|
  
- 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., B7 w/ `* j0 E7 g
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,6 d+ u& f& H+ K
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
4 ^) ~8 S- z a7 @main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
5 Q, O( [# ]2 Y1 Nin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.. W6 Z5 o7 ]8 |
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.' C$ U/ V3 `1 ]" S: h: Y7 d
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
# m! X# n3 e+ g6 W3 b' {normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
: l* N0 K" J& ?; L, Eeg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
' v, z6 A6 f1 \7 L! e) q7 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.0 U$ \" u+ M: c
1 W% I7 c* w) G& M6 P
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.( K: M* k+ k9 G0 \: ~7 U( e; `
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
& S) S% ]2 y4 u: X: c9 QFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
" y+ n5 y" R j9 v9 q( @- ?A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.& {4 `. d1 L" ]
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. $ R$ t- U& z2 g$ K2 T: o
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
) K/ }" J! F+ F4 a6 ]9 p
2 u# A9 }; n4 I. M: i& ~% p: X$ ?1 D[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|