|
  
- 帖子
- 706
- 精華
- 0
- 威望
- 316
- 魅力
- 150
- 讚好
- 0
- 性別
- 男
|
1#
發表於 2008-10-8 07:03 PM
| 顯示全部帖子
i thought it is the reason of rate of return.
4 I4 j7 W4 T* l; H9 GCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
/ B$ P# l: a; n* bmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
' l" l* } U; Y! R ?2 Mmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
& w& m" F: A9 ?% p9 ~in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
/ \0 x7 p6 M. h9 s' H) KAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
d" P2 a2 p# C/ K0 |/ Ysimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,8 K) I+ x0 U$ p: Q
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. 3 `* }! S* \; L& a5 g. m
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
0 X! |' J6 T) ~& r9 }8 mbanks 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.0 \0 Q9 l! t* t; P' \
9 \" |9 E6 k$ a5 K- b; g8 c8 W
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.5 [8 [$ L% ?6 _1 e
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.# C/ ^& _2 M: {& G
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
' |# z s5 O5 ~1 |6 }+ Z* n, dA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction., h) {0 C7 T3 v8 W* T6 Y. |
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.
. ?6 m* m. m) A3 ebut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.( X* q V$ M( Z+ n
7 ~- o2 h) ?5 \& M% D! W- ~2 b0 y[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|