Introduction by Dee Dao, President of the FOBIP Alumni Network warming up the audience at Mt. Sinai School of Medicine

The event kicked off with an introduction by the moderator Sarah Webb, a journalist for the Webb of Science. She briefly touched on the issues of our new digital age, in which many people are communicating with each other in 140 characters, or less. She mentioned the issues such as freedom of speech and government regulation in the biotech/pharma industry, discussed the ways in which people interact with healthcare companies online, and gave examples of successful early adapters of online communications strategies in medicine. She asked what do customers want, as they get their information from the internet? Today 61% of people are getting their health information online, according to a Pew study. However, only 1/2 of those people are generating content i.e. posting to blogs, commenting in forums, or contributing to discussions in an online community.

This was followed by a fantastic presentation by Michelle Hoffmann, Senior Research Manager at Deloitte Research. There is alot of buzz around social networks, there was even a movie about it- it is on everyone’s agenda. Every kid is doing it, you probably do it yourself. But, is there value in it? It’s actually very hard to make money from social media. Clients asked Deloitte: If we use this, will we find value? Deloitte answered by doing research on social networks, which is actually different than social media. What should life science networks be thinking about? How can life science companies engage in this to find value? Michelle admitted that there is hype, and there is hope. Does anyone want to ‘friend’ a company? No. The system works on the premise of data collection and collaboration between administrators and users. Does social marketing improve brand? The jury is still out. She repeated the mantra “If you build it, they will not come”. Recommend that you don’t advertise- it often doesn’t work. There are many options: blogs, wiki’s, RapidFeed, i.e. microblog such as twitter. Focused communities are rising where people come together for a single interest or event. There are more people on Facebook than the entire United States. There is alot of hype. Why are Life Sciences clients interested in this? They are interested because patients are going online to find relevant information to achieve some sort of healthcare outcome, and these networks are consumer/patient driven. There are possibilities for physicians to come enter and interact, possibly for-profit operations. 60% of doctors are using social networking for professional purposes. Social networking is most commonly being used by patients and their families, especially those fighting cancer and childhood diseases. However, obesity treatment via weight loss has not seen any significant social network activity due to the “on again, off again” nature of the therapy.

There are many different methods for collecting information, so why choose social netoworks? Owning or running a social network can give the administrator a curated database of information unavailable to them from other sources or databases. Some of the strengths of using social networking include: Collect Information- Market research, competetive intelligence Communicate- Social networks rely on “pull in” information, opposed to the traditional communications strategy of “push out”

There are social networks where physicians can actually exchange information in an online community, such as Ozmosis which bills itself as “The Trusted Physician’s Network, where good doctors go to become great doctor”s). In Sermo, a “Forum to share latest medical insights for physicians”, physicians remain anonymous. 23% of physicians plan on using social networking in the next 12-18 mo. However, it does take alot of blood, sweat and tears and manpower to get a social network running and keeping it up to date. It is not like a static web page, which can just be set up and the owner walks away. Deloitte recommends to those life science companies interested in setting up social networks to hire a very experienced moderator. People use social networking for many reasons, i.e. recreational and transactional purposes. The transactional user will need a review for a product or advice in a scenario. For example, their baby has a fever, what do they do? This is where physicians and consumers can come in and interact. Deloitte has been showing their life science clients that there’s value in social networking. For example, SpineConnect allows “spine surgeons from around the world log-on to SpineConnect to share knowledge, develop novel approaches to treatment, address the top challenges in spine healthcare, and create technological solutions that address voids in the current marketplace with the underlying goal of improving patient outcomes”. Finally, Michelle stated that she felt social network’s strength was in up-to-date information on topics that are filled with uncertainty.

Thank you to our attentive and diverse audience!

Louise Clemens, a digital strategy consultant explained that pharma wants to use social networking, but are very afraid to. She focused on what is working now. Elsevier Publishing is currently using this platform to allow editors to engage in conversation, and interact directly with their advisory board. The American College for Gastroenterology, via their ACG GI Circle has set up a system where members can participate in the conversation by commenting on abstracts and following authors- a great way to cultivate information and keep the scientific discussion going past an initial meeting at a conference.

