Tag Archives: issue

Patient Groups: Driving Therapy to Market

8 Apr

By Danielle Silva, Director of Research, LSN

There are a number of investor groups that are playing an increasingly significant role in the life sciences space as of late. One of the most compelling and motivated investors to enter the space are patient groups. These are indication-specific sources of capital that want to bring science forward in a distinct disease area. This includes a strong emphasis on carrying drugs across the “Valley of Death” to accelerate progress towards a cure. Patient groups essentially allow those afflicted by a disease to vote with their wallets to bring treatments to market, rather than seeking exit opportunities or financial returns.

At a basic level, patient groups are a collection of individuals who are afflicted by a disease that come together and mobilize to find cures for a certain affliction. In the past, patient groups often times partnered with foundations or venture philanthropists in order to make an investment or donation. One example of this is the Cystic Fibrosis foundation partnering with a number of patient groups and Aurora Biosciences [1]. However, we are now seeing more and more of these groups mobilizing others to make a strategic investment to more directly improve patient outcomes.

Patient groups are taking an innovative approach to investing in the life science space, and are becoming empowered, investing in promising companies & researchers. Patient groups will often times take a strategic approach to attempt to bring many parties together to push research along in a certain area. Generally, patient groups will try to bring together scientists that are researching different areas of the disease – usually, they will also try to find some of the best and most well known scientists in the space in order to gain further legitimacy. This is also helpful because it creates a collaborative environment amongst scientists who are researching the same disease area. Patient groups then establish their clinical network – which is a network of patients that can be utilized for clinical trials for companies that they invest in (essentially utilizing the members of the patient group that are afflicted by the disease). The final step for these patient groups is to bring biotechs / big pharma into the picture, who in turn help the scientists to commercialize their research.

Patient groups are also dynamic because they almost create an ecosystem within their particular disease focus. Generally, patient groups are huge advocates of sharing as much information as possible – and help researchers even outside of their network gain access to research and data more quickly and easily. Patient groups also help patients to educate themselves, and allow them to see the various options that are available to them that may not yet be FDA approved. Thus it is expected patient groups will start to become an increasingly major player in the life sciences space because of their collaborative nature, and gain the ability to bring together different groups to work towards a common goal.

[1] http://www.xconomy.com/national/2012/04/09/investing-in-biotech-isnt-just-for-the-investors-anymore/

Funding Gaps Spell Opportunity for those with Capital

8 Apr

By Michael Quigley, Research Analyst, LSN

mike-2LSN draws from the vast and talented pool of university & collegiate undergrads in Boston to recruit research analysts for its team. Michael Quigley is a Senior at Bentley University studying Economics and Finance.

It is no secret that the number of investments being made in the life sciences private sector is increasing at an extreme rate. At Life Science Nation, we’ve tracked over 4000 individual financing rounds in the space over the past few years. As is visible in the chart below, things are moving at quite a clip:

quig2

This may seem like great news for entrepreneurs looking to start up a life science company. With the number of investments increasing so rapidly, access to startup capital appears easy to come by. However, as anyone who has tried can tell you, this is absolutely not the case: Despite this increase in investment rounds, one trend that our data makes strikingly obvious is that the growth rate of seed and startup financing rounds is growing at a much slower pace.

This lack of growth is something that is, in part, a result of young life science companies inability to find the right fit in terms of funding partners. This problem is becoming more evident as competition for capital is increasing as traditional capital sources evaporate. Another factor contributing to this trend is that some investment firms, in particular venture capital, are looking more towards investments in the space with a shorter period to exit. They don’t want to hold a company for longer than they need to make a return on investment since the venture model no longer works well for early stage life sciences investment. The result is this “Valley of Death we so often refer to, when discussing early stage fundraising.

When taking both of these factors into account, there is a portion of this industry that is being both undersold (due to lack of fundraising capabilities) and under-examined (due to the desire for faster ROI). As time progresses if this gap goes unfilled, there will be a pool of strategic players (Big Pharma) with painfully dry pipelines, and a shortage of prospects developed enough to in-license or buy up. Consider this a call to action: Life science entrepreneurs – throw out your old maps and start looking at new strategies and opportunities for finding sources of capital. Investors – evaluate emerging opportunities and take advantage of the upcoming demand explosion for developed assets. Change is upon us, and those players who will come out on top are those that adapt first.

Hot Life Science Investor Mandate 1: Opportunistic Family Office Uses Evergreen Structure to its Advantage – April 4, 2013

1 Apr

A family office in the Eastern US has over $200 million in total assets under management, and is currently looking for new investments in the life science space, typically investing around $5 million in equity per company. Because the office has an evergreen structure, there is no set timeframe to make an allocation, and thus the firm is always opportunistically sourcing new investment opportunities.
 
The family office is currently looking for new companies in the medtech space. Specifically, they are interested in medical device companies, but have no specific preference in terms of what kind of device the company produces. The family office primarily interested in US or Canadian based firms, however has invested in internationally based companies for add-on acquisitions in the past.
 
The firm primarily engages in buyout transactions, however the firm does sometimes provide growth or venture capital to firms on a case-by-case basis.

Hot Life Science Investor Mandate 2: PE Group with Diverse Investment Interests Seeking New Targets – April 4, 2013

1 Apr

A private equity group based in the Central US has raised three funds, and has around $300 million in total assets under management. The firm is always looking for new opportunities in the life science space, and typically allocates around $20 million per firm ($10 million of the group’s allocation is typically equity, the remainder is financed using debt).
 
The firm is currently most interested in companies within the suppliers and engineering space, as well as biotech R&D service companies. The firm is particularly looking for medical device companies, as well as CMOs and niche chemical production companies. The firm solely invests in US based firms.
 
