Funding,
partnering lessons for biotechs
Biotech leaders who want to
stay in step with the trends need to rethink how to monitor and then
effectively communicate with their investors and big pharma alliance
management community
Recently, as I was interacting with CEOs and PE leaders, after
conducting a round table on personalized healthcare opportunity in
India, a leading CEO from a mid-sized biopharma company remarked that
opportunities for the mid-sized companies in India for partnering and
funding innovation are over. As one looks at the number of PE deals in
India in the sector, they have steadily increased from virtually
nothing in 2003 to around 30 in 2007 and reducing by half in 2008. On
the other hand, different models for partnering and risk sharing
emerged during the same time as large global pharma companies executed
partnering models in Asia, including India, with 2007 being the peak of
the partnering deals signed in India. In 2008, PEs were taken for a
surprise, when access to capital and liquidity events was brought to a
halt.
Biotech valuations were drastically reduced and firms were forced to
inject additional capital into businesses that were seemingly
predictable as the alliance managers of large pharma scaled down their
ambitions. In 2009, there is a rebound in deals with a total
of approximately $130 billion (about Rs 612,947 crore) have flowed from
321 deals in the first half of this year in the US alone. However,
number of deals has lagged in India in 2009 as compared to the trend
seen in the West. So, does this signal the beginning of an end of a
dream, and the drying up of funding and partnering deals
pipeline in India?
Key trends
A large number of companies were emerging in India in biotechnology,
without the full resources to take the product through to full-scale
development and global commercialization.
Investors and global pharmas demand for evidence for continued growth
and endorsement of technologies.
Labor cost arbitrage for scientific and clinical talent to reduce the
cost of drug development-to-launch.
Biosimilars segment offering huge potential for out-partnering with
large biotech and pharmas to call back molecules.
Clinical biomarkers or diagnostics linked to gene expression profile of
individual or sub-populations of patients is an essential feature of
stratified or targeted medicine. This type of research attracts and
often is best pursued by small biotech companies in India.
Collaborative development financing (CDF), where an investor provides
capital and clinical expertise in exchange for licensing of a
biotech’s pipeline.
Non-profit foundations have adopted a more investor-like
approach¯early-stage funding for proof of concept and target
validation, as well as project management support, and access to their
network of scientific experts and research clinics critical in
translating discoveries into the clinic.
The overall trends do validate that the key drivers for funding and
partnering in India have not structurally changed to witness the
opportunities in biotech diminish as generally perceived in the
short-term. But the most important ingredient for a healthy funding and
partnering deals pipeline for Indian companies that offer a long-term
growth at a compelling risk-reward ratio. The Indian companies in the
small and mid-size sector should better prepare themselves for the
upturn. Here are a few pointers.
Prep-up to these changes
Biotech leaders who want to stay in step with these trends need to
rethink how to monitor and then effectively communicate with their
investors and big pharma alliance management community. Most small-and
mid-sized biotechs are looking at raising capital for immediate and
short-term needs (round B or C), signing up strategic partnerships
building capability base in India and their business development
capability overseas, and preparing for target valuation for IPO or
acquisition. Given the current scenario, it would be prudent to keep a
buffer of 20–25 percent for the delays and uncertainty, and a
lead time of anywhere between 9–12 months. Most importantly,
it is imperative to research out and target your investors and learn
about their preferences and the competencies they bring to the biotech.
It would be wise to avoid those investors or firms with competing
investments in other Indian or foreign biotech companies.
Partnering deal types
Most Indian biotechs are entering into deals that range from low-risk
models such as fee for service, milestone-driven fees payment. Many of
them have turned away highly risky models such as co-development,
co-commercialization and joint ventures. Newer partnering models are
emerging that balance the risks and outcomes for the partners. Most
partnering arrangements have a deep impact on the biotech venture
financing and its terms and sustainable future. It is time that these
risk-reward issues are balanced out with the future stability of the
company.
Valuation of IP or
company
As new investors and larger pharma are getting more sophisticated
understanding of the science and the principles of valuation based on
factors such as IP, cost of clinical development, time to
commercialization, size of the therapeutic segment, quality of clinical
data, competitive factors, impact on other R&D programs, and
royalty cash flows, newer valuation models have emerged to reflect
reality other than traditional valuation approaches such as net present
value (NPV), discounted cash flows (DCF), and internal rate of return
(IRR).
Advisory board and
subject matter experts
Nowadays, as alliance partners and investors are turning the
due-diligence process on its head by using tools to research biotech
companies in India, those same companies in India should consider
similar moves. A panel of experts can provide invaluable information to
an investor and similarly an expert panel can help the CEOs of the
small and mid-sized biotech companies understand where they meet, and
where they fall short on alliance and investor expectations. Once these
companies understand how their partners and PE investors
perceive them, they can then start working to fill in gaps, recast
messages, better explain strategy, and so forth. The process could even
result in changing scientific and business practices, as expert panels
can bring a fresh perspective to companies that aren’t
realizing their full potential.
To be or not to be
As the line between biotech and big pharma blurs aside from mergers and
acquisitions and partnering, pharma companies are starting their own
initiatives. Pfizer pledged to spend $50 million (about Rs 235.75
crore) for a San Diego incubator; Lilly spent $560 million (about Rs
2,640 crore) to expand its biotech operation; and Roche in late 2007
announced that it would plow $255 million (about Rs 1,202 crore) into
expanding its biotech research and development. Some of these plans
have been scaled back last year in the wake of the economic downturn.
The stake sale of Ranbaxy does signal questions in the minds of CEOs in
the small and mid-sized Indian biotechs, as a stand alone, do they
stand a chance with sustainable revenue models of growth for their
innovation? The jury is still out there.