Tag Archives: life

Hot Life Science Investor Mandate 2: Government Organization has $2b to Promote Sustainable Tech Developments – March 7, 2013

6 Mar

A foundation that was created by the government of Canada in order to provide funding for technologies that promote sustainable development has been provided nearly $2 billion in assets by the Canadian government in order to further this mission. The foundation is registered as a non-profit, non-share capital corporation under the Canada Business Corporations Act. The government foundation has two funds, which have allocated over $1 billion together.

The firm is currently looking for new firms in the life sciences space for potential allocations; and although they do not have a set number of firms they wish to allocate to over the next six to nine months, they typically will provide capital to around 20 firms annually. With that being said, they will allocate to a number of firms over the next 6-9 months if some compelling opportunities are uncovered.

The foundation typically invests around $2-3 million per firm, but has allocated as little as $500,000 and as much as $40 million in the past. They are currently most interested in the biotech space, specifically in firms focused on environmental biotechnology. In particular, the firm is seeking firms that are developing anti-pollution or waste remediation technologies. The firm is only looking for firms that are pre-revenue, and thus provide seed funding to these firms.

Hot Life Science Investor Mandate 3: VC Group has Interest in CMOs, CROs – March 7, 2013

6 Mar

A venture capital group based in the Eastern US has around $200 million in assets, and is currently deploying capital from the firm’s second fund, which has $100+ million in assets. They are currently looking for new investment opportunities in the life sciences space, and plan to invest in 2-3 new firms within the next six to nine months. The firm allocates $3-10 million and the majority of the group’s investments are in the $5-7 million range.

The firm is most interested in biotech R&D services firms, and is seeking contract manufacturing organizations (CMOs) and contract research organizations (CROs). The firm is looking for biotech firm’s whose primary customer base is biotech therapeutic and diagnostic firms as well as pharmaceutical companies. The firm prefers companies that have at least $2 million in revenue, but prefers firms in the $5-30 million range. The firm solely invests in privately owned firms.

CRO Trends in 2013

6 Mar

By Alejandro Zamorano, VP of Business Development, LSN

A clinical research organization (CRO) is an organization that provides support to the pharmaceuticalbiotechnology, and medical device industries in the form of research services outsourced on a contract basis. These services can include assay development, preclinical research, clinical research, clinical trial management, and commercialization services. CROs have grown massively over the past 10 years due to their ability to specialize; allowing clients to streamline operations far beyond what could ever be accomplished internally. These firms tend to be highly capital efficient, and play the space strategically. A CROs survival is hinged on moving with industry changes. Below are the top behavior trends among CROs for 2013 as we continue to see strong growth in this often ignored sector:

Strategic Alliances

2013 will be the year of strategic alliances for the CRO industry. Big pharma is already picking sides, signing multiyear agreements with the industry’s big players. By forming partnerships, big pharma is able to negotiate prices and take advantage of key personnel within the company. In addition, big pharma can consolidate its operations and streamline communications, easing the burden of managing multiple service providers.

Investors

CROs have begun to take equity positions in lieu of cash for services rendered, especially among small and emerging clients. We will continue to see this trend grow as CROs move more heavily into the small and emerging biotech space due to competition and the potential opportunity to foster a long-term relationship. In addition to this, these specialized organizations can (and will) leverage their in-house expertise to invest in particular assets. This trend is also being facilitated by the fact that CROs want to diversify their exposure from a specific service class, and want to participate in the upside potential with unique clients. As an entrepreneur getting a discount off of preclinical work, Phase I or Phase II study is huge relief. In addition, this is appealing for the entrepreneur as it aligns the interest of the entrepreneur and the CRO. Finally, CROs tend take modest equity stakes depending on the work rendered and the phase of the lead asset, which is often more attractive than what entrepreneurs can yield in the market.

Emerging Markets
CROs will continue to expand their operations in China and India to take advantage of the cheap labor force, a more lenient regulatory environment, rapidly accelerating R&D, and advantageous tax treatments. It’s not just US and European-based companies relocating operations to these markets; over the past 5 years, native companies in these emerging markets have begun to make a splash. Often competing on price, these native operations have begun to put pressure on the market, decreasing gross margins across the board.

