Minding the Gap between early stage technology and late stage products with licensing.

"Burned in the past, but flush with new money to invest, VCs are demanding quicker returns on an investment, often in a two-to-three year timeframe - something unlikely to happen with basic research in the life sciences...

“We play in the gap,” says Jim McLoughlin, director, strategic alliances, Global R&D – Worldwide Safety Sciences, at Pfizer. “We see an opportunity where VC funding is not flowing in.”

McLoughlin notes that his staff of more than 50 handles about 2,000 college licensing and development deals a year. And the relationship is more hands-on than a traditional technology licensing arrangement. “We stay engaged with [the university partner] and help move the technology forward,” says McLoughlin."

Well. There are two interesting phenomena here. First, that big pharma is moving up the chain farther than is generally talked about - not dealing with the biotechs that have licensed the university technology and then conducted at least some of the necessary clinical trials, but going straight to the universities themselves at the beginning of the process. Now big pharma is a competitor for the biotechs.

Second, 2000 deals a year? Pfizer must have some kind of licensing sausage factory going. The universities do too, so there must have a battle of the standard forms, and if Pfizer is doing 2000 deals a year, they must be winning that battle.