Business Value of IT Investment: The Case of a Low Cost Airline’s Website

Using the case of a low cost airline company’s website we analyze some special research questions of information technology valuation. The distinctive characteristics of this research are the ex post valuation perspective; the parallel and comparative use of accounting and business valuation approaches; and the integrated application of discounted cash flow and real option valuation. As the examined international company is a strategic user of e-technology and wants to manage and account intangible IT-assets explicitly, these specific valuation perspectives are gaining practical significance

Quantitative valuation of platform technology based intangibles companies

In the course of raising external equity, e.g. from venture capitalists, a quantitative valuation is usually required for entrepreneurial ventures. This paper examines the challenges of quantitatively valuing platform technology based entrepreneurial ventures. The distinct characteristics of such companies pose specific requirements on the applicability of quantitative valuation methods. The entrepreneur can choose from a wide range of potential commercialization strategies to pursue in the course of company development which is difficult to take account of in a quantitative valuation. By developing and applying a systematic map of valuation requirements in this context, we analyze whether the cost, market or income approach is suitable for platform technology based entrepreneurial ventures. We argue that all three valuation methods have drawbacks. Yet, the income approach fulfills most of the requirements and, therefore, is considered to be more suitable for the entrepreneur as well as external equity providers than other quantitative valuation methods. --entrepreneurial venture,platform technology,young venture valuation,quantitative company valuation,intangible assets,intellectual property,commercialization strategies,value extraction

The Need of Changes in Traditional Accounting Systems Necessitated by Modern Intellectual Capital Conception

While economists, business people and policy analysts continue to debate the question of what is "new" about the so-called "New Economy", globalization, urgency of innovation and intensive use of Information technology, one important feature of modern Corporation in the early twenty-first century seems clear: intangible factors are playing an increasingly dominant role in business wealth creation. The drivers of tomorrow's wealth are brands, networks, knowledge, innovation, relationships, competencies, corporate culture and leadership, and these are the new critical assets - the weightless keys to business future wealth. But despite the growing awareness of the importance of intangible assets, they remain almost universally ignored in traditional accounting and reporting procedures. The authors in this article analyze the main problems concerning difficulties to reflect intangibles in traditional accounting statements and project the tendencies of reporting intangible-related information in future accountability.Podczas gdy ekonomiści, przedsiębiorcy i politolodzy dyskutują nad tym, co jest "nowego" w tzw. Nowej Ekonomii oraz nad zagadnieniami związanymi z globalizacją i potrzebą innowacji oraz szerokiego korzystania z technologii informatycznej, jedna kwestia nie ulega wątpliwości, jeśli chodzi o zmiany w przedsiębiorstwie XXI w.: czynniki niematerialne odgrywają coraz większą rolę w tworzeniu wartości. Czynniki kluczowe w kreowaniu przyszłego bogactwa to znaki firmowe, systemy połączeń i kooperacji, wiedza, innowacje, relacje, wartości, kultura organizacyjna i przywództwo. Ale chociaż świadomość znaczenia aktywów niematerialnych i prawnych jest coraz większa, tradycyjna rachunkowość i sprawozdawczość niemal całkowicie je ignoruje. Autorzy tego artykułu analizują najważniejsze problemy, wynikające z trudności odzwierciedlenia aktywów niematerialnych w tradycyjnych sprawozdaniach finansowych oraz ukazują kierunki przyszłego rozwoju rachunkowości w tym zakresie.Nepaisant augančio nematerialaus turto svarbos suvokimo, daugelyje šalių jis iślieka ignoruojamas tradicineje atskaitomybeje ir ataskaitų procedūrose. Praktiškai visos nematerialios investicijos finansinese ataskaitose yra fiksuojamos kaip iślaidos, bet ne kapitahzuojamos (traktuojamos kaip turtas), ir nuamortizuojamos prognozuojamame naudos laikotarpyje. Materialaus-nematerialaus turto asimetnja stingant informacijos apie investicijas į nematerialų turtą daro socialinę ir ekonominę żalą. Sio straipsnio autoriai analizuoja pagrindines nematerialaus turto atspindejimo tradicinese finansinese ataskaitose sunkumų problemas, pasiūlydami jų sprendimo būdus ir prognozuodami informacijos apie nematerialų turtą fiksavimo ateitį atskaitomybėse.Zadanie pt. Digitalizacja i udostępnienie w Cyfrowym Repozytorium Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego kolekcji czasopism naukowych wydawanych przez Uniwersytet Łódzki nr 885/P-DUN/2014 zostało dofinansowane ze środków MNiSW w ramach działalności upowszechniającej naukę

Impairment of Assets or Impairment of Financial Information?

This paper begins with overviews of the Statements of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 144 and No. 142 as they pertain to impairments. Subsequent to the overviews, a conceptual evaluation considers how the impairment standards are related to various components of the conceptual framework, including reliability, relevance, and various components within and related to these two characteristics. Incorporated into the discussion is SFAS No. 157 and current fair value measurements in accounting. Controversies surrounding SFAS No. 144 and No. 142 are discussed and companies that have incurred impairment losses or conduct impairment testing on a regular basis are presented. All components of this paper are directed to an analysis of the costs and benefits of impairment testing and the possible result of the trade-off

Fair value on commons-based intellectual property assets: Lessons of an estimation over Linux kernel.

