An Aug 14 article in The Danbury News-Times explores the growth of bioscience in the Danbury area. “That corner of Connecticut has been quite lively recently,” said Bill Kelly, communications director at CURE. “Danbury doesn’t have Yale or UConn, but it does have Danbury Hospital and Boehringer-Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals.”
“Connecticut is attractive to bioscience entrepreneurs, particularly when they’re in the research and development stage,” Kelly said. “The chance of any new business succeeding is never guaranteed, no more in bioscience than any other industry. So an entrepreneur will say, ‘I’ll give this a shot, but if it doesn’t work, is there someplace else I can go or my employees can go in the state.’ If there’s enough of a critical mass built up, people are comfortable to move to Connecticut or leave a job to create a bioscience startup. “We’ve reached that point; Connecticut is a bioscience player. People know they can make careers here.”
An Aug 31 article in the Meriden Record-Journal reports on an agreement by Protein Sciences to sell its FluBlØk vaccine in Japan. Paul Pescatello, president and chief executive officer of CURE, said Protein Sciences’s manufacturing challenges are typical in the vaccine market.
“It’s a relatively expensive process,” Pescatello said. “FluBlØk is a great product and it faces the same uncertainties that other vaccines face — that’s ensuring the market exists.” During an outbreak, a company needs lead time to develop large quantities of vaccine. If there’s too much, the company is left holding it.”
Pescatello predicted there will be changes in regulatory structure that will be more favorable to vaccines, and that the financing will fall into place. In the meantime, Protein Sciences is making the right moves with global partners, he said.
A Sept 7 article in the The Stamford Advocate mentions that Thomas, McNerney & Partners, a Stamford-based health-care venture capital firm that invests in life science and medical technology companies, closed its second fund after raising $375 million in limited partner commitments. Venture capital firms provide the lifeblood of the bioscience industry, Kelly told the Advocate. He said venture capital is vital for a medical company because it can take up to 10 years or longer for the firm to get its product to market. “But when a venture capital firm makes a commitment, you realize this is a serious product with commercial potential in the foreseeable future," Kelly said.
An article in the Sept issue of Connecticut magazine applauds the state for its forward-looking approach to stem cell research. Pescatello of CURE is quoted as saying that California’s passage of a stem cell bill in 2004 was one reason that Connecticut acted when it did.
A Sept 18 article in CT Business Journal asks whether the bioscience boom in Connecticut is still going strong. The biotech market is no "straight hockey stick," according to Kevin Rakin, co-chair of CURE. “It's just a matter of time before the industry as a whole really takes off as a growing and prosperous business,” Rakin said. “So we need to keep asking questions like: ‘How do you really build a biotech company so that science and business mesh?’”
“Investment in bioscience is an inherently risky proposition,” adds Paul Pescatello. "The cost of one project could be $1.7 billion and it could take 15 years before everything comes together. There are more time and more money invested than in any other industry, but there are significant payoffs when everything comes together.”
“The biotech industry is similar to the oil industry,” says Pescatello. “Some projects turn out to be incredibly robust and others are dry holes. It simply depends on where the company is in clinical trails and research,” he adds. “Not every avenue of research pans out, but luckily there are multiple avenues. It's not a perfect picture, and it's not 100 percent.”
A Sept 24 article in The Hartford Courant recounts the decision of Artifical Cell Technologies to make Connecticut its home. Pescatello is quoted as saying that the state needs to consider seeding the really early stage companies, “places where the VCs fear to tread.”
In a Sept 29 article in The Yale Daily News, Bill Kelly comments that Connecticut is a very attractive state for biotechnology firms to settle in because of its access to capital, the general environment, and state tax incentives. He said that while many states give tax incentives to emerging companies, Connecticut uses a system where each dollar of tax credit can be exchanged for 65 cents of direct aid if the company is not profitable. “A lot of states give tax credits, but that does not do most biotechnology companies much good as they don't make any money for a while,” Kelly said.
In the Oct issue of CT Business magazine, Pescatello contributes a column on bioscience in New Haven County. “Bioscience in Connecticut has grown to become a $7.6 billion industry, and New Haven County has emerged as its vital epicenter,” Pescatello writes.
