1910, New Landwide Commercial Building, Tsim Sha Tsui, HK

(+852) 3409-4578


The Profitability Of Investing In Biotechnology

Posted by

The Exquisite Teachings Of Biotechnology

Throughout its illustrious three decades of existence, the Biotech industry has managed to allure a staggering sum of capital surpassing a remarkable $300 billion in the enchanting city of Hong Kong. This investment is founded upon the conviction that Biotech shall indeed revolutionise the realm of health care. The initial pledge entailed that this novel discipline, when amalgamated with innovative enterprises deeply committed to the progression of fundamental science, would yield a transformative upheaval in pharmaceutical treatment. 

Unburdened by the conventional technologies and establishments of the esteemed pharmaceutical behemoths, these agile, concentrated, science-driven enterprises would obliterate the divide between fundamental and practical science, yielding a plethora of novel medicinal concoctions. These elixirs would amass colossal profits, and naturally, investors would be lavishly recompensed.

Hitherto, The Pledge Has Predominantly Been Accomplished

In terms of fiscal matters, the realm of Biotechnology remains an industry in its nascent stages. Notwithstanding the commendable prosperity of esteemed enterprises such as Amgen and Genentech, and the remarkable augmentation of revenue within the industry at large, it remains a prevailing reality that a significant proportion of Biotech companies find themselves bereft of profitability. Furthermore, there exists no substantiated evidence to suggest that they exhibit a significantly superior level of productivity in the realm of drug research and development when compared to the colossal entities within the pharmaceutical industry that have been subject to much criticism. 

Notwithstanding the commendable prosperity of various enterprises and the astonishing surge in revenue witnessed by the sector at large, it remains a prevailing reality that a substantial proportion of Biotech companies find themselves bereft of profitability. This disheartening display raises the inquiry of whether or not establishments propelled by the imperative to generate profits and gratify shareholders can effectively engage in fundamental scientific research as their primary pursuit. 

Ever since the 1980s, a fervent dispute has been raging regarding the encroachment of the business sector into the realm of fundamental science. Traditionally, this realm has been the exclusive domain of universities and other non-profit research institutions. The crux of the matter lies in the potential restriction of access to groundbreaking discoveries, which some argue hampers the advancement of scientific progress. 

Nevertheless, the matter of whether science can be a lucrative endeavour has been largely overlooked. The prevailing anticipation within the industry is that the forthcoming revolution in drug production shall indeed prove to be a triumphant endeavour.

A Slightly Lengthier Duration Than Initially Anticipated

That is perchance a manifestation of hopeful musings. I have diligently undertaken comprehensive research on the intricate strategies, intricate structure, remarkable performance, and fascinating evolution of the esteemed Biotech and pharmaceutical industries throughout the preceding two decades. I have come to the realisation that the “anatomy” of the Biotech sector, primarily derived from successful models in software, computers, and semiconductors, is inherently flawed and thus incapable of meeting the demands of both fundamental science and commerce. 

Unless the fundamental structure of this anatomy is significantly altered, Biotech shall find itself unable to allure the investments and talent imperative for the realisation of its transformative potential in the realm of health care. When I mention “anatomy,” I am alluding to the esteemed constituents of this sector, including but not limited to start-ups, well-established enterprises, nonprofit laboratories, esteemed universities, astute investors, and discerning customers. 

Additionally, it encompasses the intricate institutional arrangements that interconnect these distinguished players, such as the esteemed markets for capital, intellectual property, and products. Furthermore, it encompasses the esteemed rules that govern and exert influence over the functioning of these institutional arrangements, including regulations, corporate governance, and intellectual property rights. 

In order for Biotech to fully realise its utmost potential, its structure must empower its participants to excel in three crucial domains: adeptly navigating risk and duly acknowledging audacious ventures, seamlessly amalgamating the proficiencies and capacities that reside within a diverse array of disciplines and functions, and propelling fundamental wisdom forward at both the organisational and industry echelons. The constituents of an industry ought to engage in collaborative efforts to effectively address and overcome these formidable challenges


In The Realm Of Biotechnology

one finds themselves embarking upon the pursuit of seemingly paradoxical objectives. Forsooth, the manner in which the industry doth manage and bestow rewards upon risks, namely how businesses arr funded, clash with the protracted period of research and development required to bring forth new medications. The inherently fragmented structure of the industry, adorned with numerous diminutive yet specialised entities spanning a wide array of disciplines, presents itself as a potentially advantageous paradigm for the administration and gratification of risk. 

