Challenges Faced By Companies Of The Bionanotechnology Sector Depending On Their Size. Small Companies

As faculty members, there should not be any form of restriction to how much they can contribute to biotechnology companies since it is their invention on trial. However for effectiveness, they need to work closely with experts from the biotechnology companies to create a device that fully meets patients or people’s needs for both commercial and medical potential.

Biotech companies’ values are primarily driven by intellectual property, they do not need to rely much on their suppliers. These companies also have relatively easy access to sources of raw materials (such as chemicals), scientific tools, computers and testing equipment.

As an investment manager from Sierra Capital Partners, Rodney Chu is interested in purchasing a 60% equity interest of Arcadian Microarray Technologies, Inc., a biotechnology firm. The bid is currently at $40 million. The Arcadian’s managers have optimistic projections for their firms’ performance over the next 11 years.

- On the surface, obtaining support from key opinion leaders, launching manufacturing operations in Costa Rica, and the relationship between James Westcott and Trevor Burns are main problems at Biometra. However, all of this problems were caused because of the organizational structure, lack of communication, and less experienced managers.

Technical risk, a large portion of all development costs are spent on drugs that never reach the market.

The global growth market in the industry where Nucleon competes is dynamic and complex. Many of the large pharmaceutical enterprises have R&D capabilities along with in-house manufacturing technologies. Some also have collaboration with startup companies.

There are several rewards to consider with expansion of Biocon. Currently in India, there is a growing market for contract research organization and the growth of Biocon falls right within this opportunity. The growth is expected to last for more than few years with a rate that looks promising. Clinigene is expected to reap revenues much higher than the current Biocon and Syngene combined (Kalegaonkar A., Nov 4, 2008). It will take clinical studies to a higher level with better options in terms of drug manufacturing. With other countries ready to outsource the service of clinical studies, Clinigene’s future looks bright.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYSilicon Valley Medical Technologies (SIVMED) was founded as a research and development firm. In the beginning, SIVMED performed its own basic research, obtained patents on promising technologies, and then either sold or licensed the technologies to other firms which marketed the products. The firm has since then grown and is now contracted to perform research and testing for larger genetic engineering firms, biotechnology firms, the US government, and is now widely recognized as the leader in an emerging growth industry. SIVMED's founders were relatively wealthy individuals when they started company, and they committed a great deal of their own funds to the venture. Their personal funds, however, were soon exhausted by the

But researchers are notoriously difficult to manage. A strategic plan cannot force a research breakthrough. Within Amgen therefore 20% of the researchers’ time is free to use as they themselves see fit.

NeoMed Technologies should’ve considered applying their initial product development to the technology of screening for drugs, drug delivery applications or detecting cancer. These areas would’ve possibly allowed for a quick to market product, without the additional approvals, quality standards applied in the medical equipment space, and FDA approvals needed. Bringing a simpler product to market first could’ve brought in revenue to fund the long-term product focus of a CAD screen system. The profits from a drug screening or drug delivery product could’ve assisted in funding their long-term product focus, they missed an opportunity to develop a quick revenue steam.

This illustrates that Albany has the needed support of industries in competitive areas, which is a great start for it to become a nanotechnology cluster. As for the Dresden team’s role, it should pass on their experiences along with the refined methods of process operations to the new fab. Like AMD Dresden’s beginning, Albany should send its managers and engineers to Dresden for training in order to copy its successful formula. However, processes can be copied exactly but culture can’t. AMD Dresden’s success is not only the processes of its operations, but it includes the people and the culture of Germany. Many industries in Germany are well known for the attention to detail, innovation, and precision engineering. This is not something that can be easily copied. Therefore, AMD’s strategy for Dresden and Albany is to divide them into different areas. The key to success understands the real strength of Dresden, and that is their ability of innovation. Dresden should become the innovation and research focus center while Albany takes control of manufacturing and development.

In order to decide on the R&D portfolio, an objective quantitative analysis might not be suitable considering the high levels of uncertainities and consequently the risks involved in pharmaceutical research projects. It is important to have a qualitative analysis of the situation as a whole that includes Vertex’s own financial position, strategic implications, a quantitative analysis of its Portfolios with realistic estimations and a risk analysis of the portfolios.

Achieve a median composite eight-year product development cycle by 2010. Deliver two new molecular entity (NME) launches on average per year from 2010. In order to achieve the above objective, ensure that we have 10 or more NMEs in Phase III development by 2010. Development cycle times and quality for small molecules and biologics. Number of NME launches per year. Attrition rates. Number of development projects by phase. Number of in-licensing deals, alliances and acquisitions. R&D investment levels. Improving R&D quality and speed through leading-edge science, effective risk management and decision-making and overall business efficiency. Maximising the value of our biologics business and continuing to build a major presence in this fast-growing sector. Investing in external opportunities to enhance our internal innovation through in-licensing, alliances and acquisitions. 2008 target exceeded for small molecule development cycle times. NME and life-cycle management progressions

The research and development of the pharmaceutical industry is very important as the industry relies on it to develop new products to maintain and sustain the growth of the industry (ALRC 2014). According to the Australian Government Law Reform Commission, every year, the total spending in research and development in pharmaceutical industry, which includes drug discovery, pre-clinical testing and clinical trials on drugs is around $300 million (ALRC 2014). Mergers and acquisitions are intensifying in the global pharmaceutical industry, especially over the last 10 years. With factors like exorbitant research and development costs, the relatively shorter product life cycles, and the rarity of discovering a new life-changing drug acting as catalysts, leading pharmaceutical companies now have more cause to step out and look for external collaboration. This results in an increasing number of smaller biotechnology companies merging with bigger pharmaceutical companies (The

Solution: Creating autonomous teams that don’t report into the organization but report to the top management. Co-locate with the local biotech ecosystem. Second, give time bound budgets.