startup | Leaders in Pharmaceutical Business Intelligence (LPBI) Group

Posts Tagged ‘startup’

AI Acquisitions by Big Tech Firms Are Happening at a Blistering Pace: 2019 Recent Data by CBIInsights

Posted in An executive's guide to AI, Artificial Intelligence - Breakthroughs in Theories and Technologies, Artificial Intelligence - General, Artificial Intelligence Applications in Health Care, Artificial Intelligence in Medicine - Applications in Therapeutics, Big Data, Intelligent Information Systems, Transformative Technologies in Healthcare, tagged AI, Amazon, Apple, Artificial intelligence, Big data, big tech, early ventures, Facebook, Google, Machine Learning, Mergers and acquisitions, microsoft, startup on December 11, 2019| Leave a Comment »

AI Acquisitions by Big Tech Firms Are Happening at a Blistering Pace: 2019 Recent Data by CBI Insights

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, Ph.D.

3.4.16 AI Acquisitions by Big Tech Firms Are Happening at a Blistering Pace: 2019 Recent Data by CBI Insights, Volume 2 (Volume Two: Latest in Genomics Methodologies for Therapeutics: Gene Editing, NGS and BioInformatics, Simulations and the Genome Ontology), Part 3: AI in Medicine

Recent report from CBI Insights shows the rapid pace at which the biggest tech firms (Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, and Amazon) are acquiring artificial intelligence (AI) startups, potentially confounding the AI talent shortage that exists.

The link to the report and free download is given here at https://www.cbinsights.com/research/top-acquirers-ai-startups-ma-timeline/

Part of the report:

TECH GIANTS LEAD IN AI ACQUISITIONS

The usual suspects are leading the race for AI: tech giants like Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft, Google, & Apple (FAMGA) have all been aggressively acquiring AI startups in the last decade.

Among the FAMGA companies, Apple leads the way, making 20 total AI acquisitions since 2010. It is followed by Google (the frontrunner from 2012 to 2016) with 14 acquisitions and Microsoft with 10.

Apple’s AI acquisition spree, which has helped it overtake Google in recent years, was essential to the development of new iPhone features. For example, FaceID, the technology that allows users to unlock their iPhone X just by looking at it, stems from Apple’s M&A moves in chips and computer vision, including the acquisition of AI company RealFace.

In fact, many of FAMGA’s prominent products and services came out of acquisitions of AI companies — such as Apple’s Siri, or Google’s contributions to healthcare through DeepMind.

That said, tech giants are far from the only companies snatching up AI startups.

Since 2010, there have been 635 AI acquisitions, as companies aim to build out their AI capabilities and capture sought-after talent (as of 8/31/2019).

The pace of these acquisitions has also been increasing. AI acquisitions saw a more than 6x uptick from 2013 to 2018, including last year’s record of 166 AI acquisitions — up 38% year-over-year.

In 2019, there have already been 140+ acquisitions (as of August), putting the year on track to beat the 2018 record at the current run rate.

Part of this increase in the pace of AI acquisitions can be attributed to a growing diversity in acquirers. Where once AI was the exclusive territory of major tech companies, today, smaller AI startups are becoming acquisition targets for traditional insurance, retail, and healthcare incumbents.

For example, in February 2018, Roche Holding acquired New York-based cancer startup Flatiron Health for $1.9B — one of the largest M&A deals in artificial intelligence. This year, Nike acquired AI-powered inventory management startup Celect, Uber acquired computer vision company Mighty AI, and McDonald’s acquired personalization platform Dynamic Yield.

Despite the increased number of acquirers, however, tech giants are still leading the charge. Acquisitive tech giants have emerged as powerful global corporations with a competitive advantage in artificial intelligence, and startups have played a pivotal role in helping these companies scale their AI initiatives.

Apple, Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Intel, and Amazon are the most active acquirers of AI startups, each acquiring 7+ companies.

To read more on recent Acquisitions in the AI space please see the following articles on this Open Access Online Journal

Diversification and Acquisitions, 2001 – 2015: Trail known as “Google Acquisitions” – Understanding Alphabet’s Acquisitions: A Sector-By-Sector Analysis

Clarivate Analytics expanded IP data leadership by new acquisition of the leading provider of intellectual property case law and analytics Darts-ip

2019 Biotechnology Sector and Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare

Forbes Opinion: 13 Industries Soon To Be Revolutionized By Artificial Intelligence

Artificial Intelligence and Cardiovascular Disease

Multiple Barriers Identified Which May Hamper Use of Artificial Intelligence in the Clinical Setting

Top 12 Artificial Intelligence Innovations Disrupting Healthcare by 2020

The launch of SCAI – Interview with Gérard Biau, director of the Sorbonne Center for Artificial Intelligence (SCAI).

Read Full Post »

NIH SBIR Funding Early Ventures: September 26, 2018 sponsored by Pennovation

Posted in BioTechnology - Venture Creation, BioTechnology - Venture Creation, Venture Capital, CANCER BIOLOGY & Innovations in Cancer Therapy, FDA Regulatory Affairs, Foundations for supporting Science and Education, Global Partnering & Biotech Investment, Intellectual Property, Innovations, Commercialization, Investment in technological breakthrough, Uncategorized, Venture Capital, tagged biotech startup, Biotechnology, early ventures, national cancer institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH) ’s Common Fund, NCI, SBIR, startup on September 27, 2018| Leave a Comment »

NIH SBIR Funding Early Ventures: September 26, 2018 sponsored by Pennovation

Stephen J. Williams PhD, Reporter

Penn Center for Innovation (Pennovation) sponsored a “Meet with NCI SBIR” program directors at University of Pennsylvania Medicine Smilow Center for Translational Research with a presentation on advice on preparing a successful SBIR/STTR application to the NCI as well as discussion of NCI SBIR current funding opportunities. Time was allotted in the afternoon for one-on-one discussions with NCI SBIR program directors.

