search: results update below


browse funds: selections are stored


recently rated:

Rated by 1
5.0

top rated funds:

Rated by 25
4.0

Rated by 17
3.9

Rated by 70
3.9

Rated by 29
3.8

Rated by 14
3.7

Rated by 22
3.7

Rated by 10
3.7

Rated by 35
3.6
 

Rated by 29
3.5
 

Rated by 31
3.5
 

Rated by 36
3.5

Rated by 10
3.5
 

Rated by 37
3.5

Rated by 30
3.4

Rated by 18
3.4
 

Rated by 32
3.4
 

Rated by 10
3.4

Rated by 18
3.3

Rated by 21
3.3

Rated by 17
3.3
 

Rated by 13
3.3
 

Rated by 12
3.3

Rated by 23
3.3

Rated by 28
3.2
 

Rated by 14
3.2
 

Rated by 10
3.2

Rated by 31
3.2

Rated by 20
3.2

Rated by 31
3.2

Rated by 29
3.2

Member Post

TheFunded.com is an online community of entrepreneurs to research, rate, and review funding sources worldwide. In addition, TheFunded.com allows entrepreneurs to view and share term sheets, to assist one other finding good investors, and to discuss the many facets of operating a business. Enjoy!

Sign-up for Membership

1
Agree
0
Disagree

David Gollaher On Gordon Binder'S "Science Lessons"

TheFunded.com Advice

Posted by MedTech Expert on 2008-04-30

PUBLIC:

"Science Lessons: What the Business of BioTech Taught Me About Management" by Gordon Binder, Harvard Business School Press.

The firm (Amgen) was founded in 1980 by six venture capitalists who put up $81,000 each. Their strategy was, by today's standards, incredibly broad: to exploit the new science of genetic engineering for human health...Amgen consisted then of just three people and "couldn't point to any products or patents, only a plan."

One of the books central tenets is that there's never enough money.

Amgen made forays into various fields, from porcine growth hormone to detergent enzymes. None panned out. The company's central focus, however, remained human therapeutics, where it had five potential products. Of these, Binder describes erythropoietin (EPO) as "the runt of the litter."

The rest is history as EPO went on to become Amgen's runaway success making Amgen one of the most successful biotech start-ups of its day.

You can read more of David's review in the current issue of "The Journal of Life Science." It is clear that those building companies in the early 80s were a different breed. Have we become too institutionalized?

PRIVATE: Members Only