There were some very interesting topics brought up during the final discussion. It was noted that the Mayo Clinic has over 300 videos up on YouTube. The FDA represents the large unknown in this sector. While they have no official social networking guidelines in place yet for the industry, the FDA themselves is publishing alot of content online via social networks. In 2010 the FDA issued 52 warning letters to the pharmaceutical industry, but only one involved social media. That was a Google Ad for a drug, which was faulted for not providing the proper warnings and side effects for the product with its advertisement. Johnson & Johnson has been very successful in opening up dialogue with patients and customers via their social media team, which responds to the individual questions submitted via their social network online (See J&J Diabetes Institute Online Community). Remember to never launch on a Friday. And finally, the future of this field will probably lie in location based sites such as Groupon, Foursquare and MyCityWay.

The evening ended with a fun and lively networking session which had food and drinks provided by the FOBIP.

When Matthew Engel invited me to guest post, he suggested I write an article on communications strategies since many graduates of the Fundamentals of the Bioscience Industry Program would be seeking employment in very specialized areas.

My business is helping biotech, device, healthcare, and emerging technology companies tell their story and how I do that was going to be the subject of the post. But then, my friend Graham Lawlor of UltraLightStartups gave me his copy of Gary Vaynerchuck’s Crush It! and I thought, “Hey, this speaks more to the idea of personal branding and is applicable to both individuals and small companies.”

At its core, Crush It! gives you the following formula for building your personal brand:

Vaynerchuck claims building your personal brand is necessary to crush it in your industry and ‘make your entrepreneurial dreams come true.” He built his personal brand to increase sales at his family’s wine store, signed a 7-figure book deal and became an internet celebrity in the process.

But, what is a personal brand and why does it matter? A personal brand is the process whereby you and your career is marketed as a brand. It’s claimed management guru Tom Peters first used the term in 1997, so the idea is not that new. Dan Schwabel, Author of Me 2.0, says “The goal of personal branding is to be recruited based on your brand, not applying for jobs.” Gary’s do-it-yourself method is similar to what I would do for any company. The first thing I ask potential clients is: What do you want people to remember about your company? What is the one thing that is guaranteed to differentiate you from anyone else in your niche? The process starts with a great story. Then, you need to figure out who to tell the story to and how to reach them.

When you’ve started a company and no one knows you, I suggest founders focus on their expertise and getting known as experts. To do that, participate in forums online and get known as the go-to person for your topic. The people in the forums will be your initial audience. They could be employers. Then, who is your audience? Where do they hang out? What’s the best way to reach them? If it’s the internet, then things like social media make sense. If not, you may have to pick up the phone and go meet people in person. Vaynerchuck claims, “The thing most people don’t realize is that… your business and personal brand need to be one and the same.”

The WineLibraryTV.com‘s host and internet celebrity’s book is a useful blueprint that you could leverage to market yourself and look for a job.

Bio: Karl Schmieder is the founder of MessagingLab, a communications firm that works with healthcare companies developing disruptive technologies. Karl has worked with the A to Z of biotech and life sciences companies and has helped launch the blockbuster drugs Januvia (Merck), Lucentis (Genentech) and Risperdal (Janssen). He blogs actively at messaginglab.com.

NYC Bio and the Center for Biotechnology invite you to the fourth session of the “Nuts and Bolts of Biotechnology Entrepreneurship” series to be held on December 9th 2009.

The session “ Crossing the Valley of Death: guides to translational, pre-seed and seed funding ” features:

• Jahanara Ali, Senior Vice President, New York City Investment Fund

• Brian Cohen, Director, New York Angels

• Franklin Madison, Technology Program Director, Industrial & Technology Assistance Corporation of New York.

Venue:
Stony Brook Manhattan
401 Park Avenue South (between 27th and 28th Streets), 2nd Floor
New York, NY 10016
Note: If you are arriving before 7:00 pm, you can use the 401 Park Avenue South entrance (between 27th and 28th Streets) to come to the Main Hall on the second floor. After 7:00 pm, you need to use the 110 East 28th Street entrance.
Time: 6:30-8:00 PM on December 9th, 2009.