To find similar presentations and one-on-one discussions with NCI/SBIR program directors in an area nearest to you please go to their page at:

https://sbir.cancer.gov/newsevents/events

For more complete information on the NCI SBIR and STTR programs please go to their web page at: https://sbir.cancer.gov/about

A few notes from the meeting are given below:

In 2016 the SBIR/STTR 2016 funded $2.5 billion (US) of early stage companies; this is compared to the $6.6 billion invested in early stage ventures by venture capital firms so the NCI program is very competitive with alternate sources of funding
It was stressed that the SBIR programs are flexible as far as ownership of a company; SBIR allows now that >50% of the sponsoring company can be owned by other ventures; In addition they are looking more favorably on using outside contractors and giving leeway on budgetary constraints so AS THEY SUGGEST ALWAYS talk to the program director about any questions you may have well before (at least 1 month) you submit. More on eligibility criteria is found at: https://sbir.cancer.gov/about/eligibilitycriteria
STTR should have strong preliminary data since more competitive; if don’t have enough go for an R21 emerging technologies grant which usually does not require preliminary data
For entities outside the US need a STRONG reason for needing to do work outside the US

Budget levels were discussed as well as the waiver program, which allows for additional funds to be requested based on criteria set by NCI (usually for work that is deemed high priority or of a specialized nature which could not be covered sufficiently under the standard funding limits) as below:

Phase I: 150K standard but you can get waivers for certain work up to 300K

Phase II: 1M with waiver up to 2M

Phase IIB waiver up to 4M

You don’t need to apply for the waiver but grant offices may suggest citing a statement requesting a waiver as review panels will ask for this information

Fast Track was not discussed in the presentation but for more information of the Fast Track program please visit the website

NCI is working hard to cut review times to 7 months between initial review to funding however at beginning of the year they set pay lines and hope to fund 50% of the well scored grants

NCI SBIR is a Centralized system with center director and then program director with specific areas of expertise: Reach out to them

IMAT Program and Low-Resource Setting new programs more suitable for initial studies and also can have non US entities

Phase IIB Bridge funding to cross “valley of death” providing up to 4M for 2-3 years: most were for drug/biological but good amount for device and diagnostics

Also they have announced administrative supplements for promoting diversity within a project: can add to the budget

FY18 Contracts Areas

3 on biotherapies

2 imaging related

2 on health IT

4 on radiation therapy related: NOTE They spent alot of time discussing the contracts centered on radiation therapy and seems to be an area of emphasis of the NCI SBIR program this year

4 other varied topics

Breakdown of funding

>70% of NCI SBIR budget went to grants (for instance Omnibus grants); about 20-30% for contracts; 16% for phase I and 34 % for phase II ;

ALSO the success rate considerably higher for companies that talk to the program director BEFORE applying than not talking to them; also contracts more successful than Omnibus applications

Take Advantage of these useful Assistance Programs through the NIH SBIR Program (Available to all SBIR grantees)

NICHE ASSESSMENT Program

From the NCI SBIR website:

The Niche Assessment Program is designed to help small businesses “jump start” their commercialization efforts. All active HHS (NIH, CDC, FDA) SBIR/STTR Phase I awardees and Phase I Fast-Track awardees (by grant or contract) are eligible to apply. Registration is on a first-come, first-serve basis!

The Niche Assessment Program provides market insight and data that can be used to help small businesses strategically position their technology in the marketplace. The results of this program can help small businesses develop their commercialization plans for their Phase II application, and be exposed to potential partners. Services are provided by Foresight Science & Technology of Providence, RI.

Technology Niche Analyses® (TNA®) are provided by Foresight, for one hundred and seventy-five (175), HHS SBIR/STTR Phase I awardees. These analyses assess potential applications for a technology and then for one viable application, it provides an assessment of the:

Needs and concerns of end-users;
Competing technologies and competing products;
Competitive advantage of the SBIR/STTR-developed technology;
Market size and potential market share (may include national and/or global markets);
Barriers to market entry (may include but is not limited to pricing, competition, government regulations, manufacturing challenges, capital requirements, etc.);
Market drivers;
Status of market and industry trends;
Potential customers, licensees, investors, or other commercialization partners; and,
The price customers are likely to pay.

Commercialization Acceleration Program (CAP)

From the NIH SBIR website:

NIH CAP is a 9-month program that is well-regarded for its combination of deep domain expertise and access to industry connections, which have resulted in measurable gains and accomplishments by participating companies. Offered since 2004 to address the commercialization objectives of companies across the spectrum of experience and stage, 1000+ companies have participated in the CAP. It is open only to HHS/NIH SBIR/STTR Phase II awardees, and 80 slots are available each year. The program enables participants to establish market and customer relevance, build commercial relationships, and focus on revenue opportunities available to them.

I-Corps Program

The I-Corps program provides funding, mentoring, and networking opportunities to help commercialize your promising biomedical technology. During this 8-week, hands-on program, you’ll learn how to focus your business plan and get the tools to bring your treatment to the patients who need it most.

Program benefits include:

Funding up to $50,000 to cover direct program costs
Training from biotech sector experts
Expanding your professional network
Building the confidence and skills to create a comprehensive business model
Gaining years of entrepreneurial skills in only weeks.

ICORPS is an Entrepreneurial Program (8 week course) to go out talk to customers, get assistance with business models, useful resource which can guide the new company where they should focus on for the commercialization aspect

THE NCI Applicant Assistance Program (AAP)

The SBIR/STTR Applicant Assistance Program (AAP) is aimed at helping eligible small R&D businesses and individuals successfully apply for Phase I SBIR/STTR funding from the National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI). Participation in the AAP will be funded by the NCI, NINDS, and NHLBI with NO COST TO PARTICIPANTS. The program will include the following services:

Needs Assessment/Small Business Mentoring
Phase I Application Preparation Support
Application Review
Team/Facilities Development
Market Research
Intellectual Property Consultation

For more details about the program, please refer to NIH Notice NOT-CA-18-072.

