|
- 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.0 T9 r- w8 B5 d2 U
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,! V- Y# Y6 _! L3 ?
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.% J) _6 s' x: G3 `; @
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
. o; ~+ z1 c) f, Lin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.$ J% C. J/ z. F+ r% c8 r
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.- d; s! n9 c; E& g/ Y/ b
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
, t0 c) R( S6 {5 m M: ynormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
" ]0 {) }% g, @1 G7 Leg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. 9 j2 u# R7 D$ |. s( f7 [ W0 E7 e
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 e; H* I! y- i4 e3 B8 y! Q
+ y- _5 |3 C' l3 uim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
1 e7 X& ?; x3 J% z2 ?- ]1 U. Ein stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
) u( {: V5 O; q$ q" bFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,- h$ p8 N5 M6 }( ~6 }5 W# ^! C( E
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.& T& a) v" y E0 A2 m7 V" U% 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. / V; f+ L D. e! C x
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.4 M8 J- Q2 V( r+ T, T3 R) R
$ E; Z4 ]" W0 `$ @7 s0 ]0 ?* S[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
