|
  
- 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.
n5 C# c+ b1 }1 v9 q: g3 [/ cCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,% F1 v; x( L0 q) @% a' m. O
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
; Y; V, O7 g# G) Zmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
5 H- y% X, C, h( o: T* lin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
- Q, {9 ?. d; M+ |+ wAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
4 q v. O% M! @5 n) O6 {& r9 ssimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,4 J# r* v8 s _ o2 Z; _
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. 5 m" d7 Y7 N f9 F. Z
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
7 z! e, ^ j) |5 Y1 ybanks 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.
" C/ U F) w1 ]/ ]
, V! E! d3 n7 Jim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
2 Z7 S* O% O! q ^. Oin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards., m! z) a/ Y( [! Q8 U5 o: Z
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
8 P' T/ ^8 J7 kA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
% S$ O$ W7 m1 M% D4 _+ P. D/ tThe 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. 2 R' K h& _( `% w. E" L! D. A
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.! B0 D6 m" X/ g$ k% c# |, a
0 i R+ X; Q- u) i
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|