|
- 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.
! W; c+ Y4 l$ ~) T& {CDs could have different ratings, AAA -> F,. }8 w* s4 m! P: E. }" T( ]1 ?
more risky ones would have higher premium (interest rate) as a compensation for an investment./ ~9 t+ v4 M3 d1 k8 |0 c
main reason why ppl buy those risky CDs is because the rate of return exceeds their internal rate of return,5 n- B; x f5 }
in other words, the interest rate of that investment > their required interest rate, therefore they invest in those securities.
$ R/ m6 B9 }4 \# H0 OAlso, fund managers would include risky assets in their portfolio for different purposes, eg efficiency.
8 \8 M, q9 i# Q3 i1 u1 ksimilar to bonds, CDs trading in the secondary market have different value at different times,$ Q/ V3 t: ?, u$ r0 O
normally the value is calculated by adding it's principle and interest.
9 l# p- |6 f- V8 E, deg. the value of the mortgage+the interests to be recieved in the future.
3 N3 X' y, T2 V- G9 Kbanks 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.
& U# q3 K, ]4 z- M8 s- \* ^, P' M ?7 W; G; A3 b2 Z E
im not quite sure if the multiplier effect does really matter in this case.
5 x5 ^) [% f9 c: [9 C Min stock market, it's the demand and supply pushing the price up/downwards.- M7 t" l; a$ E2 B8 P
For eg, A bought 10000 shares @10$ ; B sells 20000 shares to C @ $12,
' f( i" l. y. w4 ~A's shares would suddenly increase to $120000 from $100000 which does not invlove any $ transaction.
( Z; g3 }/ h. y8 b/ C. J. rThe 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. & [6 E# G6 q6 @) j* q
but the value of their assets did really drop significantly.1 |" P0 ?" f5 |, q7 W0 r
6 N% p& j+ z9 [ o! u
[ 本帖最後由 Kev 於 2008-10-8 07:26 PM 編輯 ] |
|
