From land mine detection to natural and unnatural products!

The preliminary business pitches from the second Faculty Molecules to Market module (Sheffield, Level 2, FCP201), were as inspirational as always. I thought I would capture some of the general points that were apparent to all three of us on the assessment panel. (Specific comments for each presentation will be provided through MOLE). The first thing to comment on is the diversity of business ideas seems never to diminish! The application of synthetic biology to detect persistent landmines in war zones went hand in hand with products for personal care and healthy nutrition. 

I have some very general points that I think would be useful for all teams to consider. You all had the opportunity to use a single slide to convey a message. I don't think any group made the best use of this opportunity. Some were more appealing than others, but they were mostly superfluous or in some cases contained too much detail, so much so that they were a negative distraction and we couldn't see the wood for the trees! There are many different ways to utilise a single image, think of those advertisements that have made an impact with you. Alternatively, use a logo, or a particular image that encapsulates your product or business ethos. Capturing your business idea in a single image is undoubtedly challenging, but that is the whole point of the module!

At the foot of this post, Jorge has provided a long list of point that he suggests need some attention before your poster session. I am going to pick out a few points that encompass in some cases a number of his comments. Probably the most important one is the need to describe your business in an holistic way. What will you make, or what service will you provide? What is your market? What are the achievement milestones: founding, filing (if IP is a component), first sales, first profit, first million etc. Where will the business be located, will it employ 1,10,1000 staff etc. Will Sales and Marketing/PR be a key component, or will the initial priority be a competitive manufacturing strategy, in order that good margins are achieved even on low volume sales? Jorge uses the word road-map, made popular during the Bush administration in the USA, but a nice shorthand for describing the dynamics and vision of your business plan.

The other area for discussion that I would want to encourage amongst the teams, is the contribution of each member. There were examples of full team participation and other pitches largely delivered by a single person. Both are absolutely fine, however, both can go wrong. A single charismatic presenter works really well in business pitches, especially when the pitch is kept short and the other team members then step forward to deal with specific questions on say finance, marketing, technology etc. In contrast a single presenter who also answers all of the questions gives a sense that the remaining team members are either disengaged or have been sidelined. When a carefully choreographed, tag team presentation is given, it speaks positively about team work and preparation. On the other hand, when the positive and clear parts are punctuated by indecision as in the relay racing disasters you will have seen on TV: eg when the baton is not passed cleanly; then the audience gets restless and loses confidence in the team. Rehearse your pitch and choose the right style to suit the business model and the team.

Finally, the Q & A session. Jorge has identified some specific points, but I would draw your attention again to the overall impression that you should be trying to convey. Someone said should we lie (after all these are virtual companies)? The answer is you should provide a clear and plausible answer, which may not be entirely true, but is a reasoned and logical answer in the context of your proposal. If you really are floored by a question, then face it head on, own up and try to engage the audience with a related comment. Investors want to see cohesion and self confidence; they do not like complacency and arrogance. You must earn their respect, their trust and whilst there is always a level of risk in investing, they need to feel confident on the one hand that their money is in safe and responsible hands, but that you also have a certain capacity and appetite  for an adventure that will be needed to turn a good profit from the investment.

Before I go, I couldn't resist a comment about real time analysis. As the afternoon drew on, the audience's questions and challenges became increasingly well informed. I noticed that audience members were checking (via Google) the validity of statements and were obtaining verification of figures and competitive positions. I thought this was on the one hand a welcome level of additional challenge, but I want to caution against full on assault! Leave that until the final competitive phase of the course. This development will inevitably raise the bar of Molecules to Market and we need to be in the vanguard

Dave and Liz

Jorge's points

• IP position - needs to be defined
• Stage of development of the product - needs to be defined
• Specific market share they are after (dominate the market does not sound realistic or professional)
• Specific return to investors and time lines for it
• Roadmap of product development
• To the above add diversification to control risk and increase revenue sources
• Only consider clinical trials if proof off concept and validation has been completed
• If clinical trials are considered then cost needs to be known - crowd-funding unlikely to provide the necessary amounts
• State clearly (integrated into your road-map) - how much money do you need to achieve what by when
• State the team -direct and indirect- core team and functions, plus Board of Directors, Advisory Board as well as consultants and external collaborators and partners
• State the team clearly, do not rush through it or assign roles at the very last instant - no ambiguities
• Everyone in the team should have a good grasp of aspects not necessarily related to them e.g., the scientists need to know about budgets
• Where is the science undertaken - own premises (factor in costs of facilities, equipment, recruitment, overheads, ...), outsourcing versus in-house
• Include costs of process development and manufacturing (and distribution if appropriate)
• What are the sources for it all, e.g., raw materials, processed materials, equipment, human resources, business development, ...
• Science was generally good but gaps need to be covered not by challenging the audience (e.g., investors) but by having reflected on the past achievements, the present undertakings and the future needs - there is need for scientific replies (even if in lay terms) to scientific questions
• Competitor analysis needs to be rather solid (and presented!)
• The name of the company and its mission should be obvious
• Audio/visual tools should be used to the utmost impact - do not assume that the audience will work to understand it
• Stage skills by every single person in the team must be present, rehearsed, and put into play if necessary
• who will reply to what needs to be perfectly defined before the presentation - no hesitation
• If the pitch is only 2 minutes consider having a single presenter  
• Consider alternative scenarios (path to progress) to the ideal programme to mitigate the potential for failure
• Consider the costs of the product in relation to the cost of  production to determine net profit - e.g., antibodies are expensive to produce for many reasons
• Always have a punch line at the end such that the audience knows when the presentation is over, and make the "take-home message" clear
• Stay real, do not glorify the product beyond its real potential, more potential revenue is not necessarily more interesting to investors than less but more tangible revenue/goals
• pre-emptive addressing of delicate issues to remove opportunities of futile or damaging discussions, e.g., genetically modified organisms