“And Now For the Rest of the Story…”

Spent some time this weekend looking at the recently released 4Q13 investment data compiled by the National Venture Capital Association/PricewaterhouseCoopers/Thomson Reuters in their “MoneyTree Report.” The report tracks, by stage/sector/geography, where investment dollars are flowing but it also provides insight to broader themes and implications.

In general 4Q13, at least on the surface, looked like a strong quarter as $8.4BN was invested in 1,077 companies which was in line with prior quarters. The 4Q13 was 28.5% and 27.0% of the dollars and deals for the full year ($29.4BN and 3,995, respectively), which is consistent with prior years as there is always a flurry of year-end activity. There was reasonable diversity of stage of investing in this past quarter as well with Seed/Early Stage taking 39.4% of total dollars invested, Expansion Stage and Later Stage were 35.8% and 25.8%, respectively (although interestingly the proportion of Seed investing seems to be declining over the last number of quarters – so maybe some rotation to Later Stage, or at least instead of classic seed rounds, we seem to be seeing greater incidence of Early Stage financings – suggesting entrepreneurs are taking more capital to start). Emerging from the Great Recession over the past four years the total number of VC financings on an annual basis has consistently been between 3,700 and 4,000 – nice to see some stability.

The average size of Seeds in 4Q12 was $2.6M but spiked to $4.8M in 4Q13 – clearly round sizes are increasing which may be an acknowledgment that seeds just don’t get you far enough or increased investor confidence. Early Stage round sizes increased from $4.4M to $5.5M over those same periods, while Expansion ($9.0M to $10.9M) and Later Stage ($10.5M to $10.1M) remained relatively flat.

Given the reams of data in the report there is a risk of missing some key trends but here are some items that jumped off the page for me…

  • Overall dollars invested increased 7.5% from 2012 to 2013 – that is pretty extraordinary growth (although the number of deals increased only 3.6% underscoring the larger round size phenomenon) – over all stages, the average round size in 4Q13 was $7.8M, which frankly is relatively meaningless but it was only $4.2M 20 years ago – and this in an age of Lean Start-up!
  • “First time” financings were 19.3% in 4Q13; twenty years ago that was 49.6%, perhaps suggesting that entrepreneurs have lessened their dependence on VC’s for financing. In the depth of the Great Recession, that number was 21.8% which I had expected would have been meaningfully greater as VC’s became the financier of last resort.
  • Healthcare (biotech/services/devices) in total was 33.5% of the dollars invested yet only 15.7% of the companies in 4Q13; in 4Q12 those numbers were 23.9% and 12.8%, respectively. VC’s are directing greater amounts of dollars toward healthcare (and the data do not separate out healthcare IT which would arguably add to the increased investor enthusiasm). The average size of the healthcare investments was $10.0M as compared to $4.7M for all 4Q13 investments.
  • Ready for profound insight from the data? Interesting (troublesome) trends emerge when looking at the regional data – and not just the tiresome Boston vs Valley debate (or now the New York/Boston debate). In 4Q13 Silicon Valley consumed 38.5% of all dollars invested versus 14.6% for NY Metro and 11.0% for New England (those numbers were 40.2%, 11.7% and 13.1% in 4Q12, respectively). Those three regions consumed 64.1% of all VC dollars in 4Q13; in 1995 that was 38% and ten years ago it was 57.3%. Are we seeing a bifurcation of innovation across the country (“haves and have nots”) in parallel to what we are seeing with the extraordinary disparity of family income? Clearly VC is increasingly a coastal phenomenon which does not at all take anything away from the very strong regional VC markets in the middle of the country – the implication of this VC dollar migration is something not well understood yet for our national economy.
  • Corollary to the above profound insight: 24 states in this great country had 3 or fewer reported VC deals in 4Q13 – almost half of the country! There were 6 states which had zero…nada…zilch VC deals (Iowa, Idaho, Kentucky, Maine, Montana, South Dakota) in the reported data (actually I find this hard to believe but the direction of the point remains intact).
  • The top 10 deals in 2013 consumed 6.8% of all dollars invested last year and only one of those was healthcare. In the 4Q13, the top 10 deals captured 14.9% of the $8.4BN invested and three of those were healthcare deals.
  • Head Scratcher – earlier this year the same three organizations announced that $4.9BN had been raised by VC firms in 4Q13 bringing the total for 2013 to $16.7BN (versus the $29.4BN invested). This amazes me and is now the fifth year when the VC industry has raised meaningfully less capital than it invests. Clearly this is not sustainable. Clearly other investors have stepped into the breach and joined these investor syndicates (strategics, angels, hedge funds) in an amounts not well understood – is this good? Is it bad? Arguably having the capital gap filled by investors who may not be accustomed to the vicissitudes of the VC asset class is problematic – but having said that they seemed to have hung in through the Great Recession! At some point though the amount invested and the amount raised need to come back in line.

