Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: Real estate development as real options
Authors: Hui, ECM 
Fung, HHK
Keywords: Real estate
Real options
Issue Date: 2009
Publisher: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group
Source: Construction management and economics, 2009, v. 27, no. 3, p. 221-227 How to cite?
Journal: Construction management and economics 
Abstract: One of the recent advances in property valuation is to view a property or the right to develop it as a call option. Shilling et al. (1985) were among the first to apply option pricing theory in this way. For real estate development, although not explicitly said so in his paper, Titman (1985) was the first to treat vacant lots of land as options to wait to develop. A frequently cited paper by Quigg (1993) presents the first empirical effort to support the real option pricing point of view. The valuation framework of Quigg (1993) is in one sense a specialization and in another sense a generalization of the framework of Williams (1991). Unfortunately, the works of both Williams and Quigg are technically flawed, but surprisingly their errors have gone unnoticed for over 15 years and are still propagating in the literature (e.g. in Yamaguchi et al., 2000 and Patel and Paxson, 2001). In the following, we will first address the flaws of Quigg (1993). Then we will examine the problems in Williams' (1991) work. Finally, we will discuss some implications of the Williams-Quigg valuation framework.
ISSN: 0144-6193
EISSN: 1466-433X
DOI: 10.1080/01446190902759017
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article

View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show full item record


Last Week
Last month
Citations as of Nov 17, 2018

Page view(s)

Last Week
Last month
Citations as of Nov 18, 2018

Google ScholarTM



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.