Team• Shiva Portonovo: Entrepreneurial Lead
– PhD candidate developing parallel, automated ion channel screening platform• Jason Poulos, PhD: Mentor – CEO of Librede, a startup company commercializing artificial membrane technologies• Jacob Schmidt, PhD: PI – UCLA Bioengineering research specializes in cell-free approaches to ion channel measurement
IonExpress Next Generation Ion Channel
Screening• Ion channels are critically important drug discovery targets• EVERY drug needs cardiac ion channel safety screening• They are difficult to measure: existing tech is expensive, slow, and hard to use• IonExpress’ cell-free technology is faster, better, cheaper
Drug Screening Market Size $40-60B
• Customers from Ion Channel Screening Pharma, CROs, $375M Govt/academic labs • Ion Channel Screening TAM Ion Express Automated $375M Patch Clamp $110M $245M – Strongly limited by current tech • IonExpress – 30% of TAM: $110M Drug Discovery Technologies: A Global Strategic Business Report" Global Industry Analysts, Inc. Top 10 Drug Discovery Technologies Market – Strategic Analysis and Global Forecasts (2010 to 2015) Ion Channel Trends 2011, HTS Tec, Ltd.
Initial Business Model CanvasInst mfrs
Reproducibility Fast Assay devel. Pharma Cos.Cells Beta Feedback Low cost Install/demo Govt. ctrs.Inj. molders Winning KOLs CROs Easy to use Univ. labs New targets Direct, partner IP, cells Direct Low run cost Distributors Low cost One Time Recurring Instrument Injection molding Inst. Maint One Time Recurring Recurring Recurring Assembly warranty Consum. Software Train.
Getting out of the building:
Customers and Value Proposition• Academic and Government Labs – Stanford, UCLA, UCI, Burnham, NIH, U Pitt, BYU, USC • With $0.2-$0.4/dp, we would become the preferred IC screening platform at UCLA’s IC Screening center• Large Pharma – Icagen, GSK, J&J, Novartis• Medium/Small Pharma – Amgen, Ophidion Biosciences• CROs – ChanTest, Aurora Biomed, GE Health Care, Kanalis • “If you have the capabilities that you’re telling me, you have the holy grail and should price it as high as possible” – Julie Hilton, GE HealthCare
Different market segments have different
primary pain points• CRO/L. Pharma – Need ease of use, throughput, and low running cost – Indifferent to instrument cost• Govt/Acad Lab – Need low instrument cost and ease of use – Throughput and low running cost not as important• Big surprises – Everyone was open to our technology with cost & performance – Even a medium throughput solution is viable
Key Insight Our value prop
changes with customers’ screen size• L. Pharma, CRO • Acad, S/M Pharma, CRO – Screens are bigger; high – Screens are smaller but throughput and cost are more numerous; ease of most important use is most important Setup Time Setup Time Total Total ScreenScreen time Screening Screening time Time Time
Key InsightPath to adoption and
Minimum Viable Product is different for each market segment • Academic users – Happy with 8 channel system (several labs willing to beta test) – Not a big market • M/S Pharma/CROs – A medium throughput solution is needed (1000-2000 dp/day) – Several interested in beta testing • L Pharma – Want fully validated and accepted system, high performance • M/S Pharma market is similar in size to L Pharma • Our MVP is a 32 channel system (~5000 dp/day) compatible with standard 96 well plates
Canvas 2Inst mfrs Reproducibility L
Pharma Fast Assay devel. Pharma Cos. Beta Feedback S/M PharmaCells Low cost Install/demo Govt. ctrs.Inj. molders Winning KOLs CROs Easy to use Univ/Govt/ CROs Univ. labs New targets Direct, partner IP, cells Direct Low run cost Distributors Low cost One Time Recurring Instrument Injection molding Inst. Maint One Time Recurring Recurring Recurring Assembly warranty Consum. Software Train.
Sales and Distribution Channels• IonExpress
will make instrumentation and consumables – Instrumentation is low volume – Customers will want technical support – Consumables are high volume, high margin, and usable only with our instrument; customers are locked in We don’t want/need a channel partner• Competitors’ consumables and instruments are also sold direct – Consumables off of company websites – Instruments through sales reps – They provide tech support and assay development
Canvas 3Inst mfrs Reproducibility L
Pharma Fast Assay devel. Beta Feedback S/M PharmaCells Low cost Install/demo Univ/Govt/Inj. molders Winning KOLs CROs Easy to use New targets Direct, partner IP, cells Direct Low run cost Distributors Low cost One Time Recurring Instrument Injection molding Inst. Maint One Time Recurring Recurring Recurring Assembly warranty Consum. Software Train.
Partners• Instrument – Our consumables
are compatible with off-the- shelf, standard liquid handling and motion control hardware• Cells – We use standard commercially available cells• Consumable plates – Simple inexpensive plastic plates, injection molded and assembled in house• No need to partner
Partners• Amplifier manufacturers Tecella and
Warner Instruments are interested in partnering with us – But we only need an off-the-shelf amplifier• We do need SOFTWARE and neither of them have anything good now – Software goes to “easy to use”– highly valued• Partner/license 3rd party software
Canvas 4Inst mfrs Reproducibility L
Pharma Fast Assay devel. Beta Feedback S/M PharmaCells Low cost Install/demo Univ/Govt/Inj. molders Winning KOLs CROsAmplifier Easy to useSoftware New targets Direct IP, cells Direct Low run cost Low cost One Time Recurring Instrument Injection molding Inst. Maint One Time Recurring Recurring Recurring Assembly warranty Consum. Software Train.