Note to self – I need to poke around some more at the VC fundraising data.  Investors who watch my industry closely are extremely excited about this phase of the cycle so I expect to see stepped up fundraising activity – certainly in light of the extraordinary liquidity we are now witnessing.

4 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

“All Hat, Ton of Cattle…”

Had a remarkable day today in Houston crawling around the Texas Medical Center. I was in town to speak at the Xconomy Healthcare event – an incredible roster of speakers and attendees I must say. As Ron DePinho, President of MD Anderson, characterized that this part of Houston is as if someone put the Kendall Square and Longwood regions around greater Boston into a giant centrifuge and spun it down – what an extraordinary concentration of healthcare expertise/technology/discovery – 54 healthcare institutions, 21 hospitals in only 1.6 square miles! If you have not been there before, make a point of hanging out at the Texas Medical Center.

The Texas Medical Center has 8 – 9 million patient visits per year and as Bobby Robbins, CEO of Texas Medical Center, lamented that until recently the most important part of his job has been dealing with parking. More specifically, MD Anderson sees 1.4 million of those patients and has a $4 billion annual budget; more impressive – of that amount, $700 million is on research. There are 11,000 patients enrolled in clinical trials being run at MD Anderson and the productivity of their development pipeline is exceptional.

Much of the discussion today was centered on how best to build an end-to-end healthcare innovation economy. John Mendlein, serially successful biotech entrepreneur and current CEO of aTyr Pharma, portrayed numerous possible roadmaps (he called them recipes) on how one might go about building great start-up companies, but the common refrain was that it was all about the aggregation of talent – scientific, clinical, commercial, financial, managerial talent – and they all need to be present for the ecosystem to survive. With this important awareness, it certainly feels like it is only a matter of time, and not much time at that, before we see a Genzyme or Genentech launched in Houston.

Other interesting observations I gleaned over the course of the day…and some are meant to be more thought provoking.

  • Academic centers of excellence seem to be increasingly prepared to embrace that innovation must co-exist with commercialization. DePinho stressed the need for “informed” clinical trials and the powerful role of integrated diagnostics (which was music to my ears)
  • Houston, like many other emerging healthcare hubs, has numerous grass roots efforts to raise awareness, build community, create dialogue – these activities are important precursors to successful ecosystems (see Bloomberg in NYC)
  • Surprised how many leading academic hospital systems are “exporting” their expertise in the care service delivery models that they have built (see Hopkins in Saudi Arabia, Cleveland Clinic in Abu Dhabi, MD Anderson with its numerous international partnerships, etc). There is something profound here and I am not sure all of us fully understand the implications with this phenomenon – they are probably all good though. For Foundation Medical Partners we have seen the increased focus placed on Asia, specifically China, and the ravenous appetite for new healthcare delivery service models.
  • We need to better “democratize” expertise from academic centers which plays directly into the “consumerization and retailization” investment themes our firm is exploring. How can we best deliver to the consumer/patient very complex clinical information? How can we ensure the superior standards of care we are accustomed to receiving from leading providers are made available to people who cannot access those providers? Innovative healthcare technology platforms will provide that consistency of care.
  • What is a human life worth now? The old therapeutic pricing models were predicated on inadequate therapies which showed poor efficacy for many (only great outcomes for few) and many of these drugs merely extended life by few months, and in many of those cases, it was very low quality of life. Soon we will see therapies which will profoundly extend life for many – should those drugs be more expensive or less expensive? If across a population we extend life expectancies, are we not raising overall healthcare costs to society because we all know most of healthcare care costs are incurred by those over 75 years of age. Complicated issues are going to be raised by extending life expectancy.

