Venture Capitalists as gatekeepers for Biotechnological Innovation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5912/jcb704Keywords:
Venture Capital, Biotechnology, Acquisitions, InnovationAbstract
Venture capitalists (VCs) aim at trade sales as a preferred exit-strategy for biotechnology companies they invest in. Therefore, VCs pay close attention to the wishes of larger (bio)pharmaceutical acquirers. In this paper we explore VCs’ behavior and strategies by analyzing the technology fields and therapeutic areas in which they are invested most and which yield the highest returns by means of trade sales. The data show that VCs are by far most invested in oncology and this is also an area in which relatively high returns are realized. Regarding other areas, VCs could balance their average investment valuations more in correspondence with what acquirers are willing to pay. In addition, VCs have formidable insight in the types of technologies that do well and they seem to employ a strategy focused on both short-term and long-term success. They are investing most in small molecule drugs and protein/peptide therapeutics, which both yield high returns, followed by DNA/RNA technologies which underlie the possibilities of personalized medicine. We conclude that Venture Capitalists act as technological gatekeepers because they are predicting long-term cure and care macro-trends.
References
Bradford, T. C. (2003) Evolving symbiosis—venture capital and biotechnology. Nature Biotechnology 21(9): 983 – 984
EY (2013) Beyond Borders; Matters of evidence. Biotechnology Industry. http://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/Beyond_borders/$FILE/Beyond_borders.pdf
Stewart, J. J., Allison, P. N., & Johnson, R. S. (2001) Putting a price on biotechnology. Nature biotechnology 19(9): 813-818
Lee, D. P. & Dibner, M. D. (2005) The rise of venture capital and biotechnology in the US and Europe. Nature biotechnology 23(6): 672-676
Malik, N. N. (2009) Biotech acquisitions by big pharma: why and what is next. Drug discovery today 14(17): 818-821
Fernald, K., Pennings, E., & Claassen, E. (2014) Biotechnology Commercialization Strategies: Risk and Return in Interfirm Cooperation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, in press.
Giniatullina, A., Boorsma, M., Mulder, G. J. & van Deventer, S. (2013) Building for big pharma. Nature biotechnology 31(4): 284-287
Florida, R. L. & Kenney, M. (1988) Venture capital-financed innovation and technological change in the USA. Research Policy 17(3): 119-137
OECD (2005) A Framework for Biotechnology Statistics. http://www.oecd.org/science/inno/34935605.pdf
Van der Valk, T., Moors, E. H. M. & Meeus, M. T. H. (2009) Conceptualizing patterns in the dynamics of emerging technologies: The case of biotechnology developments in the Netherlands Technovation 29(4): 247–264
Kalos, M., & June, C. H. (2013) Adoptive T cell transfer for cancer immunotherapy in the era of synthetic biology. Immunity 39(1): 49-60
Barouch, D. H., & Picker, L. J. (2014) Novel vaccine vectors for HIV-1. Nature Reviews Microbiology 12: 765–771
Mairhofer, J., & Lara, A. R. (2014) Advances in Host and Vector Development for the Production of Plasmid DNA Vaccines. Cancer Vaccines. Springer New York, pp. 505-514
Fernald, K. D. S., Weenen, T. C., Sibley, K. J. & Claassen, E. (2013) Limits of biotechnological innovation. Technology and Investment 4, 168-178
Davis, J. C., Furstenthal, L., Desai, A. A., Norris, T., Sutaria, S., Fleming, E., & Ma, P. (2009) The microeconomics of personalized medicine: today's challenge and tomorrow's promise. Nature reviews Drug discovery 8(4): 279-286
Sander, C. (2000) Genomic medicine and the future of health care. Science 287(5460): 1977-1978
Schilsky, R. L. (2010) Personalized medicine in oncology: the future is now. Nature reviews Drug discovery 9(5): 363-366
