u pdf

233 39 : 233 252(2000) J. Chinju Nat. Univ. 39 : 233 252(2000) * Eva lua t ion of Ve nture Bus ines s of Korea 's Ve nture Ca pita ls Sung- Sik Ba hn Abstract Venture Capitalist s(vcs) are considered expert s in identifying high- potential new ventures. VC- backed ventures survive at a much higher rate than those ventures backed by other sources. VCs need to efficiently screen venture proposals without unduly rejecting high potential investment. T he primary purpose of this study is to examine evaluation of venture business of Korea ' s venture capitals. First, this study explained process of growth environment and investment evaluation of venture business of Korea ' s VCs, review ed evaluation methods of venture business and analy sed case to evaluation of venture business of Korea ' s VCs. Venture evaluation needs to apply a wide variety of evaluation methods as comparative analy sis approach, intrinsic value approach, and option pricing model approach etc. as w ell as discounted cash flow with factor s of quality and quantity. And there is also needs to apply of evaluation methods as business division, industry and growth stage. Key w ords venture bu siness, venture evaluation, Korea ' s venture capitals.. 21. (venture business ) (venture capital) * (D ep t. of B us iness A dm inis tration, Chinj u N ational Univers ity. Chinj u 660-758, K orea)

234.,..., M&A.. M&A,,... 2, 3. 4. 5,.. 1... 2. 1946 George F. Dorit ARDC(American Research and Development Corporation). 1960,,..,. (economic trend).,,....

235..,. (fund).,,,,,, Massachusetts Route 128 Silicon Valley (, 1998). 1974 (K- TAC), 1981 (KT DC; KT B). 1982 (KDIC), 1984 (KT F C). 1986.,,, 1). (1982-1985),,. (1986-1991).,. (1992-1995),.,. (1996- ). KOSDAQ, pre- IPO (hedge fund).,.. KOSDAQ. 2. 1) 1), 2000,, (2000.7), pp.5-8.

236 3.,., (due diligence).,. (negotiation of terms)...? (actuarial decision aids). (component part s),.,,..,, (Zacharakis Meyer, 2000). and 2), 3.. 1970. (cognitive psychology ) (social judgment theory : SJT, Brunswik 1956) (actuarial m odels). (real) (proximal cues) (Strong 1992). (Stew art 1988). (MacMillan, Seigel and Subba Narasimha 1985; MacMillan, Zeman, and Subba Narasimha 1987; Robin 1987; T immon s, Muzyka, Stevenson, and Bygrave 1987; Sanhberg, Schw eiger and Hofer 1988; Hall and Hofer 1993; Andrew L. Zacharakis and G. Dale Meyer, 2000). (2000) 2). 2), 2000,,, 2000. 2.26, pp.229-250.

237,. 52%, 48%. 50-60%., 70-80%.. 1. 1) (fair market value) 3) (fair).,.,... 4 ).,., (M&A,, ).,.,.,.,.,,.,, M&A. 2).... 3) (fair market value),. Smith (1994) (economic benefits, ) (present value) (, 2000,? - -,, p.14). 4), 2000,,".

238 1. Page View/ / Domain/ Brand/ DB Goodwill /,, EPS, PER IRR PSR, DCF < > 2000,,... (myths) 5 ).,..,...,..,..,.,..., ( ),..,.,,,,. 2. 1) ( ) 5), 1998,,, pp.4-7.

239 ( )..,,,. < 1>. 2). < 2> < 3>.,,,..,,.., 2. 3. DCF,,,,..,,,,,.,,,. (discounted cash flow : DCF ),,., DCF., (comparative analy sis approach),,,., (option pricing model approach). ( ),,. DCF,,,. (1) (D CF ) (discounted cashflow method : DCF )

