US and Global Economy: Trends and Findings | Leaders in Pharmaceutical Business Intelligence (LPBI) Group

Archive for the ‘US and Global Economy: Trends and Findings’ Category

Near Term Investment Outlook for 2023: A Perspective from Advisors Potentially Affecting M&A Landscape

Posted in Trends in Global Economy, US and Global Economy: Trends and Findings, Venture Capital, tagged bioinvestment, Biotech Investment and Venture Growth: The Franchising of Intellectual Property as a Business Model, Global Partnering & Biotech Investment, investing, JPM, Life Sciences, M&A Brokers FINRA Guidance Investment Platforms for Private Placements Investment Platforms for Private Funds Crowdfunding, Mergers and acquisitions, PWC, Wells Fargo on August 5, 2022| Leave a Comment »

Near Term Investment Outlook for 2023: A Perspective from Advisors Potentially Affecting M&A Landscape

Curator: Stephen J. Williams, Ph.D.

The following is an adaptation from various reports and the forseen changes in forecast for different sectors as well as the general investment landscape for the near future (2022-2023). Of course projections may change given changes in undewrlying fundamentals.

Many financial advisors and professionals feel the U.S. is in a late-cycle for its economy, with a significant slowing of corporate earnings in the midst of higher than usual inflation {although inflation estimates are being halved from its current 8-10% for next year}. Consensus investment strategies deemed favorable include US (not international) equities with high quality assest and away from cyclicals. This represents the near end of a business cycle. As growth returns and interest rates increase we may seen the entrance into a new business cycle, although this may not happen until later 2023. In general, it is advised investors move out of cyclicals as the economy continues to slow and into large and mid cap US equities.

This change in landscape may be very favorable to the overall Health Care and Information Technology sectors. In health care, Life Sciences Tools and Services as well as Medical Devices are expected to outperform. In IT, IT Services, software and Networking are favored sectors while communication services like Publishing Services are considered to be Neutral to Unfavorable.

What does this mean for Life Sciences and Health Related small companies looking for an Exit or M&A strategies?

With higher interest rates, credit markets may continue to deteriote and companies may have to look toward Global Macro to find any funding through cash or credit markets. Equity Hedge strategies may be neutral to unfavorable with Event Driven opportunities like distressed deals unfavorable but most analysts do consider Merger Arbitrage as Event Driven strategy to be favorable. A competitive and narrow merger and acquisition environment is expected to last through 2023.

A general consensus for a neutroal environment is seen for most Private Equity, although a more favorable environment for small and mid cap buyouts may exist. Recent short term weakness in the IT sector has led to diminished exit valuations however this may be a good entry point for Growth Equity and Venture Capital. Private Debt strategies look unfavorable due to potential US recessions and potential underwriting issues. Therefore Favored Private Capital strategies include Private Equity for Small and Mid Cap Buyouts and Growth Equity and Venture Capital.

Sources:

https://www.wellsfargo.com/investment-institute/2022-midyear-outlook/

Deals to pick up in second half of 2022

All of the stars are aligned for there to be a flurry of deals activity across all areas of the sector despite the slow start to the year so far. Many large pharma players are flush with cash (particularly those that have COVID-19 treatments in their arsenal), biotech valuations have been normalizing after years of a boom market and the 2025 patent cliff is rapidly approaching, all making for a strong deal environment.

Given the broader labor changes, supply shortages and constantly changing supply chain strategies and operations, the focus on quality can be challenging to sustain. Yet the downside can have massive impacts on businesses, including the potential inability to manufacture products.

The long litany of macroeconomic and regulatory headwinds has CEOs looking for transactions that are easily integrated and will get cash off their balance sheet as inflationary pressures mount.

Pharmaceutical & life sciences deals outlook

Increased scrutiny from the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) around larger deals could mean that 2022 will be a year of bolt-on transactions in the $5 to $15 billion range as pharma companies take multiple shots on goal in order to make up for revenues lost to generic competition in the remainder of the decade. However, don’t rule out the potential for larger deals ⁠— consolidation is good for the health ecosystem and drives broader efficiency.

Expect to see big pharma picking up earlier stage companies to try and fill the pipeline gaps that are likely to start in 2024. While market conditions suggest bargain prices for biotech are possible, recent transactions indicate that pharma companies are still paying significantly above current trading prices (ranging from approximately 50 to 100% of current trading), but below the peak valuations of recent memory.

In the first few months of the year, semi-annualized deal value was down 58% from the same period last year, with companies investing just $61.7 billion so far. Only 137 deals were announced during that time, compared to 204 in the year-prior period.

Talk of drug pricing regulations continues in Washington as Congress bats around a pared down version of the Build Back Better plan. Expect some of that tension to ease in the fall if a new Congress takes on a different agenda.

Other areas of the sector like medical devices face similar headwinds from regulators, and continue to deal with a greater impact from semiconductor shortages. Even though semi-annualized deal value in the medical device space is down 85% from the same period the prior year, expect these companies to remain focused on M&A as the subsector searches for alternative forms of revenue ⁠— particularly from new consumer-centric technologies.

Macroeconomic headwinds and geopolitical tensions have created volatility in spending at CDMOs and CROs, limiting their willingness to deploy capital as the uncertainty persists.

Source: https://www.pwc.com/us/en/industries/health-industries/library/pharma-life-sciences-deals-outlook.html

From the JP MorgAN Healthcare Conference

Click to access pdf-dealforma-2022-Annual-outlook-final-ada.pdf

Deals Or No Deals, J.P. Morgan Sets The Tone For 2022

Collaborations, Not M&A, Dominate

12 Jan 2022

· OPINION

Mandy Jackson @ScripMandy Mandy.Jackson@informausa.com

Executive Summary

No big buyouts were revealed during the annual J.P. Morgan Healthcare Conference for a third year in a row. Big pharma firms are in acquisition mode, but execs stress desire for easy integrations and scientific alliances.

