|
- 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.
3 V1 ]/ W* m0 k$ zCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
+ p' r4 A) P* B+ C# L, xmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment." I3 z2 b0 L, s
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return, a* [ } x: q# ]/ y( g: k1 K
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.9 o A9 w- m. h( q I5 o, H- j9 _
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
C4 s. ]) M& K$ j4 y, Psimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
2 Q3 D0 {* n+ I' I: Q8 j7 _normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
8 d L8 T/ B3 ~2 E) Eeg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
2 f& ~- a: j, \& X' T) G: K/ dbanks 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.) K/ a" V/ I4 u# _( P( V
0 ^( m; A5 ^! @& Cim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
+ t0 r5 n- ~. c! uin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
2 }1 s# _6 ~& qFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,/ I+ Z' x: {7 Q2 ?8 h
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
' T4 `, b1 d# R' TThe 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.
9 |6 T! O2 X6 d+ s$ lbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.' W1 V( k Z! J8 e- T9 a
" {) C* ]0 t |/ f' E[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
