|
- 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.* [( G! t$ J3 d {$ m
CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,6 O' _% ~& [/ R7 J. G6 m
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
; N+ ?1 R' I: T- p8 Umain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
% G) F( _8 ^9 min other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
; t4 W1 [% @1 HAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
4 T% Q0 J& t' S4 {similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,
, Q o* ^- _* t# {6 cnormally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest. ) j6 H1 f7 U% b9 v' G/ J. K
eg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
4 E! W+ r- `% R5 j- j' d- o ]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.
, g/ p$ S. L3 t' H. t( v; s1 I9 `0 c ^
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.: ^8 f+ t0 i0 G, U' y3 X
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.
4 A% s" q: P' \( h( M! K. IFor eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,/ b* Z, z9 x% T% ]
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.: g& c; m8 ?5 |' b8 B1 _; d1 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. 4 z" j$ h! @4 ^/ o) w/ `
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.+ H$ t/ |0 o& {8 q1 J9 K
# v; d# Z5 v. c, C- L7 {5 X
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
