|
- 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.# A- J- M6 k7 V4 W; @
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,; z# T# s" G3 }0 U9 V
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.. M+ o( m# f5 Q
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
/ ~; K( b3 A, Fin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.: w: W" G, ^/ P1 _! w( P# f$ Z
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
Y# j6 s" R0 M: i( msimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
3 g4 d- ]2 c* Z2 mnormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
5 ]/ B# L% t7 }% K: }0 J/ I+ {eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. 8 e. i `. ~' e5 P. ]9 K" q" I
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./ z. G- z# y3 R$ h3 {: z
$ i3 T$ |+ h! u! b8 w6 U4 p' N
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.+ O8 [% l1 G' w4 E( d
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
8 x6 w& w( x0 V& S( q* aFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
# E' L4 }! ]4 I; r3 Z H0 NA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
" X- F* f- `* d" C( Q% j" FThe 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. ; O' Z0 W. }9 q4 `5 u
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.3 @* |; P& |1 c0 \+ E( G8 |+ e1 G, j
* J* ~8 k+ \, ^* `5 L! _+ T$ g& Z
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