Open source describes practices in production and development that promote access to the end product's source materials, spreading development burden amongst individuals and companies. This model has resulted in a large and efficient ecosystem and unheralded software innovation, freely available to society. Open source methods are also increasingly being applied in other fields of endeavour, such as biotechnology or cultural production. But under financial reporting framework, general volunteer activity is not reflected on financial statements. As a result, there is not value of volunteer contributions and there is also no single source for cost estimates of how much it has taken to develop an open source technology. This volunteer activity encloses not only individuals but corporations developing and contributing open source products. Standard methodology for reporting open source asset valuation is needed and must include value creation from the perspective of the different stakeholders.FLOSS, commons, accounting standards, financial reporting

Venture capital investor behaviour in the backing of UK high technology firms : financial reporting and the level of investment

This paper is an empirical investigation into the ways in which venture capitalists value (and invest in) high technology firms, focusing on financial reporting, risk disclosure and intangible assets. It is based on questionnaire returns from UK investors in diverse sectors, ranging from biotechnology, through software/ computer services, to communications and medical services. This evidence is used to examine: (a) the usefulness of financial accounts; (b) the implications of technopole investment; (c) the extent of investor control over the investee's AIS; and (d) the role of investor opinion (e.g. on disclosure, due diligence and risk reporting) in determining the level of equity provision

Maximizing Intellectual Property and Intangible Assets: Case Studies in Intangible Asset Finance

As innovative companies struggle to raise funds, intellectual property and intangible assets are providing alternative ways of financing innovation. But greater awareness of them as an asset class is needed. Raising that awareness is the focus of a new report from Athena Alliance, Maximizing Intellectual Property and Intangible Assets: Case Studies in Intangible Asset Finance by Ian Ellis, a former U.S. Department of Commerce official specializing in intellectual property and international trade. The report outlines increasing, but still nascent, means of financing innovation based on these assets in public, private and venture capital markets. As industry has invested capital in research and development to develop new technology and advance other creative activities, intellectual capital has become a valuable asset class, according to the paper. In response, firms specializing in intangible-based financing are springing up, using them to raise capital for the next round of innovation.The paper details equity, equity-debt, debt, and sale-leaseback transactions, both private and public, that have helped companies raise capital, based on careful, rigorous analysis and conservative underwriting standards. For example, the author notes that in 2000, there were two public deals using royalty securitization, raising $145 million. In 2007-08,$3.3 billion was raised in 19 deals.Unlike some of the exotic financial vehicles, however, the financial products discussed in this paper are some of the most basic financing mechanisms in business. The innovation is in recognizing the value of intangible assets for corporate finance. These new financial firms are using traditional financial techniques in new ways to help innovative companies.But more should be done.One important step would be developing sound, industry-wide, underwriting standards, according to the report. For example, Small Business Administration (SBA) rules permit its loans to be used for acquisition of intangible assets when buying on-going businesses. Rules are unclear on whether those assets can be used as collateral. The paper recommends that SBA work with commercial lenders to develop standards for using intangible assets as collateral.The report builds on earlier Athena Alliance papers, notably Intangible Asset Monetization: The Promise and the Reality

