Why do we tend to underestimate NPV when we ignore the option to abandon?

A capital investment project that generates new opportunities is more valuable than one that doesn't. A flexible project, one that does not commit management to a fixed operating strategy is more valuable than an inflexible one. When a project is flexible or generates new opportunities for the company, it is said to contain real options.

In this assignment, you are to discuss the budgeting implications of different option strategies and the cost-benefit issues associated with such decisions.

Why might recognizing a real option raise but not lower a project's net present value (NPV) as found in a traditional analysis?

Why do we tend to underestimate NPV when we ignore the option to abandon?

What do you suggest as a cost-effective approach to capital budgeting analysis when a project contains real options.