These programs are free for first time grant applicants and must not have been awarded previous SBIR

Peer Learning Webinar Series goal to improve peer learning .Also they are starting to provide Regulatory Assistance (see below)

NIH also provides Mentoring programs for CEOS and C level

Application tips

Start early: and obtain letters of collaboration
Build a great team: PI multi PI, consider other partners to fill gaps (academic, consultants, seasoned entrepreneurs (don’t need to be paid)
They will pre review 1 month before due date, use NIH Project Reporter to view previous funded grants
Specify study section in SF to specify areas of expertise for review
Specific aims are very important; some of the 20 reviewers focus on this page (describes goals and milestones as well; spend as much time on this page as the rest of the application
Letters of support from KOLs are important to have; necessary from consultants and collaborators; helpful from clinicians
Have a phase II commercialization plan
Note for non US clinical trials: They will not fund nonUS clinical trials; the company must have a FWA
SBIR budgets defined by direct costs; can request a 7% fee as an indirect cost; and they have a 5,000 $ technical assistance program like regulatory consultants but if requested can’t participate in NIH technical assistance programs so most people don’t apply for TAP

They are trying to change the definition of innovation as also using innovative methods (previously reviewers liked tried and true methodology)

10. before you submit solicit independent readers

NCI SBIR can be found on Twitter @NCIsbir ‏

Discussion with Monique Pond, Ph.D. on Establishment of a Regulatory Assistance Program for NCI SBIR

I was able to sit down with Dr. Monique Pond, AAAS Science & Technology Policy Fellow, Health Scientist within the NCI SBIR Development Center to discuss the new assistance program in regulatory affairs she is developing for the NCI SBIR program. Dr Pond had received her PhD in chemistry from the Pennsylvania State University, completed a postdoctoral fellow at NIST and then spent many years as a regulatory writer and consultant in the private sector. She applied through the AAAS for this fellowship and will bring her experience and expertise in regulatory affairs from the private sector to the SBIR program. Dr. Pond discussed the difficulties that new ventures have in formulating regulatory procedures for their companies, the difficulties in getting face time with FDA regulators and helping young companies start thinking about regulatory issues such as pharmacovigilence, oversight, compliance, and navigating the complex regulatory landscape.

In addition Dr. Pond discussed the AAAS fellowship program and alternative career paths for PhD scientists.

A formal interview will follow on this same post.

Funding Oncorus’s Immunotherapy Platform: Next-generation Oncolytic Herpes Simplex Virus (oHSV) for Brain Cancer, Glioblastoma Multiforme (GBM)

Funding Opportunities for Cancer Research

Team Profile: DrugDiscovery @LPBI Group – A BioTech Start Up submitted for Funding Competition to MassChallenge Boston 2016 Accelerator

A Message from Faculty Director Lee Fleming on Latest Issue of Crowdfunding; From the Fung Institute at Berkeley

PROTOCOL for Drug Screening of 3rd Party Intellectual Property Presented for Funding Representation

Foundations as a Funding Source

The Bioscience Crowdfunding Environment: The Bigger Better VC?

Read Full Post »

AGTC (AGTC) , An adenoviral gene therapy startup, expands in Florida with help from $1 billion deal with Biogen

Posted in Genetics & Innovations in Treatment, Genome Biology, Investment in Technological Breakthrough, Medical Devices R&D Investment, tagged AAV, adenovirus, biotech startup, gene therapy, genetic diseases, Global Partnering & Biotech Investment, startup, Venture capital on February 17, 2016| Leave a Comment »

AGTC (AGTC) , An adenoviral gene therapy startup, expands in Florida with help from $1 billion deal with Biogen

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, Ph.D.

from Biospace News

AGTC Sets Up Shop in Florida, New Facility to House 75 Employees
February 17, 2016
By Alex Keown, BioSpace.com Breaking News Staff

GAINESVILLE, Fla. — Applied Genetic Technologies Corporation (AGTC), a biotechnology company researching adeno-associated virus (AAV)-based gene therapies for the treatment of rare diseases, is expanding into the rapidly growing north central Florida biotech corridor.

The company, which was founded on technology developed at the University of Florida, is opening a combined use corporate office and laboratory facility in Alachua, Fla. AGTC’s portion of the new multi-tenant facility is expected to accommodate up to about 75 people and consists of approximately 20,000 square feet including state-of-the-art lab and office space as well as space for future expansion, the company announced this morning.

“The new facility will help us to accelerate our research and development efforts for novel AAV-based gene therapies for rare diseases and house critical corporate functions including finance, quality assurance and project management, while providing ample space as we continue to bring new talent to our team,” Sue Washer, president and chief executive officer of AGTC said in a statement.

AGTC’s lead product candidates focus on X-linked retinoschisis, achromatopsia and X-linked retinitis pigmentosa, which are inherited orphan diseases of the eye, caused by mutations in single genes that significantly affect visual function and currently lack effective medical treatments. Retinoschisis is a condition in which an area of the retina has separated into two layers. The part of the retina that is affected by retinoschisis will have suboptimal vision, according to the University of Michigan’s Kellogg Eye Center. Achromatopsia is a condition of the eye that is characterized by an absence (partial or total) of color vision. People with the complete form of achromatopsia are unable to perceive any colors and can only see black, white and shades of gray.

AGTC is also pursuing pre-clinical development of treatments for wet AMD using the company’s experience in ophthalmology to expand into disease indications with larger markets.

