|
  
- 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.
$ {* {: q; j# k4 pCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
* v' w' Z# \) dmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
% Q V l; n3 [+ g2 s9 h" s/ _main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
6 F3 C. ?+ O% c( A/ W3 E7 n/ h4 S+ i" Fin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
- u& U0 {2 y8 Q$ t2 zAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
! r6 a ] V; Q( i2 Z2 E0 S6 Osimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
1 t8 g) x3 y, M* K. H2 [normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. 8 I6 D4 a8 ~' W1 S1 ~
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. . S2 F/ H6 `* ?. N# v* h* T
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 D9 ^% G+ Y" w0 }) ~8 {% b$ y. L; t5 h
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
3 o5 a3 a2 j" {' K, zin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.% v5 b; H; S5 \ {9 U
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
" A7 e2 y. V9 ~$ Q. CA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
/ C+ J, Z% j& Y" U% E1 ?/ K8 c% c3 GThe 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 v- \3 n6 J% c. d
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
$ A; L1 c- C. k- G8 P% S( m( Y
" `7 f5 l: p8 W. ]& a+ }) e[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|