|
- 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.
5 u3 P9 d" W; G1 @CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,4 ~$ {9 p4 {; n) t7 a: L
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment. S' \& c( {) f) T& ?( J1 n0 q; K
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,, r$ X' z! j' a/ T6 n
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
, W% B' l" j1 k3 Y, LAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
( S! M% _4 S' osimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,9 {6 x2 |' @6 b* v2 ^: [
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. 1 {( z/ f) B4 N1 ^$ ?/ @3 I2 a2 Q
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. 1 a1 i! ]' [+ f, U
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.
' v i, \7 K; m# M' }. t: t$ V: `0 A
$ d, @6 a1 V* c! o* V5 aim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
3 q% g" i- F; B4 _6 v+ b/ S b: Jin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
. \ z# W# P; I. K* DFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
}4 K3 F/ s9 pA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.. I; M7 i, m3 F" i l& c# n# }
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.
% d) e& X# i4 k8 h4 d1 c. gbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.& }) z; P3 V. P% j
! F3 m2 G* z* Y8 s7 `& V1 c
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
