This study is to investigate the established valuation methods of previous studies and actual applications through the investigation of previous studies.
This study explains the notion of real option and analyzes the adoption of real option in the financial option.
The research has preceded the empirical analysis, which is calculating the investment valuation of K Port in a way of adopting currently using DCF and real option on the setting of the same conditioned variables and data.
Notably, the valuation result of Port Investment, applying the real option valuation, marked a higher score in its investment value than the valuation result of Discounted Cash Flow of common use.
The higher score in its investment value, applying real option, is perceived that the real option valuation method can prepare for the flexible features of Port facility development in an environment of future uncertainty.
Nevertheless, valuation method of adopting the real option is verified to have a lower economic feasibility, likewise the established economic valuation.
Generally, this is because of the comparably smaller benefit to the amount of investment. This, also, regarded as a distinctive feature of public investment on a large scale, i.e., the port.
Accordingly, it is not always true that the development plans with no economic feasibility has no value to invest.
Not like the other investment plans, the port facility investment has the characteristic of public service. Regarding the characteristic of an investment plan of a port, the political judgment through the procedure of policy analysis is indispensable.
In the result of alternative plan, we can notice the substantial differences in the adopting of the option to contract in the real option valuation method and adopting of the DCF valuation method.
This result indicates that the established valuation has its own purview in the devising way of various alternatives to prepare for the own flexibility of Port Industry.
Putting it succinctly, using a proper option in the valuation of the real option can make an outweighing solution to prepare for the future uncertainty.
Furthermore, we can investigate the definitive differences between the results of adopting the simply real option valuation and contract option after the detailed scenario analysis to an alternative.
Stated more abstractly, adopting the contract and expand option of real option to the Korean Port development is regarded as the complementary tool of DCF law for the current Port pre-feasibility economic valuation.
The conception of thisstudy is motivated by the questioning that the current economic feasibility valuation of Port investment can keep its facing to the rapidly changing uncertainty of Future Port environment.
Upon this theological basis, the study is preceded in the way of adopting the real option, arising alternative of DCF model, to an economic feasibility valuation.
The established real option research is mainly applied for the economic feasibility of venture, real estate and energy industries.
Yet the application of real option research is in its early stage for the field of social overhead capital.
The objective of this study is to enlarge the adopting field of real option with the Port Industry, which represents popular SOC industry and analysis the difference between established valuation methods of Port and provide a confirming valuation method in the field of Port Industry.