|
- 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.
6 q) \1 v* i1 U: CCDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,; y$ {. n5 j$ o# u
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
* z* v/ C6 m5 H$ u) u& |main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
; r' B/ Z- P5 e, oin other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.$ F" r5 b- T1 ?5 A
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency. H( u- e) k, \; }7 J; M+ p' Z' C
similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
9 O/ X9 k K* anormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. 4 `# q+ e2 ]+ ~9 B; ]5 A9 h
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. 0 b/ b( j* J R, Z
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.3 `) c. j- W8 G; B
# E/ M- L0 r m8 p. @
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
- l3 e1 e0 ^# N) Z7 U8 S D$ X4 fin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
" x5 Z, J% I/ g& t6 W# TFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
- ?& v; O" t- F3 c6 {: `5 D# bA's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
+ }: V, Z# D' ]- Z: I( W: mThe 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.
) m% T3 `$ J% K) ?* F S5 gbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
0 D" X* H8 J& a& G! |/ L& O4 h& u( ?+ C
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
