|
- 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.2 F& N: ^7 ~. D# G* E0 f' f: t9 h6 H# e
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
! Q1 c) f9 O* jmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
% y1 |% N+ c! dmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
3 T; D& O" I, K' d9 \in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.& i J+ |8 P) ^, a: p
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
2 U% h/ K) t/ f9 _; Lsimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
3 ~7 M. j& Y1 Vnormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
' s$ I7 Q# f" x! z0 s* Reg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
) J7 P/ k: Z" abanks 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., }9 H- G) R" ^* ~, Q2 R, ^
8 ] y( @8 r, J5 {& t2 b. ]im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.2 g6 w. i! [/ H6 v* ]1 Z
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.$ K$ w' X; p* ~: V& k, \( b* S9 Y
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
, s# b6 I7 }) R. gA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.% ]3 M9 [, L3 n/ p6 y4 J
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. - N1 ?; d- N* f2 L# D
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.2 }& L: R# T0 K9 c' L
k% K% s! ] d# r' w[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