But none of that mattered earlier today as I toured my brother’s pediatric ward; he is an extraordinary pediatrician at the University of Texas Health Sciences Center. At one point we stood at a large window looking down Main Street across the entire complex at Texas Medical Center and I remarked “this is the Las Vegas Strip of Healthcare.”

Fortunately for all of us, what happens at the Texas Medical Center does not stay at the Texas Medical Center…

7 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

“A Giant Hairball of Perverse Incentives…”

The best thing about going back to school is to think big thoughts, immerse oneself in what the great academic minds are ruminating over. This past weekend Harvard Business School hosted its annual healthcare conference for students and alums, and fortunately for us, some of the great faculty were on hand to share their views on the state of the healthcare industry. The quote above was the opening comment from the breakfast keynote by Prof Bill Sahlman, one of the best of the best!

While we all lament the fundamental conundrum that competition has not led to an improvement in quality at lower costs, which is the phenomenon experienced in every other industry vertical, the business of healthcare is now facing arguably the most profound transformation in modern history. But most troublesome were Prof Sahlman’s observations around the true costs, not yet acknowledged, to society due to this tragic paradox. Today the outstanding federal debt is over $17 trillion; the unfunded Medicare and Medicaid liabilities are estimated to be $30 trillion each, so a total of another $60 trillion of additional obligations – not recorded on the country’s balance sheet – sit out there due to the societal pact to fund healthcare costs for all citizens over 65 years old.

A couple of other fun facts and observations from the morning session:

• An employer-based healthcare insurance system obviously has left a lot of people uninsured
• At 18% of GDP, this implies $4,000 – $5,000 higher health costs per citizen than other developed societies; higher costs with more modest outcomes. This dynamic clearly hurts the global competitive position of the US
• The third leading cause of death is due to faulty medical care – ouch!
• Fundamental misunderstanding of the current reform debate is that we have modestly reformed access to insurance, NOT healthcare services – big difference
• And what are considered the greatest needs in healthcare today according Prof Sahlman? Greater transparency of costs and outcomes which need to be readily accessible, and a re-engineering of where healthcare services are delivered

This event also attracts CEO’s from leading healthcare franchises, and as such, we were privileged to have Mark Bertolini (Aetna) and John Brooks (Joslin Diabetes Center) address the audience later in the day. The juxtaposition of having a provider and then payer share their visions of the future underscored the “jump ball” around who will own the consumer/patient. Both view a very “patient centric” delivery model, enabled by many of the highly disruptive, highly innovative platforms which will enable these new and deep patient relationship to be fostered (frankly the types of companies my new fund at Foundation is investing in).

Some more fun facts from Mark Bertolini, who by the way if you have not heard him speak, make a point of doing so – he is great.

• According to the Institute of Medicine in 2009, 27% of the $880 billion of medical spend was unnecessary; 17% of that was on inefficient care delivery; and, 10% was considered fraud – staggering waste and inefficiencies
• In 2020 Bertolini expects there will be 75 million people on retail commercial insurance exchanges
• When asked about his strategic priorities, quite surprisingly he pointed to the need to enable providers to underwrite risk (be insurance companies?), foster greater sense of community by facilitating public/private exchanges and then drive hard on an integrated “digital experience” – very provocative and forward-thinking
• Worst 5% of the US population consumes 43% of healthcare spend – the two greatest costs are attributed to heart failure to people over 85 years old and end-stage renal disease for those under 65 years old
• Arguably better social safety nets (i.e., better education and healthcare systems) will lead to greater peace of mind, which leads to greater consumption rates and lower savings rates
• Medical device companies will soon be confronted with greater burdens to prove that their devices actually lead to better outcomes which is ostensibly measured by keeping people out of the hospital, thus Aetna’s work with Medtronic on taking data feeds from pacemakers to better monitor for cardiac incidents – before they occur
• The iTriage initiative with CVS – mobile apps to manage one’s entire healthcare needs – is borne from the realization that better quality is mostly correlated to convenience
• Bertolini’s best quote: “Give up control to get power…”

John Brooks, CEO of Joslin, had an equally expansive vision which is very focused on providing an extended care model driven by highly innovative technology platforms. The epidemic of diabetes demands close and regular patient engagement – better longitudinal care earlier can have enormous benefits – which is the real power of the “connected health” models.

