應用實質選擇權於化妝品GMP認證之投資決策

Applying Real Options in Investment Decision of Cosmetic GMP Certification

10.30001/JIES.201012.0004

何旭輝(Shiu-Huei Ho)；趙坤山(Kuen-Shan Jaw)

GMP認證 ； 淨現值 ； 不確定性 ； 實質選擇權

美容科技學刊

7卷4期（2010 / 12 / 01）

47 - 64

繁體中文

本研究之目的在針對化妝品業者於營收不確定的狀況下，應用實質選擇權分析(real options analysis, ROA)以求得營收之最適進入與退出門檻值，藉由此最適進入與退出門檻值作為化妝品業者決定投資GMP認證或退出GMP認證之決策依據。由於GMP認證對廠商而言可視為是其一項投資專案，傳統上常使用淨現值(net present value, NPV)法與內部報酬率(internal rate of return, IRR)法等資本預算方法作投資專案之評價。然而傳統的資本預算技術受限於某些不符合實際情況的假設，例如投資專案之現金流量是在一種預設的情境下確定發生，且投資專案之執行具有立即性，缺乏延遲投資等管理上之彈性。因此使得運用傳統的資本預算技術無法正確且完整的顯現整個投資專案的價值，進而造成對投資專案做出不正確的評價與不適當的投資決策。本研究利用實質選擇權分析於化妝品業者進行產品GMP認證之評估，以呈現投資專案完整之價值，並比較風險調整淨現值法與實質選擇權法之差異。

The purpose of the study is to propose a model that based on the real options analysis for dealing with the entry-exit strategies of cosmetic GMP certification. The optimal thresholds are obtained from the model with uncertain revenue of the firm. According to the optimal entry and exit thresholds, the cosmetic firms can determine to enter into or to withdraw from the GMP certification. The GMP certification is an investment for the firms. Traditionally, the investments are evaluated by capital budgeting methods such as net present value (NPV) method or internal rate of return (IRR) method. However, the traditional methods are based on some unrealistic assumptions. For example, the cash flows of the project are generated with a certain scenario and the project are now exercised without any deferring flexibility. As a result, the traditional capital budgeting methods can not reveal the whole value of the project. Therefore, in order to show the entire value of the project, this paper adopts the real options approach to evaluate the project of cosmetic GMP certification. In addition, we compare the difference between the risk-adjusted net present value and real options.

1. Black, F.,Scholes, M.(1973).The pricing of options and corporate liabilities.Journal of Political Economy,81,637-659.
2. Cox, J.,Ross, S.,Rubinstein, M.(1979).Option pricing: A simplified approach.Journal of Financial Economics,7,229-263.
3. Dixit, A. K.,Pindyck, R. S.(1994).Investment under uncertainty.Princeton University Press.
4. Gilroy, B. M.,Lukas, E.(2006).The choice between Greenfield investment and cross-border acquisition: A real option approach.The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance,46,447-465.
5. Grenadier, S. R.,Weiss, A. M.(1997).Investment in technological innovations: An option pricing approach.Journal of Financial Economics,44,397-416.
6. Haenlein, M.,Kaplan, A. M.,Schoder, D.(2006).Valuing the real option of abandoning unprofitable customers when calculating customer lifetime value.Journal of Marketing,70,5-20.
7. Ito, K.(1951).On stochastic differential equation memories.American Mathematical Society,4,1-51.
8. Li, J.,Rugman, A. M.(2007).Real options and the theory of foreign direct investment.International Business Review,16,687-712.
9. Lundgren, T.(2003).A real options approach to abatement investments and green goodwill.Environmental and Resource Economics,25,17-31.
10. Maklan, S.,Knox, S.,Ryals, L.(2005).Using real options to help build the business case for CRM investment.Long Range Planning,38,393-410.
11. Murto, P.(2007).Timing of investment under technological and revenue-related uncertainties.Journal of Economic Dynamics & Control,31,1473-1497.
12. Schmit, T. M.,Luo, J.,Tauer, L. W.(2009).Ethanol plant investment using net present value and real options analyses.Biomass and Bioenergy,33,1442-1451.
13. Schwartz, E. S.,Gorostiza, C. Z.(2003).Investment under uncertainty in information technology: acquisition and development projects.Management Science,49(1),57-70.
14. Takalo, T.,Kanniainen, V.(2000).Do patents slow down technological progess?.International Journal of Industrial Organization,18,1105-1127.
15. Trigeorgis, L.,Mason, S. P.(1987).Valuing managerial flexibility.Midland Corporate Finance Journal,5(1),14-21.