|
- 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.
% y) {3 D1 z1 G8 f# \1 LCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
; a, n- P& h* K/ E( G' |more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.8 U! R; L4 r, g
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
* E M* b4 o4 ~# \' |in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.# W1 V3 u8 N+ r, K b* N
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency. Y- b; n& _2 W, l* T% b# R
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,, k8 P- b' K1 S9 H9 u
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. $ |3 c( _3 J% B6 Z1 w) ]; [
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. # ]3 U S( V6 N' } n0 |: _" V
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.1 z9 _' ^0 R, u# d$ e) W
1 _0 S) A7 C+ uim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
# b0 ^5 c; m1 H4 t1 Yin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
) A/ Y) @* v( e! i5 G1 g( r+ sFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
8 p# h. v, @! p' A4 RA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.. g. I, F2 @2 d/ e! ^: R* a) {
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. 7 m( U3 d4 \* m% O _& U
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.9 X$ Q. [. U$ F( c& i s. q
* h o# q/ O. ?; C4 I[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