Globalization

With growing the therapeutic market in the emerging markets, countries are now requiring that native populations are included in clinical trials. As a result, clinical trial organizations have significantly grown in countries such as Brazil, Russian, Japan, China, and South Korea. As of 2011, around 53% of clinical trials were performed in the US, 24% in Europe, and 23% in the rest of the world. Looking forward we can expect the market share especially amongst the BRIC’s (Brazil, Russia, India and China) to grow. Analysts for example project the pharmaceutical market in China will reach $200 billion by 2020, making it the second largest in the world.

Developing Biosimilars

Large CROs are starting to team up with CMOs as they realize that by combining their economies of scale in the area of biologics, they have a perfect partnership to start developing bio-similars. Small biotechs have realized that developing biosimilars is harder than most would have expected. More importantly traditional generic developers are not equipped to handle the next generation of biosimilars. This has provided a perfect opportunity for CRO’s to fill in the gap.

 

http://www.fiercebiotech.com/story/rd-trends-spur-cro-business/2011-08-05

http://www.contractpharma.com/issues/2011-05/view_features/cro-industry-update-2011-04-29-10-53-51/

http://www.niceinsight.com/ni_it.php

http://www.contractpharma.com/issues/2012-06/view_features/cro-outlook-opportunities

What Investors Look for During the Due Diligence Process

6 Mar

By Danielle Silva, Director of Research, Life Science Nation

For life science investors, conducting thorough due diligence on potential investments is critical, especially because many investors in the sector invest in pre-revenue companies that do not have sturdy financial positions from which to court investors. There are many misconceptions that life science firms have about what will make or break an investor’s decision to provide capital. It is extremely important for life science firms to understand what factors will come into play during the due diligence process, and what they will need to demonstrate to a potential investor. It is also key to have a checklist of all the due diligence materials that they will need to have readily available to provide to investors.

Investors in life science companies have become increasingly cognizant of intellectual property (IP) issues, which often times are addressed during the due diligence process. If IP issues are ignored, it can ultimately decrease an investor’s return on investment (ROI), and cause legal issues for them in the future. Thus, potential investors will expect that startups be very transparent about their IP portfolio and will expect companies to disclose all information regarding the IP, including if the IP is protected (for instance if the firm has patents), what products or services are covered by the IP, if there are potential competing technologies, as well as regulatory and legal implications that could potentially affect the IP. Investors may also expect to be provided a number of documents pertaining to the IP during the due diligence process.

Often times, emerging firms will believe that if they are backed by a well-known incubator, the due diligence process will be less exhaustive than for startups which do not have this kind of relationship. If anything, investors will expect firms that work with an incubator to be even more polished than startups that do not have a relationship with this kind of firm, because incubators often provide startups with many resources to help them create a solid infrastructure.

Although business incubators are known to be selective in terms of the firms they work with, they typically do not conduct deep due diligence themselves (they typically just want to ensure that a firm will not be a liability in the long term). Thus, investors will still need to conduct deep research on the firm themselves, and speak with references that are not associated with the firm’s incubator. Working with an incubator, however, is still beneficial for startups, and may illustrate to a potential investor that the firm has a unique product or idea and that they’re putting in some extra effort grow the company and get a solid infrastructure in place.

Another myth that many entrepreneurs believe is that if their firm is registered as a Delaware corporation (DE corp) it will shorten the due diligence process. Although registering a firm as a Delaware corporation will certainly add legitimacy to a company (around half on the Fortune 500 list are registered as DE corporations), it unquestionably will not convince an investor to immediately give a firm their stamp of approval and make an investment. Firms can easily and inexpensively register as a DE corporation online (sometimes for as little as a several hundred dollars), so investors may be wary about a firm’s validity even if they do obtain this registration. Registering as a DE firm, however, is beneficial to small firms and should be taken into consideration because Delaware does have very favorable business laws. Thus having a DE corp registration will not make or break an investor’s decision, but it may help a firm demonstrate to an investor that the management team does have a level of business acumen.

Many life science firms recognize that they must spend a good deal of time and resources putting together their marketing materials and focusing on branding their firm to attract potential investors. Many firms, however, do not realize that in order to complete a deal with a potential investor, they must also have their due diligence materials in order. Accordingly, it is vital to put just as much time and effort into drafting due diligence materials as it is to spend valuable resources on putting together marketing materials.