In August, AGTC’s research was bolstered by a $1 billion deal withBiogen (BIIB) to support the company’s gene-based therapies. As part of the deal, Biogen holds a license to AGTC’s XLRS and XLRP programs and an additional three licenses, BioSpace (DHX) reported in August.

David Day, assistant vice president & director of the Office of Technology Licensing at the University of Florida, touted the growth of the biotech sector in north central Florida.

“AGTC’s progress in developing novel treatments for rare diseases without adequate therapeutic options is a particularly good model for the entire biotechnology sector,” Day said in a statement.

Read Full Post »

GlaxoSmithKline and Johnson & Johnson Team with VC Firm Medicxi to Launch $250Million Life Science Startup Fund

Posted in Pharmaceutical Industry Competitive Intelligence, Pharmaceutical R&D Investment, Venture Capital, tagged bioinvestment, biotech startup, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Life Sciences, Medicxi, startup, Venture capital on February 2, 2016| Leave a Comment »

From Biospace News: GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Johnson & Johnson (JNJ)-Backed VC Firm Medicxi Launches $250 Million Fund For Life Science Startups

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, PhD

original article: http://www.biospace.com/News/glaxosmithkline-and-johnson-johnson-backed-vc-firm/407338/source=TopBreaking

Press release

Medicxi Ventures, Formerly Index Ventures Life Sciences, Launches as an Independent Venture Capital Firm and Announces Closing of a €210m Fund including GSK and Johnson & Johnson Innovation

LONDON, GENEVA and JERSEY, February 2, 2016 /PRNewswire/ —

Medicxi Ventures comprises all of the existing life sciences team, portfolio company investments and life sciences funds of Index Ventures
GSK and Johnson & Johnson Innovation expand their commitment to the asset-centric approach
Index Ventures technology practice remains unchanged

Medicxi Ventures, a new venture capital firm comprising all of the existing life sciences portfolio companies, funds and team from Index Ventures, today announces the close of Medicxi Ventures 1 (MV1), a new €210 million ($250 million) fund that will focus on early-stage life sciences investments. MV1 will predominantly invest in Europe and principally follow the “asset-centric” strategy pioneered by its partners at Index.

By investing in MV1, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Johnson & Johnson Innovation – JJDC, Inc. (JJDC) have renewed and expanded their commitment to the asset-centric approach, following the prior investment in Index Life 6 (IL-6) alongside other financial investors.

Medicxi Ventures starts its operations as one of the largest independent European life sciences focused investment firms. The Company’s mission is to focus on strengthening R&D innovation by providing solutions to unmet medical needs. Collaboration with pharmaceutical companies will continue to be a key strategy helping the firm to deliver on this mission.

Medicxi Ventures will be managed by four General Partners, Francesco De Rubertis, David Grainger, Kevin Johnson and Michèle Ollier, all of whom previously led the life sciences practice of Index Ventures. The four partners will form the executive management of the new firm.

Francesco De Rubertis, General Partner of Medicxi Ventures, said: “We are excited to take this next step in our evolution as a life sciences focused investment firm. A high percentage of the drugs approved every year by the FDA were discovered in European academic labs. By working in close partnership with academia, biotech and the pharmaceutical industry, we are committed to translating this high quality science in Europe into effective new medicines.”

He added: “It has been a privilege working with Neil Rimer, Giuseppe Zocco and the other tech partners at Index Ventures for the last 20 years and we have benefitted from their expertise in investing in and building high growth entrepreneurial companies.”

Dr Moncef Slaoui, Chairman Global Vaccines and GSK‘s representative on Medicxi‘s Scientific Advisory Board, commented on the announcement: “We are delighted to support the Medicxi team and this early stage investment fund. We believe in the potential to create an exciting pipeline of new medicine candidates by collaborating and investing with an asset-centric model. The team at Medicxi has a proven track record in partnering with world-class entrepreneurs and scientists to translate disruptive science from academia and industry into new medicines with demonstrable patient benefits.”

Dr Richard Mason, Head, Johnson & Johnson Innovation, London, commented: “Johnson & Johnson Innovation is focused on enabling and advancing all stages of science and technology across the world’s most robust innovation ecosystems. We are optimistic that applying the asset-centric investment model of Medicxi across Europe and beyond will uncover the new and highly differentiated science and technology that is needed to turn early stage research into viable products and patient solutions. We are delighted to work closely with the Medicxi team to help increase the productivity and likelihood of success for the life sciences innovation community throughout the region. ”

The Scientific Advisory Board of the new fund will include some of the top R&D and business development executives from the two pharmaceutical companies as well as Medicxi-appointed executives. As in IL-6, the two pharmaceutical companies have not received any specific rights to the portfolio companies.

Neil Rimer, co-founder of Index Ventures, said: “The creation of Medicxi Ventures as a new entity is a natural evolution given that Index’ life sciences team has been operating autonomously within the firm for several years. Whilst Index and Medicxi will operate independently, we retain close ties and look forward to continuing to share ideas and expertise.”

Notes for Editors

About Medicxi Ventures

Medicxi Ventures is based in London, Geneva and Jersey. It comprises all of the legacy portfolio companies, funds and the life sciences team of Index Ventures, and a new €210 million fund (MV1) that will focus on early-stage investments in life sciences. The Company’s mission is to invest and collaborate along the full healthcare continuum focusing on drug discovery and development and pharmaceutical innovation. Leading healthcare companies, GSK and Johnson & Johnson Innovation-JJDC are investors in Medicxi Ventures’ funds.

Medicxi Ventures’ team has been investing in life sciences for over 20 years and has backed many successful companies, including Genmab (Nasdaq Copenhagen: GEN), PanGenetics (sold to AbbVie), Molecular Partners (SWX: MOLN), XO1 (sold to Janssen) Egalet (EGLT), Minerva Neurosciences (NERV) and Versartis (VSAR).