Biopharmaceutical industry players – and reporters – eagerly await merger and acquisition announcements going into the annual J.P. Morgan Healthcare Conference, hoping to scrutinize which big pharma is buying which other company for signs of what the deal-making environment will be like in the coming year. And in 2022, for the third year in a row, the meeting started with no big M&A deals.

Instead, Pfizer Inc., Novartis AG, Amgen, Inc., Bristol Myers Squibb Company and others announced collaboration agreements. (Also see “Deal Watch: Bristol, Pfizer Lead Off J.P. Morgan Week With Two Deals Apiece” – Scrip, 11 Jan, 2022.)

They and their peers insisted during J.P. Morgan presentations and Q&A sessions as well as in interviews with Scrip that they do intend to invest in business development in 2022, but with a primary focus on smaller bolt-on acquisitions as well as licensing deals and collaboration agreements. Bolt-on deals have been the focus for the past few years. (Also see “The Pandemic Hurt, But EY Expects More Biopharma Deal-Making In 2021” – Scrip, 11 Jan, 2021.)

Amgen CEO Bradway On Deals: Good (Smaller) Opportunities Are Vast

By Mandy Jackson11 Jan 2022

Amgen is enthusiastic about deals of all sizes, including a new Arrakis collaboration, and is interested in large transactions like its Otezla buy – but Bradway said right-priced opportunities are fewer and farther between.

Read the full article here

While investors and others are clamoring for potential buyers to execute large transactions, Amgen CEO Robert Bradway made the astute – and as he pointed out, obvious – observation that there simply are more small, early-stage ventures to partner with than there are large, later-stage companies to acquire. Bradway also noted that while Amgen would like to buy another growing commercial-stage product like Otezla (apremilast), not only are few available but there are few assets at a price that still leaves value on the table for both companies’ investors.

Source: https://scrip.pharmaintelligence.informa.com/SC145698/Deals-Or-No-Deals-JP-Morgan-Sets-The-Tone-For-2022

Impact of New Regulatory Trends in M&A Deals

The following podcast from Pricewaterhouse Cooper Health Research Institute (called Next in Health) discusses some of the trends in healthcare M&A and is a great listen. However from 6:30 on the podcast discusses a new trend which is occuring in the healthcare company boardroom, which is this new focus on integrating companies that have proven ESG (or environmental, social, governance) functions within their organzations. As stated, doing an M&A deal with a company with strong ESG is looked favorably among regulators now.

Please click on the following link to hear a Google Podcast Next in Health episode

https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5idXp6c3Byb3V0LmNvbS8xMjgyNjQ2LnJzcw?sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwil9sua2cf5AhUErXIEHaoTBQoQ9sEGegQIARAC

Greylock Partners Announces Unique $500 Million Venture to act as Seed Capital Funding for Earliest Stage Startups

Posted in BioTechnology - Venture Creation, BioTechnology - Venture Creation, Venture Capital, Pharmacodynamics and Pharmacokinetics, Technology Advance Assessment of, Technology Transfer: Biotech and Pharmaceutical, Trends in Global Economy, US and Global Economy: Trends and Findings, Venture Capital, tagged Biotech Investment and Venture Growth: The Franchising of Intellectual Property as a Business Model, biotech startup, Global Partnering & Biotech Investment, Greylock Partners, Reid Hoffman, seed capital, seed funding, startup funding, tech startup, Venture capital on October 16, 2021| Leave a Comment »

Greylock Partners Announces Unique $500 Million Venture to act as Seed Capital Funding for Earliest Stage Startups

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, Ph.D.

Greylock Partners CEO Reid Hoffman announces a $500 million fund to help the earliest stage startups find capital.

See video below:

https://www.bloomberg.com/multimedia/api/embed/iframe?id=798828e9-7850-4c83-9348-a35d5fad3e1c

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2021-09-24/intv-sara-guoh-greylock-partners-video

See transcript from Bloomberg.com

00:00This is a lot of money for seed stage deals which is typicallysmaller. Why do you want to make seed such a priority.

00:09So see it has always been a priority for us. We’ve been activeat this stage for a long time and some of our biggest wins

00:15historically have been incubation and seed. So I think companieslike Workday and Palo Alto Networks and more recently abnormal

00:21and Snorkel. And then this year 70 percent of our investmentsyou must mints or seeds before we announce this fund. And so

00:29when we saw this level of opportunity we also want to make surewe had enough funding to really back entrepreneurs and to

00:36support them through their journey and make sure entrepreneursalso know they have different options at the seed for the type

00:41of partners they work with. Now at the seed stage you’re talkingabout companies in their infancy. How early are you investing. I

00:49mean is this ideas on a napkin stage with a couple ofentrepreneurs that you believe in or is it beyond that.