In an article on venture capital in the same issue, Pescatello says that Connecticut will attract enough of a concentration of firms to become a lure for venture capitalists. “Where a firm decides to set up shop can be highly idiosyncratic,” Pescatello says. “But one determining factor is whether a firm is in close proximity to its investment.”
A Nov article in CT Business speaks of the state as “the new silicon valley.” The article quotes Pescatello as saying that more bioscience organizations will locate in Connecticut as the result of the state’s stem cell legislation.
A Nov 10 article in The Hartford Courant reports Bayer’s decision to move from West Haven. Pescatello says that despite the closing, the state still benefits from a vibrant biotech sector as well as major pharma such as Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Pfizer.
For the Nov 10 story on Bayer in The New Haven Register, Pescatello points out that Bayer has gradually been taking a smaller role in West Haven in recent years. But “Bayer has done a great job of keeping the site up. They’ve kept the whole site in really tiptop condition, so I would think it would be very attractive to another pharmaceutical company or large biotech,” Pescatello says in a follow-up story on Nov. 11.
A Nov 10 story on Bayer in The Connecticut Post mentions that Pescatello has been named by the Governor to a Commission that is charged to “move aggressively to identify a new corporate entity to lease or buy the site and bring jobs back.”
In a Nov 11 editorial, the Day (New London) says the Bayer news should not be taken lightly. The editorial commends the work CURE is doing on behalf of the industry and quotes Pescatello as saying that the industry could be helped further by state aid early in the formative stages of small companies emerging from university research laboratories.
A Nov 13 article in Business New Haven profiles CURE. “In this age of downsizing and outsourcing, the bioscience industry is creating wellpaying, career-path jobs,” Pescatello tells the reporter. “Jobs created by this industry are really among the best in the state, as they are typically high-paying, not easily outsourced, unlikely to be downsized, and have an excellent multiplier or ripple effect in creating additional jobs in other industries.”
The Nov 27 issue of Business New Haven mentions that UConn R&D has opened an office in New Haven. “This new connection will help draw talent and venture capital to the state,” Pescatello says.
A Nov 28 article in CT Business Journal sees a silver lining in the Bayer closing. The pharma giant’s facility, Pescatello says, could be subdivided into an attractive research park.
A Dec 9 article in the Hartford Courant reports that other Connecticut bioscience companies are interested in Bayer workers. There’s no shortage of lab space in the state, Pescatello tells the paper.
In an article on Science Park appearing in the Yale Herald in December, Pescatello observes: “The number-one determinant of success in biotech is the research university—the research that goes on there, the technology transfer, and its entrepreneurialism.”
In a Dec 27 interview, Harriet Jones of NPR spoke with Pescatelo about the progress of the Connecticut bioscience sector. “Small biotechs have done very well by several measures,” Pescatello said. “They’ve certainly been successful in raising capital, which is a great vote of confidence from their investors, who are usually the best judges of what's going on in the labs.” Pescatello also mentioned the international stem cell symposium that is scheduled to be held in Hartford March 27-28 of 2007.
A Dec 8 article in the New Haven Register mentions the possibility of securing stem cells from amniotic fluid. “Most women do not have amniotic fluid tested because it could be risky,” Pescatello points out.
A Jan 12 article in the Waterbury Republican-American argues that federal support for stem cell research would help, not hurt, Connecticut’s program. “My sense from looking at the process here in Connecticut is there is way more good research to be done than there is money for,” Pescatello said.
A Jan 23 article in the New Haven Register reports that Pfizer will cut 10,000 workers, but that Connecticut will not feel the brunt of the changes. Pescatello comments that Pfizer is doing the right thing. “Restructuring is never an easy process, but Pfizer has astutely refocused its business model by creating a simpler structure and concentrating on relationships with doctors, third-party payers and biotechnology companies,” he said. "It will become a nimbler and even more productive company, and that’s good for Connecticut.”
A second article in the Jan 23 New Haven Register reports on the infusion of venture capital into Connecticut in 2006. “Once again, this shows the confidence that investors have in what’s going on in Connecticut’s labs,” Pescatello says.
A Jan 24 article in the Worcester Telegram discusses the changing political climate for stem cell research. “What’s striking about embryonic stem cell research is how many really good research proposals are out there,” Pescatello says.
More CURE in the News (Aug 2006 issue) View