Please see http://www.medicxiventures.com for more information.

About the Medicxi Ventures Executive Team

Francesco De Rubertis joined Index in 1997 to lead the firm’s life sciences activity and has been involved with and overseen all of the investments that Index has made in life sciences

David Grainger joined Index in 2012. Prior to this, David led an internationally recognised research group in Cambridge University’s Department of Medicine, where he published more than 80 first author papers in leading journals including Nature, Science and Nature Medicine. He is an inventor on more than 150 patents and patent applications.

Kevin Johnson has been working with Index since 2003. He focuses on life sciences, especially drug development companies and was part of the management team that floated Cambridge Antibody Technology on the London Stock Exchange. Two of his products, Humira (Abbott Pharmaceutical) and Benlysta (Human Genome Sciences, GSK), are now on the market.

Michèle Ollier joined Index in 2006. She has spent more than 15 years in several development and marketing positions at Sanofi International, Bristol-Myers Squibb, RPR/Gencell/Aventis international and Serono International.

For further information, please contact:

Francesco De Rubertis
General Partner, Medicxi Ventures
francesco@medicxiventures.com
+44(0)207-154-2020

Katja Stout, Sylvie Berrebi
Citigate Dewe Rogerson
katja.stout@citigatedr.co.uk
Sylvie.berrebi@citigatedr.co.uk
+44(0)207-638-9571

Bill Douglass
Gotham Communications LLC
bill@gothamcomm.com
+1(646)504-0890

Read Full Post »

Podcast Review: Quiet Innovation Podcast on Obtaining $ for Your Startup

Posted in Innovations, Intellectual Property, Intellectual Property, Innovations, Commercialization, Investment in technological breakthrough, Interviews with Scientific Leaders, Investment in Technological Breakthrough, tagged angel investors, Aviva Lev-Ari, bioangel, crowd-funding, Entrepreneur, Funding, Idea Lab, Innovation, Innovation Act, open innovation, podcast, science funding, startup, Venture capital on March 12, 2015| Leave a Comment »

Podcast Review: Quiet Innovation Podcast on Obtaining $ for Your Startup

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, Ph.D.

I wanted to highlight an interesting interview (What it Really Takes to Get Money for Your Startup) with David S. Rose, serial entrepreneur and Founder and CEO of Gust.com, which is a global collaboration platform for early stage angel investing, connecting hundreds of thousands of entrepreneurs and investors in over 75 countries. The interview with David and CFA John P. Gavin was broadcast on the podcast Quiet Innovation (from PodCast Addict @Podcast_Addict) from. I had tweeted it out on my Twitter account below (see the http link)

… but will include some notes from the podcast here. In addition you can link to the podcast directly using the links below:

[Quiet Innovation: Helping the Startup, Entrepreneur, & Innovator Turn Their Great Ideas […] => http://t.co/XPjLrJQG7O via @Podcast_Addict

— Stephen J Williams (@StephenJWillia2) March 12, 2015

QI-013 David Rose Interview_01.mp3

Or download the mp3

http://t.co/XPjLrJQG7O

This post is a followup from yesterday’s post Protecting Your Biotech IP and Market Strategy: Notes from Life Sciences Collaborative 2015 Meeting.

Some highlights from the podcast

IDEAS DON’T GET FUNDED

David Rose discusses how there are hundreds of thousands of new ideas, some which are great some which are not… having an idea may be an initial step but for an investor to even consider your idea it is more important to have

EXECUTION

This is what David feels is critical to investors, such as himself, to decide whether your idea is investable. A startup needs to show they can accomplish their goal and show at least a rudimentary example of this, whether it is putting up a website or writing up a design blueprint for a new widget. He says starting a business today (either tech or manufacturing) requires a lot less capital than years ago (unless you are starting a biotech). He gives an example of internet startups he had founded in the 90’s versus today… in the 90’s you needed $2 million… today you can do it for $2,000. But the ability to show that you can EXECUTE this plan is CRITICAL.

David sites three aspects which are important to investors:

Integrity – Be humble about yourself. He says there are way too many people who claim ‘our idea is the best’ or ‘we do it better than anyone’ or ‘we are the first to have this idea’. As he says Jeff Bezos of Amazon was not the first to have the idea of selling books over the internet, he just EXECUTED the plan extremely well.
Passion- Investors need to see that you are ‘all in’ and committed. A specific example is angels asking how much money have you put into your idea (skin in the game)
Experience- David says there are TWO important types of experience in developing startups and both valid. The first is how many startups have you done and succeeded and the second is how many startups have failed. He says investors actually like if you have failed because they are learning experiences, just as valuable if not more than having startups always succeed. Investors need to know how you can deal with adversity. All three points goes back to execution.

David Rose gave some reading suggestions as well including

Lucky or Smart? Secrets to an Entrepreneurial Life by Bo Peabody – He highlights this book to help people understand that a startup entrepreneur should always hire someone smarter than themselves.

Derek Sivers post Ideas Are Just a Multiplier of Execution – where a great idea is worth $20 but a great idea plus execution is worth $20 million.

Eris Reese’s post The Lean Startup in his blog StartUpLessonsLearned – being frugal (gets back to what he said about not needed as much capital as you would think i.e. Don’t Burn Through the Cash) and also get metrics on your startup or idea (as long as you have the IP). He suggests taking out an ad to see what the interest is out there. You can measure the clicks from the ad and use that as a marketing tool to potential investors i.e. Getting Feedback

Some other posts on this site about Investing and Startups include:

Protecting Your Biotech IP and Market Strategy: Notes from Life Sciences Collaborative 2015 Meeting

THE BLOOMBERG INNOVATION INDEX: Country Rankings by Six Measures of the Capacity to Innovate as a Nation

Updated: Investing and Inventing: Is the Tango of Mars and Venus Still on

Sand Hill Angels

The Bioscience Crowdfunding Environment: The Bigger Better VC?

