|
  
- 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.6 u+ v& L* y5 u, i
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
! C" G, h. V% S" V5 }more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment./ v4 y4 V( u: h, Y. c! z7 H- `
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
7 F! ?$ a) X2 q6 @4 \' B Min other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities. g+ l9 N3 ]! b
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
, Z* Q# v8 N+ A8 Z& qsimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,$ g0 I" c S: x6 n, r* K1 J
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
4 {1 b5 @$ w5 z! n* B: meg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
- R) ~$ `- u; M! Z: _" D) qbanks 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.9 J) i: D. H2 N: H: W2 u
; d# ]! W% Z# k
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
1 `* U" ^& h) T1 J& jin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
7 y& p: s Q! _% A9 `- PFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
( V6 Y* {( W5 `% _( o4 \A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
3 A3 ^3 T" T! u- |: YThe 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. * L- e" d' {9 i
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
8 [& V C2 H) C- I9 r+ Y( l2 N' g! P& e8 k
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|