There is a fee of $10 for this session. All payments should be made through PayPal when you RSVP on the meetup website:

http://biotech.meetup.com/40/calendar/11864065/

We look forward to seeing you there.

By Mathew A. Engel

Day 1 Summary: Venture Capital Financing, Intellectual Property Management, and Emerging Business Models

The 2009 Life Science Summit took place from September 23 to 24, 2009 at the Hyatt Regency Hotel in Happauge, NY. There were hundreds of attendees representing the biotech industry and academia from all over the state. The industry attendees showed a diverse segmentation with strong representation from university technology transfer offices, law firms, venture capital firms, medicine, privately held biotech companies, mid and large-cap pharmaceutical companies. As a graduate student and alumni of the Fundamentals of the Bioscience Industry Program, I spent most of my time talking with accomplished professionals from successful companies who had experience commercializing technology,  raising capital, or evaluating new ventures. Below I will summarize my findings from the most interesting sessions throughout the first day of the summit. Hopefully, in the near future I will publish a follow-up covering day 2.

What Does it Take to Build a Biotechnology Company in Today’s Environment

The opening plenary session was a great way to spark the crowd’s interest and attention. In the back of my mind, I am always thinking about starting a biotechnology company and therefore always eager to hear advice from seasoned industry veterans. These individuals, especially those who volunteer as panelists or speakers are often willing to share their knowledge and offer some deep insight to beginners. In this session the speakers focused on how to raise capital. Those who are evaluating your proposal will be thinking “where is the technology” and “where is the project”. It is suggested that you network and these connections will lead you to investors who can also guide you into small collaborations. Their role is to keep these smaller companies on track. Currently, most of the demand is for products in late stage clinical trials, in this space demand remains high. Pharma is limiting their investment to certain therapeutic areas. The days of massive deal for a new platform technology are behind us. The huge investment in genomics with no products to show for it was cited. Most deals come about because someone knew someone. It’s not just writing a business plan and patents (though that is still required!). Venture capital (VC) will only stay in for a very short time. Pharma will only jump in Phase II. VC largely invests in people they know. Mailing the best business plan in the world to VCs randomly will get you nothing. Your job is to meet and know people who may be interested in investing. For example, some of the people on the panels at the Summit are Angel investors. Remember to “pick your partners”. The entrepreneur better be prepared to invest. It is important to consider if there are there other options besides a start-up? Many of the panelists, knowing what they do now, would not have chosen to start their own company. You’ve “got to be ignorant to go do it” they claimed. Today, businesses are focusing on staying extremely lean – infrastructure is minimized, reducing the amount of money necessary to operate. However, a company can only “be so lean” and achieve its business goals. VC is not going to be the “sugar baby” that’s going to take the company all the way through. There are drug discovery and medical chemistry labs on campus for basic R&D work. A good university should have a funding pool designated for small companies coming out of academia. One of the panelists spent time describing the experience of his friend who was trying to raise capital. His friend took ‘no’ as just another opportunity to go back to the VC. However, it’s good to get someone with a lot of experience and put together a team of people. “Build a culture and your company”. Medical devices are a great area to get into now. Diagnostic tools are a “neat area to be going into”. Get management in – VC looks at the management team. Get help and advice from your VC. Donald L. Drakeman, Venture Partner at Advent Ventures previously ran a company and was now a VC. His motto is “management, management, management”. What makes great management someone asked? “Management that will step aside”.

Is the VC funding Model Broken?