Technion-Cornell Innovation Institute in NYC: Postdocs keep exclusive license to their IP and take a fixed dollar amount of Equity if the researchers create a Spinoff company

Tycho Brahe, where art thou? Today’s Renaissance of the Self-Funded Scientist!

Read Full Post »

Protecting Your Biotech IP and Market Strategy: Notes from Life Sciences Collaborative 2015 Meeting

Posted in Academic Publishing, Affordable Care Act, Bio Instrumentation in Experimental Life Sciences Research, BioSimilars, BioTechnology - Venture Creation, Venture Capital, Commercialization, Conference Coverage with Social Media, Diagnostics and Lab Tests, Drug Delivery Platform Technology, Ecosystems & Industrial Concentration in the Medical Device Sector, FDA, FDA Regulatory Affairs, Global Partnering & Biotech Investment, Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Health Law & Patient Safety, Healthcare costs and reimbursement, HealthCare IT, Healthcare Reform, Intellectual Property, Intellectual Property, Innovations, Commercialization, Investment in technological breakthrough, Interviews with Scientific Leaders, Investment in Technological Breakthrough, Medical Devices R&D and Inventions, Medical Devices R&D Investment, Medicare and Medicaid, Patents, Personal Health Applications: Tech Innovations serves HealhCare, Pharmaceutical Discovery, Pharmaceutical Industry Competitive Intelligence, Pharmaceutical R&D Investment, Population Health Management, Prescription Drugs Costs, Scientific & Biotech Conferences: Press Coverage, Scientist: Career considerations, Technology Capital Expenses, Uncategorized, Venture Capital, tagged angel investors, Aviva Lev-Ari, bioinvestment, biotech incubator, biotech startup, Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals, competetive intelligence, Conditions and Diseases, crowd-funding, diabetes foundaion, Drug discovery, Food and Drug Administration, health, Health Care Delivery, health care spending, Innovation, Intellectual property, Medicare, medicare costs, Patent portfolio, patents, pharmacy benefit managers, philadelphia, Princeton University, Reimbursement, research, science funding, startup, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Venture capital on March 11, 2015| Leave a Comment »

Protecting Your Biotech IP and Market Strategy: Notes from Life Sciences Collaborative 2015 Meeting

Achievement Beyond Regulatory Approval – Design for Commercial Success

Stephen J. Williams, Ph.D.: Reporter

The Mid-Atlantic group Life Sciences Collaborative, a select group of industry veterans and executives from the pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and medical device sectors whose mission is to increase the success of emerging life sciences businesses in the Mid-Atlantic region through networking, education, training and mentorship, met Tuesday March 3, 2015 at the University of the Sciences in Philadelphia (USP) to discuss post-approval regulatory issues and concerns such as designing strong patent protection, developing strategies for insurance reimbursement, and securing financing for any stage of a business.

The meeting was divided into three panel discussions and keynote speech:

Panel 1: Design for Market Protection– Intellectual Property Strategy Planning
Panel 2: Design for Market Success– Commercial Strategy Planning
Panel 3: Design for Investment– Financing Each Stage
Keynote Speaker: Robert Radie, President & CEO Egalet Corporation

Below are Notes from each PANEL Discussion:

For more information about the Life Sciences Collaborative SEE

Website: http://www.lifesciencescollaborative.org/

Or On Facebook

Or On Twitter @LSCollaborative

Panel 1: Design for Market Protection; Intellectual Property Strategy Planning

Take-home Message: Developing a very strong Intellectual Property (IP) portfolio and strategy for a startup is CRITICALLY IMPORTANT for its long-term success. Potential investors, partners, and acquirers will focus on the strength of a startup’s IP so important to take advantage of the legal services available. Do your DUE DIGILENCE.

Panelists:

John F. Ritter, J.D.., MBA; Director Office Tech. Licensing Princeton University

Cozette McAvoy; Senior Attorney Novartis Oncology Pharma Patents

Ryan O’Donnell; Partner Volpe & Koenig

Panel Moderator: Dipanjan “DJ” Nag, PhD, MBA, CLP, RTTP; President CEO IP Shaktl, LLC

Notes:

Dr. Nag:

Sometimes IP can be a double edged sword; e.g. Herbert Boyer with Paul Berg and Stanley Cohen credited with developing recombinant technology but they did not keep the IP strict and opened the door for a biotech revolution (see nice review from Chemical Heritage Foundation).

Naked patent licenses are most profitable when try to sell IP

John Ritter: Mr. Ritter gave Princeton University’s perspective on developing and promoting a university-based IP portfolio.

30-40% of Princeton’s IP portfolio is related to life sciences
Universities will prefer to seek provisional patent status as a quicker process and allows for publication
Princeton will work closely with investigators to walk them through process – Very Important to have support system in place INCLUDING helping investigators and early startups establish a STRONG startup MANAGEMENT TEAM, and making important introductions to and DEVELOPING RELATIONSHIOPS with investors, angels
Good to cast a wide net when looking at early development partners like pharma
Good example of university which takes active role in developing startups is University of Pennsylvania’s Penn UPstart program.
Last 2 years many universities filing patents for startups as a micro-entity

Comment from attendee: Universities are not using enough of their endowments for purpose of startups. Princeton only using $500,00 for accelerator program.

