IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/lan/wpaper/96496260.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

When are capital structure decisions nonseparable from production planning?

Author

Listed:
  • Kim Kaivanto
  • Alan Zinober

Abstract

The well-known result that capital structure is irrelevant for firm value follows from a set of assumptions conducive to theoretical analysis. In this note we explore the implications of relaxing one of these assumptions: the independence of cash flows from capital structure. Unlike debt and equity, funding that is accompanied by a royalty payment obligation has the effect of increasing marginal cost, to which a profit-maximizing firm responds by reducing output, violating the independence assumption. We study the effect on optimal production plans of generalized royalty payment obligations in which the royalty rate need not be constant across partitions of cumulative output, resulting in piece-wise linear cumulative royalty schedules that are not everywhere differentiable. The associated optimization problem for intertemporal production planning is nonstandard as it is not time separable. Here we solve this nonstandard problem by formulating an equivalent problem that in turn can be solved by the Pontryagin Maximum Principle using numerical techniques. When generalized royalty-based finance is included in the financing mix, the optimal production plan is non-trivially related to capital structure and capital structure is relevant to firm value. Unless the financing mix is restricted to debt and equity, financing decisions and production planning decisions cannot be undertaken independently in general.

Suggested Citation

  • Kim Kaivanto & Alan Zinober, 2015. "When are capital structure decisions nonseparable from production planning?," Working Papers 96496260, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
  • Handle: RePEc:lan:wpaper:96496260
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/media/lancaster-university/content-assets/documents/lums/economics/working-papers/LancasterWP2015_025.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kaivanto, Kim & Stoneman, Paul, 2007. "Public provision of sales contingent claims backed finance to SMEs: A policy alternative," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 637-651, June.
    2. Stoneman, Paul & Kaivanto, Kim, 2004. "Risk Shifting, Technology Policy and Sales Contingent Claims: When is Launch Aid to the Aerospace Industry A Subsidy?," CEPR Discussion Papers 4798, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Aswath Damodaran, 1999. "Financing Innovations and Capital Structure Choices," New York University, Leonard N. Stern School Finance Department Working Paper Seires 99-020, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business-.
    4. Maqbool Dada & K. N. Srikanth, 1990. "Monopolistic Pricing and the Learning Curve: An Algorithmic Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 38(4), pages 656-666, August.
    5. Cabral, Luis M B & Riordan, Michael H, 1994. "The Learning Curve, Market Dominance, and Predatory Pricing," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(5), pages 1115-1140, September.
    6. A. M. Spence, 1981. "The Learning Curve and Competition," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 12(1), pages 49-70, Spring.
    7. Joseph B. Mazzola & Kevin F. McCardle, 1997. "The Stochastic Learning Curve: Optimal Production in the Presence of Learning-Curve Uncertainty," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 45(3), pages 440-450, June.
    8. Aswath Damodaran, 1999. "Financing Innovations And Capital Structure Choices," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 12(1), pages 28-39, March.
    9. Suresh P. Sethi, 2021. "Optimal Control Theory," Springer Texts in Business and Economics, Springer, edition 4, number 978-3-030-91745-6, August.
    10. Aivazian, Varouj A. & Booth, Laurence & Cleary, Sean, 2006. "Dividend Smoothing and Debt Ratings," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 41(2), pages 439-453, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kaivanto, Kim & Zinober, Alan, 2015. "When are Capital Structure Decisions Nonseparable from Production Planning? The Case of Generalized Royalty-Based Hybrid Finance," MPRA Paper 66963, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Way, Rupert & Lafond, François & Lillo, Fabrizio & Panchenko, Valentyn & Farmer, J. Doyne, 2019. "Wright meets Markowitz: How standard portfolio theory changes when assets are technologies following experience curves," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 211-238.
    3. Anelí Bongers, 2017. "Learning and forgetting in the jet fighter aircraft industry," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(9), pages 1-19, September.
    4. Hazhir Rahmandad, 2012. "Impact of Growth Opportunities and Competition on Firm-Level Capability Development Trade-offs," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 138-154, February.
    5. Philip Auerswald, 2010. "Entry and Schumpeterian profits," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 553-582, August.
    6. Park, Sangin, 2009. "An empirical evaluation of the 1986 Semiconductor Trade Arrangement," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 349-357, December.
    7. Newbery, David, 2018. "Evaluating the case for supporting renewable electricity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 684-696.
    8. John Sutton, 1996. "Game Theoretical Models of Market Structure," STICERD - Economics of Industry Papers 15, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    9. Ana Espínola-Arredondo & Félix Muñoz-García, 2013. "Uncovering Entry Deterrence in the Presence of Learning-by-Doing," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 319-338, September.
    10. Luis Cabral, 2007. "Lock in and Switch: Asymmetric Information and New Product Diffusion," Working Papers 07-10, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    11. Della Seta, Marco & Gryglewicz, Sebastian & Kort, Peter M., 2012. "Optimal investment in learning-curve technologies," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 1462-1476.
    12. Kogan, Konstantin & El Ouardighi, Fouad & Herbon, Avi, 2017. "Production with learning and forgetting in a competitive environment," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 52-62.
    13. Suchismita Ghosh & Ritu Pareek & Tarak Nath Sahu, 2023. "U‐shaped relationship between environmental performance and financial performance of non‐financial companies: An empirical assessment," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(4), pages 1805-1815, July.
    14. Tombak, Mihkel M., 2006. "Strategic asymmetry," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 339-350, November.
    15. Laura J. Kornish & Steven A. Lippman & John W. Mamer, 2011. "Search and the introduction of improved technologies," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(6), pages 578-594, September.
    16. Apostolis Pavlou, 2015. "Learning by doing and horizontal mergers," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 116(1), pages 25-38, September.
    17. Jean-Étienne Palard, 2007. "Recentrage stratégique et politique de financement:le cas des firmes cotées en Europe (1987-2003)," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 10(3), pages 111-137, September.
    18. Hommes, Cars & Zeppini, Paolo, 2014. "Innovate or Imitate? Behavioural technological change," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 308-324.
    19. Alessandro Arlotto & Stephen E. Chick & Noah Gans, 2014. "Optimal Hiring and Retention Policies for Heterogeneous Workers Who Learn," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(1), pages 110-129, January.
    20. Mazzola, Joseph B. & Neebe, Alan W. & Rump, Christopher M., 1998. "Multiproduct production planning in the presence of work-force learning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 106(2-3), pages 336-356, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    production planning; capital structure; separability; Pontryagin Maximum Princi- ple; numerical methods; royalty-based finance; hybrid instruments;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G32 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Financing Policy; Financial Risk and Risk Management; Capital and Ownership Structure; Value of Firms; Goodwill

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:lan:wpaper:96496260. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Giorgio Motta (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/delanuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.