Advertisement

R&D Cooperation in Real Option Game Analysis

  • Giovanni VillaniEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

In recent years, the real option theory has been widely used in evaluating investment decisions in a dynamic environment. The market developments are complex and so the conventional NPV (Net Present Value) rule undertakes the value of a project because this method fails to take into account the market uncertainty, irreversibility of investment and ability to delay entry. The well accepted paradigm in real option theory states the equivalence between investment opportunities of firms and financial contingent claims, allowing for managerial flexibility.

Several models, such as Lee (1997); Shackleton and Wojakowski (2003); Trigeorgis (1991) and so on, are based on the assumption that the option exercise price, and so the investment cost, is fixed. But, particularly for the R&D investments, it is reasonable to consider that the evolution of the investment cost is uncertain. The R&D investment opportunity corresponds to an exchange option, i.e., the swap of an uncertain investment cost for an uncertain gross project value. The most important valuation models of exchange options are given in Armada, Kryzanowsky, and Pereira (2007); Carr (1988, 1995); Margrabe (1978); McDonald and Siegel (1985). In particular way, McDonald and Siegel (1985) value a simple European exchange option while Carr (1988) develops a model to price a compound European exchange option. Both models consider that assets distribute “dividends” that, in real options context, are the opportunity costs if an investment project is postponed (Majd & Pindyck, 1987).

Keywords

Nash Equilibrium Success Probability Real Option Information Revelation Exchange Option 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Armada, M. R., Kryzanowsky, L., & Pereira, P. J. (2007) A modified finite-lived American exchange option methodology applied to real options valuation. Global Finance Journal,17(3), 419–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Carr, P. (1988) The valuation of sequential exchange opportunities. The Journal of Finance,43(5), 1235–1256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carr, P. (1995) The valuation of American exchange options with application to real options. In L. Trigeorgis (Ed.) Real options in capital investment: models, strategies and applications. Westport Connecticut, London: Praeger.Google Scholar
  4. Chi, T. (2000) Option to acquire or divest a joint venture. Strategic Management Journal,21(6), 665–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dias, M. A. G. & Teixeira, J. P. (2004) Continuous-time option games part 2: oligopoly, war of attrition and bargaining under uncertainty. Working Paper, PUC-Rio, Proceeding at 8th Annual International Conference on Real Options, Montreal, June 2004. Google Scholar
  6. Dias, M. A. G. (2004) Real options, learning measures, and Bernoulli revelation processes. Working paper, Puc-Rio, Proceeding at 8th Annual International Conference on Real Options, Paris, June 2005. Google Scholar
  7. Lee, M. H. (1997) Valuing finite-maturity investment-timing options. Financial Management,26(2), 58–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Majd, S. & Pindyck, R. S. (1987) Time to build, option value and investment decisions. Journal of Financial Economics,18(1), 7–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Huisman, K. J. M. (2001) Technology investment: a game theoretic real options approach. Boston: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  10. Margrabe, W. (1978) The value of an exchange option to exchange one asset for another. The Journal of Finance,33(1), 177–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. McDonald, R. L. & Siegel, D. R. (1985) Investment and the valuation of firms when there is an option to shut down. International Economic Review,28(2), 331–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kogut, B. (1991) Joint ventures and option to expand and acquire. Management Science,37(1), 19–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kong, J. J. & Kwok, Y. K. (2007) Real options in strategic investment games between two asymmetric firms. European Journal of Operational Research,181(2), 967–985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Shackleton, M. & Wojakowski, R. (2003) The expected return and exercise time of merton-style real options. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting,29(3–4), 541–555.Google Scholar
  15. Trigeorgis, L. (1991) Anticipated competitive entry and early preemptive investment in deferrable projects. Journal of Economics and Business,43(2), 143–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Villani, G. (2008) An R&D investment game under uncertainty in real option analysis. Computational Economics,32(1–2), 199–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Facoltà di Economia - Università di FoggiaFoggiaItaly

Personalised recommendations