|
- 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./ L s& Z& B6 i/ v
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
0 w+ q# v/ ^, q3 \" }: p! @more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
/ H) A8 e- s3 k# l' i9 Gmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
# Y8 e# \# R9 S* ein other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.7 ^) L6 @" O- U5 R8 a$ o# P
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.! J" \; |6 O: a
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,5 j3 ~) u) f! g1 k7 e$ E5 R
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
& }( v) i- c0 [4 r" K6 ueg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
) ~: \) S- r8 fbanks 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.; n6 h% W( J& P
4 _- ^2 P" V7 \0 ?* g4 L: _
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
5 \) j4 t! u+ n) xin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
2 J4 ^5 p4 t) e: j' ^1 wFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,1 q, M5 l" a$ A, ^" Q2 [) _
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.* a. w2 a( L) q: ~, I
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.
+ q1 i8 H5 W2 |0 G6 ]but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
% P" f; X2 C4 f( b
/ P( O3 t) O2 S$ g8 c o! o[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
