Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Correspondence
  • Published:

Reply to 'Real options for biotechnology valuation'

Nature Biotechnology volume 20, pages 223–224 (2002)Cite this article

Jeffrey J. Stewart responds

The shortcomings that Harrison and Lerer perceive in rNPV methods of valuing biotechnologies are more theoretical than practical. To cure the perceived ills in rNPV, Harrison and Lerer suggest taking into account two additional parameters: first, an increasing certainty in market size as research and development (R&D) proceeds; and second, a distribution of possible market returns. We must ask, however, whether there are any realistic scenarios where such parameters come into play.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Fink, R. CFO Magazine. September, 85–86 (2001).

  2. Stewart, J.J. et al. Nat. Biotechnol. 19, 813–817 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Reply to 'Real options for biotechnology valuation'. Nat Biotechnol 20, 223–224 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0302-223b

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0302-223b

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing