|
- 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.+ ^' }' s* @" ?+ u! i+ c5 v
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,8 g! p s" H/ ?, l$ E
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment. @8 V( j9 X, }$ _; j2 G/ j
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
* S% x, K" i/ sin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
, J3 O8 E1 V4 Z9 ~- aAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.9 z, U1 H; D2 E7 |+ n0 o
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
8 q8 [& f n3 @) J2 ?- Qnormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
+ z5 w k# x; u' ]7 v, M$ C' Keg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. : x- y: b, }2 m( X
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.
7 X5 _9 K! _. i6 t6 K: j$ D) _* Y7 \/ @; z, N! E
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
% T! z6 Y3 V6 Uin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.8 ]+ Z5 b3 S) r$ s& d/ U# J. M* O
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
3 f- I( e' [3 G0 }( U; ]9 h! WA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.4 O$ D9 d, N# d, G; @. }; N' J
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.
' |1 A5 H( W; e. ^5 c0 U' T( Q3 Y$ Zbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.( e2 y- |8 x" W3 X" m4 Y& p
; ^6 X9 x% o* P. S6 n
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
