|
  
- 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.
* @: e" o+ K8 D) s: xCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,! T7 A' ^8 c/ Y
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
0 [! Q( R% T$ A9 k; \main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,* F4 D/ `. h1 [& x
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
9 H0 n% K; @# g" T$ |Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.$ r# J* G4 c0 C! ]
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,0 B. g. ~: W/ S- _/ Y [
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. 6 x& H0 U. N% ~) s4 s9 U
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
1 e, C% W/ I! i, L2 mbanks 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.
; H" o) N+ J' G0 M4 t. N. _2 x: R9 J0 V6 f4 d1 d" m' }& |- d
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.* ~8 N, F% e( b% u
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
8 {& _5 P* w* ^! [: O3 `9 g/ pFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
; G4 y% p8 W& f) B* sA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.$ d; |& K% Z* u9 X4 Z
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. 5 c) w3 k8 B* j: R) ]
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
8 y+ r- X7 z) L7 Q( @3 b7 R6 B/ o, S
/ P" b) [) Z9 [$ Z) ^2 w8 ]* c[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|