A review of active investors in US and European life science/biotechnology companies, and current venture capital market dynamics.

1. VM
Index
by
Venture
Market
Intelligence
Burak
Alpar
CEO
Venture
Market
Intelligence
burak.alpar@vmindex.com
+44
20
3514
0710
www.vmindex.com

2. Contents
1. Life
Science
Venture
Capital
–
2012
update
2. Strategies
for
Raising
Venture
Capital
3. VM
Index
–
Venture
Capital
Made
Easier
4. Case
study:
Rempex
PharmaceuQcals
www.vmindex.com
1

3. SecQon
1
LIFE
SCIENCE
VENTURE
CAPITAL
–
2012
UPDATE
www.vmindex.com
2

4. Raising
Venture
Capital
is
GeSng
Harder
Compe&&on
for
money
is
• Investment
in
life
sciences
down
30%
from
2007
peak
in
US
&
intensifying
while
funds
Europe
($10.9bn
to
$7.7bn)
are
drying
up
• 1,506
biotech
companies
(Europe
&
N.America)
raised
money
in
the
last
5
years
– All
are
compeQng
for
finance,
licencing
deals
and
exits
VCs
can
afford
to
take
their
&me,
and
want
to
– Thousands
more
start-­‐ups
are
looking
for
their
first
round
of
funding
meet
and
benchmark
as
– On
average
only
600
companies
have
successfully
closed
funding
rounds
each
many
companies
as
year
over
the
last
5
years
possible
– Half
of
the
established
companies
looking
for
money
will
not
get
funded
this
year
• “Companies
have
a
less
than
1%
chance
with
a
VC:
We
meet
How
much
&me
can
CEOs
300-­‐400
companies
a
year,
and
make
2
or
3
investments.”
afford
to
waste
speaking
– Dinko
Valerio,
General
Partner,
Aescap
speaking
at
BioEurope
Spring,
to
the
wrong
investors?
Amsterdam,
March
2012
• It’s
a
‘numbers
game’
–
you
have
to
go
to
ALL
potenQal
investors
in
the
right
order
as
fast
as
possible
www.vmindex.com
3

5. N.
America
-­‐
Life
Science
Investment
Ac&vity
returning
to
10000
700
2008
levels,
but
s&ll
8891
6260
5149
5465
6373
9000
600
28%
down
from
8000
Amount
Raised
(USD
m)
2007
peak
7000
500
Number
of
deals
6000
400
Investment
is
5000
300
moving
towards
4000
later-­‐stage
deals
3000
200
2000
100
Deals
are
smaller
1000
0
0
and
fewer
deals
are
geJng
done
than
in
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2007/8
Amount
Raised
-­‐
SVR
Amount
Raised
-­‐
FVR
Number
of
deals
Number
of
deals
581
453
370
390
438
Amount
raised
–
FVR
$m
1451
1301
928
887
1156
Amount
raised
–
SVR
$m
7440
4959
4221
4578
5212
Avg.
deal
size
–
FVR
$m
8.2
9.0
9.6
9.5
8.8
Avg.
deal
size
–
SVR
$m
21.3
19.9
17.5
17.1
19.8
*N.
America
=
US
&
Canada.
All
amounts
USD
4
Source:
vmindex.com

6. Europe
-­‐
Life
Science
Investment
Investment
almost
2500
2012
1614
1088
1415
1405
250
halved
from
2007
to
2009.
S&ll
30%
down
2000
200
Amount
Raied
(USD
m)
from
2007
peak
in
Number
of
deals
2011
1500
150
Later
stage
deals
1000
100
increasingly
aRrac&ve
500
50
N.America
has
done
0
0
2.6x
more
deals
than
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Europe
and
raised
Amount
Raised
-­‐
SVR
Amount
Raised
-­‐
FVR
Number
of
deals
4.3x
more
capital
Number
of
deals
229
194
135
147
159
Amount
raised
–
FVR
$m
463
349
247
308
283
Amount
raised
–
SVR
$m
1549
1265
841
1107
1122
Avg.
deal
size
–
FVR
$m
5.0
5.5
6.5
7.0
5.4
Avg.
deal
size
–
SVR
$m
16.7
13.8
12.2
13.1
15.2
*N.
America
=
US
&
Canada.
All
amounts
USD
5
Source:
vmindex.com

7. The
Truth
About
Venture
Capital
Regional
investment
• CEOs
can’t
rely
on
just
speaking
to
the
big
name
VCs
analysis*
reveals
striking
similari&es
in
all
the
• Most
investors
are
not
as
acQve
as
you
think
–
most
acQvity
is
major
VC
markets
funding
exisQng
pornolio,
not
new
investments
• There
is
a
‘long
tail’
of
acQve
life
science
investors.
Most
do
just
1
Google,
guess-­‐work
and
luck
will
not
find
you
all
deal
per
year
or
less
and
have
a
much
lower
profile.
How
do
you
the
right
investors
to
find
them?
approach,
and
will
waste
• Many
deals
are
led
by
an
increasing
number
of
lesser
known
or
a
great
deal
of
&me,
money
and
opportuni&es
non-­‐obvious
investors
• Many
deals
include
non-­‐VC
investors
(eg
family
offices,
corporate
VM
Index
tracks
and
funds,
etc)
analyses
all
ac&ve
investors,
and
separates
• Lead
investors
are
hard
to
idenQfy
without
VM
Index
and
leads
from
followers
represent
a
minority
of
the
total
populaQon
*See
analysis
on
following
slides
• Cross-­‐border/non-­‐local
investors
represent
a
significant
source
of
funding,
but
which
ones
should
you
approach?
www.vmindex.com
6

