• Journal of Advanced Navigation Technology
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.104-111
• /
• 2011

In this study, I have tried to analyze an influence of R&D investment on ROV(Real Option Value), corporate value and market value by analyzing R&D investment, ROV, corporate value and market value of machine and material industry in the perspective of ex post. As a result of this study, corporate value, which has been deduced by real option according to R&D investment, reflects market value well and possesses a strong correlation with R&D investment, ROV, corporate value and market value. This implication demonstrates this study result is corresponding with existing theories.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Railway
• /
• v.10 no.2 s.39
• /
• pp.137-145
• /
• 2007

In traditional financial theory, the discount cash flow model(DCF or NPV) operates as the basic framework for most analyses. In doing valuation analysis, the conventional view is that the net present value(NPV) of a project is the measure of the present value of expected net cash flows. Thus, investing in a positive(negative) NPV project will increase(decrease) firm value. Recently, this framework has come under some fire for failing to consider the options of the managerial flexibilities. Real option valuation(ROV) considers the managerial flexibility to make ongoing decisions regarding the implementation of investment projects and the deployment of real assets. The appeal of the framework is natural given the high degree of uncertainty that firms face in their technology investment decisions. This paper suggests an algorithm for estimating volatility of logarithmic cash flow returns of real assets based on the Black-Sholes option pricing model, the binomial option pricing model, and the Monte Carlo simulation. This paper uses those models to obtain point estimates of real option value with the G7- HSR350X(high-speed train).

• Communications for Statistical Applications and Methods
• /
• v.15 no.4
• /
• pp.563-585
• /
• 2008

This paper presents how to improve the efficiency and accuracy in the pricing and sensitivity evaluation for derivatives, since the need for the evaluation of complicated derivatives is increased. The Monte Carlo(MC) simulation using the quasi random number instead of pseudo random number can improve the elapsed time and accuracy for the valuation of European-type derivatives. However, the quasi MC simulation method has its limit for applying it in the multi-dimensional case such as American-type and path-dependent options due to the increased correlation between dimensions as the dimension of random numbers is increased. In order to complement this problem, we develop a modified method in which correlation values are controlled to be below a pre-specified value. Thus, this method is applicable for the pricing of either derivatives ill which underlying assets or risk factors are several or derivatives having path-dependent or early redemption property. Furthermore, we illustrate that it is important to take an appropriate grid interval for the use of finite difference method(FDM) by applying the FDM to one example of non-symmetrical butterfly spreads.

• Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.8 no.6
• /
• pp.1634-1647
• /
• 2007

"To invest or not to invest?" Most business leaders are frequently faced with this question on new and ongoing projects. The challenge lies in deciding what projects to choose, expand, contract, defer, or abandon. The project valuation tools used in this process are vital to making the right decisions. Traditional tools such as discounted cash flow (DCF)/net present value (NPV) assume a "fixed" path ahead, but real world projects face uncertainties, forcing us to change the path often. Comparing to other traditional valuation methods, the real options approach captures the flexibility inherent to investment decisions. The use of real options has gained wide acceptance among practitioners in a number of several industries during the last few decades. Even though the options are present in all types of business decisions, it is still not considered as a proper method of valuation in some industries. Mining has been comparably slow to adopt new valuation techniques over the years. The reason fur this is not entirely clear. One possible reason is the level and types of risks in mining. Not only are these risks high, but they are also more numerous and involve natural risks compared with other industries. That is why the purpose of this study is to deal with a more practical approach to project valuation, known as real options analysis in mining industry. This paper provides a case study approach to the copper mining industry using a real options analysis. It shows how companies can minimize investment risks, exercise flexibility in decision making and maximize returns.

• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.165-181
• /
• 2002

A variety of methods of patent valuation are written in this paper. The typical methods such as scoring method, income approach method, market approach method, DCF method, real option method, are introduced in this paper and each of them is criticized respectively. A new method, so called "GVP Method", is introduced and shows how much effective it is when patent valuation is required. And specially MPEG patent licensing method is introduced in this paper.his paper.

• Proceedings of the Korea Technology Innovation Society Conference
• /
• 2002.11a
• /
• pp.197-207
• /
• 2002

최근 들어 정보통신산업의 발달과 더불어 벤처기업 및 소규모 중소기업이 가지고 있는 기술의 가치평가 및 이를 바탕으로 한 기업의 가치평가에 관한 요구가 많이 늘어나고 있다. 하지만 이러한 기업들이 가지고 있는 기술들은 생명공학, 정보통신, 나노관련기술 등 미래의 불확실한 상황에 따라 쉽게 변화할 수 있기 때문에, 기존의 전통적인 가치평가기법으로 가치를 평가하기 어려운 기술들이다. 따라서 이러한 첨단 기술들 혹은 불확실한 미래를 가지는 기술들에 대한 가치평가는 새로운 접근방법 및 시각이 필요하게 되었다. 본 연구에서는 전통적으로 널리 사용되어지고 있는 기술가치평가방법을 기초로 좀 더 미래상황에 영업적으로나 전략적으로 유연성이 있는 가치평가시스템에 대한 툴을 제시하고자 한다.

• The Korean Journal of Financial Studies
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.247-266
• /
• 1995

• Proceedings of the Korea Technology Innovation Society Conference
• /
• 2002.05a
• /
• pp.21-30
• /
• 2002

• Proceedings of the Korea Technology Innovation Society Conference
• /
• 2001.11a
• /
• pp.223-237
• /
• 2001

• Proceedings of the Korean Operations and Management Science Society Conference
• /
• 1996.10a
• /
• pp.317-317
• /
• 1996