|
- 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.
( {, N$ f6 _! j, K1 ?CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
- [- n0 ~% @, Omore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
0 E/ ?* L; @2 kmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
. [3 |* l, x" k6 f! Q4 S. Xin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.( z% t) |+ s" @1 v. @- F
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
( j( ]9 L c$ w# _) jsimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
! S% e/ p- K% f/ \normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
, G4 g5 P5 h* s' c" `8 veg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
5 S* s4 K$ s4 d( ?4 v r- Cbanks 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.8 }+ M6 l2 }, T3 a/ M
! x2 I$ \ x7 _) j, ^; v0 X
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case." L/ O4 C" q7 q5 V: k8 b
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.- D% V$ g' e. g x6 W: A V1 A
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,. n( E: U8 H. i h$ H
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.1 V2 ]8 Z7 Y1 _
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 b. @! Z7 d" Wbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
H2 t7 V5 C( E6 H8 l% s) E
# {& L) l7 E: U1 E. b[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
