IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/8954.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Going Public When You Can in Biotechnology

Author

Listed:
  • Michael R. Darby
  • Lynne G. Zucker

Abstract

Scientist-entrepreneurs prominent in biotech and other high-technology industries view going public not as a cost-effective source of capital but as a cross between selling a now-proven innovation and winning a lottery. Unlike most empirical IPO analyses confined to those firms that go public, we study substantially all the non-public biotech firms founded up through 1989. The probability that one of these firms goes public in any given year increases with the quality of the firm's science base (use of recombinant DNA technology, number of articles by star scientists as or with firm employees, number of biotech patents), the percentage of eligible firms going public the year the firm was founded as a strategy indicator, recent biotech returns as an indicator of a hot market, and whether or how many rounds of venture capital has been obtained. The same key factors increase the expected proceeds raised from IPOs, but the quality of the firm's science base plays a more dominant role. All firms going public try to look like the next Genentech, but only those with the strong science base necessary for success attract large investments.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael R. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker, 2002. "Going Public When You Can in Biotechnology," NBER Working Papers 8954, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:8954
    Note: CF PR
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w8954.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jeff S. Armstrong & Michael R. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker, 2003. "Commercializing knowledge: university science, knowledge capture and firm performance in biotechnology," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Sep, pages 149-170.
    2. Philippe Aghion & Jean Tirole, 1994. "The Management of Innovation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 109(4), pages 1185-1209.
    3. Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby & Marilynn B. Brewer, 1994. "Intellectual Capital and the Birth of U.S. Biotechnology Enterprises," NBER Working Papers 4653, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Stephan, Paula E & Everhart, Stephen S, 1998. "The Changing Rewards to Science: The Case of Biotechnology," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 141-151, March.
    5. Zucker, Lynne G & Darby, Michael R & Armstrong, Jeff, 1998. "Geographically Localized Knowledge: Spillovers or Markets?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 36(1), pages 65-86, January.
    6. Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby & Maximo Torero, 2002. "Labor Mobility from Academe to Commerce," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(3), pages 629-660, July.
    7. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Zucker, Lynne G & Darby, Michael R & Brewer, Marilynn B, 1998. "Intellectual Human Capital and the Birth of U.S. Biotechnology Enterprises," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(1), pages 290-306, March.
    9. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Michael R. Darby & Qiao Liu & Lynne G. Zucker, 1999. "Stakes and Stars: The Effect of Intellectual Human Capital on the Level and Variability of High-Tech Firms' Market Values," NBER Working Papers 7201, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Abhijit V. Banerjee, 1992. "A Simple Model of Herd Behavior," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 107(3), pages 797-817.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michael R. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker, 2003. "Growing by leaps and inches: creative destruction, real cost reduction, and inching up," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Sep, pages 13-42.
    2. Armin Schwienbacher, 2008. "Innovation and Venture Capital Exits," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(533), pages 1888-1916, November.
    3. Michael S. Lawlor, 2003. "Biotechnology and government funding: economic motivation and policy models," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Sep, pages 131-146.
    4. Hermans, Raine & Kauranen, Ilkka, 2003. "Intellectual Capital and Anticipated Future Sales in Small and Medium-sized Biotechnology Companies," Discussion Papers 856, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    5. Rebecca S. Eisenberg, 2003. "Reaching through the genome," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Sep, pages 105-115.
    6. Jeff S. Armstrong & Michael R. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker, 2003. "Commercializing knowledge: university science, knowledge capture and firm performance in biotechnology," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Sep, pages 149-170.
    7. Giot, Pierre & Schwienbacher, Armin, 2007. "IPOs, trade sales and liquidations: Modelling venture capital exits using survival analysis," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 679-702, March.
    8. Timothy F. Howe, 2003. "Financing biotechnology research: a firsthand perspective," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Sep, pages 119-130.
    9. Cassiman, Bruno & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Zuniga, Pluvia, 2007. "Science linkages and innovation performance: An analysis on CIS-3 firms in Belgium," IESE Research Papers D/671, IESE Business School.
    10. Henry G. Grabowski, 2003. "Patents and new product development in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Sep, pages 87-104.
    11. John V. Duca & Mine K. Yücel, 2003. "Science and Cents: Exploring the economics of biotechnology: an overview," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Sep, pages 3-10.
    12. Pukthuanthong, Kuntara, 2006. "Underwriter learning about unfamiliar firms: Evidence from the history of biotech IPOS," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 366-407, November.