Valuing adaptation under rapid change

AbstractThe methods used to plan adaptation to climate change have been heavily influenced by scientific narratives of gradual change and economic narratives of marginal adjustments to that change. An investigation of the theoretical aspects of how the climate changes suggests that scientific narratives of climate change are socially constructed, biasing scientific narratives to descriptions of gradual as opposed rapid, non-linear change. Evidence of widespread step changes in recent climate records and in model projections of future climate is being overlooked because of this. Step-wise climate change has the potential to produce rapid increases in extreme events that can cross institutional, geographical and sectoral domains.Likewise, orthodox economics is not well suited to the deep uncertainty faced under climate change, requiring a multi-faceted approach to adaptation. The presence of tangible and intangible values range across five adaptation clusters: goods; services; capital assets and infrastructure; social assets and infrastructure; and natural assets and infrastructure. Standard economic methods have difficulty in giving adequate weight to the different types of values across these clusters. They also do not account well for the inter-connectedness of impacts and subsequent responses between agents in the economy. As a result, many highly-valued aspects of human and environmental capital are being overlooked.Recent extreme events are already pressuring areas of public policy, and national strategies for emergency response and disaster risk reduction are being developed as a consequence. However, the potential for an escalation of total damage costs due to rapid change requires a coordinated approach at the institutional level, involving all levels of government, the private sector and civil society.One of the largest risks of maladaptation is the potential for un-owned risks, as risks propagate across domains and responsibility for their management is poorly allocated between public and private interests, and between the roles of the individual and civil society. Economic strategies developed by the disaster community for disaster response and risk reduction provide a base to work from, but many gaps remain.We have developed a framework for valuing adaptation that has the following aspects: the valuation of impacts thus estimating values at risk, the evaluation of different adaptation options and strategies based on cost, and the valuation of benefits expressed as a combination of the benefits of avoided damages and a range of institutional values such as equity, justice, sustainability and profit.The choice of economic methods and tools used to assess adaptation depends largely on the ability to constrain uncertainty around problems (predictive uncertainty) and solutions (outcome uncertainty). Orthodox methods can be used where both are constrained, portfolio methodologies where problems are constrained and robust methodologies where solutions are constrained. Where both are unconstrained, process-based methods utilising innovation methods and adaptive management are most suitable. All methods should involve stakeholders where possible.Innovative processes methods that enable transformation will be required in some circumstances, to allow institutions, sectors and communities to prepare for anticipated major change.Please cite this report as: Jones, RN, Young, CK, Handmer, J, Keating, A, Mekala, GD, Sheehan, P 2013 Valuing adaptation under rapid change, National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility, Gold Coast, pp. 192.The methods used to plan adaptation to climate change have been heavily influenced by scientific narratives of gradual change and economic narratives of marginal adjustments to that change. An investigation of the theoretical aspects of how the climate changes suggests that scientific narratives of climate change are socially constructed, biasing scientific narratives to descriptions of gradual as opposed rapid, non-linear change. Evidence of widespread step changes in recent climate records and in model projections of future climate is being overlooked because of this. Step-wise climate change has the potential to produce rapid increases in extreme events that can cross institutional, geographical and sectoral domains.Likewise, orthodox economics is not well suited to the deep uncertainty faced under climate change, requiring a multi-faceted approach to adaptation. The presence of tangible and intangible values range across five adaptation clusters: goods; services; capital assets and infrastructure; social assets and infrastructure; and natural assets and infrastructure. Standard economic methods have difficulty in giving adequate weight to the different types of values across these clusters. They also do not account well for the inter-connectedness of impacts and subsequent responses between agents in the economy. As a result, many highly-valued aspects of human and environmental capital are being overlooked.Recent extreme events are already pressuring areas of public policy, and national strategies for emergency response and disaster risk reduction are being developed as a consequence. However, the potential for an escalation of total damage costs due to rapid change requires a coordinated approach at the institutional level, involving all levels of government, the private sector and civil society.One of the largest risks of maladaptation is the potential for un-owned risks, as risks propagate across domains and responsibility for their management is poorly allocated between public and private interests, and between the roles of the individual and civil society. Economic strategies developed by the disaster community for disaster response and risk reduction provide a base to work from, but many gaps remain.We have developed a framework for valuing adaptation that has the following aspects: the valuation of impacts thus estimating values at risk, the evaluation of different adaptation options and strategies based on cost, and the valuation of benefits expressed as a combination of the benefits of avoided damages and a range of institutional values such as equity, justice, sustainability and profit.The choice of economic methods and tools used to assess adaptation depends largely on the ability to constrain uncertainty around problems (predictive uncertainty) and solutions (outcome uncertainty). Orthodox methods can be used where both are constrained, portfolio methodologies where problems are constrained and robust methodologies where solutions are constrained. Where both are unconstrained, process-based methods utilising innovation methods and adaptive management are most suitable. All methods should involve stakeholders where possible.Innovative processes methods that enable transformation will be required in some circumstances, to allow institutions, sectors and communities to prepare for anticipated major change

Cultural heritage and sustainable development targets : a possible harmonisation? Insights from the European Perspective

The Agenda 2030 includes a set of targets that need to be achieved by 2030. Although none of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) focuses exclusively on cultural heritage, the resulting Agenda includes explicit reference to heritage in SDG 11.4 and indirect reference to other Goals. Achievement of international targets shall happen at local and national level, and therefore, it is crucial to understand how interventions on local heritage are monitored nationally, therefore feeding into the sustainable development framework. This paper is focused on gauging the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals with reference to cultural heritage, by interrogating the current way of classifying it (and consequently monitoring). In fact, there is no common dataset associated with monitoring SDGs, and the field of heritage is extremely complex and diversified. The purpose for the paper is to understand if the taxonomy used by different national databases allows consistency in the classification and valuing of the different assets categories. The European case study has been chosen as field of investigation, in order to pilot a methodology that can be expanded in further research. A cross‐comparison of a selected sample of publicly accessible national cultural heritage databases has been conducted. As a result, this study confirms the existence of general harmonisation of data towards the achievement of the SDGs with a broad agreement of the conceptualisation of cultural heritage with international frameworks, thus confirming that consistency exists in the classification and valuing of the different assets categories. However, diverse challenges of achieving a consistent and coherent approach to integrating culture in sustainability remains problematic. The findings allow concluding that it could be possible to mainstream across different databases those indicators, which could lead to depicting the overall level of attainment of the Agenda 2030 targets on heritage. However, more research is needed in developing a robust correlation between national datasets and international targets