|
- 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.4 E! b" z5 J0 ?$ Q1 T$ d, C
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
4 P; f2 Y7 a, D/ n; fmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.0 A" H, \" e0 D( R
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
6 H: q& B% n, _in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
, w# e/ T) O( a7 ?2 J2 A+ ?# \Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
# z/ m, G+ ~) J8 C! O( Bsimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
% {4 h( X4 P5 [. Q8 Y7 C0 {$ cnormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
e: V& k0 W4 l2 C8 Y. yeg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. 3 `' s% H5 `- H
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.
( r- C7 v2 r$ b9 ?" l$ D* D2 Q
3 n2 V% x2 q2 ?im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.* a% A, Q$ e/ B( [) J8 q% A
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
, f2 Y, d4 R P' I3 DFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,% O6 `2 \( k, x9 H
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
e9 s9 s) d5 g1 wThe 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. : d4 e/ f6 L# L& e; ?- v
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
% y9 ]% x: m6 M) L
Q0 \% I/ T O$ O: ]( i" N+ r, _! h[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