All of this opportunity/confusion in the marketplace is reflected in recent financing data. In addition to the dramatic spike in overall healthcare tech investing, valuations have moved meaningfully over the course of 2013…

• First round pre-money valuations from 2012 through 3Q13 decreased from $7.1 million to $4.8 million – perhaps a reflection of the increased start-up activity in this sector and the risk of too many undifferentiated companies – just a guess
• Second round pre-money valuations from 2012 through 3Q13 remained essentially flat – $23 million to $22.5 million
• While Later Stage valuations from 2012 through 3Q13 jumped from $54 million to $64.7 million, which undoubtedly reflects some of the “break-out” winners and increased IPO and M&A activity.

10 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Some 2014 Predictions….

So I wanted to come up with some 2014 predictions – nothing fancy or too controversial – but hopefully somewhat thought provoking…

  •  IPO’s: This past year witnessed an extraordinary resurgence in IPO activity for venture-backed companies. It felt much like 1999 right before the crest of the wave. With modest growth, unsustainably high valuation multiples, little excess left for Corporate America to cut, profit margins are maxed out which makes the next 12 months feel very much like the year 2000. While it will not be such a disaster, clearly the pace of last year simply cannot be maintained. Even raging bulls need to stop and smell the roses once in a while.
  • Fundraising:  Very strong liquidity to LP’s in private equity and venture funds give them increased confidence to continue to increase – albeit modestly – allocations to the asset class. Notwithstanding every investor’s claim that they only invest looking forward, past performance (i.e., distributions) continue to fuel fundraising. Unfortunately the rich continue to get richer as established firms find it relatively easy to raise new and larger funds causing the overall roster of investment managers to continue to shrink.
  • Crowdfunding:  This form of financing continues to play an important role for start-up’s, although admittedly, mostly around the margins. The crowdfunding phenomenon simply does not have the heft to lead Series B and C rounds. And furthermore, in addition to capital, great entrepreneurs are also looking for great business partners in their investors. The risk here is that there will be a spectacular scam and Senator Warren and others come down hard with new consumer protection laws which chill the marketplace. Disaster scenario: some desperate African Prince just needs $10M more in Bitcoins to fund his next great widget…and he actually raises the “money!” – never to be heard from again  
  • Healthcare Technology:  Out of the carnage with the introduction of health insurance exchanges comes the broad and irrefutable realization that the healthcare industry simply must be fundamentally re-architected. Novel and innovative business solutions lead the way to greater efficiencies and productivity. Ironically improvements in healthcare at lower costs accelerate across society as more people get access to affordable care at the right time, right place. With this phenomenon comes the growing appreciation that extraordinary near-term societal benefits can be achieved and may even outweigh any distant future benefits hoped for with continued massive investment looking for the next great therapeutic or medical device.
  • Sports Grand Slam:  The Mets win the World Series, the Knicks win the NBA Championship, the Giants win the Super Bowl and the Islanders win the Stanley Cup.

Now you know I have no idea what I am talking about…

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

An Interesting List….

Every year for the last nineteen years I have spent the final week of the year with a dozen of my closest friends (now there are also 14 children in our group) – some of these people have grown up to be real serious business executives! We reflect on the year just concluded and then prognosticate about the next 365 days. There is always a lot of smack talk which makes for a very entertaining week. One of my closest friends in the group is a senior partner at a leading Wall Street firm. The list below – much of it collected from various experts across his firm – captures many of the highlights for 2013. It is actually quite bullish – and not all of it is business related. Enjoy!

