Home Archives 2012 March

Monthly Archives: March 2012

This article provides an overview of the impact of raising capital on the equity ownership structure of a biotechnology company. The equity ownership structure as captured in a table of capitalization determines how the fruits of success will be divided between founders, management and investors at an exit event such as an acquisition or initial public offering. The evolution of the Cap Table is captured and described through multiple financing events and scenarios and illustrates how value is allocated to the various parties involved in the transactions as the company grows and develops. Full details at the Journal of Commercial Biotechnology

This article covers the essentials of constructing and delivering a “pitch” of a business opportunity to potential investors or corporate partners.  We advocate constructing an effective pitch first and then using that as a guide to prepare your business plan.  The content of the pitch itself as described herein in effect comprises the elements to be incorporated into a business plan as a more comprehensive documentation of the business.  Therefore, focusing efforts on creating and delivering the components of a compelling pitch will provide the essence of what you will then need to put into prose as a business plan.  So, our mantra is “pitch then plan”, i. e. don’t waste your time writing prose until you know what you need to write.  Furthermore plans change many times between the first writing and successful implementation.

Full details at the Journal of Commercial Biotechnology

Due diligence, as it applies to venture capital, is actually imprecise. Origins of the term are based in banking case law. Due diligence to the attorney is more of a precise concept. A better term is “homework.” Better indeed, because the burden of this homework weighs far more heavily on the entrepreneur than on the venture capitalist. The odds of getting funded by a venture capital firm are somewhere between 50: and 100: 1. In most instances, the funding goes to companies that already have some connection into the community of venture capital funds. Does this mean that all others need not apply? That is hardly the case. Good venture capitalists know a good opportunity when they see it, but sometimes it is not always obvious. Either the business plan is flawed in strategy, format or content, or the due diligence process reveals a team totally unprepared to fulfill their own vision. Elsewhere in this special edition of JCB is an article on the business plan and the pitch book. This article teaches, in a manner of speaking, how business plans get read and pitches gets heard.

Full details at the Journal of Commercial Biotechnology

This article focuses on the essentials of building effective, collaborative, team-based organizations. The entrepreneurs and innovators who found and build technology-based organizations comprise out target audience, but most specifically we address the biotechnology and biomedical field.  Two perspectives are provided in the article: 1) advice based on the experiential learning provided by years of experience of building and growing entrepreneurial organizations; and 2) identifying the keys to building effective teams based on some selected the academic or scholarly literature on building effective teams.  Our goal is to provide a perspective that blends real-world lessons filtered through a more scholarly approach based on case literature and other research-based studies.  The material summarized herein is presented as a learning module to the participants in the Biotechnology Entrepreneurship Boot Camp.  Our pedagogical approach in the Boot camp is to lead with the background material and perspective contained herein, and to then have a moderated panel discussion around these and other topics. The moderated panel consists of the key members of a real company consisting of key C-level officers and founders and a venture capitalist who funded the company.  Thus the “theory and practice” of team-based innovation come together via a real-time case.

 

Full details at the Journal of Commercial Biotechnology

For many years the United States has led the world in government support for non-military research and development (R&D), especially support for work that directly relates to health and human development.  A focal point for such federal investments to date in biomedical research has been the National Institutes of Health (NIH) along with other government laboratories and university-based research programs.   Base funding provided by the NIH alone reached  $31.2 billion (excluding economic stimulus funds) in fiscal year 2011 with approximately 10% of this funding spent on internal NIH R&D projects (intramural research) utilizing the work of about  6,000 scientists.  The balance was used to support the work of 325,000 non-government scientists (extramural research) at 3,000 various colleges, universities and research organizations such as Johns Hopkins University and others throughout the world. Each year this biomedical research leads to a large variety of novel basic and clinical research discoveries – all of which generally require commercial partners in order to develop them into products for hospital, physician or patient use.  Thus federal laboratories and universities need and actively seek corporate partners or licensees to commercialize their federally-funded research into products in order to help fulfill their fundamental missions in healthcare, medical education and training.

Full details at the Journal of Commercial Biotechnology

As surely as the bio-enterprise can benefit from positive media coverage, it cannot thrive in the face of unanswered negative and/or inaccurate media attention. On all counts, the bio-enterprise must be able to strategically engage with the media at every stage in its life cycle. This article describes the global science-business media landscape, including traditional media and emergent social media and information in the online space. Current research is used to document the interdependence of media, how sources of information feed media coverage, the challenges of science communication in the broader context of business, and the effect of media engagement by the CEO.

A strategic model is presented which relates the bio-enterprise to global media, providing a larger framework within which to develop media action plans at critical junctures in the life of the bio-enterprise. Further documented is the difference between journalistic and non-journalistic media, and how journalistic ethics and standards guidelines work with ethical persuasion practices to the benefit of the bio-enterprise. Full details at the Journal of Commercial Biotechnology

The process of commercializing a new item or service in the U.S. health care market involves three distinct but necessary components: coverage, coding, and reimbursement.  This article provides an overview of these processes and the challenges in successfully navigating the course and spotting the particular issues for individual items and services. Full details at the Journal of Commercial Biotechnology

Valuation approaches to biotechnology companies by angel investors and venture capitalists often appear to the entrepreneurs to be based on voodoo rather than sound principles of finance. While there may be some truth to that perception, there is actually a very sound, somewhat complex, internal logic to the way private biotechnology companies are valued. Note the emphasis on the word “private.” This article will focus entirely on the valuation methodology of companies that are not yet listed. Moreover, the article will not consider the valuation approaches used by, say, a pharmaceutical company when it is targeting a biotechnology company for acquisition or strategic partnering. The emphasis of this piece is on the thought process or algorithm in play — the so-called “Venture Capital Method” — when an investor is looking at a biotechnology company in the seed stage or in the first or second round of venture capital funding. Full details at the Journal of Commercial Biotechnology

This article focuses on the essentials of building effective, collaborative, team-based organizations. The entrepreneurs and innovators who found and build technology-based organizations comprise out target audience, but most specifically we address the biotechnology and biomedical field.  Two perspectives are provided in the article: 1) advice based on the experiential learning provided by years of experience of building and growing entrepreneurial organizations; and 2) identifying the keys to building effective teams based on some selected the academic or scholarly literature on building effective teams.  Our goal is to provide a perspective that blends real-world lessons filtered through a more scholarly approach based on case literature and other research-based studies.  The material summarized herein is presented as a learning module to the participants in the Biotechnology Entrepreneurship Boot Camp.  Our pedagogical approach in the Boot camp is to lead with the background material and perspective contained herein, and to then have a moderated panel discussion around these and other topics. The moderated panel consists of the key members of a real company consisting of key C-level officers and founders and a venture capitalist who funded the company.  Thus the “theory and practice” of team-based innovation come together via a real-time case.

Full details at the Journal of Commercial Biotechnology