240 (income approach)., ( ). Miller and Modigliani(1961) 6 ). DCF 7 ). V = = t = 0 CF t ( 1 + WA CC) t CF I C* (R OI C - WA CC) * T + WA CC WA CC( 1 + WA CC) V = CF = 8) W A CC = (w ei g h t e d average cost of cost : WACC) IC = ROIC = (return on invested capital)=cf/ IC ROIC - WACC = T = DCF, IC0,.,. DCF 9). V = PV[ ] + P V [ ] DCF (+),. DCF (- ),,..,, DCF. M&A. DCF., 6) M. Miller and F. Modigliani, 1961, "Dividend Policy, Growth and Valuation of Shares, J ournal of B usiness, Oct., pp.411-433;, 1998,, p16-19;, 2000,," 2000 1, pp.231-232. 7) DCF Copeland and Weston, 1987, F inancial Theory and Corp orate P olicy, 3rd ed., Addition Willey pp.554-556. 8) DCF CF EBIT DA, NOPAT, NOI. 9) S. Myers, 1977, Determinants of Corporate Borrowing," J ournal of F inancial E conom ics, pp.147-176.

24 1. (2),,. (price earning ratio: PER), (price book value ratio; PBR), (price sales ratio: PSR) (T obin Q)..(, 1998)...,. DCF. 10).. (Gordon, 1959). P 0 = DP S 1 Po : DPS 1 : r : ( ) gn : DPS 1 = EPSo( )(1+gn ). P 0 = E P S 0 ( )( 1 + g n ) EPS 0, P 0 = PE R = E P S 0 ( )( 1 + g n ) E PS 0,, P 0 E PS 1 = PE R =,.. PER (EPS ) PER. PER,. 0.. (Gordon, 1959). 10), 1998,, pp. 396-400.

242 P 0 = DP S 1 Po: DPS1: r : ( ) gn : DPS 1 EPSo( )(1+gn ),. P 0 = E P S 0 ( )( 1 + g n ) (ROE) EPS0/ BV0 (BV0 P 0 = : 1 ), B V 0 R OE ( )( 1 + g n ) BV0, PBR. P 0 B V 0 = PB R = R OE ( )( 1 + g n ), ROE EPS1/ BV0, PBR. P 0 B V 0 = PB R = R OE (PBR), ROE,. ROE, g= ROE(1- ) P 0 B V 0 = PB R = R OE - g n PBR ROE., ROE. ROE.. PER PBS. (price sales ratio : PSR). (Gordon, 1959). P 0 = DPS 1 Po: DPS 1: r : ( ) gn : DPS1 EPSo( )(1+gn),. P 0 = E P S 0 ( )( 1 + g n ) (ROS) EPS0/ S0 (S 0 : 1 ), P 0 = S 0 R OS ( )( 1 + g n ) S0, PSR. P 0 S 0 = P SR = R OS ( )( 1 + g n ), ROS EPS 1/ S0, PSR. P 0 S 0 = PB R = R OS PSR,,,. PSR., PER PBR

243 PSR.,, PER (, ) PER PSR., PER PBR., PSR., PSR.. PSR,.,.. (3) - (Black- Scholes (call option). Model) = SN ( d 1 ) - K e - r t SN ( d 2 ) d 1 : d 2 ln ( S K ) + ( r + t : d 1 - t 2 2, S = 2 t) K = t = r = =, ln ( ) -. 1 : - d 1 d 2. 2 : N ( d 1 ) N ( d 2 ). 3 :. = K e - 4 : -. (4) ( ) KOSDAQ.,... = ( 1 1.5) 2.5 = = ( ) = 2 =(1 3 2 2) 5 = 5 1 1.5 = 30% = ( r t

244 ) 2.. (5) 11).. < > 10, 5 200, 30%, 30, 5, PER 10 5 300 ( 30 PER 10 ). 37.1 (10 (1 0.3) 5. 12.4% (37.1 300 )..,,,,. 50-70%, 1 40-60%, 2 35-50%, 3 30-50%, 4 30-40%, IPO 25-35%. 9 ( ) 7, 4, DCF, PER 3, EV/ EBIT DA, 1.. 1. 12 ). (,, ), / (,,, ), (, CEO, CF O,, ), (, ), (, Off- line,, ). / 35%, / 24%, 22%, 12% 8%. 2.. T A. 11), 2000,,, pp.6-7. 12) Bzeye. com 2000.5;,,.