Cozette McAvoy: Mrs. McAvoy talked about monetizing your IP from an industry perspective

Industry now is looking at “indirect monetization” of their and others IP portfolio. Indirect monetization refers to unlocking the “indirect value” of intellectual property; for example research tools, processes, which may or may not be related to a tangible product.
Good to make a contractual bundle of IP – “days of the $million check is gone”
Big companies like big pharma looks to PR (press relation) buzz surrounding new technology, products SO IMPORTANT FOR STARTUP TO FOCUS ON YOUR PR

Ryan O’Donnell: talked about how life science IP has changed especially due to America Invests Act

Need to develop a GLOBAL IP strategy so whether drug or device can market in multiple countries
Diagnostics and genes not patentable now – Major shift in patent strategy
Companies like Unified Patents can protect you against the patent trolls – if patent threatened by patent troll (patent assertion entity) will file a petition with the USPTO (US Patent Office) requesting institution of inter partes review (IPR); this may cost $40,000 BUT WELL WORTH the money – BE PROACTIVE about your patents and IP

Panel 2: Design for Market Success; Commercial Strategy Planning

Take-home Message: Commercial strategy development is defined market facing data, reimbursement strategies and commercial planning that inform labeling requirements, clinical study designs, healthcare economic outcomes and pricing targets. Clarity from payers is extremely important to develop any market strategy. Develop this strategy early and seek advice from payers.

Panelists:

David Blaszczak; Founder, Precipio Health Strategies

Terri Bernacchi, PharmD, MBA; Founder & President Cambria Health Advisory Professionals

Paul Firuta; President US Commercial Operations, NPS Pharma

Panel Moderator: Matt Cabrey; Executive Director, Select Greater Philadelphia

Notes:

David Blaszczak:

Commercial payers are bundling payment: most important to get clarity from these payers
Payers are using clinical trials to alter marketing (labeling) so IMPORTANT to BUILD LABEL in early clinical trial phases (phase I or II)
When in early phases of small company best now to team or partner with a Medicare or PBM (pharmacy benefit manager) and payers to help develop and spot tier1 and tier 2 companies in their area

Terri Bernacchi:

Building relationship with the payer is very important but firms like hers will also look to patients and advocacy groups to see how they respond to a given therapy and decrease the price risk by bundling
Value-based contracting with manufacturers can save patient and payer $$
As most PBMs formularies are 80% generics goal is how to make money off of generics
Patent extension would have greatest impact on price, value

Paul Firuta:

NPS Pharma developing a pharmacy benefit program for orphan diseases
How you pay depends on mix of Medicare, private payers now
Most important change which could affect price is change in compliance regulations

Panel 3: Design for Investment; Financing Each Stage

Take-home Message: VC is a personal relationship so spend time making those relationships. Do your preparation on your value and your market. Look to non-VC avenues: they are out there.

Panelists:

Ting Pau Oei; Managing Director, Easton Capital (NYC)

Manya Deehr; CEO & Founder, Pediva Therapeutics

Sanjoy Dutta, PhD; Assistant VP, Translational Devel. & Intl. Res., Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation

Panel Moderator: Shahram Hejazi, PhD; Venture Partner, BioAdvance

In 2000 his experience finding 1^st capital was what are your assets; now has changed to value

Notes:

Ting Pau Oei:

Your very 1^st capital is all about VALUE– so plan where you add value
Venture Capital is a PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP
1) you need the management team, 2) be able to communicate effectively (Powerpoint, elevator pitch, business plan) and #1 and #2 will get you important 2^nd Venture Capital meeting; VC’s don’t decide anything in 1^st meeting
VC’s don’t normally do a good job of premarket valuation or premarket due diligence but know post market valuation well
Best advice: show some phase 2 milestones and VC will knock on your door

Manya Deehr:

Investment is more niche oriented so find your niche investors
Define your product first and then match the investors
Biggest failure she has experienced: companies that go out too early looking for capital

Dr. Dutta: funding from a non-profit patient advocacy group perspective

Your First Capital: find alliances which can help you get out of “valley of death”
Develop a targeted product and patient treatment profile
Non-profit groups ask three questions:

1) what is the value to patients (non-profits want to partner)

2) what is your timeline (we can wait longer than VC; for example Cystic Fibrosis Foundation waited long time but got great returns for their patients with Kalydeco™)

3) when can we see return

Long-term market projections are the knowledge gaps that startups have (the landscape) and startups don’t have all the competitive intelligence
Have a plan B every step of the way

The Vibrant Philly Biotech Scene: Focus on Computer-Aided Drug Design and Gfree Bio, LLC

Posted in Bio Instrumentation in Experimental Life Sciences Research, BioSimilars, BioTechnology - Venture Creation, Computational Biology/Systems and Bioinformatics, Disease Biology, Drug Delivery Platform Technology, Global Partnering & Biotech Investment, Interviews with Scientific Leaders, Investment in Technological Breakthrough, Pharmaceutical Discovery, Pharmaceutical Industry Competitive Intelligence, Pharmaceutical R&D Investment, Small Molecules in Development of Therapeutic Drugs, Venture Capital, tagged #biotech, Aviva Lev-Ari, bioinvestment, Biomolecular structure, biotech incubator, biotech startup, Biotechnology, Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals, collaboration, computational biology, Conditions and Diseases, health, molecular modeling, philadelphia, research, SBIR, science, startup, structural biology, Venture capital on February 10, 2015| Leave a Comment »

The Vibrant Philly Biotech Scene: Focus on Computer-Aided Drug Design and Gfree Bio, LLC

Curator: Stephen J. Williams, Ph.D.

This post is the second in a series of posts highlighting interviews with Philadelphia area biotech startup CEO’s and show how a vibrant biotech startup scene is evolving in the city as well as the Delaware Valley area. Philadelphia has been home to some of the nation’s oldest biotechs including Cephalon, Centocor, hundreds of spinouts from a multitude of universities as well as home of the first cloned animal (a frog), the first transgenic mouse, and Nobel laureates in the field of molecular biology and genetics. Although some recent disheartening news about the fall in rankings of Philadelphia as a biotech hub and recent remarks by CEO’s of former area companies has dominated the news, biotech incubators like the University City Science Center and Bucks County Biotechnology Center as well as a reinvigorated investment community (like PCCI and MABA) are bringing Philadelphia back. And although much work is needed to bring the Philadelphia area back to its former glory days (including political will at the state level) there are many bright spots such as the innovative young companies as outlined in these posts.