00:58So there definitely is a whole range. We don’t catch everysingle person. Like the day they left their job. Right. But you

01:04know abnormal was to see it in 2018 when it was a slide deck andtwo co-founders. We backed another company recently and self on

01:12first capital. That was a repeat founder we have history with.Similarly no product yet. Just an idea and an early team. And so

01:20the range of when we do see it really depends on when weencounter companies. We do like to get to know people as early

01:26as possible. And sometimes that’s the right time for us to writethe check. Obviously Greylock is a multi-stage venture venture

01:32capital firm and I think founders might have the question here.You know if you give me the seed funding we’ll follow on and

01:38reserves come out of that same bucket. And what could this meanin terms of a longer term relationship with Greylock. What’s the

01:46answer to that. So the first thing I’d start with is seeds forus our core investments. Right. So many firms look at them as

01:54options to then follow on. We look at seeds as investments we’retrying to make money on. We’re building a relationship for the

02:01long term to begin with. Right. So. So I’d start with that thenI’d say it is a third of our fund. So it is a big piece of our

02:09investing. And and you know there are many instances where wethen follow on and invest even more because our conviction

02:16continues or even grows. But the point of us doing seed is notjust a follow on it’s to make that investment. How big is each

02:24deal. I mean would you say that seed is the new series A.I think I think that.

02:33Well let’s see the market data would tell us that round sizesoverall have increased for the same level of progress. And I

02:41think that makes sense right. And the reason being the markethas become a lot smarter at the attractiveness of early stage

02:48technology opportunities. And so great returns in tech venturecapital over many years mean there’s more capital than ever and

02:57people are savvier about software and Internet companies. ButI’d say there is you know I think kind of the noble creature

03:04doesn’t matter so much. We think of it as being the firstinstitutional partner to go to a set of founders. The world is

03:12changing quickly. I mean we’re still in the middle of apandemic. And who would’ve known that you know working from home

03:16was going to be a thing 18 months ago. What are the trends thatyou are most excited about right now that you’re doubling down

03:22on at the seed stage.Yeah. So we invest across the technology spectrum business

03:30consumer. The one you just mentioned in terms of just the seachange of the pandemic in terms of how we do our work together

03:36as one. I’m really excited about but we’ve been we’ve beeninvesting in let’s say just this. There’s a shortage globally

03:44because the pandemic. But even before of human connection andand intimacy and people look for it online. And so we invest in

03:53companies like Dischord and Common ROOM and Promotion that helppeople connect more online. So that’s when we’ll continue to

04:00invest in. And then of course we’re investing across all of yourusual range of SAS social data A.I. etc. and then spending more

04:10and more time in fintech and crypto in particular. Now what arethe potential problems with seed stage. Is that at a certain

04:16point as the company develops maybe they pivot they change. Overtime they could potentially ultimately compete with another one

04:23of your core portfolio companies. How do you manage that.So it’s a good question but it is also something that doesn’t

04:30only happen at the scene and funnily enough Greylock has been aninvestor in several companies that were like great companies

04:37post pivot right. So like first semester and discord and nextdoor after they decided to be what they are today. And so that

04:46you know I’d start with the premise of our our philosophy isthat the company should do what’s best for the company. And we

04:53know our our philosophy is to be fully behind companies and notto go invest in a bunch of competitors in a sector just because

04:59we like this sector. But if that were to happen you know wewould we would just divide those interests within the firm and

05:06like make sure that there’s no information flow and just addressit in a reasonable way. I’ve talked with many of your partners

05:12over the years about investing in more women. And I’m curioushow you look at it as an opportunity to potentially you know

05:22spread the wealth a little bit across more women entrepreneurspeople of color people who historically haven’t gotten a chance

05:29in Silicon Valley and Silicon Valley hasn’t benefited from theirideas.

05:34OK. So I’d say this is an issue that’s near and dear to myheart. We are working on it. Two of the last three founders I

05:40backed are women. One is the seed stage founder. One of thefounders. I backed at the seed stage is Hispanic. But. But I

05:49would say you know one thing I want to make sure is clear. Likeyou want to back great founders from diverse backgrounds across

05:56the spectrum. And like we wouldn’t like do it more in seedbecause seed isn’t important. Because it is important to us.

06:02Right. It’s just across the portfolio. This is a priority.

From TechStartups

Source: https://techstartups.com/2021/09/22/greylock-partners-raises-500-million-invest-seed-stage-startups/

Greylock Partners raises $500 million to invest in seed-stage startups

Nickie LouisePOSTED ON SEPTEMBER 22, 2021

Greylock Partners has raised $500 million to invest exclusively in seed-stage startups. The announcement comes a year after the firm raised $1 billion for its 16th flagship fund to invest in early- and growth-stage tech startups.

Guo and general partner Saam Motamedi said in an interview the fund is part of an expansion of a $1.1 billion fund, which we reported last year, to $1.6 billion, The Information reported. The funding is among the industry’s largest devoted to seed investments, which often represent a startup’s first outside capital.

The pool of funds will give the 56-year-old venture capital firm the ability to write large checks at “lean-in valuations” and emphasize its commitment to early-stage investing, said general partner Sarah Guo. In a thread post on Twitter, Greylock said, “We at @GreylockVC are excited to announce we’ve raised $500M dedicated to seed investing. This is the industry’s largest pool of venture capital dedicated to backing founders at day one.”

Press Release from Grelock

$500M for Seeds

Real Time Coverage @BIOConvention #BIO2019: Keynote Address Jamie Dimon CEO @jpmorgan June 5 Philadelphia

Posted in Conference Coverage with Social Media, Ethics and Leadership, Executive Compensation - Big Pharma, Global Partnering & Biotech Investment, Income Geographic Distribution, Intellectual Property, International Global Work in Pharmaceutical, US and Global Economy: Trends and Findings, Venture Capital, tagged #JPM2019, Global Partnering & Biotech Investment, JP Morgan on June 5, 2019| Leave a Comment »

Real Time Coverage @BIOConvention #BIO2019: Keynote Address Jamie Dimon CEO @jpmorgan June 5 Philadelphia

