|
- 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.
, J% Y( u" N3 Q/ J1 j& qCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
, @, ~; G5 G l+ @more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.& M) ^# @$ V1 ^
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,* }+ x3 F* p4 L
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.2 b3 u; Y, D; i" M, A
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.% I- z8 y& J) W* B- P
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,* u. T7 H5 p" `* s: U
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. $ z7 j+ p/ ]1 a' E: m
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. * {8 |) u8 }8 f; [, |
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.% `5 T* {. c4 ^ g: B+ o4 F
# m+ o4 ~. H z- l5 o
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
/ ?4 `( i- @7 I }+ P" |+ qin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.1 ]& x% M" R, |$ C0 V* Q5 i( P
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12, g+ I% n0 p! K2 L- C
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.4 c6 h4 ? }2 ~- L2 p# y
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.
5 N' x+ {( v) D3 E! |. T# Ibut the value of their assets did really drop significantly., [, J% a9 I, h, f7 x. W
- o4 _% S( r# W# `$ L[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