Mary C. Tanner, Managing Director at Peter J. Solomon & Co. and Maggie Flanagan LeFlore, Managing Director at MedImmune Venture Inc. were two of the most outspoken panelists during this business workshop. The panel delivered an overview of the VC industry covering current trends and their investment strategies. VC’s are adaptable and clever. They are in the business of building private companies to be sold. Their goal is to reach a deal with your company, in which payments are made as milestones are met. LeFlore completed 18 deals in the last year (given as a benchmark). Private companies are easier to sell. Fewer and fewer big pharma are in the market for these types of investments. There has been a fundamentals shift in exit strategy. Survival has followed those most adaptable to change. There are many exit strategies available. How does one get the VCs interest, a participant asked? Early stage risk is notorious, your goal should be to find little pockets of money to move things forward. The faculty members on your team better be well known (i.e. published in Nature, Science, Cell..). One of the panelists, E. Jonathan Soderstrom, Managing Director of the Office of Cooperative Research at Yale University had brought a compound to the attention of Lily and they asked for a proof of concept in humans! He did not even have POC in animals. The message is that you cannot expect Lily or Genetech to fund your development costs when the product is highly experimental.

The Center for Biotechnology and NYC Bio invite you to the second session of “Nuts and Bolts of Biotechnology Entrepreneurship” series on October 7th 2009 from 6-8pm.

“Intellectual Property and Technology Licensing” feature panelists:

• Abram Goldfinger, Executive Director, Industrial Liasion/Technology Transfer, NYU
• Daryn A. Grossman, Partner and Co-Chair of the Technology, Media and Communications practice group, Proskauer Rose LLP
• Kathleen Denis, Ph.D., Associate Vice President, Technology Transfer, Rockefeller University

Venue:
Stony Brook Manhattan
401 Park Avenue South (between 27th and 28th Streets), 2nd Floor
New York, NY 10016

Registration
There is a fee of $10 for this session. All payments should be made through PayPal when you RSVP on the meetup website: http://biotech.meetup.com/40/calendar/11129215/

Note: If you are arriving before 7:00 pm, you can use the 401 Park Avenue South entrance (between 27th and 28th Streets) to come to the Main Hall on the second floor. After 7:00 pm, you need to use the 110 East 28th Street entrance.

Time: 6:30-8:00 PM on October 7th, 2009.

Networking Cocktail: 8.00-9.00 PM

Great news for venture-minded Alumni!

The Center for Biotechnology has partnered with the non-profit organization NYC Bio and announced an upcoming seminar series/NYC Bio Meetup, entitled “The Nuts and Bolts of Biotechnology Entrepreneurship.” This four-part series is designed to educate innovators, academics, postdoctoral fellows, and graduate students on the practical, legal, and business aspects of commercializing their technology and transitioning their ideas into the bioscience industry.

All sessions will be held at the Stony Brook Manhattan Campus (401 Park Avenue South between 27th and 28th Streets, 2nd Floor, New York, NY 10016) at 6:30-8PM on their designated dates.

The first seminar entitled “Entrepreneurship in the Biotechnology Industry” will be held on Wednesday, September 2, 2009.

Featured panelists include:

• Alan Paau, Vice Provost for Technology Transfer and Economic Development at Weill Cornell   Medical College;

• Mark Wilson, President of Initiatives Consulting;

• Jeff Yablon, VP of Sales and Marketing at Sciformix Corp.;

• Jim Chinitz, CEO of Population Diagnostics; and

• Lorrence H. Green, President of Westbury Diagnostics.

Future seminars will run until December 2009 and are scheduled as follows:

“Intellectual Property and Technology Licensing,” on October 7th, 2009

“Business Plans 101: Making the Pitch,” on November 11th, 2009

“Crossing the Valley of Death: guides to transitional, pre-seed and seed funding,” on December 9th, 2009

There are only 63 slots for this series so registering early is HIGHLY recommended. The registration fee for each session is $10 (students/post docs) and $20 (everyone else) payable upon registration. And if you register for all four sessions at once, you even get a discount package ($30 for students/postdocs, and $60 for everyone else). Considering the caliber of the featured panelists and the networking opportunities at this event, I personally think that’s a steal.

To register, fee payments should be sent to the PayPal account: NYC.BIO.4U@gmail.com. Email your information to the same account and include: (1) your full name, (2) affiliated institution/company, (3) the session(s) you are interested in attending, (4) registration fee paid, and (5) the payment email address you used. NYC Bio will only confirm your registration upon receiving your payment.

For more details, see NYC Bio’s Meetup.

See you at the Series!