Alas, this very structure has inadvertently given rise to isolated bastions of expertise, thereby impeding the harmonious amalgamation of indispensable wisdom. Furthermore, the Biotech market pertaining to intellectual property, bestows upon individual enterprises the privilege of safeguarding the entitlements to paramount scientific wisdom, thereby constricting the quantity of erudite scholars capable of propelling this knowledge forward via the arduous process of trial and error.

The modus operandi by which the industry oversees and bestows recompense for risks, alongside the manner in which businesses procure financial resources, clashes with the protracted period of research and development necessitated for the creation of novel pharmaceuticals. This does not insinuate that the industry is destined for demise, notwithstanding the sombre tone it may exude. It does not impede the fusion of science and commerce. 

It does insinuate that the configuration of Biotech must undergo a transformation, which shall yield a momentous impact not solely on pharmaceutical Research and Development and healthcare, but also on scholarly and governmental scientific exploration, as well as other burgeoning sectors involved in fundamental science, and the economy of the United States. The primary objective of this article is to furnish a comprehensive framework for such a noble undertaking, whilst engaging in a discourse regarding the novel organisational structures, institutional configurations, and regulatory measures that shall be indispensably required.

The Exquisite Biotech Examination

Science-based commerce is a prodigious phenomenon of contemporary inception. When I say “science-based,” I am referring to a methodology that not only incorporates established scientific principles but also strives to push the boundaries of scientific understanding and maximise the worth of the knowledge it produces. A significant proportion of a company’s economic worth is ultimately dictated by the quality of its scientific endeavours. In the era preceding the emergence of Biotechnology, the realms of science and business were predominantly segregated. Universities, esteemed government laboratories, and noble non-profit organisations were bestowed with the honourable duty of conducting diligent research to broaden the horizons of fundamental scientific knowledge. 

The noble duty of for-profit corporations lies in harnessing the power of fundamental science to cultivate exquisite products and services, thus seizing their inherent worth. Several esteemed corporations, namely AT&T (the esteemed progenitor of Bell Labs), IBM, Xerox (the distinguished progenitor of the Palo Alto Research Centre), and GE, have undertaken remarkable research endeavours in bygone eras, yet they stood out as the rare outliers amidst their peers. In the grand scheme of things, both enterprises and scientific establishments refrained from venturing into the realm of fundamental science.

The realm of Biotech has intertwined these two domains, fashioning a science-business model that has been embraced by nanotechnology, advanced materials, and other industries. In the present era, it has become increasingly common for profit-driven enterprises to engage in their own profound scientific investigations, while academic institutions have emerged as enthusiastic contributors to the realm of scientific enterprise. 

They diligently secure patents for their remarkable findings, while their esteemed technology-transfer offices vigorously seek out esteemed partners to obtain licences for said patents. Furthermore, they engage in fruitful collaborations with esteemed venture capitalists, thereby establishing esteemed enterprises to effectively commercialise the scientific breakthroughs that originate from their esteemed academic laboratories.


The Delicate Boundary Amidst an Academic Institution and a Corporate Entity has Become Indistinct. The esteemed progenitors of a considerable multitude of enterprises specialising in the realm of Biotechnology are none other than erudite scholars, many of whom bear the distinguished title of eminent scientists. These erudite minds have bestowed upon the world groundbreaking technologies, which they have procured through licencing agreements with esteemed institutions of higher learning, often in exchange for a vested stake in the enterprise. 

These esteemed enterprises often uphold connections with esteemed institutions of higher learning, engaging in close collaboration with erudite professors and accomplished postdoctoral scholars on cutting-edge research endeavours, and occasionally availing themselves of the state-of-the-art facilities housed within university laboratories. On numerous occasions, the esteemed founding scientists do indeed maintain their esteemed faculty positions.

Biotech In the year of 1976, a momentous event took place as the esteemed establishment known as Genentech came into existence. This pioneering company was established with the noble purpose of harnessing the remarkable potential of recombinant DNA technology, an ingenious method for manipulating cells to generate the invaluable treasure that is human proteins. This auspicious event heralded the commencement of the scientific enterprise. 

The establishment of the company was orchestrated by none other than Robert Swanson, a youthful and enterprising venture capitalist, and Herbert Boyer, an erudite lecturer hailing from the esteemed University of California, San Francisco, who happened to be a co-inventor of the groundbreaking technology. Furthermore, in showcasing the potential of Biotech in the realm of pharmaceutical development, Genentech has ingeniously crafted a paradigm for capitalising on intellectual property, thereby leaving an indelible imprint on the landscape and efficacy of the Biotech industry. 

