|
- 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.$ ^7 S) ^, o- u. @( p) {; K
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
& K9 B1 T4 v$ w$ Fmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.5 D# Q9 R4 X' W$ d) Z1 c
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,0 I) Y( G' i! i8 t, m0 t5 D
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.& K) j0 H! D. X% L& S
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
. f$ T7 V) \3 Msimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,3 o, X# k$ z N0 D$ M
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
$ ^8 v1 N7 t0 m5 V( u+ Leg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
: \8 W9 g" C& Q6 Ubanks 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.1 o( w4 Q2 i0 G7 s5 h9 d# @
( N% {6 P) }+ z8 p" A& M' Yim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.% _3 M; H# R/ a
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
3 U. l6 u# K0 m9 [- @, Y/ EFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,7 q. `4 o1 K6 ~1 p3 o8 @3 e
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
) l) {! P7 ^% ]) A7 G% BThe 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. . q+ |6 A% ]) U/ y8 \
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
( O: a0 v" z, j) R2 a# ^
7 U {6 D9 \+ e+ t( [[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