    13. Rothaermel, Frank T. & Thursby, Marie, 2005. "Incubator firm failure or graduation?: The role of university linkages," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 1076-1090, September.
    14. Malcolm Gillis, 2003. "Harnessing new technologies for the 21st century," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Sep, pages 63-75.
    15. C. Thomas Caskey, 2003. "The convergence of disruptive technologies enabling a new industrial approach to health products," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Sep, pages 77-84.
    16. Frank R. Lichtenberg, 2003. "The benefits to society of new drugs: a survey of the econometric evidence," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Sep, pages 43-59.
    17. Hermans, Raine, . "International Mega-Trends and Growth Prospects of the Finnish Bio-technology Industry - Essays on New Economic Geography, Market Structure of the Pharmaceutical Industry, Sources of Financing, Intelle," ETLA A, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy, number 40, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jarle Moen, 2005. "Is Mobility of Technical Personnel a Source of R&D Spillovers?," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 23(1), pages 81-114, January.
    2. Bruce Rasmussen, 2010. "Innovation and Commercialisation in the Biopharmaceutical Industry," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13680.
    3. Michael R. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker, 2006. "Innovation, Competition and Welfare-Enhancing Monopoly," NBER Working Papers 12094, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Herrera, Liliana & Nieto, Mariano, 2015. "The determinants of firms' PhD recruitment to undertake R&D activities," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 132-142.
    5. Jeff S. Armstrong & Michael R. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker, 2003. "Commercializing knowledge: university science, knowledge capture and firm performance in biotechnology," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Sep, pages 149-170.
    6. Kamilia Loukil, 2018. "The Impact of R&D Collaboration on Technological Innovation in European Countries," Academic Journal of Economic Studies, Faculty of Finance, Banking and Accountancy Bucharest,"Dimitrie Cantemir" Christian University Bucharest, vol. 4(4), pages 34-41, December.
    7. Kamilia Loukil, 2016. "Innovation Policy and R&D Efficiency in Emerging Countries: a Stochastic Frontier Analysis," Eastern European Business and Economics Journal, Eastern European Business and Economics Studies Centre, vol. 2(3), pages 165-192.
    8. Zucker, Lynne G. & Darby, Michael R. & Furner, Jonathan & Liu, Robert C. & Ma, Hongyan, 2007. "Minerva unbound: Knowledge stocks, knowledge flows and new knowledge production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 850-863, July.
    9. Zucker, Lynne G & Darby, Michael R, 2001. "Capturing Technological Opportunity via Japan's Star Scientists: Evidence from Japanese Firms' Biotech Patents and Products," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(1-2), pages 37-58, January.
    10. Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby, 2014. "Defacto and Deeded Intellectual Property: Knowledge-Driven Co-Evolution of Firm Collaboration Boundaries and IPR Stragtegy," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 115-116, pages 221-251.
    11. Spulber, Daniel F., 2012. "Tacit knowledge with innovative entrepreneurship," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 641-653.
    12. Michael R. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker & Andrew Wang, 2004. "Joint Ventures, Universities, and Success in the Advanced Technology Program," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 22(2), pages 145-161, April.
    13. Luo, Xiaowei Rose & Koput, Kenneth W. & Powell, Walter W., 2009. "Intellectual capital or signal? The effects of scientists on alliance formation in knowledge-intensive industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1313-1325, October.
    14. Junfu Zhang, 2006. "A Study of Academic Entrepreneurs Using Venture Capital Data," PPIC Working Papers 2006.01, Public Policy Institute of California.
    15. Blomkvist, Katarina & Kappen, Philip & Zander, Ivo, 2014. "Superstar inventors—Towards a people-centric perspective on the geography of technological renewal in the multinational corporation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 669-682.
    16. Rene Belderbos & Victor Gilsing & Shinya Suzuki, 2015. "Direct and mediated ties to universities: ‘Scientific’ absorptive capacity and innovation performance of pharmaceutical firms," Working Papers of Department of Management, Strategy and Innovation, Leuven 504836, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), Department of Management, Strategy and Innovation, Leuven.
    17. Michael R. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker & Andrew Wang, 2003. "Universities, Joint Ventures, and Success in the Advanced Technology Program," NBER Working Papers 9463, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Corolleur, Catherine D. F. & Carrere, M. & Mangematin, V., 2004. "Turning scientific and technological human capital into economic capital: the experience of biotech start-ups in France," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 631-642, May.
    19. Baba, Yasunori & Shichijo, Naohiro & Sedita, Silvia Rita, 2009. "How do collaborations with universities affect firms' innovative performance? The role of "Pasteur scientists" in the advanced materials field," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 756-764, June.
    20. Michaela Trippl & Joshua von Gabain & Franz Tödtling, 2006. "Policy agents as catalysts of knowledge links in the biotechnology sector," SRE-Disc sre-disc-2006_01, Institute for Multilevel Governance and Development, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • G32 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Financing Policy; Financial Risk and Risk Management; Capital and Ownership Structure; Value of Firms; Goodwill

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:8954. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.