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, PhD @StephenJWillia2

Dr Janet Woodcock from FDA was given the BIO Heritage award for leading the FDA from safety focus of 90s to the Voice of the Patient. She became a champion for advocacy groups
Governor Phil Murphy, Governor of New Jersey, received the Governor of the Year Award. New Jersey known as medicine chest of the world, have first 3D printed drug on market and number two in biotech and number one on drug approvals. We must do more to foster stem education. It will take private and public capital investment. New Jersey matches federal dollars and had doubled the angel investor tax credit.
Dr. Kakkis CEO of Ultragenix wins the Genzyme Henri Termeer Award for visionary work. Dr. Termeer recently passed. Dr. Kakkis is awarded for work with patients of rare diseases and help formulating legislation to help patients with rare disease have access to investigational drugs quickly.
Dr. Jeremy Levin from OVID named new chair of BIO

Interview with Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan

Mr Dimon had recently survived throat cancer and now has a renewed dedication to improving people’s lives. With Amazon had embarked on a nonprofit experimental model to streamline healthcare for their employees. He said the hardest part of going through cancer was telling his parents and children.
On the bailout he said it was a lie all banks needed TARP but could not just give to some and not all. He says the financial system in US is very solid so next downturn will not come from financial sector and never is from geopolitical but trade issues could be a catalyst. Policy usually always does the opposite of what is intended. He announced no intention of running for President of US.
We need to keep a growth agenda which includes education and infrastructure, without these competitive business tax relief does no account for much. We need a better conversation of how government handles finances
Immigration, education very important. Higher education needs to reduce costs and incentivize the people they bring in to stay here.
on healthcare: JPM had reduced the deductables to zero for workers making $60,000 or less

Please follow LIVE on TWITTER using the following @ handles and # hashtags:

@Handles

@pharma_BI

@AVIVA1950

@BIOConvention

# Hashtags

#BIO2019 (official meeting hashtag)

#itstartswithone

#RightMixMatters

37th Annual J.P. Morgan HEALTHCARE CONFERENCE: News at #JPM2019 for Jan. 10, 2019: Deals and Announcements

37th Annual J.P. Morgan HEALTHCARE CONFERENCE: News at #JPM2019 for Jan. 8, 2019: Deals and Announcements

37th Annual J.P. Morgan HEALTHCARE CONFERENCE: #JPM2019 for Jan. 8, 2019; Opening Videos, Novartis expands Cell Therapies, January 7 – 10, 2019, Westin St. Francis Hotel | San Francisco, California

Read Full Post »

We’re seeing an acceleration of M&A activity and a growing IPO pipeline through the end of 2016, but the bar remains high.

Posted in US and Global Economy: Trends and Findings, Venture Capital on December 3, 2016| Leave a Comment »

We’re seeing an acceleration of M&A activity and a growing IPO pipeline through the end of 2016, but the bar remains high.

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

Here’s what one top VC firm predicts will happen to tech startups in 2017

Accel, Medium

Dec. 2, 2016, 9:00 AM

Accel is an early & growth-stage venture capital firm and is known for its investments in Facebook, Slack, and Dropbox. This is the firm’s annual presentation on what the tech environment is like for founders today and what will happen in 2017, republished with permission.

It’s an incredible time to be a technology entrepreneur.
A rising “new guard” are officially the most valuable companies in the world: Apple, Alphabet/Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook.
But of course, it’s important to stay disciplined.
We’re seeing an acceleration of M&A activity and a growing IPO pipeline through the end of 2016, but the bar remains high.

*In order as of 11/22/16:

Apple — $596B
Alphabet/Google — $551B
Microsoft — $478B
Amazon — $372B
Facebook — $348B

**Bloomberg dug into the numbers here too.

SOURCE

http://www.businessinsider.com/accel-2017-vc-predictions-2016-11

Read Full Post »

The 16th annual EmTech MIT – A Place of Inspiration, October 18-20, 2016, Cambridge, MA

Posted in 3D Printing for Medical Application, Academic Publishing, Bio Instrumentation in Experimental Life Sciences Research, Bio-Ethics, BioIT: BioInformatics, BioIT: BioInformatics, NGS, Clinical & Translational, Pharmaceutical R&D Informatics, Clinical Genomics, Cancer Informatics, Biomarkers & Medical Diagnostics, BioTechnology - Venture Creation, Venture Capital, CANCER BIOLOGY & Innovations in Cancer Therapy, Conference Coverage with Social Media, CRISPR/Cas9 & Gene Editing, US and Global Economy: Trends and Findings, Venture Capital on May 17, 2016| Leave a Comment »

The 16th annual EmTech MIT – A Place of Inspiration, October 18-20, 2016, Cambridge, MA

MIT Media Lab
Building E14
75 Amherst Street
(Corner of Ames and Amherst)
Cambridge, MA 02139

Conference Location: Entire 6th floor of Building E14

EmTech MIT Brings The Award-Winning Journalism of MIT Technology Review To Life

The 16th annual EmTech MIT gathers preeminent thought leaders, researchers and business leaders to examine the most significant themes in emerging technologies, including:

