in the question 3 (DIGUNDER) of Dec 07 past question., how was the current price /PV of the project arrived at to be $28m? PV given in the question was $4m.

No – the $4m given in the question is the NET present value. Since the cost is $24M, it therefore means that the PV of the returns is $28M

(PS If you want me to answer a question then please post it in the Ask the Tutor F5 Forum – it is not possible for me always to read all the comments under lectures 🙂 )

Hi John, I’m sorry but the question below confused me, could you please clear it out? thanks much appreciated 🙂

June 2012 Q1 part iii)

In the Model Answers the examiner answers it in the following way: Price of asset (PV of future positive cash flows) = $2,434,000 Exercise price (initial cost of project, not discounted) = $2,500,000 Time to expiry of option = 2 years Risk free rate (estimate) = 3·2% Volatility = 42% d1 = [ln(2,434/2,500) + (0·032 + 0·5 x 0·422) x 2]/(0·42 x 21/2) = 0·359 (in normal distribution tables is = .1368) d2 = 0·359 – (0·42 x 21/2) = –0·235 (in normal distribution tables is = .0910)

N(d1) = 0·5 + (0·1368 + 0·9 x (0·1406 – 0·1368)) = 0·6402 ***What is the + 0·9 x (0·1406 – 0·1368 part?? N(d2) = 0·5 – (0·0910 + 0·5 x (0·0948 – 0·0910)) = 0·4071 **What is the + 0·5 x (0·0948 – 0·0910)) part??

***Shouldn’t it just be N(d1)= 0.5 + 0.1368 = 0.6368 **Shouldn’t it just be N(d2) = 0·5 – 0·0910 = .409 :/

It is because the tables only have two decimal places when you are looking up. So for 0.359 he has taken 90% of the way between 0.35 and 0.36. Similarly, for 0.235 he has taken half way between 0.23 and 0.24.

I don’t think you would lose any marks for not doing that (and therefore just going to the nearest) even though your final answer would be slightly different.

Sir in this example u have added the value to delay the option to the NPV. BUT there is a question of past paper DIGUNDER of Dec 07. kaplan in its previous answer have added the value of option (i.e 7.48) with projects npv (i.e. 4). When they have amended in new edition they just write as 7.48 which incldes 4m intrinsic value and rest is time value. please resolve my query whether the value of project would taken after addition or the value got from the formula is the eltimate answer?

Dear Sir, is one expected to switch between discrete and continuos rates within such tasks (e.g., if the same risk-free rate given for project appraisal is expected to be used also for pricing of a real option)? The difference isn’t likely to exceed a couple of bps, so my concern is mostly methodology. Thank you very much for support,

Thank you very much for your answer. Could you please comment in a little bit more detail on the following: when I’m calculating the NPV, the rates given are assumed to be discrete, so the P1=P0(1+R1), etc, but when I calculate the value of a real option, I apply the Black Scholes formula, which in general case assumes continuous compounding . So my question was, in fact, whether I am supposed to convert the risk-free rate to continuous setting before pricing the option, or whether this can be ignored.

We do not have lectures on all topics – more will be added as time permits. Mergers and acquisitions are an important area – they are covered in the course notes (and most of the techniques involved are covered in other lectures).

Hi John, you know some of us rely on these your lectures to understand some of these topics because most are new to us: i know your services are free and on behalf of all those using this site i would like to say thank you: but leaving some topics at this level of the course will mean making things difficult: it will prefereable the topics that were covered in an earlier course be left out than leaving out something new at this level thank you

Firstly, we do not pretend to offer a distance learning course. We provide everything on the site voluntarily in our spare time to try and help people. We make it clear that we are not trying to replace study texts.

Secondly, mergers and acquisitions are best not regarded as a separate topic for learning. As with so much of P4 it draws upon existing knowledge (there is not so much extra to learn at P4 than what has already been learned at F9) but expects more depth. This is not a topic that I actually lecture much on during courses I teach – instead we look at past exam questions and sort it out from there. Again, we make it clear on this website that it is so important to practice questions – at the very least past exam questions, but preferably using an exam/revision kit from one of the approved publishers.

Hello, Thank you very much for a brilliant lecture. I have a question. In share option lecture you expressed that the value of the option is what we pay for the option now. Is it same for the real option? Does it mean, as in example 1, we pay now $3.90m to buy option to delay – call option? Can you please also clarify what is behind of the full value of project of $5.9m Thanks

It does not mean that we pay 3.90 now – it means that the option is worth that much to us. It makes the value of the whole project greater than it would have been without the option to delay.

Sir, just some clarification please. In June 2012 exam Q1 (iii) which dealt with delaying the project I noticed they used a different method to calculate N(d1) & N(d2), does that mean I can use EITHER method in the exam? Which is the preferred option? Thank you –

The examiner has not used a different method. It is simply that the tables only have 2 decimal places for d and so he has made it slightly more accurate by approximating to a third decimal place. Although it does make it a little more accurate, you do not really need to do this in the exam – just take d to the nearest 2 decimal places.