The PEG is only looking for firms that currently have products that are on the market. Additionally, they are looking for companies that have at least $15-100 million in annualrevenue, and prefer firms with annual EBITDA in the $3-15 million range. Consequently, the firm will not consider early stage pre-revenue companies.

Hot Life Science Investor Mandate 3: Nonprofit PE is Interested in Wide Range of Investment Opportunities – April 4, 2013

1 Apr

A nonprofit private equity fund headquartered in the Eastern US has roughly $50 million in assets. The firm’s mission is to create positive social impact via direct investment in several sectors that constitute major areas of concern in third world countries, including healthcare. The PE invests across the life sciences sector, and is always evaluating new opportunities that offer compelling solutions to major public health problems in the developing world. The firm has no set time frame to make an allocation, but would invest if a compelling opportunity were uncovered.
 
The firm makes initial equity investments ranging from $500 thousand to $2 million, with most investments close to the $1 million mark. This capital can be provided as either debt or equity financing. The firm is interested in all areas of the industry, including therapeutics, diagnostics, devices, and service companies (especially CMOs). The firm doesn’t have a specific mandate regarding phase or indication, but prefers later-stage assets. It will however invest in preclinical opportunities with the right co-investor. The firm is comfortable making allocations to companies in the US, Europe or in relevant emerging markets.

An Update on Incubators

1 Apr

By Max Klietmann, VP of Research, LSN

Incubators have become an increasingly integral part of the life sciences landscape. They play a key role in the advancement of nascent technologies from an academic research stage to commercial potential. However, in my discussions with many emerging life science entrepreneurs, I’ve learned that there are a number of myths and misconceptions about what value incubators really provide. However, statistics consistently show that the value of adoption by a good incubator considerably decreases risk and time to market. This article seeks to explain exactly what incubators are, how they can help move your company forward, and what to look for when evaluating an incubator to partner with.

Incubators in the context of life sciences can be loosely defined as a shared laboratory space to facilitate the growth of early stage companies and technologies. They are often run by universities, state or regional economic development organizations, research institutions, large industry players, or some combination thereof. The most basic mission of these organizations is to increase the success rate of early-stage companies for a variety of reasons. These typically include identifying future customers, creating valuable jobs within a certain region, or to find early-stage technologies that could be future investment or partnering opportunities.

A good incubator committed to its constituents offers a number of powerful advantages – First and foremost, there is the advantage of sharing space and equipment, which means massive cost savings. This is a huge advantage in the current investment environment surrounding life sciences, as capital efficiency is becoming a primary focus of investment evaluation in a highly capital-intensive space. Second, a good incubator offers resources and fosters an ecosystem that can help emerging companies to quickly fill gaps, learn best practices, and develop a more informed strategy to reach the market. These benefits can take the form of pro bono legal or financial services provided by firms seeking out future clients, consultative services provided by the incubator itself, or simply being surrounded by other entrepreneurs. Finally, it puts your company in the context of a network that helps to build out a highly compelling team. Most life sciences entrepreneurs previously existed either in the context of academia or within a large biopharma. They may be brilliant scientists developing cutting-edge technologies, but they lack the business sense to fully comprehend that their asset is the basis of a business, not just a research publication. Incubators provide a network that can help entrepreneurs find the right people to fill this gap.

All of these sound nice, but will they actually increase your company’s probability of success? In short, yes – According to the National Business Incubation Association (NBIA), partnering with a hands-on incubator (not just rental lab space), doubles the likelihood that a company will still be operating five years later. This is because incubators exist to move companies forward and get them ready for their next round of funding. Considering that there has been roughly a 50% funding drop for early stage companies over the last two years, incubators clearly provide a huge advantage in this regard.

So how do you pick the right one? Fit is the most critical piece of the puzzle – It isn’t necessarily the most prestigious incubator that you should be focusing on. Look for those that provide services relevant to your firm, and ideally are specialized in helping companies similar to yours. Shop around – ask how long a typical member remains in incubation before moving to the next level, and make sure the organization is personally committed to your company’s success. Making this evaluation should be a carefully-planned and well thought-out decision. A solid relationship with a strong, hands-on incubator is one of the easiest ways to decrease risk surrounding your company. Heck, you may even learn a thing or two!

How to Stop the “Valley of Death” From Getting Deeper

1 Apr

By Danielle Silva, Director of Research, LSN

In the life sciences space, most scientific breakthroughs fail to translate into commercial product. There are many forces behind this trend, including regulatory issues and many emerging scientist-executives’ lack of business acumen. The largest issue, however, is that many emerging biotechs are unable to obtain the necessary funding to move an early stage research project down the pipeline towards market. This gap, which continues to widen, has become known in the industry as “The Valley of Death.”

LSN maintains a focus on the Valley of Death, because it is chiefly an issue stemming from an inability to make the right connections with investors, rather than a problem with the fundamental science behind an early stage asset. As we’ve discussed previously, in recent years, LSN has seen traditional sources of capital for scientists and young stage life sciences firms, such as venture capital funds, all but dry up. That means there is even more competition to get a meeting with these investors, and because these investors are becoming more risk averse often times the firm with a less disruptive, but later stage product will be the winner, not the scientist with the novel discovery.

So what can the life sciences industry as a whole do to prevent the valley of death from getting wider? Quite simply, there needs to be a forum for early stage scientists to engage with the new sources of capital in the space. In today’s environment, it’s really all about targeting the family offices seeking to contribute money to accelerate research for a specific indication. All of the pieces are in place for a completely new paradigm of philanthropically-driven private capital pushing the next generation of drugs to market. The key to this will be in creating an environment for both parties to engage face to face collaboration towards a common goal.