+ P: u3 m( w* v: bin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.3 Y$ P: i8 P/ N. S5 ]
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.6 \$ B* N3 G/ o4 [% P
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,( G4 u D9 e H5 [: q. {
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
. r6 k2 G5 F( g0 @$ L Deg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
7 p# P0 s6 }/ n1 k$ `& Mbanks 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.
+ |+ ?: U4 r. ?& J, j Q* T. C* ~3 O) p
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
8 u! w N* C7 _( v: l% pin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.+ o$ ~" t* u5 u0 t
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,, t# D; D+ V' t
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.3 t. L1 H @* u- O: ?
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.
$ [: V. D! x3 S: B" O& A: cbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
, ]* `$ ~' I3 X/ c8 {! L- {2 e
7 e' z M# ~0 H7 W! f( S. Z! O[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|