245 1) A A 1998, 2000 3 5,. 2) (1) USPS IBI(Infomation - Based Indicia). IBI,,,. IBI 1999 8, 2000 1, 4. (2).. 2000.. 44 (2000 ) DM 70% 28, DM 20%. 3) (1) EZ- Stamp(electronic stamp) PC, 2D- 4State. 2D- 2D-,,. 360, 2Byte,,.,, 2D- OCR 85% 99.99%. (2) 2001 3. 6 70% DM.,. 1,,, (,, )..,. (,,,, )

246 (cyber money)., 1 2byte,. (3) Stamp.com, FBI Down Sizing.. EZ- Stamp, 4) T A < 4> < 5>. 5) T A. : 5 4 : 11,112 : 45,000 ( 5,000 ) : 2000 11 6) (1) T A 4. A ( : ) 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 7.0 82.5 440.2 591.8 761.5 952.4 5.0 27.6 79.0 96.4 113.6 130.7 2.1 54.9 361.2 495.3 647.9 821.7 2.6 14.9 42.4 51.0 58.7 66.5-0.5 40.0 318.7 444.4 589.2 755.2 0.0 2.8 2.5 10.0 25.5 44.6 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0-0.5 42.4 321.2 455.3 614.3 799.8-0.5 42.4 321.2 455.3 614.3 799.8 0.0 11.9 89.9 127.5 172.0 223.9-0.5 30.5 231.3 327.8 442.3 575.8 5. A ( :, %) 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 EPS ( ) - 250 15,272 115,639 163,917 221,131 287,917 BPS ( ) 27,250 42,772 146,847 294,372 493,390 752.515 (%) 445.0 755.4 2,836.9 5,787.4 9,767.8 14,950.3 (%) 14.7 15.5 16.9 11.1 8.4 6.8 (%) - 7.1 51.4 73.0 76.9 80.7 84.0 ROE (%) - 0.9 35.7 78.7 55.7 44.8 38.3 ROA (%) - 0.8 40.5 92.9 68.0 55.1 47.0 EPS (%) 657.2 41.7 34.9 30.2

247 6. 1. ( :, ) 200,000,000 100,000 ( ) 2,000 2. 2000 2001 ('00 ) ('00 ) - 50,000,000 100,000-500 60% ('00 ) 87,500 3. 53,300 10,500 12% = {( 2000 1) + ( 87,500 1.5)} 2.5 = 53,300 3,000,000,000 111,111 27,000 40% 2000( ) 2001( ) - 500 27,000 PER 5 5-2,500 135,000 7. A ( : ) 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 : 12% 2005-260 40 200-500 0 1.00-260 68,158 270,242-610 3,050 320-3,300-680 0.89-543 22,488 23,130 440-600 - 482 0.8 17,990 32,539 32,780 500-300 - 441 0.71 23,103 43,543 44,230 600-500 - 787 0.64 27,868 56,893 57,580 600-500 - 787 0.57 32,429 338,399 0 338,399 169,200 84,600 761,400 8,460 50.00% 50.00% ( : ) 10.00%

248 < 6>. (2) T A. < 7>. (3) A 53,300 1.2 20. 7) 2000 2,, S/ W (con sortium ).. 2D-, 1D-,,., 2002 100,000 ( 5000 ). 45,000 9 (Exit ) 300% 2000%. (10.0 % ). (Netw ork Infra) (Consulting) (Partnership). 80.., T. 3. T. T 8.

249.,..., DCF. DCF..,..,,,.., DCF,.,. DCF.,.,,,.,,,,.,.,,,.....,.,.,,,.. DCF,

250.,,.,,,.,,,,.,...... 1., 2000,, (2000.7), pp.5-8. 2., 2000,,,. 3., 2000, Venture Capital,,. 4., 2000,? -," 5., 2000,,,. 6., 2000,,,. 7.,,, 2000,, (2000.2.26), pp.229-150. 8., 1998,,. 9., 2000,,. 10., 1998,,, 20 2, pp.321-350. 11. (1998),,. 12. Bygrave, W. D. and J. A. T immons, 1992, Venture Capital at the Crossroads, Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, 230-232. 13. Copeland and Weston, 1987, Financial T heory and Corporate Policy, 3rd ed., Addition Willey.

