|
- 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 j" t$ G4 F6 x' lCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
* h% D& i. Y' G$ }: F5 Fmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.( D) G9 v: ^, o9 u4 R: I
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
" L- e; Z$ h j' Din other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
# t. Z, O$ ~5 ~$ H/ hAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.+ k* l, X0 M6 N4 B2 ^. d
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,2 a' O) E) j& q$ _$ J+ c
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. 6 v3 j$ u; q1 C9 S1 E& w( g
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
6 Y8 \0 d0 n' a, j5 @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.
8 u7 _+ Q9 m' |# g0 O% ]6 D1 x- ?: ^3 Y$ L
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
9 Y; f# S# d% T; M( ]* oin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.3 q* S) y8 t9 `& K6 H1 Q
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12," O8 S6 P" J* O
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
Q6 j' G; j# n) Z& eThe 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.
1 [9 |1 Q; ]' ] A& C1 q' `+ Nbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
) \; G& Y2 u$ E, M4 w; ?9 g# E( {6 S: a4 u6 q0 q2 ^3 R4 Y) [% D
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