Revenue Streams Product Offerings• Instrumentation
and consumables grouped by capacity and function (priced for adoption) – 32 channel system (“Best Value”) • Instrument- $200k (Fluxion: $250k) • Plates- $50 (Fluxion: $150) – 384 channel system (“Highest throughput”) • Instrument- $500k (Barracuda 384: $750k-$1M) • Plates- $200 (Barracuda 384: $250-$300)• Reagents: Cell aliquots, gel electrodes, lipid mixtures, buffers
Competition Matrix: Key Metrics Simultaneous
Instrument System Consumable Ease of Cost/dp Recording Dp/day(Manufacturer) Cost† cost Use SitesIonExpress A32 Low/Mod. Low $.26/dp 32 5000 High IonExpress Moderate Med $.13/dp 384 60000 High A384 IonWorks Barracuda High Med -- 384 10000* Low (MDS) IonWorks Quattro High Med/High $0.75/dp 48 3000  Med (MDS) SyncroPatch High Med -- 96 5000* Med (Nanion) IonFluxHT Moderate Med $1-4/dp 64 9000* Med(FluxionBiosci) Q-patchHT High Med/High $3.50/dp 48 2000  Med (Sophion)  Comley, J. Automated Patch Clamping: setting a new standard for early hERG. Drug Discovery World 62-79 (2005)  Farre, C. Ion channel screening - automated patch clamp on the rise Drug Discovery Today: Technologies 5 1 e23-e28 (2008) *Fluxionbio.com or Nanion.com or Moleculardevices.com
Competition Matrix: Features Instrument Yield/
Seal Solution Suitability of (Manufacturer) Patch Success Rate Resistance Perfusion any cell type IonExpress A32 High > 1GΩ Yes High IonExpress A384 High > 1GΩ Yes HighIonWorks Barracuda Med/High < 1GΩ Yes Med/Low (MDS) IonWorks Quattro Med/High < 1GΩ No Med/Low (MDS) SyncroPatch Med/High > 1GΩ Yes Med/High (Nanion) IonFluxHT Med > 1GΩ Yes N/A (FluxionBiosci) Q-patchHT Med/High > 1GΩ No Med (Sophion) From Ion Channel Trends 2009 and 2011, HTS Tec. Ltd.
Current Market Landscape • All
APC instruments are cell-based and the market is fragmented with no real leader • The instruments made by each of these companies have their own advantages and disadvantages and no platform is universally used for all applications.From Ion Channel Trends 2008 and 2011, HTS Tec. Ltd.
Estimate of total customer demand
Projected usage of IonExpress’ Plates by Market Segment Equiv # <Sites/ <Labs/ <Screens/ <DP/ Entities Total labs 32 well entity> site> yr/lab> screen> Plates/yrL Pharma 20 3.5 4 280 6.7 20k 1.2M M/S 500 1.25 1.5 938 4.1 10k 1.2MPharma Govt/ 50 1 1 50 4.0 10k 63k AcadFrom Ion Channel Trends 2011, HTS Tec. Ltd.
Adoption rate and SalesEstimated Adoption
by Customer Segment Year % L Pharma % M/S Pharma % Govt/Acad 1 0% 0% 5% 2 0% 1% 10% 3 1% 2% 10% 4 2% 5% 10% 5 5% 10% 10%Resultant Sales Users and Year # Plates Instruments 1 3 3125 2 14 18268 3 27 42011 4 58 89791 5 113 185056
Income Statement Year 1 2
3 4 5 Revenue ($M) 0.7 3.3 4.5 10.7 20.3 COGS + Ops. ($M) 0.4 1.7 1.9 4.6 8.4 Profit ($M) 0.3 1.6 2.7 6.1 11.9 25 Revenue ($M) 20 COGS ($M) • 1st $100k/mo 15 revenue in Year 2$M Profits ($M) 10 • 1st $1M/mo 5 revenue in Year 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 Year
Customer Lifetime Value• Instrument –
One time initial purchase ($200k) – To increase capacity/throughput, small number of additional purchases possible ($200k+)• Consumable – Recurring purchases: ~ 4188 plates/yr for each lab in big pharma ($209k/yr)• Lifetime revenue value: – Instrument: $200k in Year 1 + $200k in Year 4 – Plates: $209k/yr Years 1-3 and $418k/year Years 4-10 = ~$3M (discounted at 5%/yr)
Marketing• Existing market: Adoption may
be slow – Customers don’t respond to ads they want a demo – They look to scientific journal publications and conference presentations• Two phases 1) Getting initial users and KOLs • Publish data and put it on website as application notes 2) Expand user base • Booths at scientific meetings and trade conventions • Formal/established scientific loan program
Final Canvas Reproducibility L Pharma
Fast Assay devel. Beta Feedback S/M Pharma Low cost Install/demo Univ/Govt/ Winning KOLs CROsAmplifier Easy to useSoftware New targets Direct IP, cells Direct Low run cost Low cost One Time Recurring Instrument Injection molding Inst. Maint One Time Recurring Recurring Recurring Assembly warranty Consum. Software Train.
What we’re going to do
next• We have a competitive advantage vs APC in cost, throughput, and ease of use• If we make a 32 channel system we have identified customers who will write a check on the spot• We think this is a viable business and we will pursue this after class – Submitted SBIR proposal to mitigate technical risk and ultimately build MVP prototype