|
  
- 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.
) {* \) Z$ O) M6 d+ N8 P* c! qCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
* ^, E, e4 g) [. Xmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
6 g: D5 z2 A5 r/ q) X7 z9 mmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
2 t8 n0 S8 e n4 fin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
& V* l4 u, ^6 z7 M- ]3 |Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.& U# @/ }! z: H; B
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
0 H& r7 ?9 O1 u7 znormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. 1 A! Q3 e* ~6 z3 f5 C" y
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. # @$ r- {/ o; |! _7 J2 O
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.$ |4 F6 L1 ], U
- U2 p6 ^# E# l# L
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.3 o; S* N( B$ Y+ o3 L$ X
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.+ y& T8 l% _6 f3 g
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
7 J6 P; t4 r- M! }7 b' h! CA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.- R& |& T1 A% c7 Z. Z& z/ W
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.
8 y3 w+ y' o: F1 I1 j2 Nbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.: _( \% D! B+ m* q2 v
, M1 j# q" s; }
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|