|
  
- 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 Y4 H* [8 ] @; @7 h: L, ]
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
4 n0 J* \- v9 R, R' _7 m+ Pmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.* O* ]1 v, n6 T7 y" A1 f
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,8 L& O* P |/ T7 s+ o6 F
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.. G7 ^1 y3 h$ { o) `2 X
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.8 v# u/ Y7 D2 ?
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
8 K" J* H% {. ]normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
7 d) ]; V0 @; J# y* leg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. ! a C3 ^2 d. W
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.
# O1 e+ _; K$ q9 C
+ u" P) Z* K$ V" u: w' Bim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
! B4 F6 i }; T. e2 [5 Y) uin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
$ {4 O$ M$ M- d+ O3 mFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,1 J( C M) ?& }7 ~/ ]1 {- B
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
0 J1 e2 W% H I4 l6 y( {5 H: V$ j& x( wThe 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.
# Z0 n4 @0 h B2 y+ k, Tbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.! ^3 ?1 }) ?! |( [
" H1 Z/ l; F0 F3 V' j+ N; v) D
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|