|
- 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.2 w1 d" k8 X) w! E
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,3 h: k1 e" n! j. `/ y. n
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
0 \* W2 |% f5 Q0 D- S; kmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,, d' K0 K1 ^7 V$ L
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
8 ~8 p& V9 r) a, R h/ ?% AAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.8 a; K8 j+ Z6 q0 M! r8 C; [
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
2 l/ s/ z0 p$ ^9 ynormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. ) }- A, r# c/ M( T, p+ j2 @/ _
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
. r0 j9 Y. H/ B" {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.7 w, R4 z" k5 e% U0 h& \5 U
+ U% X6 C. E2 c- Z
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
q2 [: A% k; F5 T( }in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards./ o* g1 k) N( Y/ w! s; T
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
& B: p2 u/ {0 w* k9 I4 VA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
3 u# n5 N% Q% t9 NThe 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. 7 R3 _# ?) @8 E; [) J; `+ ~+ v
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
1 G' n1 r+ |, i {) x9 p# a' U$ D5 z, s: A2 L/ \8 M
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
