Big Pharma's Leap into Biologics: Bridging both Scientific and Cultural Gaps
Executive Summary
Pharma companies are bullish about biologics, seeing them as at least a partial solution for the pipeline troubles and reimbursement challenges bedeviling the industry. The major question is how best to bring these new biologics capabilities in-house--either piecemeal through a series of smaller acquisitions and licensing deals or in one fell swoop through the acquisition of a player with soup-to-nuts capabilities. Both strategies require delicate post-merger management skills, but many feel acquiring an end-to-end player is a faster, less risky solution to filling the biologics gap. But because few end-to-end biologics players are left for acquisition, in the future it seems likely that Big Pharma will be forced to make a serial acquisition strategy work.
You may also be interested in...
Time To Strike On Regenerative Medicine/Stem Cell Companies?
As the hype that accompanied the revelation of regenerative medicine recedes, biotechs that survived the transition from science experiment to market-focused company have now settled into the same realities that face the rest of the industry in terms of making the case for reimbursement and preparing for regulatory scrutiny, not to mention the exit question.
Is Diagnostics the New Biotech...and Will Pharma Embrace It?
The early biotech industry thrived on a combination of hope and hype while diagnostics, which evolved using many of the same tools, was traditionally viewed -- and priced -- almost as a commodity. Now we're seeing the advent of complex, high-value diagnostics. As the techniques underlying tests increase in their biological complexity and the knowledge base of their developers about specific disease areas deepens, is the value proposition becoming more biotech-like?
Is Diagnostics the New Biotech...and Will Pharma Embrace It?
The early biotech industry thrived on a combination of hope and hype while diagnostics, which evolved using many of the same tools, was traditionally viewed -- and priced -- almost as a commodity. Now we're seeing the advent of complex, high-value diagnostics. As the techniques underlying tests increase in their biological complexity and the knowledge base of their developers about specific disease areas deepens, is the value proposition becoming more biotech-like?