RT1 and Real option: Difference between pages

From ACT Wiki
(Difference between pages)
Jump to navigationJump to search
imported>Doug Williamson
(Create page. Sources: The Treasurer, Nov-Dec 2017, p06, EBA Clearing webpage https://www.ebaclearing.eu/services/instant-payments/introduction/)
 
imported>Doug Williamson
m (Spacing 20/8/13)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
''Single Euro Payments Area (SEPA) - EBA Clearing''
Real options are the valuable operational choices available to the owners of projects and of businesses.


RT1 is EBA Clearing's pan-European infrastructure for instant payments in euros.
For example, the options to expand, contract, defer or abandon the project (or business).


RT1 is used for real-time settlement of payments, in line with the SEPA Instant Credit Transfer Scheme.
The existence of valuable real options in favour of the owners generally increases the total value of a project or business.
 
For this reason a real options analysis of a proposal may in some cases result in a decision to proceed with the project, in circumstances where other project evaluation techniques would have led to rejecting the proposal.
 
However, it is also possible that a proposal may grant real options - perhaps inadvertantly - in favour of other parties.
 
In such a case, the other parties might in future exercise their real options ''against'' the interests of the owners, causing losses to the owners.
 
Such real options in favour of other parties are ''liabilities'' of a project or business, and ''reduce'' the total net value of the project or business.




== See also ==
== See also ==
* [[EBA Clearing]]
* [[Option]]
* [[EURO1]]
* [[Project appraisal]]
* [[Infrastructure]]
* [[Real]]
* [[Instant Credit Transfer Scheme]]
* [[Real options valuation]]
* [[STEP2]]
* [[Single Euro Payments Area]]
* [[Payments and payment systems]]

Revision as of 15:20, 20 August 2013

Real options are the valuable operational choices available to the owners of projects and of businesses.

For example, the options to expand, contract, defer or abandon the project (or business).

The existence of valuable real options in favour of the owners generally increases the total value of a project or business.

For this reason a real options analysis of a proposal may in some cases result in a decision to proceed with the project, in circumstances where other project evaluation techniques would have led to rejecting the proposal.

However, it is also possible that a proposal may grant real options - perhaps inadvertantly - in favour of other parties.

In such a case, the other parties might in future exercise their real options against the interests of the owners, causing losses to the owners.

Such real options in favour of other parties are liabilities of a project or business, and reduce the total net value of the project or business.


See also