|
  
- 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.$ \1 @9 A: c& U, B1 m$ H# e4 d
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,# }2 A7 u4 t; [! ]
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.! p7 p" G5 e; {( ~7 i* u3 j
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
; `- f' c% [7 O7 b* din other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.0 O) A% T: v% W' e( |
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
3 J+ C2 G6 @6 _1 _5 B( Osimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,) k4 Y: s2 O( B2 T% D
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
& a$ ~, A5 ?! j" e& eeg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. ) c# \9 c C4 Z3 Y3 G
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.
& S1 }0 y. K6 H
4 j8 _ b7 d n: A$ cim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.% K. S8 v& A6 I; m) Y1 {
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
; {) J( }8 N. B6 p& X8 c: W( CFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
- @9 K: J$ L5 Y [, w( PA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.( B* J9 R7 C; F7 }% W5 `9 }
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. / T+ F S- M2 z: y% }0 G
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.% G/ ^+ {3 \2 K2 q2 C& R
. i) |! n: {! ^4 l( X. H& s
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|