Hehe, to do this kind of topic, we must first clarify a concept. The exchange here is about relative advantage rather than absolute advantage, and the income here is not the only criterion. Moreover, it can be understood that one party to a transaction has an absolute advantage, whether it is a fixed interest rate or a floating interest rate, that is, it is smaller than the other party, but there must be an advantage that one interest rate is smaller than the other party, so this interest rate is his relative disadvantage. The reason why he gave up absolute advantage and chose relative advantage is to avoid risks or other reasons, and he must choose the investment interest rate with relative disadvantage. In this case, the cooperation between the two can reduce the cost.

The first question:

As can be seen from the problem.

A 9% five-year Swiss franc loan 15% loan.

B 9.5%5-year Swiss franc loan 16.5% USD loan.

There is no doubt that whether it is the Swiss franc or the US dollar, A will have an absolute advantage.

The Swiss franc A is less than B by 0.5%, and the dollar A is less than B by 1.5%. It can be seen that A has an absolute advantage and a relative advantage in the dollar, because the advantage in the dollar is more obvious.

The hidden condition in the question should be that A must borrow Swiss francs at a relative disadvantage and B must borrow US dollars at a relative disadvantage, so that the question will be meaningful.

Therefore, A borrows US dollars for B at the interest rate of 15% in the market, while B borrows Swiss francs for A at the interest rate of 9.5% in the market.

At this time, according to your analysis, Party A pays the market 15% interest in dollars, and pays 8.5% to the intermediary (this interest rate level is determined by the profit agreement between the two parties). At the same time, Party B receives the interest paid by the intermediary 15%, so the total income is the difference between the relative advantages of both parties. And the distribution of benefits can be agreed by themselves.

The second question:

First, A has absolute advantages in both fixed interest rate and floating interest rate, but it is less than B 1% in fixed interest rate and only 0.25% in floating interest rate. Therefore, Party A has a comparative advantage in the fixed interest rate.

But there is also a hidden condition of this problem, that is, A must borrow at a relatively inferior floating interest rate.

Therefore, Party A borrows at a fixed interest rate, while Party B borrows at a floating interest rate, and both parties share the benefits with the intermediary.

Party A pays a fixed interest rate of 65,438+02% to the market, and at the same time pays a floating interest of LIBOR-0.25% to Party B, and receives a fixed interest of 65,438+02% paid by the bank, and Party B also operates according to the topic, so that both parties benefit together, and the total interest is the difference of their respective comparative advantages, that is, 0.75% in the topic. The distribution of profits can also be agreed by the three parties themselves.

That's basically the analysis ~ ~

1. Borrower A can get a five-year loan in Swiss francs with a fixed interest rate of 9% and a loan in US dollars with a fixed interest rate of 15%, and Borrower B can get a five-year loan in Swiss francs with a fixed interest rate of 9.5% and a loan in US dollars with a fixed interest rate of 16.5%.

Obviously, A's credit status and borrowing cost are better than B's.

B itself has the relative advantage of borrowing Swiss francs: the interest rate difference between B borrowing Swiss francs and borrowing US dollars is 16.5%-9.5% = 7%, while that of A is 15%-9% = 6%, and the difference of 1% is mainly reflected in the interest rate of borrowing US dollars. B The difference between borrowing Swiss francs and B is only 0.5%.

If B needs to borrow US dollars, A needs to borrow Swiss francs, and make use of their respective advantages to exchange them. Through the intermediary, B needs to borrow in dollars and A needs to borrow in Swiss francs.

If not, Party B will borrow US dollars at the interest rate of 16.5%, and Party A will borrow Swiss francs at the interest rate of 9%, paying the interest rate of * * *( 16.5+9%).

After the swap, Party B borrows Swiss francs at the interest rate of 9.5%, and Party A borrows US dollars at the interest rate of 65,438+05%, paying the interest rate of * * * (9.5%+65,438+05%).

Compared with the two, it saves 1%.

Results: A needed to borrow Swiss francs and got a Swiss franc loan, paying 8.5% Swiss franc interest rate.

If B needs to borrow dollars, he gets a dollar loan and pays the dollar interest rate of 16.25%.

The intermediary company gets 0.25% profit and bears the credit risks of both parties.

2. Party A can get a sterling loan with a fixed interest rate of 12% or a sterling loan with a floating interest rate just at LIBOR level.

B can get a fixed interest rate of 13% or a floating interest rate of LIBOR+0.25%.

If Party A borrows a fixed interest rate, it is 65,438+0% less than Party B, and if it borrows a floating interest rate, it is 0.25% less than Party B. Obviously, Party A has obvious advantages in borrowing a fixed interest rate, while Party B has obvious advantages in borrowing a floating interest rate.

The problem is that if Party A needs floating interest rate and borrows floating interest rate, the interest rate will be LIBOR, while Party B needs fixed interest rate and borrows fixed interest rate, the interest rate will be 13%, and the sum of them will be LIBOR+ 13%.

After taking advantage of their respective advantages, Party A borrows a fixed-rate loan with an interest rate of 65,438+02%, and Party B borrows a floating-rate loan with an interest rate of LIBOR+0.25%, making LIBOR+65,438+02.25% in total.

Compared with the two, the interest is saved by 0.75% and shared among the three parties.

Results: A needed floating rate payment, but got floating rate payment, and the payment interest rate was LIBOR-0.25%.

B needs to pay at a fixed interest rate, but is paid at a fixed interest rate of 12.75%.

The intermediary company gets 0.25% profit and bears the credit risks of both parties.