8. West
Coast
U.S.
-­‐
Top
25
Life
Science
investors
N-;O$(?'A?+$*5%
56%
of
the
biggest
names
!"#$%&'( )$*+,-*(&$(% ./01.22 3/22
didn’t
do
a
deal
in
the
!"#$%&'$((")%$*+( &,-'.,/0,1 23 4
region
last
year
$5*$'6$7*&+7( )89:;</=:8 >? @
A5+%&+7'6+7A%&(')$BC%+5!'D'EF+7( )89:;</=:8 >G 2
"7E%#+!'$!H%("7( &,-'F</I >3 G
428
investors
ac&ve
in
Life
("C%&&"H$'H+&*B7+( )89:;</=:8 >J @
H+&7")A )89:;</=:8 3K @
Sciences
in
the
region
H+7($&*'H+&*B7+( )89:;</=:8 3? @
over
5
years
E$F')%*F')$6%*$5 )89:;</=:8 34 2
67"(6+)*'H+&*B7+'6$7*&+7( )89:;</=:8 34 >
+((+L'M""!5$&!'N+$5*N'H+&*B7+( )89:;</=:8 3O >
85%
of
all
ac&ve
investors
#"N7'!$H%!"M'H+&*B7+( )89:;</=:8 3O O
did
1
deal
or
less
per
year
&+M'+&*+767%(+'$((")%$*+( )89:;</=:8 3O 2
H%H"'H+&*B7+( )89:;</=:8 32 O
over
the
last
5
years
4$#'H+&*B7+( )89:;</=:8 3> @
#6#')$6%*$5 #8008PQR0,SS0 3> @
25%
of
ac&ve
investors
$7)N'H+&*B7+'6$7*&+7( %99:=<:0 33 @
C"7M$7!'H+&*B7+( )89:;</=:8 33 @
headquartered
outside
C7$T%+7'N+$5*N)$7+'H+&*B7+( M80Q:=US<= 33 @
the
U.S.
&
Canada
VE('H+&*B7+'6$7*&+7( 4-%&(*56* 33 O
&+M'5+$C'H+&*B7+'6$7*&+7( &,-'F</I 33 @
EB77%55'$&!')"#6$&F )89:;</=:8 3J @
Only
36%
of
investors
)5$7B('H+&*B7+( #8008PQR0,SS0 3J >
lead
deals
NE#'6$7*&+7( 786&9$(5*"+ 3J @
%&*+7M+(*'6$7*&+7( )89:;</=:8 3J @
&"H"'H+&*B7+( :$";*(< 3J @
CEOs
need
to
approach
='>?3@?56A$?%B6$"B$?6"#$%&'(%?"'&?6"#$%&6"C?($C6'"?6"?3/22 2D?E@FGH
all
the
right
investors
to
maximise
the
chances
of
./01.22 !"#$"%#%&' 3/22 !"#$"%#%&'
='&*5?56A$?%B6$"B$?6"#$%&'(%?*B&6#$?6"?($C6'" D3I 2D0
success
on
the
best
terms
J$*+?6"#$%&'(% 342 ()! OG (*!
!"#$%&'(%?*#$(*C6"C?->?&'?2?+$*5KL$*( 2GO +,! 33K +-!
M*(5L?%&*C$?6"#$%&'(% 324 (.! 22 ..!
N-;O$(?'A?B('%%1O'(+$(?6"#$%&'(% 3JG .,! 2> ..!
Source:
vmindex.com
7

9. West
Coast
U.S.
-­‐
Life
Science
Investments
2
of
the
top
3
deals
of
Largest
Deals
–
2011
2011
were
led
by
investors
outside
the
list
1. Portola
PharmaceuRcals
–
USD
89.0m
of
25
most
ac&ve
5th
largest
deal
in
the
US.
Led
by
Temasek
(1,
Singapore)
with
exisQng
investors
investors
parQcipaQng.
Temasek
outside
top
25
investors
The
largest
deal
was
led
2. Rempex
PharmaceuRcals
–
USD
67.5m
by
a
cross-­‐border
investor
9th
largest
deal
in
the
US.
Co-­‐Led
by
Frazier
Healthcare
(4)
and
Vivo
Ventures
(5)
who
only
did
1
investment
in
the
region
in
2011
3. CardioDX–
USD
60.0m
10th
largest
deal
in
the
US.
Led
by
Longitude
Capital
(3).
Longitude
outside
top
25
The
top
3
deals
account
investors
for
approx.
10%
of
the
Amount
Invested
in
Region
(USDm)
money
invested
in
the
4500
region
in
2011
4000
44%
3500
3000
36%
43%
43%
37%
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
*
%age
figures
are
proporQon
of
total
amount
invested
in
Life
Science
deals
in
N.America
8
Source:
vmindex.com

