|
- 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.7 w3 ~! W8 y/ P u; @1 w
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
6 C; A0 {7 d' Hmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
1 S7 K, b5 t5 rmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,9 B6 z: \7 X# i& S; f: d5 J
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
e- R! U( o8 o) q4 D$ B" I# ?Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.$ K ~, Z3 K; f, h9 ]% w0 H) K
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
g; ~7 Y+ ], e& Unormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
, g0 d' I( F0 X. X( Y) Qeg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. # A. k: M3 J/ r3 o8 A
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.
: u) b3 m' V/ Y4 Z9 B& o
5 G; Z. ~5 l- W3 Aim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
6 y! C3 X% q* o7 r; t: m1 gin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
8 m' X9 e. I5 o8 {* }For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
$ o2 J- R$ p, O- V6 F) L; V3 c: F4 UA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.7 @+ T- V0 l1 t; F6 v, T
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. % l! F; J! s# \5 Y
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
3 S2 U) Y! a# w4 u3 B; j5 L& H
0 E9 h$ Z0 ?6 g8 _7 ^+ q- o[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
