|
  
- 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.
% R+ y4 ]; u$ q. V& m- [CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,9 D A2 w! N! M0 D# D
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment.
# t: d: b A$ D; |1 L7 Cmain reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,
& ]9 P$ ~ U @ T- ]in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
0 Q, \( ?7 m* Z2 ]. `. X* `+ ZAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
1 L+ f/ F& w5 [6 z# \similar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,- y' a! A% w4 K
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
( p) L- Q4 ?& J5 ?* Jeg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
9 z W1 J( ^1 w, n: d' L. Abanks 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.2 U% u7 r0 U8 Z( i$ j V% S
! x o7 m9 ~, x+ D. H' L0 dim not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.3 U5 V7 v" _" ~( t" U' ^
in stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.9 T: J0 E! U7 d" U' S' Y% b1 P
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,, _9 C7 `% a) Y- Q
A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
: L* D" t9 Z1 l) |: 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.
1 _. O6 K* o7 {% ~+ Y& lbut the value of their assets did really drop significantly.& C3 O: \5 M$ @9 r1 t
. J, o% K9 R; p6 B1 L O! \
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|