The business of extracting knowledge from academic publications

Re:The business of extracting knowledge from academic public... by pfisherman on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @10:29PM (#38108263)

I think the big case study everybody gives is Schrödinger who took 20 years to IPO.

The problem is that the market is just not that big. Assume that every single pharma company buys your product - like Schrödinger - where does your revenue top out?

You can beat that as a small pharma company with one or two assets that make it to market. So the question is: if the computational platform is so good then why not just be pharma company?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The business of extracting knowledge from academic public... by riwsky on Thursday November 02, 2023 @01:14AM (#38109263)

“If you’re so smart, then why aren’t you rich?”

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The business of extracting knowledge from academic public... by petra on Thursday November 02, 2023 @02:15AM (#38109584)

For a good computational platform, that can pinpoint unique and valuable candidates , isn't there an option to do license/consult in exchange for royalties ?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The business of extracting knowledge from academic public... by pfisherman on Thursday November 02, 2023 @09:52AM (#38113511)

No. Makes more sense to license the asset (molecule). And even then, big pharma companies won’t talk to you until your molecule is in phase 2.

If anybody with an AI pharma start up tells you they plan to make money by licensing their platform, then run the other way because it is a red flag.

If you want to see what a real “AI” pharma company looks like check out Vertex pharmaceuticals.

[ Parent | on HN ]