10. North
East
U.S.
-­‐
Top
25
Life
Science
investors
NJ;O$(9'A97$65%
40%
of
the
biggest
names
!"#$%&'( )$*+'" ,-./,00 1-00
didn’t
do
a
deal
in
the
!"#$%&'()*+,-%*(!$%,+*%' ./00/12304550 67 8
region
last
year
9#$:';&!()*+,-%*' ./00/12304550 7< =
.!.(>$!&,$# ./00/12304550 ?@ 6
,;&%A(%">B()*+,-%*' ./00/12304550 ?? <<
392
investors
ac&ve
in
Life
+")$%,&'()*+,-%*(9-+A' 23+&4$(56"7 ?< C
')(#&9*('>&*+>*' ./00/12304550 <D C
Sciences
in
the
region
E*''*.*%()*+,-%*(!$%,+*%' +4F(GHIJ <K @
over
5
years
+*L(*+,*%!%&'*($''">&$,*' >/MNOHIPN/ <K =
)*+%">B >/MNOHIPN/ <@ 7
A".$&+($''">&$,*' +4F(Q4I04R <6 C
89%
of
all
ac&ve
investors
"%E&.*A($A)&'"%' +4F(GHIJ <7 @
did
1
deal
or
less
per
year
"S9"%A(E&"'>&*+>*(!$%,+*%' ./00/12304550 <7 C
$,#$'()*+,-%* ./00/12304550 <? @
over
the
last
5
years
;*$#,;>$%*()*+,-%*' +4F(Q4I04R <? 7
$E&+:L"%,;(.$+$:*.*+, 8"+&$79:+"*7'; << C
22%
of
ac&ve
investors
$%>;()*+,-%*(!$%,+*%' &MMNPHN0 << ?
;E.(!$%,+*%' 23+&4$(56"7 << C
headquartered
outside
+")"()*+,-%*' <$";6(= << C
the
U.S.
&
Canada
T-$B*%(E&")*+,-%*' !4PP0RMU/PN/ << C
'BG#&+*()*+,-%*' >/MNOHIPN/ << C
9#GE%&A:*(>$!&,$#(!$%,+*%' ./00/12304550 <V 7
Only
34%
of
investors
&+,*%L*',(!$%,+*%' >/MNOHIPN/ <V ?
9&A*#&,G(E&"'>&*+>*' ./00/12304550 8 C
lead
deals
9%$W&*%(;*$#,;>$%*()*+,-%*' L/02NPX5HP 8 ?
'%C"+* !4PP0RMU/PN/ 8 6
>'?91@95+A$9%B+$"B$9+"#$%&'(%9"'&9+"#$%&+"*9($*+'"9+"91-00 0-9CD-EF
CEOs
need
to
approach
all
the
right
investors
to
,-./,00 !"#$"%#%&' 1-00 !"#$"%#%&'
maximise
the
chances
of
>'&6595+A$9%B+$"B$9+"#$%&'(%96B&+#$9+"9($*+'" GH1 0DG
success
on
the
best
terms
I$679+"#$%&'(% <76 ()! 6? *+!
!"#$%&'(%96#$(6*+"*9J?9&'9097$65KL$6( 76D ,+! <VK -.!
M6(5L9%&6*$9+"#$%&'(% <@7 (+! 7V */!
NJ;O$(9'A9B('%%/O'(7$(9+"#$%&'(% D@ **! ?@ /-!
Source:
vmindex.com
9

11. North
East
U.S.
-­‐
Life
Science
Investments
All
of
the
top
3
deals
of
Largest
Deals
–
2011
2011
were
led
by
investors
outside
the
list
1. Valeritas
–
USD
150.0m
of
25
most
ac&ve
Largest
deal
in
the
US.
Led
by
Welsh,
Carson,
Anderson
&
Stowe
(1)
-­‐
outside
top
25
investors
investor
list
Second
largest
deal
led
by
2. Tesaro
–
USD
101.0m
Kleiner
Perkins
–
a
big
2nd
largest
deal
in
the
US.
Led
by
Kleiner
Perkins
(6)
-­‐
outside
top
25
investor
list
name
however
not
a
top
25
investor
in
this
region
3. Radius
Health
–
USD
78.8m
10th
largest
deal
in
the
US.
Co-­‐led
by
BB
Biotech
(1,
Switzerland),
Brookside
Group
(1),
The
top
3
deals
account
and
Saints
Capital
(3)
–
all
outside
the
top
25
investor
list.
for
approx.
15%
of
total
money
invested
in
the
region
in
2011
Amount
Invested
in
Region
(USDm)
2500
33%
2000
27%
16%
29%
27%
1500
1000
500
0
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
*
%age
figures
are
proporQon
of
total
amount
invested
in
Life
Science
deals
in
N.America
10
Source:
vmindex.com

