The webinar includes a deep dive on each of the following topics: • Governance and structural concerns of LLCs, including organizational documents, founders’ agreements, and management provisions • Tax issues, including partnership provisions and conversion opportunities for LLCs • Investor concerns on LLCs, particularly from the venture capital lens • Accounting issues on tax and…
Over the past year, tech transfer directors from Columbia, Duke, JHU, Penn, MIT, Stanford, and Yale worked with life science VCs from 5AM, Atlas, Polaris, OUP, RA Capital, and Venrock to create a common set of principles for university startup deal negotiations. These principles were captured in two documents: “Recommendations for Term Sheet Structuring”, covering equity, royalties, milestones, sublicensing, know-how royalties, diligence, and other recommendations for creating win-win outcomes; and “Recommendations for Process Improvements”, with recommendations for structuring the negotiation process itself to avoid unnecessary friction, gain buy-in early, and avoid overly long and painful negotiations.
A discussion on the differences in licensing to startups based out of Israel, China, and the UK by experts who have worked in these regions. David Ai, formerly of City University in Hong Kong, Amir Naiberg, formerly of Yeda Research and Development Co, in Israel, and Teri Willey, formerly of Cambridge Enterprise, will talk about particular variances in license clauses and startup structures that US tech transfer offices may encounter when licensing to entities incorporated in these countries.
It’s Spring, which means it is once again time for OUP’s annual financing trends webinar. Which sectors have had the greatest amounts of investment and which are facing funding challenges? How do these trends apply to advancing academic technologies? What does the beginning of 2019 imply for the rest of the year and what lies over the horizon?
Last year, Congress passed the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act (FIRRMA), which significantly expands the authorities of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS). In November of 2018, the U.S. Federal Government began a pilot program of these new FIRRMA authorities to review and in some cases restrict investment by non-U.S. sources in “critical technology” areas. Those “critical” areas currently include certain types of software, aerospace products, energy storage products, and many more technologies. In addition, the government is engaged in a proceeding to consider expanding the set of “critical” fields to include biotechnology, artificial intelligence, robotics, quantum computing, and advanced materials, among others.
Therapeutics remain the primary focus for life science venture investments. As we all know, pre-clinical development of therapeutics is complicated, time consuming, and capital intensive. In the early stages of development, multiple aspects of a therapeutic product need to be optimized to enhance its drug-like properties. However, given the limited time and resources in the academic setting, what aspects of development should inventors focus on? Before diving into drug development, inventors should ask themselves: What is feasible in an academic setting? What is valued more by the investors? Should it be performed in-house or be out-sourced? How much would it cost?
Columbia Technology Ventures (CTV) and venture investors Osage University Partners (OUP) invite you to join a seminar on the following topic: “Understanding the real economics of university startup formation.”
OUP principal John Lee will take you step-by-step through the life of a company, illustrating the different types equity, the pros and cons of each equity type depending on different company outcomes, and the economic effect this has on founders’ shares. Data will be presented to support the conversation around founders’ equity, the right allocation between faculty vs. post docs vs. grad students, and how much equity one needs to give away to attract and keep your top talent.
Hardware is hard. Large capital requirements, long development timelines, and fickle customers are classic critiques that VCs focus on when evaluating a hardware startup. Yet substantial investments in quantum computing, semiconductors, and additive manufacturing prove that an industry-changing vision with cutting edge technology can overcome investor hesitations about the sector. And while the numbers show that investment dollars into software outpace hardware, the reality is the two keywords no longer separate the industry as many hardware entrepreneurs and investors have learned the benefits of software-enabled “things.” Is the market returning to hardware bets? What do investors want to see in 2018? What are avoidable pitfalls of pitching a hardware story?
While investments in biotech have reached record highs in recent years, investment in the diagnostics sector from traditional VCs has cooled. This is despite a rapid decline in the cost of sequencing and increased public interest in the potential of precision medicine. In this webinar, Osage University Partners explores the unique challenges facing diagnostics with Garheng Kong, a Managing Partner at HealthQuest Capital, a LabCorp director and active diagnostics investor, and Doug Fisher, CBO of Sera Prognostics and partner at InterWest Partners, also active in diagnostics.