|
- 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.+ v' v( _/ i# v$ p
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
* x% F) n% Y! M! j7 T' r% D ~more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
; c& a2 {5 @2 `* R( m$ X; xmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,8 b. l" f8 E- m) w9 F) Z
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
+ j! `1 f% H6 B5 a, `7 G0 oAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
) Y( A- `3 M Z' g6 osimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
5 v, n6 A, G N- H8 g# `7 a# h. hnormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
( f2 C0 }; Y8 ^eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. 7 X. p- o' l6 z/ S$ Y
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.6 T) i+ L6 O$ z, O4 \& ?
; g3 A: D+ }3 O& f$ ~5 xim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.+ s( B2 ]9 Q+ o* Q6 n
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
. p: F! Y5 I% kFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,) g2 d: `7 q9 @7 a- I
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
2 E7 V/ r: r/ H ]% w# F- q" u3 ~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.
) N1 l# u* B% K- V6 ?but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
M( v$ c4 l4 X0 N! ^2 Y0 _* x# |& f. o! K! n: E) b$ I
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
