|
- 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.! h) V- N0 q7 _" Y& @
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
$ a; z) A6 U, y5 g* a, B) zmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
L& e( |) Q2 v! T' Ymain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,! V2 q( ~( C" N2 ?
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
' U D/ B/ Z) U" GAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.9 {; b- F W( ]. a9 r9 l; R
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,/ @0 r+ E8 ?* X* F
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. ! H# U$ x+ ]) c$ n7 {& Z
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
2 w5 h, r- I1 Z: `3 \0 Cbanks 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.6 p& M- X+ W$ e9 ]8 V& k- O
) ]( w% y6 q- W# b; ]! r+ }
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
% P2 M$ b; S. A5 a" A9 Gin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.6 m( i7 m( T5 h4 O/ [$ u8 i$ m
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
2 Y6 G7 |# o: E/ K# {9 ~A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
8 c; L/ T* A) s) `) jThe 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.
0 v/ [% w+ `0 V; Cbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly./ c- T: p# A4 ?, n" ?
# j, c: ]6 X. ~4 f* X* R: N
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
