|
- 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., e* I# j+ W: i8 U8 ~
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,4 N# ^% w& {& r, ?
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.5 N U8 s: h1 t
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,3 @# w3 e1 r1 r% x- }3 e
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.8 Q: P" R1 |. k* V- Z
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.9 O) j; r2 F; L- Z
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,% [( `& ]& v, R& M2 x* C9 P
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
5 v3 {- Y+ ~9 m$ C1 B* Q' {* keg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
9 R' S. u$ m1 rbanks 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.
# P7 m U7 u. L+ I
- l1 k9 R- @7 z& Q; w% M* J4 g. qim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
5 J' ?, | `- N6 h( hin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards. P5 I" f( X! V3 p) A' W
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
& z0 v l$ w" {; P$ SA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.2 U8 b f/ n1 e
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.
; Y* n8 P7 l9 o+ ]2 Sbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
! x" [( V3 {8 n4 q8 c7 T7 o2 G v/ r
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
