|
  
- 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.
% t" A% c. v; rCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,6 H+ h5 S' r/ U; @7 V
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
7 v5 j8 T- _ W) s7 x5 `main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
9 `/ \+ Y0 l, P2 z; b# F1 V# Hin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
. t( N8 {4 x1 h+ \Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
1 D5 p% j4 _* w' U, O4 Gsimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
1 x! O3 ?: Q; e u; cnormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. ( u) x: c/ X$ ?$ t
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
) f0 v: y( x0 v3 h% Cbanks 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.' t5 b* X8 B0 O! n2 v4 S- |7 N
8 N: }9 f" d( t: l+ vim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.5 I$ n6 R: h ~8 J
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
% {9 o1 `) |+ ?" DFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12, P: S! \: x$ }! D% R
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.6 r' |" X: K, p8 S/ ~5 f8 ~
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.
: q0 ?, Z7 d% y& O4 S4 f. A/ ]but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
& x4 z& Z1 D8 o9 Z8 j* q+ r5 c, n
' h; o8 R# c9 y. X[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|