Investors will expect that entrepreneurs will provide a number of documents during the due diligence process, regardless of how young the firm is. This will generally include all of the companies financials (including future forecasts), lists of employees, investors, and advisors (including legal representation), stock purchase agreements (as well as stock option and agreements and plans), articles of incorporation and by-laws, product plans, as well as a business plan and investor deck (if not already provided to the investor previously). This is not an exhaustive list of all the due diligence materials that investors may ask for, but these are the most common documents that investors will ask that a company provide.

The most important thing to keep in mind during the due diligence process (although quite obvious) is that honesty is always the best policy. If certain numbers are provided to an investor over the phone by a company during their initial correspondence and these figures do not match up when an investor is going through a firm’s financials during the due diligence process this will be a huge red flag for the investor. Thus it is imperative for entrepreneurs to be open and honest with investors from the get go, and to be as transparent with investors as possible. This will not only ensure that an investor is comfortable during the due diligence process, but will also help the firm develop an open and solid relationship from the very beginning. Thus, the more transparent and candid life science firms are during the due diligence process, and the more willing they are to provide the necessary documents to investors, the smoother the due diligence process will be for both the life science firm and the investor.

Life Science Investor Sands are Shifting and New Landscape is Forming

6 Mar

By Dennis Ford, CEO, LSN

As you know, I think that most of the industry is navigating the fundraising process from an out-of-date map in terms of who to go after for capital. The sands are shifting, and the new landscape is starting to take shape. The primary mission of LSN is to create the new accurate map.

I recently conducted an informal survey about what is needed in general to help the cause of fundraising. The people I interviewed all stated that biggest gap lies in connecting early stage firms with investors, and an “early stage” focused conference was needed.

“There is a big need to create an early-stage JP Morgan like event… with better content, focused on early stage only.” – CEO / scientist

“Something more focused than the partnering conferences… the problem with the big partnering conferences is that it’s a free-for-all, cross-industry meeting… closer to a “mosh pit” than organized for a specific purpose.” – CEO, emerging biotech

“What’s needed is basically assembling early and mid-stage investors who can write checks to scientists who need the capital. I understand it takes time which is why they should convene these meetings regularly.” – academic scientist #1

“What we need is a boot camp for partnering! A conference that offers a basic, rudimentary skillset explaining the ins and outs of raising money… a how to… a survival guide” – academic scientist #2

“Ongoing regular quarterly events where investors and emerging scientists can create dialogue facilitate relationships which eventually result in capital inflows.” – life science marketer

Establishing a Web Presence for your Life Science Firm

26 Feb

By Tom Crosby, Marketing Manager, LSN

In our increasingly connected world, the Internet has become not only the new marketplace of ideas, but in a very real sense, it is the new marketplace – where the majority of business is conducted every day, all over the globe.

This is not news to anyone with an Internet connection, but even the most successful and intelligent people in their respective industries can have trouble keeping up with the ever-changing environment, and often times fail to recognize how critically important it is for their own businesses. To the chagrin of traditionalists everywhere, web presence has become a vital piece of your company’s image or brand, and helps to deliver your message. In other words, it is too important to treat as an afterthought, especially when it comes to fundraising – if you don’t have web presence, you don’t exist. Worse yet, if you have a poor web presence, you are publicly out of touch, and sending the message that you do not “get it.” Investors are savvy, and it takes only a few seconds to see if you are brand-aware, and your message is on point.

Web presence takes careful planning and professional execution. For those attempting to raise funds in the life science arena, this often means using a specialized third party to execute this piece. The development (and subsequent marketing) of your products, creating dialogue with prospective investors & maintaining investor relationships, and your on-line branding all at once are too much for an executive to focus on, and will likely yield poor results. This is not to say that it can’t be done by the right individual with enough time, effort, and funding. However, the most cost-effective route long-term is the one that brings in capital the fastest and promotes a quicker path to market.

In order to raise funds efficiently today, a strong web presence is of pinnacle importance. This is something that is too often overlooked by industry leaders, whether they would like to admit it or not. Many life science firms will pay an uninformed third party – lacking any sort of industry-specific insight – what amounts to a nominal fee to establish their entire online identity, and leave it there. This is where having a dedicated team in place to establish your web operations can easily put you ahead of your competition for precious investor dollars. This can be done in-house, or by a team of industry-specific consultants, but either way, it is not an area in which you should underspend or cut corners.

