|
- 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.% {5 B7 d5 `8 v7 d
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,7 G( o) h& |5 j' j: ]/ f
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.2 `+ l, g8 l! l( T! \
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
& \9 _' H) ^/ j% h7 u$ u, `* U4 l min other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.' ?, S' V1 `3 P6 d* X! \2 q1 ~7 k0 E
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency., A1 ~0 G: w% R
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,' ~0 D# Q# C) q
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
1 _: Y, u6 Z& {! S4 ~$ V- Xeg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. 8 {% p% ]$ O9 W* f
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.) I/ k4 x( f) z# f1 b
: K. A3 z: R$ m/ |' Fim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
# c- \- y2 _% d" sin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.. `9 e: o* N4 N: j) w
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
, D* s/ @) l! I2 ]A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
7 s" y. o: |9 x" WThe 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. 4 A& |, Z2 F4 f9 l E; }
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly., r. y# P& ^8 U! V+ L
) Z' S4 ^$ W8 {& G7 y' Q
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
