Bioentrepreneur in 2005

Young biotech startups can benefit hugely from the US National Institutes of Health (NIH), not least because of the agency's non-dilutive funding, guidance, and opportunities for collaboration. Increasingly, however, there is a fair bit of misunderstanding about what the NIH can and cannot do for a biotech entrepreneur.

Venture capitalists and angels are pulling back from seed rounds, just as biotech startups need more money than ever to get off the ground.

In recent years, a number of universities have created graduate degrees in biotech and business. Although it's still too early to measure their value, it appears that they are already inspiring debate and some startup activity.

The UK government is looking for a few good US biotech entrepreneurs.

New York City is crowing about the long-awaited arrival of a new biotech park, but the city will have to overcome its image as a financial and fashion capital before it captures the interest of biotech startups.

You've heard enough bragging about the great licensing successes of your colleagues. But for each successful deal, there is at least one total disaster that they try to forget. It's time to pull back the curtain and talk about some truly lousy deals.

As biopharmaceutical companies are pushed up the pipeline to find the best licensing deals, some small biotechs are starting to command more money at an earlier stage in their research.

The government of Chile turns to a consortium of business leaders and academics to bolster its biotech prospects.

The US National Cancer Institute has completed its funding for nanobiotech projects, but the debate about its value to startups lingers.

Many nations provide startup funding for biotech startups. In an effort to give its upstarts an added boost, the Swedish government also plays the role of bridge builder by taking its startups on the road.

Few things are misunderstood more by biotech startup management teams than the importance of creating working space conducive to innovation and productivity, and compatible with the company's vision. Aesthetics, form and function matter.

Life science investors are once again smitten with medical device startups. But, biotech entrepreneurs and investors should keep things in perspective.

Fledgling biotechs and their original investors are increasingly looking at PIPEs to fill the funding void.

In China, biotech startups are struggling to make a go of it. But new models for survival are emerging.

The buzz is growing about reverse mergers as an alternative path to capital markets in the US.

Because of their scale and cost advantages, virtual biotechs are attracting growing interest again. In theory, any element in the innovation chain of a biotech or medical device firm can be outsourced. In practice, the virtual model represents challenges to both investors and management.

The biotech sector is maturing, but investors are still cautious.

New law could provide the long underachieving Argentinean biotech industry the incentives and funding to finally test its potential.

A new panel has been formed in Africa to determine how and where the continent should be building its biotech base.

Despite a faltering biotech IPO market, secondary offerings are still going strong for startups with good news and impeccable timing.