|
- 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.0 K$ w2 p ]: w5 W2 U- e+ N' K' [
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,0 i. W" j: b$ Z- D
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.7 k2 I6 c1 w2 Z1 d, B
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
# F D+ f$ S! G9 `in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.. j4 [$ G2 t) g) r( N
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.% L9 I/ x$ B1 y1 P5 ^. `* f
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
7 Z2 f0 m) z# G. u. H- cnormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. : j9 w! l/ g# |0 c/ v
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
5 Y* Y3 t; T- i$ s7 n# [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.
/ Z; ~# d+ ]- I6 `7 q3 R0 d- M: M
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
$ A: M: H* ~6 s, L9 N/ b, _4 M+ C6 kin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
9 b+ B. c: j+ g! K$ DFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
3 N) Q( G7 \- b9 GA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
7 I" U! k9 X4 Q! m, ?* |! Q/ N3 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.
8 v. m5 e# q6 B8 k3 s* T+ C& ebut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.& V2 B8 T5 }5 n, k U, ]
/ f0 U* o, r0 M[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