12. United
Kingdom
-­‐
Top
25
Life
Science
investors
<-AQ$(='G=+$*;%
64%
of
the
biggest
names
!"#$%&'( )$*+,-*(&$(% ./01.22 3/22
didn’t
do
a
deal
in
the
!"#$%!&'(!))*+&,!*)- ./ 01 2
region
last
year
34"($5.!,3(#&%,)$%- ./ 67 8
!#(9%*.#(:&/&(,*#(,$;<)*'*93(+$),.%$-= ./ 62 >
-;*,,!-<($),$%#%!-$ ./ 62 0
221
investors
ac&ve
in
Life
*?4*%@(,$;<)*'*93(+$),.%$(;&#!,&'(,%.-,-(:,<$= ./ 66 >
A!*4.-!*) ./ 6B C
Sciences
in
the
U.K.
over
5
4!)&);$(D&'$- ./ 6B 0
years
"+"('EFG(-HEGIHG(#JKLIGKM ./ 6B 0
)$-,& ./ 6B C
-+('!4$(-;!$);$- 4*%%*56-%$&&% 6B >
90%
of
all
ac&ve
investors
)*+&%,!-(+$),.%$(4.)@- 789&:$(;*"+ 1 C
did
1
deal
or
less
per
year
*?4*%@(;&#!,&'(#&%,)$%- ./ 1 C
;&,&#.',(+$),.%$("&)&9$%- ./ N C
over
the
last
5
years
D$'';*"$(,%.-,(:)"A(-$#,$"A$%(+$),.%$-= ./ N C
D"($),$%#%!-$ ./ N C
45%
of
ac&ve
investors
&A$%@$$)(&--$,("&)&9$"$), ./ 2 C
&@+$),(+$),.%$(#&%,)$%- ./ 2 C
headquartered
outside
$-#$%&),$(+$),.%$- <$&6$(;*"+% 2 C
the
U.K.
!)+$-;*(#%!+&,$(;&#!,&' <$8=>'(? 2 0
'*)9A*D(;&#!,&' ./ 2 C
)*%,<-,&%(+$),.%$-(:4/&()*%,<-,&%($5.!,3(!)+$-,*%-= ./ 2 C
Only
41%
of
investors
)*+*(+$),.%$- @$"A*(? 2 C
lead
deals
&A!)9D*%,<("&)&9$"$), ./ O C
;&"A%!@9$($),$%#%!-$ ./ O C
9&A%!$'(!)+$-,"$),- B$""%C;#*"9* O C
CEOs
need
to
approach
all
the
right
investors
to
D'E=3F=;9G$=%59$"5$=9"#$%&'(%="'&=9"#$%&9"H=($H9'"=9"=3/22 2I=JIKLM
maximise
the
chances
of
success
on
the
best
terms
./01.22 !"#$"%#%&' 3/22 !"#$"%#%&'
D'&*;=;9G$=%59$"5$=9"#$%&'(%=*5&9#$=9"=($H9'" 332 0/
N$*+=9"#$%&'(% 76 ()! 08 **!
!"#$%&'(%=*#$(*H9"H=-E=&'=2=+$*;OC$*( 677 +,! >1 -+!
P*(;C=%&*H$=9"#$%&'(% 27 *)! 61 .-!
<-AQ$(='G=5('%%1Q'(+$(=9"#$%&'(% 77 (/! 86 ((!
Source:
vmindex.com
11

13. United
Kingdom
-­‐
Life
Science
Investments
2
of
the
top
3
deals
of
Largest
Deals
–
2011
2011
were
led
by
overseas
investors
outside
1. Circassia
–
USD
98.0m
the
list
of
25
most
ac&ve
2nd
largest
deal
in
Europe.
Also,
larger
than
#1
deal
in
the
U.S.
West
Coast
region.
Led
by
Imperial
InnovaQons
(6)
3
of
the
4
lead
investors
in
2. Oxford
Nanopore
Technology
–
USD
41.3m
the
top
three
deals
are
4th
largest
deal
in
Europe.
Redmile
Group
(1,
California)
co-­‐led
the
deal
with
exisQng
located
outside
the
U.K.,
investors.
Redmile
not
in
top
25
investor
list
only
1
of
them
is
U.S.
based
3. Oxyrane
–
USD
26.5m
9th
largest
deal
in
Europe.
Co-­‐led
by
Forbion
Capital
Partners
(5,
Netherlands)
and
The
top
3
deals
account
Morningside
Group
(3,
China).
Both
outside
top
25
investor
list
for
approx.
35%
of
total
money
invested
in
the
700
Amount
Invested
in
Region
(USDm)
region
in
2011
36%
600
28%
34%
500
28%
400
300
23%
200
100
0
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
*
%age
figures
are
proporQon
of
total
amount
invested
in
Life
Science
deals
in
Europe
12
Source:
vmindex.com