– Rethinking Energy

– Virtual Reality, Augmented Life

– Artificial intelligence

– Global Connectivity

– Engineering a Healthy Planet

– Spotlight talks on the 10 Breakthrough Technologies

– Celebration of the 2016 Innovators Under 35

ANNOUNCEMENT

Leaders in Pharmaceutical Business Intelligence (LPBI) Group, Boston

will cover in REAL TIME

The 16th annual EmTech MIT – A Place of Inspiration, October 18-20, 2016, Cambridge, MA

http://events.technologyreview.com/emtech/16/

In attendance, streaming LIVE using Social Media

Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

Editor-in-Chief

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com

@pharma_BI

@AVIVA1950

All Speakers

SOURCE

http://events.technologyreview.com/emtech/16/#section-about

Featured Speakers

Rachel
Haot

Managing Director, 1776

Incubating Technical Solutions with Global Impact
Yael
Maguire

Engineering Director, Facebook Connectivity Lab

Expanding the Global Impact of Internet Connectivity
Pranav
Mistry

Global Vice President of Research, Samsung

Envisioning What’s Next for Virtual Reality
Padmasree
Warrior

CEO, NextEV

Imagining Clean, Connected Transportation

Nora
Ayanian

Gabilan Assistant Professor, University of Southern California

2016 Innovator Under 35
Amir
Banifatemi

Prize Lead, X Prize

Incentivizing Innovative Approaches & Collaboration in A.I.
Muyinatu
Bell

Assistant Professor, Johns Hopkins University

2016 Innovator Under 35
Brian
Bergstein

Executive Editor, MIT Technology Review
Nessan
Bermingham

Chief Executive Officer, President and Founder, Intellia Therapeutics

The Potential for Genome Editing Technology to Transform Medicine
Dinesh
Bharadia

Postdoctoral Associate, MIT CSAIL

2016 Innovator Under 35
Heather
Bowerman

CEO & Founder, Dot Laboratories

2016 Innovator Under 35
Elizabeth
Bramson-Boudreau

Chief Operating Officer, MIT Technology Review
Qing
Cao

Research Staff Member, IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

2016 Innovator Under 35
Jagdish
Chaturvedi

Director, Clinical Innovations, InnAccel

2016 Innovator Under 35
David
Cox

Assistant Professor of Molecular and Cellular Biology and of Computer Science, Harvard University

Building Computer Vision Systems Inspired by the Brain
Tom
Davenport

President’s Distinguished Professor of Information Technology & Management, Babson College

Presented by RAGE Frameworks
Stefano
Domenicali

CEO, Automobili Lamborghini

Presented by the Italian Trade Agency
Kevin
Esvelt

Assistant Professor, MIT Media Lab

The Technology Driving Gene Drives
Vivian
Ferry

Assistant Professor, University of Minnesota

2016 Innovator Under 35
Wei
Gao

Postdoctoral Fellow, University of California, Berkeley

2016 Innovator Under 35
Dileep
George

Cofounder, Vicarious

Artificial Intelligence At Work
Shyam
Gollakota

Assistant Professor, University of Washington

10 Breakthrough Technologies of 2016: Power from the Air
Meron
Gribetz

CEO, Meta

2016 Innovator Under 35
Jiawei
Gu

Cofounder, Ling Robotics

2016 Innovator Under 35
Rachel
Haot

Managing Director, 1776

Incubating Technical Solutions with Global Impact
Alex
Hegyi

Member of Research Staff, PARC

2016 Innovator Under 35
Katherine
High

Cofounder, President and Chief Scientific Officer, Spark Therapeutics

Gene Therapy: A New Era of Medicine
Christine
Ho

CEO, Imprint Energy, Inc.

2016 Innovator Under 35
Ehsan
Hoque

Assistant Professor, University of Rochester

2016 Innovator Under 35
Solomon
Hsiang

Chancellor’s Associate Professor of Public Policy, University of California, Berkeley

Addressing the Effects of Climate Change
Karl
Iagnemma

CEO and Cofounder, nuTonomy

Intelligent Machines: Autonomous Cars
Sangbae
Kim

Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering, MIT

Robots at Work
Samay
Kohli

Chief Executive Officer, GreyOrange

2016 Innovator Under 35
Kendra
Kuhl

CTO, Opus 12

2016 Innovator Under 35
Maithilee
Kunda

Assistant Professor, Vanderbilt University

2016 Innovator Under 35
Stephanie
Lampkin

Founder & CEO, Blendoor

2016 Innovator Under 35
Desmond
Loke

Assistant Professor, Singapore University of Technology and Design

2016 Innovator Under 35
Evan
Macosko

Instructor, Harvard Medical School

2016 Innovator Under 35
Yael
Maguire

Engineering Director, Facebook Connectivity Lab

Expanding the Global Impact of Internet Connectivity
Vikram
Mahidhar

SVP, Artificial Intelligence Solutions, RAGE Frameworks

Presented by RAGE Frameworks
Marcela
Maus

Director of Cellular Immunotherapy, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center

The Promise of Cancer Immunotherapy
Pranav
Mistry

Global Vice President of Research, Samsung

Envisioning What’s Next for Virtual Reality
Jason
Pontin

Editor in Chief and Publisher, MIT Technology Review
Ramesh
Raskar

Director, MIT Media Lab Camera Culture Group

Presented by Lemelson-MIT
Alberto Maria
Sacchi

Board Member & Past President, Federmacchine

Presented by the Italian Trade Agency
Don
Sadoway

Professor, Materials Science & Engineering, MIT

Providing Power for a Growing Global Population
Ruslan
Salakhutdinov

Associate Professor, Carnegie Mellon University

The Promise and Limitations of Machine Learning
Kelly
Sanders

Assistant Professor, University of Southern California

2016 Innovator Under 35
Michele
Scannavini

President, Italian Trade Agency

Presented by the Italian Trade Agency
Stefanie
Tellex

Assistant Professor, Computer Science, Brown University

10 Breakthrough Technologies of 2016: Robots That Teach Each Other
Ronaldo
Tenorio

CEO, Hand Talk

2016 Innovator Under 35
Sonia
Vallabh

PhD Student, Prion Scientist, Broad Institute

2016 Innovator Under 35
Cyrus
Vance Jr.

Manhattan District Attorney, Manhattan District Attorney’s Office

Security & Privacy in the Connected Era
Oriol
Vinyals

Research Scientist, Google DeepMind

2016 Innovator Under 35
Aleksandra
Vojvodic

Assistant Professor, University of Pennsylvania

2016 Innovator Under 35
Padmasree
Warrior

CEO, NextEV

Imagining Clean, Connected Transportation
Jean
Yang

Assistant Professor, Carnegie Mellon University

2016 Innovator Under 35
Yihui
Zhang

Associate Professor, Tsinghua University

2016 Innovator Under 35
Jia
Zhu

Professor, Nanjing University

2016 Innovator Under 35

Read Full Post »

