|
- 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.* N' r2 b6 p" G z+ k w' r
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,4 s5 v4 C$ c9 L9 x# ?0 M2 z
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
8 x1 J: N/ i* H; G1 F! X, @main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
( \+ L' V* |8 |8 _8 {in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities." g. ~3 ~4 `' H7 l! y( Q
Also, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
) {( Y7 J% K) s9 O9 v' @9 k; `similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
@, Q; P' R$ N8 U0 t6 dnormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
* G+ g) v3 k8 @9 \6 O2 }& feg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future. 3 v$ E7 b' c$ [, @* y& j
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. A- [$ |0 P- v+ i, Y/ u
4 M+ ^4 I2 k7 u3 ]. h
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
8 ?2 ~! J# m/ s2 l+ R- Pin stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
( w! }3 b9 f4 ~ Y& J" Z$ tFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,/ e- q8 W& \3 U+ |0 u
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction. y' g& V" N1 E, [ u; X
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. , A$ N+ @1 w6 f6 D
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.
1 J5 ] D8 s! b# o, F% H
% C4 T, j: C: B* h2 s[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
