Just a quick post...
I just got off the phone with a candidate.
I asked him - "Why should my client hire you?"
The candidate's response was to simply list their current job responsibilities.
Basically they rehashed the list of responsibilities that appears on their resume.
That type of answer will not get you hired!
Bottom line - on your interview - don't simply discuss your responsibilities.
Instead focus on talking about your accomplishments.
More on this topic later.....
Saturday, May 30, 2009
J&J and the Merck/Schering Reverse Merger
J&J filed for arbitration to end its revenue-sharing deal with Schering-Plough, due to Schering's merger with rival drugmaker Merck.
The problem for J&J is that Merck and Schering designed their deal as a reverse merger.
Here is J&J's problem....This is traditionally how a Reverse Merger works (you can read the complete BioJobBlogger post here):
Generally speaking, a failing or failed publicly traded company that is listed on one stock exchange or another merges with a privately held company. The privately held company takes over the public stock listing and manages the day-to-day operations of the new business. Private companies that engage in reverse mergers are usually looking for cash infusions for product development or a stock listing (without going through an initial public offering) which offers it shareholders immediate cash value. Investors who previously held stock in the public company are either compensated for their shares in cash or given shares (at a negotiated price) in the new entity. Any cash (or assets) left in the public company can be used to develop the formerly private company’s product(s) and if successful, shareholders in the old public company can eventually benefit.
But last I checked, neither Merck or Schering is a private company. So why in the world would they do a reverse merger?
Here's why - Again, according to the BioJobBlogger:
Schering-Plough markets Remicade outside of the US under an agreement with Johnson and Johnson which sells the drug in America. A termination clause in the original marketing agreement stipulates that the ex-US rights to Remicade (and another drug being developed) would revert to Johnson and Johnson if control or ownership of Schering Plough changes. Remicade, a treatment for rheumatoid arthritis, developed by Johnson and Johnson’s subsidiary Centocor, represented $2.1 billion in sales for Schering in 2008. Further, about 70% of Schering Plough’s revenue comes from outside the US. That said, the success or failure of the deal really hinges on whether or not Johnson and Johnson will challenge the change-in-control clause for Remicade. To obviate that possibility, Merck devised an unusual reverse merger strategy in which ownership of Schering Plough will not change hands—at least on paper anyway. Instead, even though Merck is putting up the money to purchase Schering, and Richard Clark, Merck’s Chairman and CEO, will run the newly combined company, Merck would technically become a subsidiary of Schering Plough and consequently there would be no change in Schering Plough management!
It will definitely be interesting to see how the arbitration process plays out.
The problem for J&J is that Merck and Schering designed their deal as a reverse merger.
Here is J&J's problem....This is traditionally how a Reverse Merger works (you can read the complete BioJobBlogger post here):
Generally speaking, a failing or failed publicly traded company that is listed on one stock exchange or another merges with a privately held company. The privately held company takes over the public stock listing and manages the day-to-day operations of the new business. Private companies that engage in reverse mergers are usually looking for cash infusions for product development or a stock listing (without going through an initial public offering) which offers it shareholders immediate cash value. Investors who previously held stock in the public company are either compensated for their shares in cash or given shares (at a negotiated price) in the new entity. Any cash (or assets) left in the public company can be used to develop the formerly private company’s product(s) and if successful, shareholders in the old public company can eventually benefit.
But last I checked, neither Merck or Schering is a private company. So why in the world would they do a reverse merger?
Here's why - Again, according to the BioJobBlogger:
Schering-Plough markets Remicade outside of the US under an agreement with Johnson and Johnson which sells the drug in America. A termination clause in the original marketing agreement stipulates that the ex-US rights to Remicade (and another drug being developed) would revert to Johnson and Johnson if control or ownership of Schering Plough changes. Remicade, a treatment for rheumatoid arthritis, developed by Johnson and Johnson’s subsidiary Centocor, represented $2.1 billion in sales for Schering in 2008. Further, about 70% of Schering Plough’s revenue comes from outside the US. That said, the success or failure of the deal really hinges on whether or not Johnson and Johnson will challenge the change-in-control clause for Remicade. To obviate that possibility, Merck devised an unusual reverse merger strategy in which ownership of Schering Plough will not change hands—at least on paper anyway. Instead, even though Merck is putting up the money to purchase Schering, and Richard Clark, Merck’s Chairman and CEO, will run the newly combined company, Merck would technically become a subsidiary of Schering Plough and consequently there would be no change in Schering Plough management!
It will definitely be interesting to see how the arbitration process plays out.
Saturday, May 16, 2009
Where do you find the time?
I sometimes get kidded by my family and friends about the amount of time I spend on the various forms of Social Media. People who think nothing of sitting on the couch and watching a 3+ hour Yankees game...or hunkering down for a night of American Idol are always questioning me as to where do I find the time for my Blog, Twitter, Facebook etc.
Well, this afternoon I was reading Connie Crosby's blog and came across this post. Connie had embedded a video where Clay Shirky talks about this very issue.
Next time I am asked the question regarding where do I find the time...I will point them to this video.
Well, this afternoon I was reading Connie Crosby's blog and came across this post. Connie had embedded a video where Clay Shirky talks about this very issue.
Next time I am asked the question regarding where do I find the time...I will point them to this video.
