|
- 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.
5 Y& M7 S2 l$ A% b- c" X" kCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
R3 M8 e* p/ x. Nmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
9 N4 o! o7 Z- g8 c$ bmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,. q9 E+ R! s+ X# U
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.7 f1 u! l. E p4 z
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
2 v4 [. T |' lsimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
4 m+ L1 ^2 Y) rnormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. : ?" q: o/ G' k9 P( H" i' y* u
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. 9 y- n2 G; L: f3 ?
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.
5 a2 E3 A: y; X$ K% a" e
, x( t5 @/ p% g- Y7 r/ w0 C% p* {, tim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
6 G9 `8 R) S4 [$ k( _in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.5 s. W/ W2 F. m) R0 s' V1 t1 {
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
! Z8 q2 f' W4 r# z% J5 L% RA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
$ z+ [" L2 F" `- ?6 bThe 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.
) r: {* P- [& T7 M+ J! Pbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
- o) A1 D6 P. |8 u6 s$ o
6 \4 ~# o+ T# |) V$ Q! W[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
