|
  
- 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.; {# `+ X: P6 U8 ` n$ t
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
2 V! p8 L* G( q5 imore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.: k. d$ J* D# W
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,/ G: d- {0 X7 d0 h( V* l
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
9 q* `( M5 k2 ?) g0 ]Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.: u$ M% ~. K' f$ P
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
( f- j7 H9 O2 G* \) ]7 H- V. y8 c" Enormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. 3 \2 G1 V f2 L: [7 t3 t
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
_ b6 ^3 z( h [( n1 P' Hbanks 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.
/ j1 }# N) [& ^8 F; a! J8 X( B8 @! F' T: |
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.% K( t( C) |# p6 P
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.+ ~( v2 c; a1 Y" w3 C0 l
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
% \) `/ s$ S$ w. ?A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.2 P9 N& Z# k" |( h
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. + O% G) J/ Q. x: b
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
7 r' F: O; a8 R, t4 e, O6 F6 o. \# S" b' F, r# n- w
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|