Why is it so hard to value intangibles?

Gavin Reid, Julia Smith

Research output: Working paperDiscussion paper

Abstract

The paper uses a range of primary-source empirical evidence to address the question: ‘why is it to hard to value intangible assets?’ The setting is venture capital investment in high technology companies. While the investors are risk specialists and financial experts, the entrepreneurs are more knowledgeable about product innovation. Thus the context lends itself to analysis within a principal-agent framework, in which information asymmetry may give rise to adverse selection, pre-contract, and moral hazard, post-contract. We examine how the investor might attenuate such problems and attach a value to such high-tech investments in what are often merely intangible assets, through expert due diligence, monitoring and control. Qualitative evidence is used to qualify the more clear cut picture provided by a principal-agent approach to a more mixed picture in which the ‘art and science’ of investment appraisal are utilised by both parties alike.
LanguageEnglish
Place of PublicationSt Andrews
Publication statusPublished - 2008

Publication series

NameCRIEFF Discussion Paper Series
PublisherUniversity of St Andrews
No.0806
ISSN (Print)1364-453X

Fingerprint

Intangible assets
Intangibles
Investors
Product innovation
Due diligence
Investment appraisal
Venture capital
Information asymmetry
Art
Empirical evidence
Moral hazard
Adverse selection
High technology
Entrepreneurs
Capital investment
Monitoring
High-tech

Keywords

  • venture capital
  • financial reporting
  • high technology
  • intangible assets
  • accounting information

Cite this

Reid, G., & Smith, J. (2008). Why is it so hard to value intangibles? (CRIEFF Discussion Paper Series; No. 0806). St Andrews.
Reid, Gavin ; Smith, Julia. / Why is it so hard to value intangibles?. St Andrews, 2008. (CRIEFF Discussion Paper Series; 0806).
@techreport{b1a965f73fb84fcea6b05dd32ce05af8,
title = "Why is it so hard to value intangibles?",
abstract = "The paper uses a range of primary-source empirical evidence to address the question: ‘why is it to hard to value intangible assets?’ The setting is venture capital investment in high technology companies. While the investors are risk specialists and financial experts, the entrepreneurs are more knowledgeable about product innovation. Thus the context lends itself to analysis within a principal-agent framework, in which information asymmetry may give rise to adverse selection, pre-contract, and moral hazard, post-contract. We examine how the investor might attenuate such problems and attach a value to such high-tech investments in what are often merely intangible assets, through expert due diligence, monitoring and control. Qualitative evidence is used to qualify the more clear cut picture provided by a principal-agent approach to a more mixed picture in which the ‘art and science’ of investment appraisal are utilised by both parties alike.",
keywords = "venture capital, financial reporting , high technology, intangible assets, accounting information",
author = "Gavin Reid and Julia Smith",
year = "2008",
language = "English",
series = "CRIEFF Discussion Paper Series",
publisher = "University of St Andrews",
number = "0806",
type = "WorkingPaper",
institution = "University of St Andrews",

}

Reid, G & Smith, J 2008 'Why is it so hard to value intangibles?' CRIEFF Discussion Paper Series, no. 0806, St Andrews.

Why is it so hard to value intangibles? / Reid, Gavin; Smith, Julia.

St Andrews, 2008. (CRIEFF Discussion Paper Series; No. 0806).

Research output: Working paperDiscussion paper

TY - UNPB

T1 - Why is it so hard to value intangibles?

AU - Reid, Gavin

AU - Smith, Julia

PY - 2008

Y1 - 2008

N2 - The paper uses a range of primary-source empirical evidence to address the question: ‘why is it to hard to value intangible assets?’ The setting is venture capital investment in high technology companies. While the investors are risk specialists and financial experts, the entrepreneurs are more knowledgeable about product innovation. Thus the context lends itself to analysis within a principal-agent framework, in which information asymmetry may give rise to adverse selection, pre-contract, and moral hazard, post-contract. We examine how the investor might attenuate such problems and attach a value to such high-tech investments in what are often merely intangible assets, through expert due diligence, monitoring and control. Qualitative evidence is used to qualify the more clear cut picture provided by a principal-agent approach to a more mixed picture in which the ‘art and science’ of investment appraisal are utilised by both parties alike.

AB - The paper uses a range of primary-source empirical evidence to address the question: ‘why is it to hard to value intangible assets?’ The setting is venture capital investment in high technology companies. While the investors are risk specialists and financial experts, the entrepreneurs are more knowledgeable about product innovation. Thus the context lends itself to analysis within a principal-agent framework, in which information asymmetry may give rise to adverse selection, pre-contract, and moral hazard, post-contract. We examine how the investor might attenuate such problems and attach a value to such high-tech investments in what are often merely intangible assets, through expert due diligence, monitoring and control. Qualitative evidence is used to qualify the more clear cut picture provided by a principal-agent approach to a more mixed picture in which the ‘art and science’ of investment appraisal are utilised by both parties alike.

KW - venture capital

KW - financial reporting

KW - high technology

KW - intangible assets

KW - accounting information

UR - http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/crieff/dp0806.html

M3 - Discussion paper

T3 - CRIEFF Discussion Paper Series

BT - Why is it so hard to value intangibles?

CY - St Andrews

ER -

Reid G, Smith J. Why is it so hard to value intangibles? St Andrews. 2008. (CRIEFF Discussion Paper Series; 0806).