14. Germany,
Austria
&
Switzerland
-­‐
Top
25
Life
Science
investors
7-=L$(6'B6+$*8%
28%
of
the
biggest
names
!"#$%&'( )$*+,-*(&$(% ./01.22 3/22
didn’t
do
a
deal
in
the
!"# $%&'()* +, -
region
last
year
./$.0123.4$567825"978: $%&'()* ;; <
=/$4"978: $%&'()* >- +
?/9=28@A51725: :BCDE%&F()G >, H
172
investors
ac&ve
in
Life
?AI2574!A@/1AJ $%&'()* >+ ;
.?=4@A51725: :BCDE%&F()G >+ ;
Sciences
in
the
region
1K=43A@/1AJ $%&'()* >+ ;
over
5
years
A2:3A@4K271652 45$67$&5$(8*"+% L >
??4?/9123. :BCDE%&F()G L ;
J:@4J/"24:3/2732:4@A51725: 45$67$&5$(8*"+% L ;
91%
of
all
ac&ve
investors
A1JA:4K271652 9*%%*:5-%$&&% M >
did
1
deal
or
less
per
year
/782N4K271652: :BCDE%&F()G M 0
:9"/779KA4@A51725: ;(*":$ - 0
over
the
last
5
years
J??#4K27165243A@/1AJ $%&'()* < 0
75#4?A7! $%&'()* < 0
40%
of
ac&ve
investors
K/4@A51725: :BCDE%&F()G < ;
A5AK/: :BCDE%&F()G , >
headquartered
outside
352A1.954K271652 $%&'()* , ;
the
region
8/2K/7/4.9@@4?/9123. $%&'()* , 0
28=9784824591.:3./J84/7K2:1=2714@A51725: ;(*":$ , ;
$998K2714?212/J/$67$:=A7A$2=271 $%&'()* , ;
Only
36%
of
investors
79K94K271652: <$"=*(> , ;
lead
deals
:.:4$2:2JJ:3.A"14"654?212/J/$67$:=A7A$2=271 $%&'()* , 0
:K4J/"24:3/2732: 9*%%*:5-%$&&% , ;
?/9= $%&'()* H 0
CEOs
need
to
approach
all
the
right
investors
to
4'?63@68AB$6%:A$":$6A"#$%&'(%6"'&6A"#$%&A"C6($CA'"6A"63/22 06D3EFG
maximise
the
chances
of
success
on
the
best
terms
./01.22 !"#$"%#%&' 3/22 !"#$"%#%&'
4'&*868AB$6%:A$":$6A"#$%&'(%6*:&A#$6A"6($CA'" 203 @E
H$*+6A"#$%&'(% <; ()! >H *+!
!"#$%&'(%6*#$(*CA"C6-?6&'626+$*8IJ$*( >,< ,-! HO ),!
K*(8J6%&*C$6A"#$%&'(% -- +.! >L ((!
7-=L$(6'B6:('%%1L'(+$(6A"#$%&'(% <M +/! ;< +.!
13
Source:
vmindex.com

15. Germany,
Austria
&
Switzerland
-­‐
Life
Science
Investments
2
of
the
top
3
deals
of
Largest
Deals
–
2011
2011
were
led
by
investors
outside
the
list
1. BiocarRs
(CH)
–
USD
95.8.4m
of
25
most
ac&ve
3rd
largest
deal
in
Europe.
Also,
larger
than
#1
deal
in
the
West
Coast.
Syndicate
included
investors
over
11
investment
vehicles
including
family
offices,
strategic
investors
and
numerous
cross-­‐border
investors
The
top
3
deals
account
2. Affiris
(A)
–
USD
34.4m
for
approx.
35%
of
total
8th
largest
deal
in
Europe.
Led
by
Santo
VC
(1,
Germany)
–
outside
top
25
investor
list
money
invested
in
the
region
in
2011
3. F-­‐Star
(A)
–
USD
21.7m
9th
largest
deal
in
Europe.
Led
by
SR
One
(2,
USA)
-­‐
outside
top
25
investor
list
There
are
no
German
companies
in
the
top
3.
Germany’s
largest
deal
of
700
Amount
Invested
in
Region
(USDm)
2011
was
Europe’s
23rd
42%
largest
deal.
Germany
600
27%
30%
44%
has
tradi&onally
been
the
500
32%
joint
largest
investment
400
territory
in
Europe
300
(together
with
U.K.)
200
100
0
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
*
%age
figures
are
proporQon
of
total
amount
invested
in
Life
Science
deals
in
Europe
14
Source:
vmindex.com

