|
- 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 p' D1 H( M+ B& Y9 o. b- R, {CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
. z. S/ r4 U) Kmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
2 T- m I4 B) h: Emain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
2 }5 N' h, j$ X0 @8 pin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.$ H6 S# o, b" _ y
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
+ J3 B0 m* V9 T3 Msimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,6 Y; V) C) X" }( E! T% \. G. j. h
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
# a8 K# Y& p; {& x: v |* _1 Neg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. 9 b+ B9 h* {+ \
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., G& W$ l. R' b1 N
; p4 d% w3 b1 L; n
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
: ~1 q8 F6 ^- R) Yin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.( k/ ~: r C d) q
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,2 d5 B2 y" `6 m' |5 X- e5 t% u
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
+ Z4 _/ ?- J) O2 VThe 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. ! b/ N3 P* W' C. V# m; z
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
$ C! |4 y- b7 j; V$ N
?. y) a, f0 t+ v+ F. }* u7 h[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
