|
- 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.) f+ _" z2 B: A1 {7 j
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,+ ^4 M f5 w& X0 p+ t
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.7 f5 l3 V4 e( }3 Q6 u) H# f
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
9 R, I+ D1 }; y( cin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities. G c8 v; Z6 U% ~
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
+ v W% o4 Y& x b# Zsimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times," H# p' X- p9 E
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. 2 `" Z5 l7 n6 ]* t8 ~( y! V
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. 8 N) A# S9 ]2 }8 V! r
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./ a- g, m" g# |' `' O0 [0 O
6 E) F1 d8 c; L3 P; J
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case. X- w9 {8 A8 Z& f/ ?
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
2 [6 T$ S/ U- KFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,) U' g! q- l' L/ P
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
" m+ G' ^% p1 p: M2 ]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.
- t2 _# t, H% z9 V7 `1 C# sbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.2 ? `% l s% M. R' E0 N v% U
! r' V/ G4 u+ P0 t, M& `+ }, q' i[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