Friday, May 15, 2009
Biotechs To Dangle Data for Cash at Cancer Drug Meeting
An article in today's Bloomberg paints a pretty bleak picture with regards to the prospects for a number of cash poor small biotechs. For some of these companies, this year's American Society of Clinical Oncology meeting will be their last attempt to obtain a much needed infusion of cash.
According to Steven King, Chief Executive Officer of Peregrine Pharmaceuticals Inc.
"Failing to secure a development partnership, or to be sold outright, may force research delays and project shutdowns that can add years to the time it takes to bring a drug to market, or end the effort entirely...The current economy has made this the most important year, of all the years I can remember, for small biotechnology companies to get the attention of potential partners and investors at ASCO."
Steve Elek, head of Health-care Transaction Service for PricewaterhouseCoopers LLC elaborates further that,
“Without access to capital, early-stage biotechnology companies are looking to sell when a year or two ago they would never think of it....Ideally they would be able to move along a little further in the process to maximize value, but the cash burn makes that not feasible for them. I expect to see a lot more biotech M&A activity over the next six to twelve months.”
Not an easy time to be a baby biotech.....
According to Steven King, Chief Executive Officer of Peregrine Pharmaceuticals Inc.
"Failing to secure a development partnership, or to be sold outright, may force research delays and project shutdowns that can add years to the time it takes to bring a drug to market, or end the effort entirely...The current economy has made this the most important year, of all the years I can remember, for small biotechnology companies to get the attention of potential partners and investors at ASCO."
Steve Elek, head of Health-care Transaction Service for PricewaterhouseCoopers LLC elaborates further that,
“Without access to capital, early-stage biotechnology companies are looking to sell when a year or two ago they would never think of it....Ideally they would be able to move along a little further in the process to maximize value, but the cash burn makes that not feasible for them. I expect to see a lot more biotech M&A activity over the next six to twelve months.”
Not an easy time to be a baby biotech.....
Monday, May 11, 2009
Jeff Kindler and Dunbar's Number
Interesting thought....the size of the group that Jeff Kindler proposes for a successful R&D group is 150 people....which is what Robin Dunbar postulates is the "theoretical cognitive limit to the number of people with whom one can maintain stable social relationships."
Coincidence or not....
Coincidence or not....
Pfizer CEO’s Three Tips for Research Success
Jeff Kindler in today's Wall Street Journal's Health Blog gives this summary of what he feels will lead to success in today's Pharma industry:
1. Each group should have between 100 and 150 scientists — few enough that they can all get together in the cafeteria to talk about what they’re doing.
2. Each should be run by a chief scientific officer prominent in the field.
3. They should be left alone “to create their own culture,” and should be judged, for the most part, on a single metric: Discovering drugs that demonstrate proof of concept.
Bottom line - Kindler's blueprint for R&D success looks striking similar to what GSK is currently doing.
Indian drug sales to US plunge 40%
The Financial Times reports here that Drug Sales that:
"Indian exports of pharmaceutical products to the US fell almost 40 per cent in the five months between October last year and the end of February....The trend is likely to disappoint analysts. India's pharmaceuticals industry was touted as a sector that could weather the global financial crisis."
Interestingly, sales of Pharmaceuticals from companies in China, Israel and South Korea gained dramatically.
"Indian exports of pharmaceutical products to the US fell almost 40 per cent in the five months between October last year and the end of February....The trend is likely to disappoint analysts. India's pharmaceuticals industry was touted as a sector that could weather the global financial crisis."
Interestingly, sales of Pharmaceuticals from companies in China, Israel and South Korea gained dramatically.
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
Networking: The Most Effective Way to Find a Job
Matt Berndt has an interesting post on his blog entitled - Networking: The Most Effective Way to Find a Job. In his post he cites the following statistic:
According to a survey of 2002-2004 graduates of the UT College of Communication done five years after graduation:
Again, this doesn’t mean they ignored online job boards, they just didn’t depend upon them as their primary means of finding employment.
I agree 110%!!
I always tell candidates that networking....whether by using their own network contacts or by using a Recruiter's network of contacts is by far the most effective way to get a new job. And if you have exhausted your networking options....and are still unable to gain access to a specific company....then by all means use the job boards. But Job Boards should only be a last resort....not your first option.
According to a survey of 2002-2004 graduates of the UT College of Communication done five years after graduation:
- More than 70% found their first job out of college via their networking activities
- More than 78% found their current job (five years after college) via their networking activities
Again, this doesn’t mean they ignored online job boards, they just didn’t depend upon them as their primary means of finding employment.
I agree 110%!!
I always tell candidates that networking....whether by using their own network contacts or by using a Recruiter's network of contacts is by far the most effective way to get a new job. And if you have exhausted your networking options....and are still unable to gain access to a specific company....then by all means use the job boards. But Job Boards should only be a last resort....not your first option.
Sunday, May 03, 2009
Swine flu could jump start new drugs
What is bad news from a societal standpoint could benefit companies in the Biotech/Pharma sector.
Fortune Magazine details in an article here what companies stand to gain from the potential Swine Flu pandemic.
Fortune Magazine details in an article here what companies stand to gain from the potential Swine Flu pandemic.
The pharmaceutical industry faces unprecedented barriers to evolution
Great article here that details the challenges that the Pharmaceutical industry faces as well as the potential solutions to these challenges. Not a long article - but very well written and informative.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)