Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
A Comparative Study on Traditional vs. Blockchain Financing for Deep-Tier Suppliers Considering the Time Value of Capital
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
A Comparative Study on Traditional vs. Blockchain Financing for Deep-Tier Suppliers Considering the Time Value of Capital
Do you wish to request the book?
A Comparative Study on Traditional vs. Blockchain Financing for Deep-Tier Suppliers Considering the Time Value of Capital
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
A Comparative Study on Traditional vs. Blockchain Financing for Deep-Tier Suppliers Considering the Time Value of Capital
2025
Overview
Traditional downstream-initiated accounts receivable financing (TF) is often constrained in assisting immediate upstream suppliers. Conversely, blockchain-enabled accounts receivable financing (BF) offers an efficient solution for deep-tier suppliers to bridge capital gaps and ensure smooth production processes. This study constructs a three-level supply chain model comprising a capital-constrained tier-2 supplier, a similarly constrained tier-1 supplier, and an established retailer. To alleviate financial strain among suppliers, we analyze and compare two financing mechanisms: TF and BF. The investigation explores the effects of blockchain adoption and the time value of capital on a multi-tier supply chain. Our findings indicate that while BF typically features a lower interest rate than TF, it may still perform less favorably under certain conditions. Specifically, when the time value of capital for the tier-1 supplier is sufficiently high, the profitability of all supply chain members under BF falls short of that achieved through TF. In other words, adopting blockchain is not universally the best strategy for multilevel supply chains. Additionally, we delineate the impacts of the accounting period and financing rates on the optimal choice of financing model. These insights provide substantial evidence and managerial guidance regarding the appropriate circumstances for blockchain adoption and its interplay with accounts receivable financing.
Publisher
MDPI AG
Subject
