in their paper "European Real Options: An intuitive algorithm for the Black and Scholes Formula" Datar and Mathews provide a proof in the appendix on page 50, which is not really clear to me. It's meant to show the equivalence of their formula $E_{o}(max(s_{T}e^{-\mu T}-xe^{-rT},0))$ and Black and Scholes.
They refer to Hull(2000), define $y=s_{T}e^{-\mu T}$, and then do the following transformation:
$E_{o}(max(s_{T}e^{-\mu T}-xe^{-rT},0))$ $=\intop_{-xe^{-rT}}^{\infty}(s_{T}*e^{-\mu T})g(y)dy$ $=E(s_{T}e^{-\mu T})N_{d_{1}}-xe^{-rT}N_{d_{2}}$
An addition: Actually, in the paper it says $E_{o}(max(s_{T}e^{-\mu T}-xe^{-rT}),0)$, so the 0 is outside the brackets. However, I am not sure, if that is a typo and should rather be $E_{o}(max(s_{T}e^{-\mu T}-xe^{-rT},0))$. I am not familiar with a function E(max(x),0)
$\mu$ and $r$ are two different discount rates, one being the WACC and the other one the riskless rate.
Could I substitute $V=s_{0}e^{-\mu T},K=xe^{-rT}$, go through the BS steps and re-substitute? In other words, under what constrains is $E\left[max(V-K,0)\right]=E(V)N(d_{1})-KN(d_{2})$ valid?
The research related to it is a comparison of different real option pricing method.
Could anybody help me out?
Thanks in advance.
Corn