16. France
&
Benelux
-­‐
Top
25
Life
Science
investors
J-9K$(6'>6+$*=%
40%
of
the
biggest
names
!"#$%&'( )$*+,-*(&$(% ./01.22 3/22
didn’t
do
a
deal
in
the
!"#$!%&'$"(%')('"$#*+,)'+" )-./-012345 67 8
region
last
year
(+'9%,$*:+%(;!'$#+%<*,'$'=>%,? &023@- 66 8
";&%));<*$#*+,)'+" &023@- 6A B
:%C< D-1EFGH I 8
158
investors
ac&ve
in
Life
%9%)<'",$#*+,)'+" &023@- I J
&;+D%;)$(*#%,*!$#*+,)'+" )-./-012345 K 8
Sciences
in
the
region
(%($&%)*)(' &023@- L B
over
5
years
'+*"C>"$C($D%;C'9%(*!$&>)9 )-./-012345 L J
MD($#+%<*,'$'=>%,? D-1EFGH L J
";(%','$:')'+*!'$*""',$C*)*:'C'),$ &023@- L J
41%
of
all
ac&ve
investors
,N>O*$(*#%,*! )-./-012345 L B
did
1
deal
or
less
per
year
<%D$&!*)9'+"$%),'+>)%<'+"%,?$%)",%,>,'$&;+$D%;,'(N D-1EFGH L 8
*>+%:*$#*+,)'+" &023@- P J
over
the
last
5
years
C'9"(%')('"$(*#%,*! )-./-012345 P B
*D%):Q;+,N$C*)*:'C'), 4"5&$+675"8+'9 R 6
32%
of
ac&ve
investors
*'"(*#$<'),>+' )-./-012345 R B
D%;:')'+*,%;)$<'),>+'" )-./-012345 R 6
headquartered
outside
!(&$+;,N"(N%!9$:+;># &023@- R J
the
region
#C<$#*+,%(%#*,%'C**,"(N*##%O$<!**)9'+') D-1EFGH R J
D%;*C &023@- 7 J
(*%""'$9'$9'#;,"$',$#!*('C'),"$(;)"%:)*,%;)" &023@- 7 J
Only
32%
of
investors
are
(9($'),+'#+%"'" &023@- 7 B
leads
:');#;!' &023@- 7 J
!+C$!%CD>+:"'$+'(;)<'+"%'C**,"(N*##%O D-1EFGH 7 B
D*'M'!*)9$&;)9" D-1EFGH 8 J
CEOs
need
to
approach
all
the
right
investors
to
:';63<6=5>$6%?5$"?$65"#$%&'(%6"'&65"#$%&5"86($85'"65"63/22 2/6@A/BC
maximise
the
chances
of
success
on
the
best
terms
./01.22 !"#$"%#%&' 3/22 !"#$"%#%&'
:'&*=6=5>$6%?5$"?$65"#$%&'(%6*?&5#$65"6($85'" 2<D AE
F$*+65"#$%&'(% RA ()! 68 )*!
!"#$%&'(%6*#$(*85"86-;6&'626+$*=GH$*( 68I ++! 88 ,*!
I*(=H6%&*8$65"#$%&'(% PR -.! 6R (.!
J-9K$(6'>6?('%%1K'(+$(65"#$%&'(% R6 ()! 67 )/!
15
Source:
vmindex.com

17. France
&
Benelux
-­‐
Life
Science
Investments
All
3
of
the
top
deals
of
2011
had
non-­‐Top
25
lead
Largest
Deals
–
2011
investors
par&cipate
1. AM-­‐Pharma
(NL)
–
USD
39.7m
5th
largest
deal
in
Europe.
Co-­‐led
by
Ysios
(3,
Spain)
and
Kurma
Biofund
(1,
France).
Both
The
top
3
deals
account
outside
top
25
investor
list
for
approx.
50%
of
total
money
invested
in
the
2. ArGen-­‐X
(NL)
–
USD
36.7m
region
in
2011
6th
largest
deal
in
Europe.
Co-­‐led
by
Seventure
(1,
France)
and
Orbimed
(2,
USA).
Both
outside
top
25
investor
list
There
are
no
French
3. AvanRum
Technologies
(NL)
–
USD
36.6m
companies
in
the
top
3.
7th
largest
deal
in
Europe.
Co-­‐led
by
Aster
Capital
(1,
France)
and
Sofinnova
Partners
(6,
The
largest
French
deal
of
France).
Aster
outside
top
25
investor
list
2011
was
Europe’s
10th
largest
deal
500
23%
Amount
Invested
in
Region
(USDm)
400
25%
20%
300
19%
200
15%
100
0
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
*
%age
figures
are
proporQon
of
total
amount
invested
in
Life
Science
deals
in
Europe
16
Source:
vmindex.com

