|
- 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.: F8 ~* }5 b9 {
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,
% I: ]- z. q' ?, rmore risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.3 ~, n$ f; p- M* @. S. M- u
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
; a8 x5 Z& g' v" H9 ^in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
9 P) s% x' k$ N% y3 FAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
; U; a3 P6 Y) `& vsimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
6 [2 x# }. y: c6 u( e% Enormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
% p. {* J' V4 _& n- D# ~4 X: U i9 ueg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. - p& n" q! [, `" ~* [/ 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.0 c1 @9 u- e) M- L, j# T! X
" D( T& @* S$ r! j9 Rim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.- r5 ~6 I0 j% j9 s% }: t
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
% k- U p9 E5 `. T) OFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,$ X" y4 u1 A+ l& {6 @4 O, Z
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.0 w% ^) ]8 W5 R
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. ) E; [2 m0 d- j1 l
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
2 j& M9 A: t7 h+ z, T" p/ V6 p, f, h7 R: \. o
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