Yesterday and today are not the same

Posted in Leadership, Power, Social Interlocking Connections, Social Development, Stress Disorders, Substance Abuse, US and Global Economy: Trends and Findings, tagged economics, Joseph Stiglitz, millenials on March 20, 2016| Leave a Comment »

Yesterday and today are not the same

Curator: Larry H. Bernstein, MD, FCAP

The New Generation Gap

https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/new-generation-gap-social-injustice-by-joseph-e–stiglitz-2016-03

Joseph E. Stiglitz

Joseph E. Stiglitz, recipient of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences in 2001 and the John Bates Clark Medal in 1979, is University Professor at Columbia University, Co-Chair of the High-Level Expert Group on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress at the OECD, and Chief Economist of the Roosevelt Institute. A former senior vice president and chief economist of the World Bank and chair of the US president’s Council of Economic Advisers under Bill Clinton, in 2000 he founded the Initiative for Policy Dialogue, a think tank on international development based at Columbia University. His most recent book is Rewriting the Rules of the American Economy.

NEW YORK – Something interesting has emerged in voting patterns on both sides of the Atlantic: Young people are voting in ways that are markedly different from their elders. A great divide appears to have opened up, based not so much on income, education, or gender as on the voters’ generation.

There are good reasons for this divide. The lives of both old and young, as they are now lived, are different. Their pasts are different, and so are their prospects.

The Cold War, for example, was over even before some were born and while others were still children. Words like socialism do not convey the meaning they once did. If socialism means creating a society where shared concerns are not given short shrift – where people care about other people and the environment in which they live – so be it. Yes, there may have been failed experiments under that rubric a quarter- or half-century ago; but today’s experiments bear no resemblance to those of the past. So the failure of those past experiments says nothing about the new ones.

Older upper-middle-class Americans and Europeans have had a good life. When they entered the labor force, well-compensated jobs were waiting for them. The question they asked was what they wanted to do, not how long they would have to live with their parents before they got a job that enabled them to move out.

That generation expected to have job security, to marry young, to buy a house – perhaps a summer house, too – and finally retire with reasonable security. Overall, they expected to be better off than their parents.

While today’s older generation encountered bumps along the way, for the most part, their expectations were met. They may have made more on capital gains on their homes than from working. They almost surely found that strange, but they willingly accepted the gift of our speculative markets, and often gave themselves credit for buying in the right place at the right time.

Today, the expectations of young people, wherever they are in the income distribution, are the opposite. They face job insecurity throughout their lives. On average, many college graduates will search for months before they find a job – often only after having taken one or two unpaid internships. And they count themselves lucky, because they know that their poorer counterparts, some of whom did better in school, cannot afford to spend a year or two without income, and do not have the connections to get an internship in the first place.

Today’s young university graduates are burdened with debt – the poorer they are, the more they owe. So they do not ask what job they would like; they simply ask what job will enable them to pay their college loans, which often will burden them for 20 years or more. Likewise, buying a home is a distant dream.

These struggles mean that young people are not thinking much about retirement. If they did, they would only be frightened by how much they will need to accumulate to live a decent life (beyond bare social security), given the likely persistence of rock-bottom interest rates.

In short, today’s young people view the world through the lens of intergenerational fairness. The children of the upper middle class may do well in the end, because they will inherit wealth from their parents. While they may not like this kind of dependence, they dislike even more the alternative: a “fresh start” in which the cards are stacked against their attainment of anything approaching what was once viewed as a basic middle-class lifestyle.

These inequities cannot easily be explained away. It isn’t as if these young people didn’t work hard: these hardships affect those who spent long hours studying, excelled in school, and did everything “right.” The sense of social injustice – that the economic game is rigged – is enhanced as they see the bankers who brought on the financial crisis, the cause of the economy’s continuing malaise, walk away with mega-bonuses, with almost no one being held accountable for their wrongdoing. Massive fraud was committed, but somehow, no one actually perpetrated it. Political elites promised that “reforms” would bring unprecedented prosperity. And they did, but only for the top 1%. Everyone else, including the young, got unprecedented insecurity.

These three realities – social injustice on an unprecedented scale, massive inequities, and a loss of trust in elites – define our political moment, and rightly so.

More of the same is not an answer. That is why the center-left and center-right parties in Europe are losing. America is in a strange position: while the Republican presidential candidates compete on demagoguery, with ill-thought-through proposals that would make matters worse, both of the Democratic candidates are proposing changes which – if they could only get them through Congress – would make a real difference.

Were the reforms put forward by Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders adopted, the financial system’s ability to prey on those already leading a precarious life would be curbed. And both have proposals for deep reforms that would change how America finances higher education.

But more needs to be done to make home ownership possible not just for those with parents who can give them a down payment, and to make retirement security possible, given the vagaries of the stock market and the near-zero-interest world we have entered. Most important, the young will not find a smooth path into the job market unless the economy is performing much better. The “official” unemployment rate in the United States, at 4.9%, masks much higher levels of disguised unemployment, which, at the very least, are holding down wages.