18. Scandinavia
-­‐
Top
25
Life
Science
investors
7-5N$(B'DB+$*9%
54%
of
the
biggest
names
!"#$%&'( )$*+,-*(&$(% ./01.22 3/22
didn’t
do
a
deal
in
the
!"#$%!&#' ()*+*, - .
region
last
year
/#01$23(/#45"6"$1'7"3% ()*+*, - 8
(#0(2#4(""5 39:);< = >
316146"3%?0"( 5*,@;:A B .
105
investors
ac&ve
in
Life
(?3(%13"4&#'2%#$ 5*,@;:A B C
235?(%02D135"3 ()*+*, E C
Sciences
in
the
region
(&#3523#62#34$2D"4(&2"3&"46"3%?0" ()*+*, E F
over
5
years
D2332(!4235?(%0G4236"(%7"3% DH,I;,+ > C
J$1K#$4$2D"4(&2"3&"46"3%?0"( 4$(5*"6 > F
K#3/236"(% 5*,@;:A L F
93%
of
all
ac&ve
investors
5#3(/423316#%213(236"(%"023J 5*,@;:A L F
did
1
deal
or
less
per
year
23316#%213(/#'2%#$ ()*+*, L F
over
the
last
5
years
$13715%#J"03"(45G0%25(D135 5*,@;:A L F
1(%"0(M1(%2D%"$("3 ()*+*, L F
6#"/(%D135"3 5*,@;:A L F
36%
of
ac&ve
investors
5#3(/4/#'2%#$#3$#"J4#/%2"("$(/#K 5*,@;:A 8 F
J2$5"4236"(%7"3%47#3#J"7"3% 7$&8$(9*"+% 8 F
headquartered
outside
235"N46"3%?0"( :;<&=$(9*"+ 8 F
the
region
236"(%104J01O%!4&#'2%#$ ()*+*, 8 F
$('4$2D"4(&2"3&"(4'#0%3"0( 7$&8$(9*"+% 8 C
72501&43"O4%"&!31$1JG ()*+*, 8 F
Only
32%
of
investors
are
(""54&#'2%#$45"37#0/ 5*,@;:A 8 F
leads
("6"3%?0"4'#0%3"0( >(*"?$ 8 F
(2%0# DH,I;,+ 8 C
(1D23316#4'#0%3"0( >(*"?$ 8 F
CEOs
need
to
approach
all
the
right
investors
to
@'AB3CB9<D$B%?<$"?$B<"#$%&'(%B"'&B<"#$%&<"EB($E<'"B<"B3/22 2FBGFHIJ
maximise
the
chances
of
success
on
the
best
terms
./01.22 !"#$"%#%&' 3/22 !"#$"%#%&'
@'&*9B9<D$B%?<$"?$B<"#$%&'(%B*?&<#$B<"B($E<'" 2/C 3H
K$*+B<"#$%&'(% 8L ()! C8 *+!
!"#$%&'(%B*#$(*E<"EB-AB&'B2B+$*9L6$*( -= ,(! C- -,!
M*(96B%&*E$B<"#$%&'(% 88 (.! - (/!
7-5N$(B'DB?('%%1N'(+$(B<"#$%&'(% 8= (0! 8 .(! 17
Source:
vmindex.com

19. Scandinavia
-­‐
Life
Science
Investments
All
3
of
the
top
deals
of
Largest
Deals
–
2011
2011
had
non-­‐Top
25
lead
investors
par&cipate
1. Symphogen
(DK)
–
USD
132.4m
Largest
deal
in
Europe.
Also,
larger
than
#1
deal
in
the
West
Coast.
Co-­‐led
by
Novo
The
top
3
deals
account
Ventures
and
Essex
Woodland
(1,
USA)
–
Essex
outside
top
25
investor
list
for
approx.
50%
of
total
2. Orphazyme
(DK)
–
USD
19.7m
money
invested
in
the
15th
largest
deal
in
Europe.
Led
by
Aescap
Venture
(4,
Netherlands)
-­‐
outside
top
25
region
in
2011
investor
list
There
are
no
Swedish
3. NexsRm
(FI)–
USD
17.9m
companies
in
the
top
3.
19th
largest
deal
in
Europe.
Co-­‐led
by
Lundbeckfon
Ventures
(3,
Denmark)
and
The
largest
Swedish
deal
Ilmarinen
Pension
Fund
(2)
both
outside
top
25
investor
list
of
2011
was
Europe’s
28th
largest
deal
350
16%
300
Amount
Raised
USDm
250
15%
200
10%
150
10%
100
3%
50
0
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
*
%age
figures
are
proporQon
of
total
amount
invested
in
Life
Science
deals
in
Europe
18
Source:
vmindex.com

20. Conclusions
-­‐
I
• Raising
venture
capital
is
never
easy
• CompeQQon
for
investment
is
intense
and
it
is
global
• Investment
frequently
comes
from
non-­‐obvious
sources
• There
is
a
big
difference
between
percepQon
and
reality
among
VCs
• It
is
too
easy
for
CEOs
to
waste
Qme
with
the
wrong
investors,
and
overlook
the
right
investors
www.vmindex.com
19

21. Conclusions
-­‐
II
• When
raising
money
need
to
differenQate
between
lead
and
follower
investors
• Non-­‐domesQc
investors
are
increasingly
important
• It
isn’t
just
VCs
who
are
acQve
in
Life
Science
invesQng
–
family
offices,
coporate
funds,
hedge
funds,
and
insQtuQonal
investors
are
all
acQve
in
the
sector
• Very
few
investors
do
more
than
1
new
deal
each
year
–
it
is
a
‘numbers
game’,
i.e.
you
need
to
approach
every
relevant
investor
20

