|
- 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.: Y8 S4 ~) i) z% r
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
1 }" ?' ~) Z: a: smore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.# r6 v0 ?8 r2 Q, A# Y3 \ ^
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
" p% J: p6 r4 V9 }in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.# @8 I9 k* b, K8 e' t0 u1 r& L
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.) g% f+ ?3 V# P3 r" \5 z& t
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,) Y* P% C1 K0 R' n8 c
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
) t" f# d- A$ W6 m. S2 f$ M1 neg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. & }/ `' }4 m5 u% e
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.0 {2 @# V& M3 n0 e4 t
J1 a0 J7 u3 E2 B5 G* m- f
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
; L, N* N ~3 ^" \/ S* M* |( b8 rin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.% k) X* f. S a' p! |' \
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
9 i+ x, A' D) j& K3 eA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
$ k+ F( E' h0 ^4 z* \ mThe 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.
/ @( k- s' x; n3 S" n2 s; h, K; Lbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
1 C" {8 i0 d ]) |. N" J: {* ?( U% s( \. z8 ~/ l4 c0 e( K
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
