Pushing Biotechnology Through Securitization

I do not pretend to be an expert in financing. I am slowly learning about financing in biotechnology.

On TED, Roger Stein, a chief analytics officer at State Global exchange and a senior lecturer in finance at MIT Sloan, presented an interesting new model about financing biomedical research. Essentially, early stage biomedical research is pooled together and funding into a single fund. If one idea out of a hundred is financially successfully, then one successful idea will fund the other technologies. This setup is similar to VC, but this setup will fund earlier stage technologies. Stein's idea is different and quite innovative. The idea is using a new funding scheme to push innovation and help people. This is basically a securitization structure of financing. 

This scheme is unlike the current funding schemes for biotechnologies. Each research technology has to go through each of their own process of finding funds. Venture capital will fund at advanced clinical development, but VC will stay away from early stage ideas. 

There are several questions that need to be answered before embark a totally radical funding scheme.

• This scheme assumes a percentage of concepts make it into the market and become successful. What is the threshold for this scheme to become successful? 
• This is a scheme similar to that of the mortgage-backed securitization, which was partly responsible for the recent financial crisis.  How does biotechnology secrutization avoid problems that the mortgage-backed securitization faced?
• What is the necessary funding required to start a fund? Funding biomedical research is highly capital driven. 
• In what way are biomedical researchers involved? Researchers should have input into what concepts get funding. 

If you are adventurous, you can read the idea in Nature Biotechnology and the Economist.

Original paper: Nature Biotechnology, The Economist

Done with MBA applications

Whew!!! After 7 months of preparations, I am finally done with business school applications. Of course, I spent time preparing for the GMAT during that time. I would not recommend doing that. If I had to do it all over again, I would have taken the GMAT a year earlier. Then once I am comfortable with my GMAT score, I prepare my MBA applications. But I am all done.

So the waiting game begins. I applied to Maryland Smith, Georgetown McDonough, Berkeley Haas, UCLA Anderson, and University of Southern California Marshall. (When I get around to it, I will explain why I choose those schools.) With applications completed, I will need to be preparing for interviews. My strategy will include the following: collect possible interview questions, form my answers to those questions, and focus on key personal stories that can effectively answer those questions.

I already have received an interview request at Georgetown, and I schedule the interview that will take place in a couple of days. So I will be busy preparing and practicing the interview.

Why should I do now? This winter has felt pretty miserable. When spring comes around, I would like to hike more. I want to bring my dog for that. Salsa dancing and swing dancing were something my fiancee suggest we do. Tennis is something I would love to pick up again. Now I am free, I will looking for to relax a bit.

Why Organic Chemistry Is So Hard?

Justin Dragna, PhD, posted an interesting commentary: organic chemistry is hard. His point was originally posted in Quora and later posted in Business Insider. One of his thesis was that organic chemistry requires both a logic and memorization. Studying biology requires plenty of memorization. Studying physics requires the use of logic.

Justin's point really hits close to me in a couple of ways. When I started college, my major was Molecular Cell Biology. When I took my first organic chemistry, I actually loved the logic and problem solving involved. Retrosynthetic analysis felt very natural to me. I started to recognize aldol synthons. I was capable of explaining concepts to my classmates. I started a mini lecture to my classmates. I felt so confident in the material that I became a chemistry tutor. When I realize I love chemistry more than biology, I switch to chemical biology. I wanted to have my studies include both biology and chemistry.

Organic chemistry resonates with me. There are only a couple of key concepts one needs to memorize. In fact, a very small portion of the periodic table needs to be memorized. The rest of the subject requires logic. I do not have great memorization ability, but I felt my logic ability was far superior.

Why I write? - part II sharing my journey to business

As I explained in an earlier post, I will explain why I am chronicling my transitioning into business from basic science. 

To begin, I was really inspired to a blog by a fellow science researcher, Steven Ma. I found out he worked at the NIH like me. He had an interest in business like me. Steven is now attending Duke Fuqua School of Business. He has a blog chronicling his time at Duke and his transition into business.

Browsing the internet, there aren't many resources for scientists who want to venture into business. There are some books out there (I have a book I want to recommend and I will review it in a separate post). I figure I can contribute to fill the lack of resources.

The culture in basic science has been to encourage people to go gain a PhD, start a laboratory group, and write grants. Talking to people in biotech business, very few science people have the business background. I feel science people have to make their own path to discover their path. In other industries, the path is more clear cut. For example, in finance, it is expect that a junior analyst will go business school to move up in an organization. The science field has never been clear cut though. 

At the end, I hope I can make an impact on someone who wants to get out of science. There is more to science than research and a laboratory bench. My journey should not only inspire but also guide other science people.

Going to work = sad doggy

This is what I deal with everytime I go to work.

Why I write? - part I Introduction

So this is my first post as a blogger. Here is my first word of warning. My writing isn't as refine as I want it to be. I have always felt I was an alright writer. In my high school and college years, I have always feared writing. Quite recently, I have begun to tackle my writing weakness. I am writing more often. I have taken a writing class at a local school to receive a formal education.

What do I hope to gain with improving my writing abilities? There are many hopes, goals, and personal reasons for me.

1. I am looking to transition into a business related field. My current work is basic science research in cancer therapeutics. I have a burgeoning interest in business. More specifically, I have an interest biotechnology entrepreneurship. If I want to make that transition, I need to refine my writing abilities. I want to be able to communicate effectively with potential business partners. 
2. This blog will serve as an outlet for my writing. Sure, I have other outlets as well such as writing those numerous essays for business school applications. I figure if I write something on a consistent basis, I will improve my abilities. In addition, I hope I can engage the online community to receive feedback on my writing. If I inspire someone with my writing, I accomplished something important.
3. Lastly, I want to share my journey into my transition into business from science. Not a lot of people make a transition from basic science into business. I will explain this in a different post. 

If I am committed enough, I will write as frequently as possible. The minimum activity should be a post every week.