  •  The stock market did not turn negative (on a rolling YTD basis) at any point this year; that has only happened ten times since 1928
  • The total return of S&P since the March 2009 lows is 202% 
  • S&P added $3.7 trillion of market capitalization in 2013 to reach $16.4 trillion
  • US companies will earn close to $2 trillion this year, up 250% since 2000 
  • Excluding financial companies, US corporate cash balances are up 70% since 2007 
  • Twenty years ago, only 200 S&P companies repurchased stock; in 2013 that number was 425
  • Approximately $1.3 trillion of capital flowed into bond funds with 10-year notes yielding less than 3%
  • Global private equity dry powder is estimated to be $404 billion 
  • Rough math: the trend of household formation is 1.2 million units/year with nearly 300k of demolitions, which means that we need to build around 1.5 million homes (housing starts are running around 900k)
  • Texas is now producing more oil than the US imports from the Middle East 
  • Average value of farm real estate in the US has nearly doubled since 2005
  • The FDIC has taken control of nearly 500 banks since the financial crisis began in 2008 
  • Warren Buffett’s overall gain from 1964 through 2012 is 586,817% while the S&P increased 7,433%
  • EBAY sells nearly 10,000 cars a week on its mobile app
  • Over 400 million cups of coffee are consumed each day in the US 
  • Americans work 8.5 more hours per week than they did in 1979
  • From the 1992 highs, Chinese stocks are up ~ 50% while US stocks are up ~380%; over that same time period, Chinese GDP has grown 17 fold  while US GDP has grown 1.7 fold
  • Over 50% of start-up companies in Silicon Valley were founded by immigrants
  • The European Central Bank hiked rates in 2008 and 2011 – true story 
  • The Eurostoxx 600 index (SXXP) is up 17 of the past 19 months 
  • The corporate tax rate in Japan is 50% yet 70% of Japanese companies don’t pay taxes
  • Most all-time playoff wins by an NFL quarterback – Tom Brady (17)
  • Most all-time playoff losses by an NFL quarterback – Peyton Manning (11) 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Hong Kong is on Fire…

Not literally but it might as well be given the smog in the air last week. Locals attribute it to the coal plants in Southern China and others say it is because of all the cheap fuels being burned by the hundreds, maybe thousands, of container ships and junks crowding the harbor.

But it all seems to work. An economic system with seductively lax rules, unfettered entrepreneurial spirit and no capital gains tax (!) continues to amaze me whenever I am back “home” (I spent much of my teenage years living there). While there last week I met with a number of local investors and asset managers – it is always energizing to see how excited they are to be operating in the shadow of China. Thought I might share just a few of my observations and highlight some of the recurring themes from those conversations – and close with a big insight:

  • Everyone is looking to expand into the numerous frontier Asian markets, especially China. No surprise there but people are also talking about Myanmar and Mongolia (apparently the miners in Mongolia are absolutely killing it). The other two most talked about countries were Malaysia and Thailand.
  • With this diversity and fragmentation many found the landscape confusing and chaotic. The laws and financial regulations in many of these regions are unclear, undocumented, inconsistent, poorly enforced yet the growing financial assets and wealth is intoxicating. I often heard comments that “we just have to be here.”
  • Consistent with the above, there was much discussion about distribution and access. Hong Kong, after much concern with the hand-over back to China in 1997, continues to be the undisputed gateway to China. But there was anxiety on how best to access (i.e., sell to) the emerging Chinese middle class. The definition of the mutual fund laws are under active debate now in Hong Kong. Today most mutual fund products are sold through less than a handful of local Chinese banks.
  • Surprisingly some fund managers saw the rise of social media as an important customer acquisition tool.
  • Local tax laws in China – a mess. Capital gains laws are still not resolved.
  • A lot of discussion around brand and the legitimacy of a US brand. Brands in the US have been imbued over many generations with attributes of trust and strength, but they today have no value in many emerging Asian markets.
  •  With the “one child” policy China is confronted with real challenges on best to support an aging population which has modest financial assets set aside for retirement. Pension systems are being overhauled and minimum contribution levels are being increased. Fortunately, when compared to the US, China and many Asian countries have consistently greater personal savings rates.

The subtext to all of this is the unspoken gradual transition of a population from having to rely solely on the state for all of one’s needs. That is what I find so fascinating with the maturing of the financial markets in Asia. With sophisticated new investment products, and with greater understanding of how these products are meant to work, the state is gently moving people to be increasingly self-reliant and empowering them to manage more of their own well-being.  