But we won’t be able to fix the problem if we don’t recognize it. Our young do. They perceive the absence of intergenerational justice, and they are right to be angry.

Read Full Post »

Bad News this Week for Biotech Deals? News from Biospace on Deals week of 3/7/2016

Posted in Pharmaceutical Industry Competitive Intelligence, US and Global Economy: Trends and Findings, Venture Capital, tagged #biotech, Biotech Investment and Venture Growth: The Franchising of Intellectual Property as a Business Model, Funding, VC, Venture capital on March 14, 2016| Leave a Comment »

Bad News this Week for Biotech Deals?

Curator: Stephen J. Williams, Ph.D

Last week in biotech ( 3/7-3/11/2016) had a plethora of disappointing stories related to biotech drug development and hits to biotech investing and VC. Since October of 2016 the biotech index has lost 35% to today (see Biotech ETFs Hit 52-Week Lows: Time to Buy?) however were the hit back in October a signal of some of the listed events below (as shown on Biospace News) and includes:

an long-time biotech startup with failure of mesothelioma trial who has struggled in the past
multiple clinical trial failures forces the de-listing of a NASDAQ company (other biotechs this year had similar problems)
more problems with drug development for Duchenne’s Muscular Dystrophy

GlaxoSmithKline dumps Five Prime’s cancer drug in the midst of Phase I

March 11, 2016 | By Damian Garde

GSK gave Five Prime a 180-day notice that it’s nixing its license to the company’s FP-1039, which is designed to block the spread of cancer by interrupting protein signaling. The decision follows GSK’s January move to stop developing FP-1039 in squamous non-small cell lung cancer due to the rise of immuno-oncology therapies from Merck ($MRK), Bristol-Myers Squibb ($BMY) and others, citing a “change in treatment paradigms.”GlaxoSmithKline ($GSK) is cutting ties with Five Prime Therapeutics’ ($FPRX) in-development cancer therapy, backing out in the middle of a mesothelioma trial.

Now GSK is set to abandon a drug it inherited through its $3 billion acquisition of Human Genome Sciences in 2012, leaving Five Prime to go it alone in an ongoing Phase Ib study testing FP-1039 against mesothelioma. Five Prime said it plans to work with GSK to complete enrollment in the study, adding that it “continues to be encouraged” by the drug’s potential in mesothelioma.

Embattled Bay Area XOMA (XOMA) Terminates Gevokizumab Trials, Slashes Headcount by 50%

3/11/2016 6:39:17 AM

March 11, 2016
By Alex Keown, BioSpace.com Breaking News Staff

BERKELY, Calif. – Troubled XOMA Corp. (XOMA) is terminating half of its workforce after a late-stage failure of its experimental drug gevokizumab for treatment of pyoderma gangrenosum, the San Francisco Business Times reported this morning.

Following the announcement, Xoma’s stock is down this morning about 5 percent, trading at 91 cents per share as of this writing.

Xoma said it is interested in divesting itself of gevokizumab. In a statement, the company said several companies have approached Xoma about acquiring the drug. Gevokizumab binds to interleukin-1 beta (IL-1 beta), a pro-inflammatory cytokine. Xoma said it will make all information about the drug and study information available to potential buyers. Gevokizumab has had a troubled history with Xoma. The company has halted several trials with the drug for various diseases, including diabetes and a blinding eye disease, the Times reported. In 2014, Xoma was forced to stop testing gevokizumab as an arthritis treatment after the drug did not show significant benefit against placebo after a six-month period.

Struggling Eleven Biotherapeutics (EBIO) Gets Delisting Notice from Nasdaq After Back-to-Back Clinical Trial Failures

3/10/2016 6:07:38 AM

March 10, 2016
By Mark Terry, BioSpace.com Breaking News Staff

With one piece of bad news after another, Cambridge, Mass.-based Eleven Biotherapeutics Inc. (EBIO) filed a Form 8-Kwith the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, addressed a delisting notification it received from the Nasdaq on Mar. 3.

The Nasdaq informed the company that its stock dropped below $1 a share, and that the stockholder equity didn’t comply with the $5,000,000 minimum stockholders’ equity requirement. As a result, it has 180 days to comply with Nasdaq rules.

On Jan. 10, the company announced that its Phase III clinical trial of EBI-005 (isunakinra) for severe allergic conjunctivitis did not meet its primary endpoint.

In May 2015, the company reported that its drug, EBI-005, for moderate to severe dry eye disease, failed to prevent damage to the cornea or reduce eye pain in comparison to the control group.

In a January statement, Abbie Celniker, president and chief executive officer of Eleven Biotherapeutics, said, “We are disappointed that isunakinra failed to meet its primary endpoint, and based on these overall results we see no immediate path forward in allergic conjunctivitis. Our efforts will be focused on submitting an investigational new drug application (IND) for EBI-031 in diabetic macular edema in the first half of 2016.”

EBI-031 was designed for intravitreal delivery using the company’s AMP-Rx platform. The drug blocks both free IL-6 and IL-6 complexed to the soluble IL-6 receptor (IL-6R). The compound is being developed to treat diabetic macular edema (DME) and uveitis.

DMD Setback Prompts Sarepta (SRPT) to Shutter West Coast Location and Consolidate to Massachusetts, 30 Jobs Gone

3/9/2016 6:13:13 AM

March 9, 2016
By Mark Terry, BioSpace.com Breaking News Staff

Cambridge, Mass.-based Sarepta Therapeutics (SRPT) announced yesterday that it was shuttering its research-and-development manufacturing facility in Corvalis, Ore. Most of the employees there are expected to move to Sarepta’s facilities in Andover and Cambridge, Mass. About 30 people are expected to be laid off.

