|
  
- 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.
: R, r! @1 R) qCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
& m& m0 i6 O; ?5 Amore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
% c& M" Z( ]4 s% R! f& Y7 cmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,6 n( Y {$ E+ J
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.1 w4 A4 z$ {6 a' q
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
" b- ^0 z4 b7 y0 k1 h4 Y Hsimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times, q' H. S9 Q5 ?% w
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
) x: L; H) d& W( A' I& ?eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
?% I6 l5 I+ _- V1 j# z. Nbanks 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.1 X7 N, f a2 S+ l5 f; \
4 f1 k/ R4 X2 L& ~8 p9 c8 K: C# L
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
- p) g+ Q( s6 D4 E2 r, sin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
, \2 z7 }. d' F; T& b0 WFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,0 R5 ^6 I" Z+ d" u# d" `
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.1 f. S' D l; Y- U
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.
" D2 j2 `6 a8 R$ t5 p- rbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.5 E! A2 X9 O0 u' j9 b1 |! {
1 y6 [( V8 o4 j; w
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|