实物期权概述.doc

PAGE  PAGE 11 Real Options Overview Business is beginning to recognize the value of real options analysis as demonstrated by at least three recent articles on this topic in the Harvard Business Review (Dixit and Pindyck, 1995; Luehrman, 1998a,b). Moreover, the non-telephone utility industry and many other industries facing decisions on RD spending, project/asset evaluation, mergers, acquisitions and other investments have utilized real options valuation for years. 1. WHAT ARE REAL OPTIONS? The traditional approach to project evaluation and investment decisions uses discounted present value (DPV) or discounted cash flow (DCF) methods. These methods explicitly assume the project will meet the expected cash flow with no intervention by management in the process. All the uncertainty is handled in the (risk-adjusted) discount rate. This process is static. At most, the expected value of the cash flow is incorporated into the analysis. Management’s flexibility to make decisions as states of nature are revealed is assumed away by this methodology. However, management discretion has value, which is not incorporated into the DPV. The real options methodology goes beyond this na?ve view of valuation and more closely matches the manner in which firms operate. It allows for a firm’s flexibility to abandon, contract, expand or otherwise modify its actions after nature has revealed itself. This is the first lesson for policymakers – if they wish to emulate the competitive process, they cannot rely on the application of na?ve DCF methods in cost models. Decision-tree analysis (DTA) moves the analysis one step forward by allowing that alternative states of nature are possible. But, as in the case of DCF, the appropriate risk-adjusted discount rate is virtually indeterminate.1 Using the firm’s opportunity cost of capital is inappropriate if the project does not correlate with the company’s cost of capital — another lesson for the telecommunications industry. Unbundled network