|
- 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.
& e4 A* z, ?; k QCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
4 B! Q( I% ?4 G, mmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
' j/ g5 s" P9 i" ]# vmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,5 p4 p2 `$ I5 Z
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.! S, b; b" ~( P$ O! n
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.& Y2 p: k. t! ]
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
6 ^, y, l8 ^) G# \) }! [normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. ) O, b$ c! V+ I9 V/ B/ a+ `
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
8 M+ q+ L z) X- r/ @+ P& Z& o: R1 Ebanks 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.
( ~+ d5 l9 u2 s- s0 g3 O
. R3 v8 Z0 \0 {* I9 zim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
+ y' H9 k" I( N* Uin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
6 G( ^$ x4 z$ j2 ?: n$ j @For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
, ?. T8 L& k, |: h4 e: g- u* LA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction., s1 r$ k. E4 T1 v" x$ Z
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. ' y1 J/ ^! F4 P4 ?4 F" k
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.( W% t' y1 S5 p& e2 J* y) ~. h
- o$ L1 E) V+ L- c& J! F
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