Although your initial returns may be slower than outsourcing the work to the most affordable third party, having a dedicated, contextualized team presents your firm with many advantages that are worth the extra investment, not the least of which is a higher overall quality. First, your team will be in charge of shaping the performance of your brand, and therefore, will be personally invested in its success. Furthermore, by having constant, informed dialogue with your team, changes and updates to your web presence will take place quickly and fluidly. Finally, a team with specific understanding of the industry will be able to perform tasks surrounding your firm’s Internet identity that can’t necessarily be outsourced, or are better done by an individual in direct context with your goals.

One aspect that makes marketing a life science firm difficult is that there is often a disconnect between scientists and investors; the desire to do business is all there, but ideas are frequently lost in translation. This is even more so today, as life science VCs wane and new investors fill the void. Of course, any serious investor will quickly bring in a scientist to ultimately vet the technology. There are the cases of the scientist-turned-investor, or the business person who speaks biotech, but the message here is, plan for both, make sure your messaging is at least generally understandable, and save the deep-dive tech-talk for the scientists. Any vetting scientist will have to understand the value of your product, and from there, the businessperson will be able to value the market.

To effectively market any idea, simplicity is key. And it can be tempting for a drug developer in phase II to highlight the complexities of their work, touting novel pharmacological action and unique pathways. To the scientific community, this information is understandable, and even engaging. However, to an investor, this could very well be the obstacle standing between your firm and an allocation. Confidence is a huge factor in investing, and a coherent, easily understood message goes a long way towards creating investor confidence.

If you bring the messaging of your web presence in-house, or go through a consulting team that understands how to translate fluidly between the languages of science and business, you can effectively turn your product into an idea. Of course, your product is what lands your firm the allocation to push through to distribution, but unless it also exists as a single, digestible idea, getting your product to market becomes harder than it already is. An uninformed third-party can get your website up and running, but without some degree of outside understanding, you run the risk of being obscure and unattainable. The impact of a simplified, streamlined web presence cannot be underestimated, and, in a word, is a crucial factor in garnering investor confidence. Creating a brand and having your team all reciting the same message has a big impact when you are being evaluated as a firm who “gets it.”

Why Investors are Speaking to Academic Scientists

26 Feb

By Max Klietmann, VP of Research, LSN

The academic scientist is playing a more critical role in the commercial life sciences space than ever before. This is due to the fact that large pharma is replacing early-stage drug development initiatives with M&A and in-licensing of technologies emerging from academic labs, strategic investors are aggregating early stage asset portfolios, and CROs are seeking to create relationships early to pre-emptively establish market position for the future.

It is obvious why early stage investors such as angels are interested in establishing dialogue with academic scientists, but even late-stage investors are in a continuous dialogue with academic scientists today. What makes this group of innovators so critical to the industry? Fundamentally, it is because they represent a crystal ball forecasting the long-term, groundbreaking industry trends that will affect the entire industry.

Academic innovation and commercialization are closer than ever, and this trend is accelerating. Academics were once all but irrelevant to investors because their work was often decades away from market potential, and most scientists didn’t care about or even consider commercializing their work. Academics wanted to be respected by other academics, and lived by the mantra “publish or perish.”

All of this began to change in the late 90’s, when a massive surge in academic publication occurred that led to a huge rise in patent registration around various technologies. This made investors suddenly aware that academic scientists were not just professors in labs trying to impress their peers – they were sources of deal flow/investment opportunities, market intelligence, and could point out disruptive technologies before they reached the “commercial realm.” The big pharmas, investors (early and late-stage), and even secondary constituents like insurance firms all maintain dialogue with academia precisely for these reasons. Academia is the industry’s oracle, and has the most future-oriented perspective on emerging trends in the space.

The line between academia and commercialization is blurring and the two, once-disparate realms are becoming tightly intertwined. As such, creating relationships with academic laboratories and innovators is a critical piece of market intelligence for all constituents in the space. Creating strong relationships with research institutions will be a vital to the adroit navigation of an increasingly complex space moving forward.