|
  
- 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. f) e) c- ]0 g
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
5 Y) g0 q, P6 u: ?+ Amore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
) L1 O+ ]6 Q6 R" \main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
6 G, Z7 y! c0 uin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.$ p! E/ }+ N6 y s& @
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
+ m0 B, l7 s* N4 n& H! asimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,3 T4 b5 \/ ]7 j3 b+ w7 l
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. ! E% K+ ?; s! J' R5 E. e& T
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. + S) F" D; }, Y3 m0 o, ^7 g1 b4 @
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.7 ^6 y: s% n w$ I$ |
* t( [# M9 s, b7 \
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
( D3 U0 ] J5 k4 lin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
" \% A- h* Y( k* ?5 Q" d/ S9 kFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
/ S e8 o! t l" n% \; j% zA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
( V, t3 O5 Z& t8 ~$ 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.
# Q9 Z5 z% M. e$ \& ]$ d& r3 w4 kbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
, n# Y E- ~1 x/ D; n# V: H
+ E. J1 u& K, u+ t9 M0 r[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|