22. SecQon
2
STRATEGIES
FOR
RAISING
VENTURE
CAPITAL
www.vmindex.com
21

23. Methodology
–
why
should
CEOs
plan
their
fund
raising
process?
A
fund
raising
strategy
is
essen&al
to
minimise
• Fund
raising
is
a
Qme
consuming,
opaque,
and
disrup&on
to
the
business,
and
maximise
the
chances
commercially
highly
sensiQve
process
of
success
on
the
best
terms
in
the
face
of
• Few
management
teams
have
extensive
and
up-­‐to-­‐
intense
compe&&on
and
date
investor
experience
investors
determined
to
squeeze
valua&ons
• Companies
don’t
run
themselves
The
team
behind
VM
• Investors
have
only
1
focus:
get
the
deal
done
on
Index
have
developed
a
proven
fund
raising
the
best
terms
for
maximum
financial
return
methodology
based
on
decades
of
advising
– i.e.
lowest
valuaQon,
best
exit
terms,
least
risk
possible
clients
on
raising
capial
• CompeQng
against
hundreds
of
other
companies
for
the
same
pool
of
capital
www.vmindex.com
22

24. PreparaQon
–
before
you
start
Taking
&me
to
plan
your
fund
raising
process
• ExecuQve
summary
&
business
plan
allows
for
a
structured,
– Short,
readable,
well
presented
with
financials
methodical
approach
– Investors
are
looking
for
experienced
management
teams,
so
remember
to
include
biographies
– These
documents
are
used
to
obtain
a
meeQng;
keep
them
brief
or
they
won’t
Iden&fying
all
the
right
be
read
investors
early
enables
you
to
control
and
• IdenQfy
the
right
investors
manage
the
process
– Who
has
the
right
experience
of
invesQng
in
Life
Sciences
in
your
locaQon?
– Investor
websites
oxen
exaggerate
investor
interest
and
capability.
Where
did
All
investors
should
be
they
actually
invest
their
money?
assessed
for
suitability
– Split
investors
by
leads
and
followers
before
you
try
to
get
a
mee&ng
with
them
– Try
to
avoid
cold
calls:
research
and
use
co-­‐investment
relaQonships
• Check
your
long
list
for
pornolio
conflicts
– Which
investors
are
looking
for
compeQQve
intelligence
for
their
pornolio?
– Also
idenQfy
investors
with
previous
successes
in
your
sector
www.vmindex.com
23

25. MeeQng
Investors
What
makes
you
&
your
• PracQce
your
pitch
company
stand
out,
and
– Clearly
present
your
investment
opportunity
within
the
Qme
available
how
will
investors
make
money?
– What
does
your
audience
want
to
hear?
Know
your
numbers,
market
and
business
opportunity.
Keep
the
detailed
science
for
the
scienQsts,
and
adjust
each
pitch
according
to
who
is
in
the
room
If
there
is
interest
from
an
• Leverage
RelaQonships
investor,
expect
a
series
of
mee&ngs:
you
don’t
– Do
your
shareholders
and
board
have
links
to
other
relevant
investors?
have
to
cover
every
– Ask
for
a
warm
introducQon
–
this
can
reduce
your
workload
by
30%
minute
detail
in
your
first
pitch
• Focus
on
lead
investors
– Every
deal
needs
a
lead
investor,
don’t
waste
Qme
with
followers
at
the
start
– Have
they
led
deals
in
your
locaQon?
Investors
don’t
always
behave
the
same
Only
lead
investors
will
way
from
region
to
region
put
forward
a
term
sheet,
don’t
waste
your
efforts
• Get
feedback
axer
every
pitch
on
followers
at
the
early
– You
may
not
agree
with
comments,
but
watch
out
for
similar
messages
and
stages
–
can
you
tell
the
adjust
your
pitch
if
necessary
difference?
– Focusing
on
investors
who
know
your
industry
will
make
their
feedback
more
relevant
– A
third-­‐party
adviser
will
always
get
more
honest
feedback
on
your
behalf
www.vmindex.com
24

26. CompeQQon
–
The
Key
to
GeSng
the
Best
Deal
Exclusivity
and
&me-­‐
limited
term
sheets
are
• Manage
your
deal
just
2
tac&cs
investors
use
– Keep
investor
discussions
on
the
same
schedule,
don’t
allow
single
to
get
beRer
terms.
CEOs
investors
to
race
ahead
in
the
process
need
to
have
mul&ple
op&ons
to
have
the
best
– Having
only
1
investor
put
forward
a
term
sheet
weakens
your
nego&a&ng
posi&on
negoQaQng
posiQon.
– Investors
may
try
to
pressurise
you
to
go
exclusive
early
on
–
this
only
benefits
them
There
is
a
danger
of
focusing
on
a
single
lead
• Don’t
stop
at
your
first
term
sheet
once
a
term
sheet
is
agreed.
If
the
deal
falls
– Keep
approaching
investors,
otherwise
your
opQons
and
negoQaQng
apart
this
could
set
your
posiQon
will
be
compromised
funding
process
back
– The
final
deal
may
not
resemble
the
term
sheet
axer
months
of
due
months
diligence.
Expect
the
terms
to
get
tougher
• Build
parallel
syndicates
– Exploit
co-­‐investment
relaQonships
to
have
mulQple
syndicates
(that
won’t
share
notes
about
you)
compeQng
for
your
deal
– Use
lead
investor
relaQonships
to
build
syndicates
faster
www.vmindex.com
25