It is certain that i will pass P4 now, brilliant lecture. Please can we have videos for the other options as well? and for (The valuation of acquisitions and mergers)?. This will be helpful a lot.

Thanks alot for the great lecture! May I ask where I could find the lecture for chapter 16(The valuation of acquisitions and mergers)? Are there any vedios are for example 1 (calculate the economic value added)?

Sir..kindly late me know, in making decision of delay or proceed..i am going to compare present npv with value of call option???? that is $2m with $3.92

Thank you for the lecture.it was easy and straight forward but please could you tell me what the full value of the project will be compared to,as the video cut the decision aspect out.

@achalaand, sorry – there is a mistake (the synergistic benefit is 7 p.a. after tax, but the answer has it as 5 p.a.). The updated course notes have corrected this mistake.

I was also looking for part 2 of this video. The video ends before the lecturer finishes with his explanations and when you read technical article on real options it seems like there are still more matters that the videos could discuss concerning around this matter….

gabby11 says

in the question 3 (DIGUNDER) of Dec 07 past question., how was the current price /PV of the project arrived at to be $28m? PV given in the question was $4m.

John Moffat says

No – the $4m given in the question is the NET present value.

Since the cost is $24M, it therefore means that the PV of the returns is $28M

(PS If you want me to answer a question then please post it in the Ask the Tutor F5 Forum – it is not possible for me always to read all the comments under lectures 🙂 )

yohanxtech says

Hi John, I’m sorry but the question below confused me, could you please clear it out? thanks much appreciated 🙂

June 2012 Q1 part iii)

In the Model Answers the examiner answers it in the following way:

Price of asset (PV of future positive cash flows) = $2,434,000

Exercise price (initial cost of project, not discounted) = $2,500,000

Time to expiry of option = 2 years

Risk free rate (estimate) = 3·2%

Volatility = 42%

d1 = [ln(2,434/2,500) + (0·032 + 0·5 x 0·422) x 2]/(0·42 x 21/2) = 0·359 (in normal distribution tables is = .1368)

d2 = 0·359 – (0·42 x 21/2) = –0·235 (in normal distribution tables is = .0910)

N(d1) = 0·5 + (0·1368 + 0·9 x (0·1406 – 0·1368)) = 0·6402 ***What is the + 0·9 x (0·1406 – 0·1368 part??

N(d2) = 0·5 – (0·0910 + 0·5 x (0·0948 – 0·0910)) = 0·4071 **What is the + 0·5 x (0·0948 – 0·0910)) part??

***Shouldn’t it just be N(d1)= 0.5 + 0.1368 = 0.6368

**Shouldn’t it just be N(d2) = 0·5 – 0·0910 = .409

:/

John Moffat says

It is because the tables only have two decimal places when you are looking up. So for 0.359 he has taken 90% of the way between 0.35 and 0.36.

Similarly, for 0.235 he has taken half way between 0.23 and 0.24.

I don’t think you would lose any marks for not doing that (and therefore just going to the nearest) even though your final answer would be slightly different.

minhajh says

But I want to ask Mr tutor how the examiner estimated the risk free rate of 3.2%. Please can you calculate me this?

John Moffat says

The question says that Nente pays interest of 7% which is 380 basis points above government base rate.

7% – 3.8% = 3.2% !

minhajh says

Where in the normal distribution table the amount of 0.359 and 0.235 shows?

John Moffat says

I have answered this in my answer two above.

NEENA says

Sir in this example u have added the value to delay the option to the NPV. BUT there is a question of past paper DIGUNDER of Dec 07. kaplan in its previous answer have added the value of option (i.e 7.48) with projects npv (i.e. 4). When they have amended in new edition they just write as 7.48 which incldes 4m intrinsic value and rest is time value. please resolve my query whether the value of project would taken after addition or the value got from the formula is the eltimate answer?

John Moffat says

Without the option, the value of the project is simply the NPV.

If we do have the option, then the option itself has a value.

So…..the value of the project together with the option is higher. It is the NPV plus the value of the option.

ibarats says

Dear Sir,

is one expected to switch between discrete and continuos rates within such tasks (e.g., if the same risk-free rate given for project appraisal is expected to be used also for pricing of a real option)?

The difference isn’t likely to exceed a couple of bps, so my concern is mostly methodology.

Thank you very much for support,

John Moffat says

Within the same question, yes – assume rates are the same for all parts unless, obviously, you are told differently.

ibarats says

Thank you very much for your answer. Could you please comment in a little bit more detail on the following:

when I’m calculating the NPV, the rates given are assumed to be discrete, so the P1=P0(1+R1), etc, but when I calculate the value of a real option, I apply the Black Scholes formula, which in general case assumes continuous compounding . So my question was, in fact, whether I am supposed to convert the risk-free rate to continuous setting before pricing the option, or whether this can be ignored.

