|
  
- 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.
3 w* P$ ?) K2 |CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,3 @* I/ S d$ G( L1 Y
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
9 ]0 H) f [6 ` t, Emain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
- j$ P# J5 J; l! U2 Q: ?in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
: Z7 ~- `/ y9 M( u% k4 e) Z ]. RAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
' m- m, o8 k, c4 Z: V! Gsimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,4 R* A- b1 D+ C; H: [- O
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. 6 U, e5 ^( M6 U3 \5 W
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
7 f& p8 s7 f5 E. k; S! ebanks 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.4 p1 z3 {2 K }
' B( M# W) U( F1 ^& B
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
* b$ i. `. S8 `: Z1 Iin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
" e9 h+ h! |& W( B: G( lFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
T1 @% f ]/ a& UA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.! P# U) S- X9 S
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) d, S3 F9 Fbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
% w$ y- ~6 s5 j" m5 B7 B1 F8 y% _6 P+ ]% j$ M) Z
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|