Comments on: SBIR Funding Under the Gun http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2009/03/17/sbir-funding-under-the-gun/ Freshly Brewed Bio/Pharma Chat. Served Up Daily. Thu, 18 Mar 2010 11:54:35 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: SBIR Can Be Key to Accessing Financing in a Troubled Economy « Hopes and Cures http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2009/03/17/sbir-funding-under-the-gun/comment-page-1/#comment-66329 SBIR Can Be Key to Accessing Financing in a Troubled Economy « Hopes and Cures Tue, 31 Mar 2009 19:28:41 +0000 http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2009/03/17/sbir-funding-under-the-gun/#comment-66329 [...] many companies, SBIR can be key to accessing critical financing, and as Patent Baristas recently [...] [...] many companies, SBIR can be key to accessing critical financing, and as Patent Baristas recently [...]

]]> By: Robert Hurst http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2009/03/17/sbir-funding-under-the-gun/comment-page-1/#comment-66233 Robert Hurst Wed, 25 Mar 2009 01:49:32 +0000 http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2009/03/17/sbir-funding-under-the-gun/#comment-66233 As a long-time reviewer of SBIR grants, a president of a university spin-off that has tapped into the SBIR route and an academic researcher, I see two problems with the program. First, it certainly has been true that there has been a paucity of good applications. Until recently, almost anything that wasn't triaged was funded. Second, there are "businesses" that make a living doing research but never produce a product. In recent years, as a number of established companies that I would consider as medium sized (they still fit the legal definition of small businesses) have tapped into this, the quality of proposals has increased markedly. No longer is getting a score tantamount to being funded, which is as it should be. In my opinion, requiring a product and examining the past record as well as establishing an upper limit for available funding would solve many of the problems. There is much talk of these venture-funded firms with "millions" in the bank. Perhaps we should examine more closely what that actually means. After all, the objective is to bring new products to the market. Should venture-funded firms be automatically excluded? I will say that my firm is choosing to build value by SBIR research, and I would hate to see our opportunity vanish. On the other hand, as a reviewer, I also hate seeing proposals from firms or individuals that I know have no chance (or intent) of commercialization or with a record of taking funds without ever commercializing a product competing for funding. As a long-time reviewer of SBIR grants, a president of a university spin-off that has tapped into the SBIR route and an academic researcher, I see two problems with the program. First, it certainly has been true that there has been a paucity of good applications. Until recently, almost anything that wasn’t triaged was funded. Second, there are “businesses” that make a living doing research but never produce a product. In recent years, as a number of established companies that I would consider as medium sized (they still fit the legal definition of small businesses) have tapped into this, the quality of proposals has increased markedly. No longer is getting a score tantamount to being funded, which is as it should be. In my opinion, requiring a product and examining the past record as well as establishing an upper limit for available funding would solve many of the problems. There is much talk of these venture-funded firms with “millions” in the bank. Perhaps we should examine more closely what that actually means. After all, the objective is to bring new products to the market. Should venture-funded firms be automatically excluded? I will say that my firm is choosing to build value by SBIR research, and I would hate to see our opportunity vanish. On the other hand, as a reviewer, I also hate seeing proposals from firms or individuals that I know have no chance (or intent) of commercialization or with a record of taking funds without ever commercializing a product competing for funding.

]]> By: Fred Patterson - The SBIR Coach http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2009/03/17/sbir-funding-under-the-gun/comment-page-1/#comment-66150 Fred Patterson - The SBIR Coach Sun, 22 Mar 2009 20:39:20 +0000 http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2009/03/17/sbir-funding-under-the-gun/#comment-66150 I agree with James White. The SBIR Program is working well with the current eligibility rules. Expanding eligibility to majority VC controlled small businesses un-levels the playing field. If a company has secured VC funding, they literally have millions of dollars more in financial resources than those who have chosen not to dilute their ownership in that fashion. SBIR will contribute only a very small amount relative to what the company has received from the VC. Why even compete for that money? Is it greed? Keep up with the debate over the next few months by monitoring http://www.sbir-reauthorization.info and get involved! I agree with James White. The SBIR Program is working well with the current eligibility rules. Expanding eligibility to majority VC controlled small businesses un-levels the playing field.

If a company has secured VC funding, they literally have millions of dollars more in financial resources than those who have chosen not to dilute their ownership in that fashion. SBIR will contribute only a very small amount relative to what the company has received from the VC. Why even compete for that money? Is it greed?

Keep up with the debate over the next few months by monitoring http://www.sbir-reauthorization.info and get involved!

]]> By: James White http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2009/03/17/sbir-funding-under-the-gun/comment-page-1/#comment-66067 James White Wed, 18 Mar 2009 22:02:44 +0000 http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2009/03/17/sbir-funding-under-the-gun/#comment-66067 The main hurdle facing SBIR is the 8-year reauthorization that was stalled in congress last year. At issue is whether majority VC-owned firms should be allowed to access SBIR funds. Almost all small businesses oppose this: if a company has millions in VC money why do they need a $100k research grant? Of course, the main target is NIH's jumbo Phase II awards (which have been awarded in amounts up to $8M). The only way to preserve SBIR for small independent businesses and keep VCs at bay is for the small business community to be vocal and register their support for SBIR in its current form. Please call or fax your congrssional representatives, Senators, and the small business committees so that your voice can be heard! The main hurdle facing SBIR is the 8-year reauthorization that was stalled in congress last year. At issue is whether majority VC-owned firms should be allowed to access SBIR funds.

Almost all small businesses oppose this: if a company has millions in VC money why do they need a $100k research grant? Of course, the main target is NIH’s jumbo Phase II awards (which have been awarded in amounts up to $8M).

The only way to preserve SBIR for small independent businesses and keep VCs at bay is for the small business community to be vocal and register their support for SBIR in its current form. Please call or fax your congrssional representatives, Senators, and the small business committees so that your voice can be heard!

]]>