IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/conmgt/v30y2012i1p81-92.html

An overview of component unit pricing theory

Author

Listed:
  • David William Cattell

Abstract

Component unit pricing (CUP) theory presents a fresh approach to item pricing, described as the process of distributing the overall price among its constituent component items. This theory provides explanation and proof that different distributions of mark-up among the items of a project produce different levels of reward for contractors, while exposing them to different degrees of risk. The theory describes the three identified sources of these rewards, namely those of improved cash flow, escalation in compensation and valuations of likely variations. In addition, it also provides the first explanation of the three risks involved, namely the risk of ‘rejection’, the risk of ‘reaction’ and the risk of ‘being wrong’. In combination, it provides a means by which both the rewards as well as these risks can now be measured given any pricing scenario. This theory gives effect to fuzzy constraints on the price of each item, providing a scientific basis by which to identify more extreme prices when pursuing more profit and more restrained prices when seeking to reduce risk. Overall, it provides a basis by which to moderate these two objectives in the pursuit of the maximization of a contractor’s utility. A test on a hypothetical project indicates an improvement of more than 150% on utility, if a contractor applies this theory, compared to the position when balanced prices are used instead.

Suggested Citation

  • David William Cattell, 2012. "An overview of component unit pricing theory," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(1), pages 81-92, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:30:y:2012:i:1:p:81-92
    DOI: 10.1080/01446193.2011.648948
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01446193.2011.648948
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01446193.2011.648948?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Engle, Robert F. & Manganelli, Simone, 2001. "Value at risk models in finance," Working Paper Series 75, European Central Bank.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Polat Gul & Turkoglu Harun & Damci Atilla & Akin Firat Dogu, 2020. "Detecting unbalanced bids via an improved grading-based model," Organization, Technology and Management in Construction, Sciendo, vol. 12(1), pages 2072-2082, January.

    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. Hassan Belkacem Ghassan & Abdelkrim Ahmed Guendouz, 2019. "Panel modeling of z-score: evidence from Islamic and conventional Saudi banks," International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 12(3), pages 448-468, July.
    2. Fong Chan, Kam & Gray, Philip, 2006. "Using extreme value theory to measure value-at-risk for daily electricity spot prices," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 283-300.
    3. Lima, Luiz Renato & Néri, Breno Pinheiro, 2007. "Comparing Value-at-Risk Methodologies," Brazilian Review of Econometrics, Sociedade Brasileira de Econometria - SBE, vol. 27(1), May.
    4. Piotr Bórawski & Aneta Bełdycka-Bórawska & Bogdan Klepacki & Lisa Holden & Tomasz Rokicki & Andrzej Parzonko, 2024. "Changes in Gross Nuclear Electricity Production in the European Union," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-31, July.
    5. Gonzalo Cortazar & Alejandro Bernales & Diether Beuermann, 2005. "Methodology and Implementation of Value-at-Risk Measures in Emerging Fixed-Income Markets with Infrequent Trading," Finance 0512030, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Marcin Chlebus, 2016. "Can Lognormal, Weibull or Gamma Distributions Improve the EWS-GARCH Value-at-Risk Forecasts?," FindEcon Chapters: Forecasting Financial Markets and Economic Decision-Making, in: Magdalena Osińska (ed.), Statistical Review, vol. 63, 2016, 3, edition 1, volume 63, chapter 4, pages 329-350, University of Lodz.
    7. Buczyński Mateusz & Chlebus Marcin, 2018. "Comparison of Semi-Parametric and Benchmark Value-At-Risk Models in Several Time Periods with Different Volatility Levels," Financial Internet Quarterly (formerly e-Finanse), Sciendo, vol. 14(2), pages 67-82, June.
    8. Zapodeanu Daniela & Cociuba Mihai & Petria Nicolae, 2012. "The Role Of Value At Risk In The Management Of Asset And Liabilities," Annals of Faculty of Economics, University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics, vol. 1(2), pages 635-640, December.
    9. Marco Filagrana, 2002. "Il model risk nella gestione dei rischi di mercato," Alea Tech Reports 015, Department of Computer and Management Sciences, University of Trento, Italy, revised 14 Jun 2008.
    10. James M. O'Brien & Pawel J. Szerszen, 2014. "An Evaluation of Bank VaR Measures for Market Risk During and Before the Financial Crisis," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2014-21, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    11. Gonzales-Martínez, Rolando, 2009. "La Gestión de Riesgo de Liquidez en Economías Emergentes: Un Modelo Valor-en-Riesgo (VaR) Paramétrico de Calibración Indirecta y una Aplicación al Sistema Financiero Boliviano [Liquidity Risk Management in Emerging Economies: A Parametric Value-at," MPRA Paper 14247, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Victor Olkhov, 2021. "To VaR, or Not to VaR, That is the Question," Papers 2101.08559, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2024.
    13. Adrián F. Rossignolo, 2021. "The New Standardised Approach as a Credible Fallback," Remef - Revista Mexicana de Economía y Finanzas Nueva Época REMEF (The Mexican Journal of Economics and Finance), Instituto Mexicano de Ejecutivos de Finanzas, IMEF, vol. 16(TNEA), pages 1-27, Septiembr.
    14. Hassan Belkacem GHASSAN, 2017. "New alternative measuring financial stability," Turkish Economic Review, EconSciences Journals, vol. 4(3), pages 275-281, September.
    15. Bakshi, Gurdip & Panayotov, George, 2010. "First-passage probability, jump models, and intra-horizon risk," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 20-40, January.
    16. Cociuba Mihail Ioan & Zapodeanu Daniela & Kulcsar Edina, 2014. "Backtesting Value At Risk Models In The Presence Of Structural Break On The Romanian And Hungarian Stock Markets," Annals of Faculty of Economics, University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics, vol. 1(1), pages 802-812, July.
    17. Natasha Kozul, 2010. "Value At Risk (Var) As A Market Risk Measure," Montenegrin Journal of Economics, Economic Laboratory for Transition Research (ELIT), vol. 6(11), pages 145-148.
    18. Christian A.Johnson, 2001. "Value at risk: teoría y aplicaciones," Estudios de Economia, University of Chile, Department of Economics, vol. 28(2 Year 20), pages 217-247, December.
    19. Carol Alexander & Emese Lazar & Silvia Stanescu, 2011. "Analytic Approximations to GARCH Aggregated Returns Distributions with Applications to VaR and ETL," ICMA Centre Discussion Papers in Finance icma-dp2011-08, Henley Business School, University of Reading.
    20. BALTES Nicolae & DRAGOE Alexandra-Gabriela-Maria, 2017. "Estimating The Return Of The Financial Titles Of The Companies From The Manufacturing Industry, Listed On The Bucharest Stock Exchange," Revista Economica, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 69(3), pages 19-28, August.

    More about this item

    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:taf:conmgt:v:30:y:2012:i:1:p:81-92. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RCME20 .

    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.