|
- 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.
6 U+ y) s' f6 [CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
) e3 N4 R/ [, {; i& I+ a, Dmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
7 T7 y4 x$ S+ Z' N$ I3 wmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,2 U, \: C. y: y) @( y; b
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.# {1 W: O- x6 b
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
$ u& s4 F/ L- v5 ysimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,3 [$ e! S0 l, W; P1 ~2 v! ? ^6 e+ ^, P
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
- f' c! ?; u# P! G& veg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. ' F( J, X- _% `/ O" m' N0 e
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.& I0 i- P* C- _; G. Y3 {
# m+ t! W( D! G& Vim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
9 n" |* V9 {: W( {; c: c: din stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.1 P, Y {4 H3 O8 {5 X
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,& w n8 L' G% M/ {- y* M1 A
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
3 T S W, K+ J- e; \; ~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. + A+ J0 Z/ W3 _3 V% N8 v
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
% F/ B- U; {; {/ [4 o* K6 I2 a
$ f( `3 b$ v# \1 v+ T" Z0 t[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
