Private Equity – Beyond Traditional Venture Capital

In the biotech industry, there is a quote by that is often used to emphasize the importance of data in decision making: “In God we trust; all others must bring data.” The quote comes from W. Edwards Deming, who had a background in statistics that he used extensively in his teachings about management. While data is important, the analysis of the data is critical to guide decision making. I have noticed this issue lately in the reporting on venture capital funding in the US and wonder if an alternative view of the data would lead to different choices in how companies raise private equity.

Perhaps the largest source of data on venture capital (VC)  is the PWC Money Tree Reports, which provides break outs by industry and geography as well as overall numbers. However, reports on VC activity don’t generally break out the funding by source, specifically distinguishing between traditional VC and other forms of private equity financing. While often used interchangeably, these terms are not the same. Looking through the definitions used in the PWC Money Tree Reports, qualifying angel and corporate investments are also included in VC figures.

In numbers from the Money Tree Report and the National VC Association, $112M in VC was invested in Wisconsin in 2010, which was an astonishing increase compared to the $23.9M in 2009. While the data supports a significant increase in private equity raised, a closer look at the numbers suggests that the bump isn’t due to traditional VC.

In 2010, two Wisconsin companies, Virent Energy and Cellular Dynamics, raised a total of $87M.

Following the money,approximately $25M of private equity was invested in Wisconsin in 2010 beyond these two deals for an increase relative to 2009 funding is less than 5%. (I did not analyze the 2009 transactions for a breakdown of funding sources.)

The importance of the distinction between private equity and VC can also be seen beyond the Wisconsin borders. Recently BioWorld posted about an increase in biotech seed and series A funding as a percent of the overall private funding so far this year relative to 2010. The analysis of the two biggest financings to date in 2011, totaling $300M, revealed that the source of equity wasn’t traditional VC but big biotech as well as private individuals (or entities representing them).

As we anecdotally see the sources of equity financing expand, data should be collected and analyzed to understand these trends. My goal isn’t to project trends in the composition of financing entities going forward but from a company perspective the data underscores the need to be flexible in sources of private equity funding for innovation.

(While I have written about equity funding and gaps in funding, I don’t intend to address Angel vs. Super Angel vs. MicroVC vs. VC because to me these issues relate to size rather than a structure. Mark Suster recently started a series of three posts that covers these issues in the software space.)

Advertisements

6 comments on “Private Equity – Beyond Traditional Venture Capital

  1. Paul Radspinner
    July 1, 2011 at 5:40 pm #

    Couldn’t agree more. Our most recent round was lead by an individual who invests actively in start ups. The investment he made in FluGen was followed by another in Shine and he is actively evaluating other opportunities in Wisconsin. Total amount in thus far is $17 million with more on the way.

  2. Trista Morrison
    July 5, 2011 at 1:41 pm #

    Agree. When we ran the numbers for our BioWorld analysis, we thought the most interesting finding was the fact that while $$ for start-up biotechs was up overall, a significant chunk of that money was not coming from traditional VC sources (or even corporate venture groups) – it came from private investors or from structuring the start-up as a subsidiary to a pharma parent company.
    – Trista Morrison, BioWorld

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Venture Capital in Wisconsin – There Is Good News | The Next Element - January 26, 2012

    […] My first thought wasn’t that the sky is falling in Wisconsin – it was that the VC investment in Wisconsin in 2010 was probably an outlier. The 2010 story was stuck in my mind because I wrote a post about the need to distinguish between private equity and VC. […]

  2. 2012 Wisconsin Investment Capital Roundup | The Next Element - January 21, 2013

    […] stem (iPS) cells as research tools, raised an additional $21M from Tactics II Investments. I’ve mentioned previously that the founder and principal Tactics II Stem Cell Ventures is also CEO at Cellular Dynamics. […]

  3. WI VC Investment: Down (& Out?) in Q3 ’13 | The Next Element - November 5, 2013

    […] 2010: Cellular Dynamics and Virent for total ~$87M […]

  4. Is Biotech Venture Capital Dying? | The Next Element - January 27, 2014

    […] there should be alternative models for funding medical innovation but we shouldn’t ignore the $4.5B of life science VC invested in […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: