|
  
- 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 O6 Q- T4 D- r( `
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
' T6 ~! @1 w/ p9 B9 vmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
5 A% \5 x, F3 hmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
/ T% m: l/ x/ Y% \& t7 lin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
( c& U$ R7 g7 d1 c6 FAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.1 |6 c! Y" ^: G+ [ r) Q- b
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,2 d* {4 j; z, s4 z1 t
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
( n! D# m6 o! xeg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
: |: K- i$ m: U9 tbanks 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.0 Q5 { f+ `1 s' m+ v' y
+ |6 o& |* k7 V8 z6 w; g
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.5 ]# x9 N$ o5 M3 m
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards. ^7 d0 g$ i: V) M1 o
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,. _8 B, ^. \; z& T. \/ o
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
& _7 a2 z4 `; \8 {. kThe 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 I/ E, z6 M8 d* P( n
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
2 i7 [7 R0 Z2 e0 Q3 {
7 D* ]3 ^, }7 R[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|