|
- 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 e% Y- T) u8 G3 CCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
5 `8 w ~; q# Y* r6 \- lmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
' \7 }1 G; l, V1 }: N8 j$ zmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
6 k5 N. y( |) O! W- Uin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.: ~& y8 _# u7 H8 e* W" N& |$ s; a& U
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.( X$ ~: n# o: }0 u$ u. h, Q
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
2 @2 @' E6 `" ?normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
/ b1 f+ J: ^& S* m0 b6 O$ xeg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. , n- q& F' Y8 M
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.( w' y5 K& W0 e
- d9 N$ ~0 H6 `" N5 {% ]im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
6 D; b7 t! f6 M8 |- i( Tin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.; r6 Z/ {# i8 R# S% Q
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
- u0 d) f5 {3 z- r, q2 z% WA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.: T; h; O$ }6 r/ ?1 j& I) U0 r
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.
& `& H# k8 {, U- Mbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.+ `% l: N1 t: D- F: }5 N' ?
+ Z/ a( P0 G; t, |2 U o) M
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