25 1 14. Dean, B. V. and J. J., Giglierano, 1990, Multistage Financing of T echnical Start - Up Companies in Silicon Valley," Journal of Business Venturing, 5, 375-389. 15. Gordon V. Smith and Rus sel L. Parr, 1994, Valuation of Intellectual Property and Intangible Assets, John Willy & Sons. 16. Hall, J., and Hofer, C. W., 1993, Venture Capitalist s ' Decision Criteria and New Venture Evaluation," Journal of Business Venturing, 8(1), 25-42. 17. Hitt, M. A., and T yler, B. B., 1991, Strategic Decision Models : Integrating Different Perspectives, Strategic Management Journal, 12, 327-351. 18. Gorman, M. & W. A. Sahlman (1989), What Do Venture Capitalist Do?," Journal of Business Venturing, 231-248. 19. Khan, A. M., 1987, As sessing Venture Capital Investment s with Non Compensatory Behavioral Decision Models," Journal of Business Venturing, 2, 193-205. 20. Lerner, J., 1994, Venture Capitalist s and Decision to Go Public," Journal of Financial Economics, 35, 293-316. 21. Lewis, B. S., Patton, J. M., Green, S. L., 1988, T he Effects of Information Choice and Information Use on Analy st s: Predictions of Municipal Bond Rating Changes," T he Accounting Review, 63(2), 270-282. 22. MacMillan, I. C., Seigel, R., and Subba Narasimba, P. N., 1987, Criteria Distingushing Unsuccessful Ventures in the Venture Screening Process," Journal of Business Venturing, 2, 123-137. 23. MacMillan, I. C., Zeman, L., and Subba Narasimba, P. N., 1985, Criteria u sed by Venture Capitalist to Evaluate New Venture Proposals," Journal of Business Venturing, 1, 119-128. 24. Miller M. and F. Modigliani, 1961, Dividend Policy, Growth and Valuation of Shares," Journal of Business, Oct., pp.411-433; 25. Myer s, S. 1977, Determinant s of Corporate Borrow ing," Journal of Financial Economics, pp.147-176. 26. Pennington, N., and Hastie, R. 1986, Evidence Evaluation in Complex Decision Making," Journal of Personality and Social P sychology, 51(2), 242-258. 27. Fried, V. H. and R. D. Hisrich (1994), T ow ard a Model of Venture Capital- Investment Decision_Making," Financial Management, 23(3), 28-37. 28. Robinson, K. C., 1998, An Examination of the Influence of Industry Structure on Eight Alternative Measures of New Venture Performance for High Potential Independent New Venture," Journal of Business Venturing, 14(2), 165-187. 29. Ruhnka, J. C., Feldman, H. D., and Dean, T. J., 1992, T he Living Dead Phenomena in Venture Capital Investments, Journal of Business Venturing, 7(2), 137-155.

252 30. Sahlman, W. A., 1990, Structure of Venture Capital Organization, Journal of Financial Economics, 27, 483. 31. Sandberg, W. R., Schw eiger, D. M. and Hofer, C. W., 1988, T he Use of Verbal Protocols in Eetermining Venture Capitalist s ' Decision Processes, Entrepreneur ship T heory and Practice(Winter), 8-20. 32. Steier, L, and Greenw ood, R., 1995, Venture Capitalist Relationships in the Deal Structuring and Post - investment Stages of New Firm Creation, Jorunal of Management Studies, 32(3), 337-357. 33. T immons, J. A., Muzyka, D. F., Stevenson, H. H., and Bygrave, W. D., 1987, Opportunity Recognition : T he Core of Entrepreneur ship, Frontier s Of Entrepreneur ship Research, 109-123. 34. Webjee, T. T. and Bruno, A. V., 1984, A Model of Venture Capitalist Investment Activity, Management Science, 30(9), 1051-1056. 35. Zacharakis, Andrew L. and G. Dale Meyer, 2000, T he Potential of Actuarial Decision Models: Can T hey Improve the Venture Capital Investment Decision," Journal of Business Venturing, 15, 323-346.