|
Biotech Blues
Forbes
By Robert Langreth
January 12, 2009
DeCode genetics makes headlines for its pioneering discoveries
linking genes to heart disease, cancer, diabetes and other deadly
diseases. It hopes its genetic tests will one day save lives by
spotting people at risk years before they get sick. That is, if
the company itself can survive.
DeCode shares are worth 23 cents each, down from $18 at their
initial public offering in 2000. The company's most advanced heart
drug is stalled, its genetesting business faces all sorts of competition,
and it is running out of cash fast. DeCode needs more money by
early 2009 to continue operations and is exploring asset sales.
A white knight acquirer may still emerge. But don't bet on it,
says Morningstar analyst William Buhr, who predicts bankruptcy
within six months or so. DeCode founder Kari Stefansson declines
comment; in a conference call in November he blamed DeCode's woes
on auction-rate securities in which money manager Lehman Brothers
had invested much of its cash balance.
DeCode has company. Almost half of 370 small-cap biotech companies
have less than one year of cash left, according to the Biotechnology
Industry Organization, and prospects for raising more funds are
slight. Big, profitable biotech companies like Amgen are holding
up fine. But many small companies rely on repeated equity financings
to keep their research going for the 15 years it can take to design
a new drug. In the past investors have been willing to gamble on
the drug lottery. Now they're fleeing.
Shares prices of 70 U.S. biotech companies have slid below a dollar
in the last year. Total financing for biotechs fell 54% for the
first three quarters of 2008 to $8.2 billion, versus $17.9 billion
in the same period last year, according to Burrill & Co. The industry
has gone a year without an initial public offering of at least
$6 million, the second-longest period since 1990, says Jefferies & Co.
Two dozen biotechs have announced layoffs in the last two months,
while others are closing down nonessential programs in a desperate
bid to survive. Former highflier AtheroGenics filed for bankruptcy
in October; its heart drug fizzled in a big trial in 2007. CombinatoRx
of Cambridge, Mass. just laid off 65% of its 180 employees after
a promising arthritis drug fell short of its main goal in a trial,
despite some signs of efficacy. The company doesn't have money
to repeat the trial. Says Chief Executive Alexis Borisy, "The business
model is broken at the moment." Ernst & Young partner Glen Giovannetti
calls the current period "the deepest downturn in the history of
the industry."
Zack Lynch, whose Neurotechnology Industry Organization represents
50 smaller companies pursuing treatments for brain disorders, worries
that if the downturn continues, "we may lose an entire generation
of potential brain drugs" as companies vanish.
The industry has joined the list of supplicants hoping for a federal
bailout of sorts. Profitable companies now get a tax credit for
R&D expenses; biotech firms are lobbying for moneylosing firms
to get, essentially, an advance on this tax credit. "There is a
lot on the line—we don't just make widgets, we make drugs that
save lives," says James Greenwood, who heads the Biotechnology
Industry Organization.
Big drug companies are benefiting from small-company woes, as
early-stage products suddenly go on sale. "It is an opportunity," says
GlaxoSmithkline Senior Vice President Adrian Rawcliffe. In October
his company agreed to buy Genelabs Technologies, which is working
on hepatitis drugs, for $57 million, or $1.30 per share.
In November Roche inked a deal to buy Memory Pharmaceuticals,
which invented two Alzheimer's drugs Roche is testing, for $50
million, a mere 61 cents a share. That's a nice gain over the 15-cent
quote on the shares the day before but quite a comedown from the
$7 new-issue price in 2004. Biotech companies' fundraising woes
means "we will see more biotech companies looking for an acquisition," says
Daniel L. Zabrowski, Roche's global head of drug deals.
Biotech Exelixis in South San Francisco took a different approach
in mid-December. It agreed to join with Bristol-Myers Squibb to
help develop two of Exelixis' cancer drugs. Bristol-Myers is paying
Exelixis $240 million under the deal. Exelixis' shares had plunged
58% in 2008 until the announcement and, according to Chief Executive
George Scangos, the company had largely given up on selling equity
to raise cash. Its shares soared 33% the day the deal was announced.
Biotech is a business mixing a few fabulously profitable winners
like Genentech and Amgen with a large population of dream-stage
outfits that lose money for years and years. Since 1990 publicly
traded biotech companies have lost a cumulative $50 billion, according
to reports from Ernst & Young. (The number would have been smaller
if it had included the profits of successful ventures after their
acquisition by big drug companies.) Biotechs have done better recently;
in 2007 U.S. biotech firms nearly broke even on $65 billion in
revenue, up 11%.
Bayer HealthCare Chairman Arthur Higgins says many investors have
been naive about the long odds small companies face. They "convinced
themselves we have made massive progress in understanding biology,
when in reality we have made limited progress," he says.
Indeed, many people assume that biotechs are more efficient at
inventing drugs than drug companies are. But that "is a complete
myth," says Harvard Business School professor Gary Pisano. He pored
over 20 years of data for his 2006 book Science Business and found
that biotech companies spend just as much as drug companies for
each compound that reaches the market, roughly $1.3 billion. While
biotechs are more nimble, they often lack the broad skills needed
to develop drugs, he says. "Every idea getting its own company
may not be the best way to organize the sector," he says.
Hedge fund manager Larry N. Feinberg, whose Oracle Partners specializes
in health care, used to invest in young biotech companies with
no products. But he stopped in 2002 after concluding there was
little reward for all the risk. What drugs are likely to work? "You
can have Nobel laureates advising you [about that], and they are
wrong half the time," says Feinberg.
Still, investors who buy when the market is depressed can make
money; witness the quadrupling of Memory's share price. The table
on this page lists companies that Leerink Swann or JMP Securities
consider good gambles: These are smaller biotechs with drugs that
have already shown signs of effectiveness. Says biotech banker
Steven Burrill, "If you buy a good sampling of the industry now,
five years from now you are going to look like a genius."

|