Thank you once again,

John Moffat says

No – the formula does the continuous compounding. (That’s what the ‘e’ part of the formula is doing)

questforknowledge says

hello sir, if i may ask, why dont’t we have lectures on mergers and acquisitions? is it not an important area of the syllabus for the exam?

John Moffat says

We do not have lectures on all topics – more will be added as time permits.

Mergers and acquisitions are an important area – they are covered in the course notes (and most of the techniques involved are covered in other lectures).

questforknowledge says

Hi John, you know some of us rely on these your lectures to understand some of these topics because most are new to us: i know your services are free and on behalf of all those using this site i would like to say thank you: but leaving some topics at this level of the course will mean making things difficult: it will prefereable the topics that were covered in an earlier course be left out than leaving out something new at this level

thank you

John Moffat says

Two things:

Firstly, we do not pretend to offer a distance learning course. We provide everything on the site voluntarily in our spare time to try and help people. We make it clear that we are not trying to replace study texts.

Secondly, mergers and acquisitions are best not regarded as a separate topic for learning. As with so much of P4 it draws upon existing knowledge (there is not so much extra to learn at P4 than what has already been learned at F9) but expects more depth. This is not a topic that I actually lecture much on during courses I teach – instead we look at past exam questions and sort it out from there. Again, we make it clear on this website that it is so important to practice questions – at the very least past exam questions, but preferably using an exam/revision kit from one of the approved publishers.

questforknowledge says

thank you John for taking your time to explain things. may God bless youi

tuenli says

Hello,

Thank you very much for a brilliant lecture.

I have a question. In share option lecture you expressed that the value of the option is what we pay for the option now. Is it same for the real option? Does it mean, as in example 1, we pay now $3.90m to buy option to delay – call option?

Can you please also clarify what is behind of the full value of project of $5.9m

Thanks

John Moffat says

It does not mean that we pay 3.90 now – it means that the option is worth that much to us. It makes the value of the whole project greater than it would have been without the option to delay.

edu1care says

Sir, just some clarification please. In June 2012 exam Q1 (iii) which dealt with delaying the project I noticed they used a different method to calculate N(d1) & N(d2), does that mean I can use EITHER method in the exam? Which is the preferred option?

Thank you –

John Moffat says

The examiner has not used a different method. It is simply that the tables only have 2 decimal places for d and so he has made it slightly more accurate by approximating to a third decimal place.

Although it does make it a little more accurate, you do not really need to do this in the exam – just take d to the nearest 2 decimal places.

lakeside says

It is certain that i will pass P4 now, brilliant lecture. Please can we have videos for the other options as well? and for (The valuation of acquisitions and mergers)?. This will be helpful a lot.

Thanks

constanceqin says

Thanks alot for the great lecture! May I ask where I could find the lecture for chapter 16(The valuation of acquisitions and mergers)? Are there any vedios are for example 1 (calculate the economic value added)?

syedwaqar says

HELLO!

Sir..kindly late me know, in making decision of delay or proceed..i am going to compare present npv with value of call option???? that is $2m with $3.92

Regards

John Moffat says

@syedwaqar, You don’t compare them. The option makes the project worth more than if the option did not exist.

oreomolabake says

Thank you for the lecture.it was easy and straight forward but please could you tell me what the full value of the project will be compared to,as the video cut the decision aspect out.

achalaand says

Can you please explain me that how cash flows have been arrived in the given answer of Example 02 in Chapter 16…???

John Moffat says

@achalaand, sorry – there is a mistake (the synergistic benefit is 7 p.a. after tax, but the answer has it as 5 p.a.). The updated course notes have corrected this mistake.

y.prananv says

This lecture was awesomeeee!!!…..However, can you please upload a video on option to abandon/redeploy please?:)

nkechiokoro says

thank you so much for the lecture, but i want to find out if all real options will always be a call option?

utn9 says

@nkechiokoro,

Delay and Expand are Call Options

Redeploy and Abandon are Put Options

sheda100 says

Sir, pls was the conclusion/decision to delay the project based on the fact that it has a positive value. Thnx

accaforall says

thank you very much:)

this was very helpful

yengibaryan says

I could watch only part of the video:( There was some problem in the middle

abiose says

thank you, this was brief but clear

pissukade says

N(d2) rounding off error? answers in the back of course notes has the right answer.

Sam says

Yeah, it should be 0.87 which translates to 0.3078 on the SND table

viviankyc82 says

hi is there suppose to be a part 2 for this video? thanks

admin says

there is not part 2, if it was mentioned in the lecture, it was a mistake

accalegend says

I was also looking for part 2 of this video. The video ends before the lecturer finishes with his explanations and when you read technical article on real options it seems like there are still more matters that the videos could discuss concerning around this matter….

John Moffat says

There is no part 2. The free lecture notes discuss other matters.