|
  
- 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 E# F: ]5 O9 \
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,3 c J' `" N c; r b" ?
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.1 @% w: W; h9 m' E, l
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,/ l0 P+ ?. M r7 a( c7 R
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.9 d$ {& i9 K2 t8 P/ l B6 q1 o
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.- F& n: _" b% P. u, Y i+ U5 W, H& z
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,, E# h: u+ L3 h+ N
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. $ o+ v" ]4 h/ ~
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. : \1 b; U1 Y) f0 b% 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.# C, o! W9 `- ]! L
- e1 y% N( v$ G5 J. }) S) nim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.( u4 C" {. W$ Q% e$ S
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.5 Z8 C9 v! V3 Q0 o3 y( N7 ]
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
, ?& U+ D2 N9 m% y7 s% ^: WA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.# [1 N) ?6 m% s
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. : ?/ c2 Z7 H( k8 d, @/ l
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
5 e9 J0 v8 s! ]( ~# q5 G7 k
5 D% I# L- r1 U4 T[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|