On Jan. 21, Sarepta announced that, with an impending snowstorm on the east coast, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)’s meeting to review the company’s New Drug Application (NDA) for eteplirsen to treat Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD) was postponed.

DMD is a muscle wasting disease caused by mutations in the dystrophin gene. The disease is progressive and generally causes death in early adulthood. Complications include serious heart or respiratory-related problems. It mostly affects boys, about 1 in every 3,500 to 5,000 male children.

On Jan. 15, an FDA advisory committee decided to reschedule the meeting, at which point a recommendation or approval decision will be made. That meeting of the Peripheral and Central Nervous System Advisory Committee has not been rescheduled yet, but Sarepta believes it will be prior to May 26, which is the PDUFA date. The Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) is a law that allows the FDA to collect an application fee from drug companies when an NDA or Biologics License Application (BLA) is submitted.

The DMD drug arena has been fraught with failures and bad news this year. San Rafael, Calif.-based BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc. (BMRN)’s application for its DMD drug Kyndrisa (drisapersen) was turned down by the FDA on Jan. 15. The FDA argued that Kyndrisa didn’t show enough benefit.

On Jan. 25, Cambridge, Mass.-based Akashi Therapeuticsannounced that it had halted its DMD trial for HT-100 after one of its patients developed serious, life-threatening health problems. In that DMD is a serious, life-threatening health problem in itself, it’s not clear if the patient’s problems are directly related to the drug. The patient was receiving the highest dose in the HALO trial, while others in the trial with lower doses were not showing adverse side effects.

Read Full Post »

Brookings Papers on Economic Activity (BPEA): Wealth and Income Concentration is rising by about half as much as previously thought

Posted in US and Global Economy: Trends and Findings, tagged a “Shadow Stimulus, ” and other BPEA Findings, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Challenging Piketty on March 14, 2016| Leave a Comment »

Brookings Papers on Economic Activity (BPEA): Wealth and Income Concentration is rising by about half as much as previously thought

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

SOURCE

From: “Janice Eberly and Jim Stock, Brookings Institution” <economicstudies@brookings.edu>

Reply-To: <economicstudies@brookings.edu>

Date: Monday, March 14, 2016 at 1:40 PM

To: Aviva Lev-Ari <AvivaLev-Ari@alum.berkeley.edu>

Subject: Challenging Piketty, a “Shadow Stimulus,” and other BPEA Findings

Read new research from the Brookings Papers on Economic Activity.
View this email in your browser here.

Friends and Colleagues,

We spent Thursday and Friday of last week sitting at Brookings, discussing six new papers with dozens of the world’s top economists and readying the findings to be published in our economics journal, the Brookings Papers on Economic Activity (BPEA).

One of the great things about this twice-yearly conference is that, in the spirit of true academic discussion, it often raises as many questions as it answers.

Here are six things we wanted to share from inside our discussion room:

1. “If this is our technological future, economists aren’t sure it adds up to much.” The Washington Post’s Wonkblog has a great summary of important new research on why we can’t blame the ongoing productivity decline on our inability to measure the benefits of the Internet and other technological innovations.

2. A group of Fed economists challenged what renowned economists Piketty, Saez and others say about the richest 1%. The blue line in the chart below represents the new BPEA estimates. The blue line is still rising—but a lot more slowly. The authors ultimately conclude that wealth and income concentration is rising by about half as much as previously thought.

3. We debated whether federal lending programs served as a “shadow stimulus.” (h/t Wall Street Journal on the apt phrasing.) These programs, especially housing and student loans, grew dramatically during the Great Recession. There was a lively discussion around a finding that the government’s housing and education credit programs were nearly as large as the 2009 stimulus act (ARRA) and on average three times more effective per dollar of cost at stimulating the economy.

4. Boys whose mothers did not complete high school are even more likely to drop out of high school themselves—if they live in areas with high income inequality. Typical explanations, like school quality, don’t account for this finding. The boys’ academic attainment explains part of it, though, reinforcing the view that interventions to get kids on track early may break the link between inequality and low mobility. This interactive map illustrates the point well.

5. American workers are moving around the labor market less and less, and it’s not because of disruptive technologies. This decline is pervasive across losing a job, finding a job, dropping out of the labor force, and moving from one job to another. The “fluidity rate” has been declining for at least three decades, but a closer look at the rate in different U.S. states shows that the decline in fluidity was smaller in states with more workers in routine jobs displaced by technological advancements. See the chart here.

6. If you’ve ever lived through hyperinflation, you know that very poor people are by necessity very sophisticated about inflation and exchange rates. That’s an observation from a conference participant, but it helps explain a finding that the average Argentinian wasn’t fooled by the government’s notorious manipulation of inflation data from 2007- 2013. David Wessel has moreon this “interesting question…[of] how much public perceptions matter.” As the Fed worries about inflation expectations going forward, the lesson from Argentina is that the general public can be very sophisticated when the stakes get high.

If you want to know more about BPEA or the new research submitted to this edition of the journal,v isit BPEA on the Brookings website. We’ll be back in the fall with more new findings from leading economists.

Sincerely,
Janice Eberly and James Stock
Co-editors, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity
Nonresident Senior Fellows, Economic Studies at Brookings

SOURCE

From: “Janice Eberly and Jim Stock, Brookings Institution” <economicstudies@brookings.edu>

Reply-To: <economicstudies@brookings.edu>

Date: Monday, March 14, 2016 at 1:40 PM

To: Aviva Lev-Ari <AvivaLev-Ari@alum.berkeley.edu>

Subject: Challenging Piketty, a “Shadow Stimulus,” and other BPEA Findings