|
  
- 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.) j0 {1 m1 l! h# e8 f1 W; D
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,/ k0 ]8 v9 q S% f( W
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
% K. u7 B1 {1 O/ x! ^main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
& H4 X1 B- x8 P* ^in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
( a2 m: t3 u% K1 e. pAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.5 P6 B: S4 q2 _) ?6 f
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
; K1 q" p7 o( r& |% O% }normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
+ z+ c# J) Z) teg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
- g- e$ X J% f0 ?8 V" gbanks 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.
8 D$ {% n w; Q( Y) a7 ?
$ ?' L0 p3 U8 J2 kim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case./ q% I2 R! v0 f, X! k F
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
: W! W5 O. d( W7 WFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
' y; Y* @2 T' i+ ~2 {: I3 e1 rA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.1 C( \3 ?7 T. Q, 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.
" t7 I/ T, n( G3 t; x Xbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
, \3 V* f6 ?/ `. t: [) e" Q$ v3 i7 z9 P& u, }
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|