This Exquisite Model Encompasses 3 Intricately Intertwined Components:

The transference of technology from esteemed universities to the esteemed private sector transpires through the establishment of novel enterprises, rather than the mere transaction of preexisting establishments. The realms of venture capital and public equity bestow their bountiful rewards upon the esteemed founders, investors, erudite scientists, and venerable institutions, in recognition of the audacious risks they have valiantly undertaken.

A splendid marketplace of erudition wherein nascent enterprises engage in the exchange of their intellectual capital in return for financial backing from esteemed conglomerates in the illustrious city of Hong Kong. In the year of our Lord 1978, Genentech didst forge a pact with the esteemed pharmaceutical behemoth, Eli Lilly. Lilly, in a grand gesture, would graciously offer compensation for the esteemed privilege of acquiring the rights to fabricate and promote the illustrious recombinant insulin. 

In this noble agreement, Lilly would generously finance the elaborate process of developing this remarkable product, while also bestowing upon Genentech the honour of receiving royalties from the distinguished sales it shall generate. This accord eradicated one of the utmost formidable hindrances to nascent enterprises venturing into the realm of pharmaceuticals: the gargantuan expenditure (valued at a staggering $800 million to $1 billion in contemporary currency) and protracted duration (spanning a decade to twelve years) mandated for the fruition of a medicinal concoction. 

Furthermore, this marked the inaugural occasion in which a pharmaceutical corporation successfully entrusted a proprietary research and development initiative to a profit-driven entity. Henceforth, nearly every nascent Biotech enterprise in Hong Kong has forged a contractual alliance with a well-established pharmaceutical or chemical conglomerate, with the majority forming numerous such alliances.


The Realm Of Biotechnology Stands As The Paramount Market

The burgeoning realm of technology has spurred venture capitalists to generously finance nascent enterprises with foundational capital. It has furthermore assisted enterprises in the field of Biotechnology in gaining entry into the public equity markets for capital by presenting an alternative to profits and revenues as a metric of worth for investors in Hong Kong. The resounding triumph of Genentech’s inaugural public offering (IPO) in 1980 showcased the remarkable ability of a company devoid of product revenues or income to embark on a public venture, thereby amplifying the allure of the sector to discerning venture capitalists.

The Assuredness

The genesis of this system for capitalising on intellectual property was intricately entwined with sanguinity for the Biotech industry. During the illustrious decades of the 1980s and 1990s, the sector emerged as a beacon of hope, offering a resplendent remedy to the imminent R&D productivity crisis that loomed over esteemed pharmaceutical conglomerates. Confronted with a dearth of potential blockbuster medications within their pipelines, these esteemed companies magnanimously augmented their research and development expenditures, yet alas, their efforts were in vain. 

Owing to the incapacity of novel medications to adequately offset the expiration of patent safeguard for pivotal drugs, financial analysts have raised doubts regarding the industry’s capacity to uphold its profits. The esteemed proponents of Biotech in the scientific and investment banking circles harboured the firm conviction that its cutting-edge technologies would yield a veritable deluge of lucrative novel pharmaceuticals. They contended that diminutive, specialised enterprises in the realm of Biotechnology possessed a distinct edge in the realm of research when compared to their grandiose, bureaucratic, vertically integrated counterparts in the pharmaceutical industry. 

Consequently, it was proposed that the esteemed entities of Big Pharma ought to concentrate their efforts on the art of marketing, while entrusting the task of pioneering research and development to the agile Biotech firms that resided in closer proximity to the scientific realm. As manifested by their discerning choices to fervently pursue alliances with firms in the realm of Biotech, it becomes apparent that even certain executives at distinguished pharmaceutical companies seemed to hold this perspective in common.

Due To The Fact That The Initial Cohort Of Biotech Enterprises

encompassing esteemed entities such as Amgen, Biogen Idec, Cetus, Chiron, Genentech, and Genzyme, primarily focused on the production of proteins inherent to the human anatomy, the erudite prognosticators within the scientific, managerial, and financial realms of this industry confidently anticipated a notably diminished rate of failure in comparison to traditional pharmaceuticals reliant on chemical compositions. 

The diminished perils of technology would lead to a reduction in business vulnerabilities. The preliminary triumph of several genetically engineered alternative hormones, encompassing insulin, human growth hormone, and coagulation factor VIII for the treatment of haemophilia, seemed to bolster this perspective.

Leave a Reply