|
- 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.8 `: t# a- v0 ^) W" V
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
I2 i5 ?/ y' nmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
) y' K+ _' p* _$ A! }3 Gmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
" {% n. z) {6 D1 Nin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.3 @. Z+ t, i" v+ s
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.5 t0 F" @' Y0 _
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
. c! @$ n5 B$ gnormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. 0 R6 A) @* D+ {5 @; b* D
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. 3 s% O% `8 e/ S3 T. a+ z
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.
! x- t/ C+ S$ v5 N5 U
# A; O1 L6 P$ m; E% T5 ]( x E, y# mim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.3 c" f, q7 a( U. A0 F1 }
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
* q, Y: j6 |* D. wFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,+ y. j H* h5 i5 {8 Y8 @9 c9 s
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
i6 ?4 b* e! Q, E. h1 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. . P) g8 S' \( D: |9 H& i
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.& J+ Y! Z# B* A2 `
: V" R$ w$ ^$ |# `$ a
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
