High Stakes in High Technology: High‐Tech Market Values as Options

In science-based industries, world-class scientists drive the most successful firms. These scientists are more likely to follow high-stakes, high-returns R&D strategies instead of more predictable incremental strategies. We develop an options pricing model in which the probability of stock-price jumps increases with knowledge capital. GMM estimates show the probability of stock-price jumps increases with three measures of knowledge capital intensity, two of which can be reasonably estimated contemporaneously. The model explains most variation in biotech firm market values. Firms with two standard deviations more knowledge capital are valued 10--50% more than firms with mean values of all variables. (JEL G12, O31, M40) Copyright 2004, Oxford University Press.

[1]  Bronwyn H. Hall,et al.  The Stock Market's Valuation of R&D Investment during the 1980's , 1993 .

[2]  Paula E. Stephan,et al.  The Changing Rewards to Science: The Case of Biotechnology , 1998 .

[3]  R. C. Merton,et al.  Option pricing when underlying stock returns are discontinuous , 1976 .

[4]  Michael R. Darby,et al.  Change or die: The adoption of biotechnology in the Japanese and U.S. pharmaceutical industries , 2001 .

[5]  Z. Griliches Market Value, R&D, and Patents , 1981 .

[6]  M. Brewer,et al.  Intellectual Capital and the Birth of U.S. Biotechnology Enterprises , 1994 .

[7]  Z. Griliches Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: a Survey , 1990 .

[8]  David S. Bates Jumps and Stochastic Volatility: Exchange Rate Processes Implicit in Thephlx Deutschemark Options , 1993 .

[9]  W. Newey,et al.  Hypothesis Testing with Efficient Method of Moments Estimation , 1987 .

[10]  S. Ross,et al.  The valuation of options for alternative stochastic processes , 1976 .

[11]  L. Zucker,et al.  Star scientists and institutional transformation: patterns of invention and innovation in the formation of the biotechnology industry. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[12]  Manuel Trajtenberg,et al.  Market Value and Patent Citations: A First Look , 2000 .

[13]  Michael R. Darby,et al.  Entrepreneurs, star scientists, and biotechnology , 1998 .

[14]  D. Austin,et al.  An Event-Study Approach to Measuring Innovative Output: The Case of Biotechnology , 1993 .

[15]  Arthur J. Keown,et al.  Do strategic alliances create value , 1997 .

[16]  A. Jaffe Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms&Apos; Patents, Profits and Market Value , 1986 .

[17]  J. Hicks,et al.  The economics of science , 1996 .

[18]  Michael R. Darby,et al.  Labor Mobility from Academe to Commerce , 1997, Journal of Labor Economics.

[19]  Michael R. Darby,et al.  Capturing Technological Opportunity Via Japan's Star Scientists: Evidence from Japanese Firms' Biotech Patents and Products , 1998 .

[20]  Baruch Lev,et al.  Penetrating the Book-to-Market Black Box: The R&D Effect , 1999 .

[21]  David S. Bates The Crash of ʼ87: Was It Expected? The Evidence from Options Markets , 1991 .

[22]  L. Zucker,et al.  Growing by Leaps and Inches: Creative Destruction, Real Cost Reduction, and Inching Up , 2002 .

[23]  Mark S. Klock,et al.  The Impact on Intangible Capital on Tobin's q in the Semiconductor Industry , 1993 .

[24]  Gurdip Bakshi,et al.  Empirical Performance of Alternative Option Pricing Models , 1997 .

[25]  Michael R. Darby,et al.  GEOGRAPHICALLY LOCALIZED KNOWLEDGE: SPILLOVERS OR MARKETS? , 1998 .

[26]  Ashutosh Kumar Singh,et al.  Underwriter Reputation, Initial Returns, and the Long‐Run Performance of IPO Stocks , 1998 .

[27]  Mark A. Schankerman,et al.  The Quality of Ideas: Measuring Innovation with Multiple Indicators , 1999 .

[28]  R. Merton The Matthew Effect in Science , 1968, Science.

[29]  Are Jumps in Stock Returns Diversifiable? Evidence and Implications for Option Pricing , 1994 .

[30]  S. Heston A Closed-Form Solution for Options with Stochastic Volatility with Applications to Bond and Currency Options , 1993 .