|
- 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.3 f3 Y v2 H; n* q" U' X# I* s, l/ n
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
5 }7 w, r" n& ^/ omore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
4 F {5 i0 P# vmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
# Y6 u- d. q& X v }3 Min other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
* Y0 i9 u' L1 j# w3 W0 iAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.' c" t/ `/ Q1 U1 d1 M5 @ f
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
/ h5 ~' y) I* c5 snormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
6 q5 l& @ R" ceg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. . p7 q" g5 z% h* M
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." d6 z* ^2 c7 }
* c( @! j3 U: q) e8 |) C
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
, x$ W& m/ e" T* k+ m `6 J+ j, Uin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.. i. t" f( _& L9 ^# c' i" l7 P6 L
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12," y2 f7 @; ?) y' M7 Z
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
) x7 J- J& |, i2 Z jThe 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 j; k! k6 J" M% o6 @- Lbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
8 R1 M" f4 r% {! m: ~) G) n! ~$ h# o3 q4 M a
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
