|
- 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.
! {. E2 X8 s/ c o( c; eCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,6 _3 h$ G+ T0 A9 ]0 |
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.$ {/ ]. \8 G) \9 ?, A
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,) E% S# z+ B7 }% I( [2 j
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.3 L, ?" v/ w+ f- x! e. f
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
9 _% ^. y; f, ^2 ]+ Z& l/ }similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,5 M8 }, o8 y1 p( k' ]
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
( ~ A3 ^* H1 k* S1 Yeg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
$ n4 g( g% G6 y3 y5 p1 Qbanks 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.3 f/ o9 M6 a( M. C
r% B5 n8 M2 @: n7 |* @
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
2 y. x3 N5 R! C1 f% C% Z" iin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
, u" T0 A7 y2 Z. cFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,9 j" [! h+ {5 p0 h* C( l6 _
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
# c' K" J* a z% S5 D" d$ E1 u) s! QThe 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.
% z6 v% T# X2 g- h1 }$ L) ebut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
# F, P( p: Z f! F
) T3 a/ M% v2 z! }) J[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
