|
  
- 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.
# V. ^* P& T: e( d6 c0 rCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
1 Q! K- J& U9 S$ pmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
1 r+ ~% Q9 s, z6 F# y$ r+ ^' ^2 _main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
2 c. D/ U4 {, fin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.3 ]5 a2 Z' g7 I' h8 {; s# O
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
) R. ^! E+ P/ J7 \. xsimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
. D$ N7 R# u1 anormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
4 I* J( s" k" W2 reg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. # `* ^5 R7 z3 l% H, T
banks 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 J; o6 @" J I# E9 L3 k, e& ~9 C7 }7 L, h
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
6 V1 R, }1 o2 Q. Q# p0 win stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.& Q! M+ |' [2 i2 J4 {. K
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,8 u, O9 P; }% f
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction. u" [6 j) H6 p' O: x" {; q
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. + X& }7 J7 f8 P- H! |( y1 t" R
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
: g$ y- ]6 Z& r
; {1 w2 J( w8 u, F. x, {[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|