|
- 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.
5 K/ Y% Z# j) E3 ACDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,5 P l8 N+ V; u9 N, g" v2 L" h
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.3 }* J$ l7 Y: W' u' _
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,' Y, d% h. t% D2 E2 R- V
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
' a$ e: j' ]9 r p# M+ ]Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
& b: J1 O! c% I7 Hsimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,3 J2 W3 S: Z, G. P
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. * N1 m, d u b3 [) I, F g5 g
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. - T x6 p0 b! j& D
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.& C% D J( d" k+ y6 z9 X% `. p
( c2 C2 v: g) J5 l4 ]im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.2 \6 O$ J7 c }( h1 \9 e" S5 w
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
6 Q8 Q) z4 z- ?# x8 y- BFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
7 H, @7 c" d. K1 n& g3 |5 @- TA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.. d0 I _1 \* F- h- [ P2 ^1 q9 A
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. 3 W6 a, L8 B6 ?2 B2 O/ b( e
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.4 ]: Q; K1 d/ g) q$ ?$ m
, k# ^; {) u' x" W. S' u- N9 }# `[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
