|
- 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.+ u2 D5 i& Z6 _0 d
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,8 E+ H, K" ?) u0 }1 M" z
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.1 Y* t- _( w. P" |# s
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
: A* P- o' S( W/ c. vin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
N/ P, d C3 p0 WAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.* w) `* m7 h8 M( i; g5 P
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
, D$ _. B" ^% B/ t) Tnormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
" t5 A( F. C+ e" F+ e0 z% R: D3 keg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. 5 N- M9 O0 p- ]- _
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) K: q! Q& z o+ P1 k7 h
`9 N" n- I* c0 h
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
" ^1 z5 Y2 u/ O0 |in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
0 t' k5 w& i' _: Q! VFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,3 M& N3 O- f1 J; Q1 U) Y
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.& |% C9 t, `8 h. p7 i- K, j7 q
The 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. * B( b- `' Y2 L$ d! o8 ^
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.( C4 t. X+ ~( d! \ c% y3 x( ?
! v( h0 S* M" R6 _[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
