On Optimal Asset Abandonment and Replacement

Numerous studies in recent years have emphasized the importance of accounting properly for abandoment value in capital budgeting (see [1], [4], [7], [10], and [11]). For a variety of reasons, a project need be neither physically exhausted nor have negative cash flows to be abandoned. Robichek and Van Home [10] suggested that a project should be abandoned in any period in which the present value of future cash flows does not exceed its abandonment value. In a modification of this rule, Dyl and Long [4] proposed that the firm give consideration to all possible future abandonment opportunities. They argued that abandonment need not occur at the earliest possible date that the abandonment condition is satisfied, but rather at the date that yields the highest NPV over all future abandonment possibilities. A generalization of these models was offered by Bonini [1], who developed a dynamic programming model to analyze investment projects with abandonment possibilities and uncertain cash flows. More recently, Gaumnitz and Emery [7] compared the abandonment decision to the like-for-like replacement decision and noted that the correct model for a particular case depends on the suitability of the assumptions.