In today’s post, I had the opportunity to talk with molecular modeler Charles H. Reynolds, Ph.D., founder and CEO of Gfree Bio LLC, a computational structure-based design and modeling company based in the Pennsylvania Biotech Center of Bucks County. Gfree is actually one of a few molecular modeling companies at the Bucks County Biotech Center (I highlighted another company RabD Biotech which structural computational methods to design antibody therapeutics).

Below is the interview with Dr. Reynolds of Gfree Bio LLC and Leaders in Pharmaceutical Business Intelligence (LPBI):

LPBI: Could you briefly explain, for non-molecular modelers, your business and the advantages you offer over other molecular modeling programs (either academic programs or other biotech companies)? As big pharma outsources more are you finding that your company is filling a needed niche market?

GfreeBio: Gfree develops and deploys innovative computational solutions to accelerate drug discovery. We can offer academic labs a proven partner for developing SBIR/STTR proposals that include a computational or structure-based design component. This can be very helpful in developing a successful proposal. We also provide the same modeling and structure-based design input for small biotechs that do not have these capabilities internally. Working with Gfree is much more cost-effective than trying to develop these capabilities internally. We have helped several small biotechs in the Philadelphia region assess their modeling needs and apply computational tools to advance their discovery programs. (see publication and collaboration list here).

LPBI: Could you offer more information on the nature of your 2014 STTR award?

GfreeBio: Gfree has been involved in three successful SBIR/STTR awards in 2014. I am the PI for an STTR with Professor Burgess of Texas A&M that is focused on new computational and synthetic approaches to designing inhibitors for protein-protein interactions. Gfree is also collaborating with the Wistar Institute and Phelix Therapeutics on two other Phase II proposals in the areas of oncology and infectious disease.

LPBI: Why did you choose the Bucks County Pennsylvania Biotechnology Center?

GfreeBio: I chose to locate my company at the Biotech Center because it is a regional hub for small biotech companies and it provides a range of shared resources that are very useful to the company. Many of my most valuable collaborations have resulted from contacts at the center.

LPBI: The Blumberg Institute and Natural Products Discovery Institute has acquired a massive phytochemical library. How does this resource benefit the present and future plans for GfreeBio?

GfreeBio: To date Gfree Bio has not been an active collaborator with the Natural Products Insititute, but I have a good relationship with the Director and that could change at any time.

LPBI: Was the state of Pennsylvania and local industry groups support GfreeBio’s move into the Doylestown incubator? Has the partnership with Ben Franklin Partners and the Center provided you with investment and partnership opportunities?

GfreeBio: Gfree Bio has not been actively seeking outside investors, at least to date. We have been focused on growing the company through collaborations and consulting relationships. However, we have benefitted from being part of the Keystone Innovation Zone, a state program that provides incentives for small technology-based businesses in Pennsylvania.

LPBI: You will be speaking at a conference in the UK on reinventing the drug discovery process through tighter collaborations between biotech, academia, and non-profit organizations. How do you feel the Philadelphia area can increase this type of collaboration to enhance not only the goals and missions of nonprofits, invigorate the Pennsylvania biotech industry, but add much needed funding to the local academic organizations?

GfreeBio: I think this type of collaboration across sectors appears to be one of the most important emerging models for drug discovery. The Philadelphia region has been in many ways hard hit by the shift of drug discovery from large vertically integrated pharmaceutical companies to smaller biotechs, since this area was at the very center of “Big Pharma.” But I think the region is bouncing back as it shifts more to being a center for biotech. The three ingredients for success in the new pharma model are great universities, a sizeable talent pool, and access to capital. The last item may be the biggest challenge locally. The KIZ program (Keystone Innovation Zone) is a good start, but the region and state could do more to help promote innovation and company creation. Some other states are being much more aggressive.

LPBI: In addition, the Pennsylvania Biotechnology Center in Bucks County appears to have this ecosystem: nonprofit organizations, biotechs, and academic researchers. Does this diversity of researchers/companies under one roof foster the type of collaboration needed, as will be discussed at the UK conference? Do you feel collaborations which are in close physical proximity are more effective and productive than a “virtual-style” (online) collaboration model? Could you comment on some of the collaborations GfreeBio is doing with other area biotechs and academics?

GfreeBio: I do think the “ecosystem” at the Pennsylvania Biotechnology Center is important in fostering new innovative companies. It promotes collaborations that might not happen otherwise, and I think close proximity is always a big plus. As I mentioned before, many of the current efforts of Gfree have come from contacts at the center. This includes SBIR/STTR collaborations and contract work for local small biotech companies.

LPBI: Thompson Reuters just reported that China’s IQ (Innovation Quotient) has risen dramatically with the greatest patents for pharmaceuticals and compounds from natural products. Have you or your colleagues noticed more competition or business from Chinese pharmaceutical companies?

GfreeBio: The rise of Asia, particularly China, has been one of the most significant recent trends in the pharmaceutical industry. Initially, this was almost exclusively in the CRO space, but now China is aggressively building a fully integrated domestic pharmaceutical industry.

LPBI: How can the Philadelphia ecosystem work closer together to support greater innovation?

GfreeBio: A lot has happened in recent years to promote innovation and company creation in the region. There could always be more opportunities for networking and collaboration within the Philadelphia community. Of course the biggest obstacle in this business is often financing. Philadelphia needs more public and private sources for investment in startups.

LPBI: Thank you Dr. Reynolds.

Please look for future posts in this series on the Philly Biotech Scene on this site