Tag Archives: reading

Pullan’s Pieces #4 – China, Japan, Europe, Korea vs US- Collaborate or Compete?

5 Aug

As a deal maker, where should I go for a deal?  Where is my competition?

There is so much written about China, I thought I would try to put it in the context of other countries.

DEMOGRAPHICS:  China is Big but low GDP per capita, Japan has the oldest population.  Both Japan and China may have reached peak population, while the US has immigration to continue growth.  China and Japan have more big cities (making clinical trial recruitment easier).

The Medical Culture varies tremendously.  

The US, with the 3rd largest population and private insurance, has the biggest market

But there are even bigger differences in the magnitude of sales of new drugs. In the US, to be in the top 10 in 2031 means double digit billions.

The biggest company R&D budgets per company are in “Global companies”.

The biggest European and Japanese companies have become global companies. 

The biggest companies in the US have 45%-70% of their Rx sales in the US.

The biggest companies in Europe have 15%-30% of their Rx sales in Europe.

The biggest companies in Japan have <10% (Takeda) to 39% of their sales in Japan. (Smaller Japanese companies have most of their Rx sales in Japan)

The biggest Chinese companies have 80-95% of their sales in China.

2024 saw a surge in approvals: In 2024, China first-approved 93 innovative drugs, with 42% being domestically developed. But China is losing domestic market share to MNCs.

The biggest Korean companies with biologics (Samsung and Celltrion) have 10-20% of their sales in Korea.  The other big Korean companies have 70-90% of their Rx sales in Korea.

But China has almost as many drugs in Phase 1 thru 3 as the US, in almost as many companies as in the US.  

There are more companies getting series A in the US and in China but the dollar amount is smaller in China. 

The US leads in IPOs

But the Hong Kong Hang Seng Biotech Index was up 87% year to date (while the US XBI was down 6%).  

Europe is active in company acquisitions, but Asia is not.  

For companies with headquarters in the US, Europe, Japan and Korea:  most partnering deals are early and with more in-licensing than out-licensing. 

China does more out-licensing than in-licensing.  

So as a deal-maker, what do I think this data suggests?

1)  You need to capture value from the US, the biggest market and home of blockbusters.

2) US companies do the most in-licensing. US and Europe do the most M&A.

3) The most deals in 2024 and 1st Half of 2025 are still done at discovery and preclinical.

4) Japanese companies are increasingly global companies and do more in-licensing than out-licensing.

5)  China is a source of drugs to bring in, with many drugs in the pipeline and new series A companies needing partners to maximize their value. China does more out-licensing than in-licensing.  Presumably, the huge China vs China competition is pushing Chinese companies to innovate more to compete and to do deals.   And more exits (IPOs and M&A) encourages more VC funding of innovation.

6)  But the low cost and the high populations cities (for fast recruitment) means China should be considered for collaborations for your drug development.  (Just remember you need 20% of patients in the US for FDA approval).

7) Korea is a high-income market but small.  In-licensing deals are often early or at market stage.

Pullan’s Pieces #3 – January – A Corner on Market Sentiments – Seed to Series A

29 Jul

As the saying goes, “What’s in a name? That which we call a Series A by any other name would smell as sweet.” Er… something like that, right? Hmmm, maybe it went a little bit differently.

But whatever it be, or not to be😊, the Seed Round is the new Series A. Clearly. I think we’ve all felt it for sometime but the data is in and the good ‘ole Series A just don’t buy what it used to. Nahhh… the Seed round does that, and it may buy more (equity) than it used to as a Series A (more data hunting and crunching required but one gets a sense that the venture capitalists are, well, capitalizing).

Labiotech does a really nice job collecting and summarizing a variety of topics related to financings and dealmaking in the biotech sector and the 2024 breakdown of funding offers the following approximations (roughly, with some rounding made by this author):

The internal breakdowns for amounts invested look like this:


Readers of this corner will know that we keep a close eye on the XBI

As usual, the outliers can skew the numbers (more on this in a moment) but the median amounts invested into these rounds puh-rihhhty much drive the nail in the coffin of the old thinking about Series dynamics. This data could be charted in another way in which an inverted bell curve would appear and a GAPING hole between $20M and $50M would stare back at you. Think about that for a moment… if you can’t get to value inflection for ~$15-20M, you better be raising $60-75M and have multiple reasons to do so as a cursory view of the companies listed in the dataset further indicates that the lower outliers (sub-median) on the Series A were generally geared for “finding out” about a single asset in the clinic.

Back to that previously mentioned outlier that can skew the averages… it also happens to bring even more of a spotlight to those famed words from Shakespeare which began this Corner on Market Sentiments. One of the companies in the 2024 data set raised a whopping $100,000,000 … as a Seed Round!! Indeed, a rose by any other name…