3 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Land of the Setting Sun…

With no disrespect to Japan at all, the population is aging so quickly, that new healthcare technologies must be deployed to navigate this dilemma….  

Over the past four days I have been meeting with government officials and executives of some of the leading healthcare companies in Japan (I am traveling with Governor Deval Patrick of Massachusetts as he promotes the extraordinary healthcare technology community in the Commonwealth). Meeting with Japanese leaders who are tasked with solving many of the same problems we have in the US – aging populations, role and costs of advanced medical technologies, novel insights into disease progression, etc – has been fascinating. But the Japanese have a unique set of challenges which profoundly defines their healthcare technology agenda.

First some context. Many entrepreneurs I met with this week talked about the “Lost Two Decades” of economic vitality. Imagine an entire generation experiencing nominal economic growth – how dispiriting, and frankly, quite damaging to the entrepreneurial community. Notwithstanding the current genuine enthusiasm for Prime Minister Abe’s economic policies to finally spur demand – “Abenomics” recently levied a 3% point increase in national sales tax rate concurrent with the pending termination of a massive $130 BN fiscal stimulus program – early results are mixed. Recent quarter trade balances swung to a deficit as import growth spiked. Many of these initiatives are structured to address the extraordinary levels of government debt which looms frighteningly over the rapidly aging population. Real income per worker is falling quickly which makes the future cost of healthcare more daunting to the next generation.

It is this economic background which now frames the healthcare technology agenda. Often executives in Japan referred to their society as a “super aging” society. Some analysts forecast that two-thirds of the population is older than 50; in 1970 that would have been well below 20%. In urban centers 18% of the population is over 75 years old. There does not appear to be significant investment in new hospitals, and given it costs roughly one-third to provide in-home care, new technologies are being deployed to both rationalize healthcare costs and improve remote care.

Due to recent natural disasters like the earthquake that crippled the Fukushima nuclear facilities, and the ever-present threats of future disasters, across the country the Japanese healthcare system is encouraged to provide more innovative and distributed care coordination systems. For example, nearly three years since the devastating tsunami hit Ishinomaki City, one third of the residents still live in compromised housing. This is exposing a debilitating set of social costs as well – 40% of residents have experienced a reduction in household income, 25% are reporting social issues, and 6% are at imminent risk of suicide.  

The healthcare priorities most referenced in Japan this past week tended to center around a few key themes:

  • Connected Health:  given the demographics cited above, lack of hospital capacity forecasted, and the constant fear of the next natural disaster, distributed systems to manage patients are paramount. Being able to provide “end-of-life” care in the home, manage patients in a rapid response manner, intelligent remote monitoring all appear to be top of mind with healthcare executives. Industry leaders demonstrated a wide range of platforms from voice activated psychological assessment tools, “quantified self” peripherals (wristbands, sensors, etc), to a “check-up” toilet by Toto – not kidding, Toto has developed a medical screening and monitoring system which is used exclusively in the bathroom – the ultimate connected device.
  • Robotics:  Not surprisingly, given strength of the Japanese robotics industry, there were numerous fascinating robotics platforms on display from motion-assist systems (like the “robot suit”) to rehabilitation devices.
  • Personalized Medicine:  But not necessarily in the manner VC’s in the States but think of it. There is the concept of “Me-Byo” which is a continuum of one’s state of health from “Healthy to Sickness.” New care models are forming which rely on more sophisticated IT infrastructure and are data centric and tend to be very consumer-centric (mostly app’s).

There was little discussion around predictive modeling and population analytics which is all the rage in the US today, in part driven by the advent of accountable care and the new healthcare insurance exchanges. The Japanese have a Universal Health coverage system which in 2016 will adopt a universal identifier numbering system which will serve as both one’s social security and tax ID; once this has been rolled out perhaps we might expect to see a greater emphasis on population management tools.

Only around the periphery of conversations was there discussion of a more holistic, population-centric approach to Japanese healthcare.  It does increasingly appear that there is a movement toward (as John Halamka, CIO of Harvard Medical System suggested) a system that is a health care system, not a sick care system.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized