17 Burst results for "Long"

"long" Discussed on The Long Run

The Long Run

08:51 min | 10 months ago

"long" Discussed on The Long Run

"So it's a theme that we've touched on now a few times is a different paradigm. There are so many new companies and so many new Therapeutics being developed that there is no way that traditional big pharma can consume in a meaning acquire license partner. Can consume the volume of companies and products that are out there. Full stop. It's too many. So maybe you want to think about this being an independent company for the long haul. That's right. No, that's exactly right. And so therefore the other cell therapy companies outside of sellable, they are seeing what we're seeing, right? They're like, hey, if the old model was will develop it up to a point and get bought by Merck, that option is not that it doesn't exist, it's just going to be difficult because of the sheer number of companies that are available. To be acquired slash partner slash license with, right? So therefore they have to start thinking about the longer term. So then, hey, how do we actually think about commercialization and late stage development, et cetera, et cetera, where it's historically that, you know, you didn't have to worry about it potentially. So that's where we're finding people saying, hey, it looks like we got to start thinking about this. And working with a company like sell evolve is an option. Now, what sort of pushback do you get if any? Is it just traditional thoughts? We'll get to that later. Is that kind of what you up against? Yeah. Yeah, it's definitely that classic thinking like, you know, we're worried about commercialization, you know, at the last minute. You know, which is I think an unfortunate view that the industry has had specially small BioTech and frankly, I think destructive, but that's just my opinion. But unfortunately, folks still have that point of view. And so that is a very, very classic pushback. On the other hand, of why it makes sense to engage earlier. I mean, I could think of if you let's say, you really ought to make some small modification to the product itself or your manufacturing process, it's better to do it early. Rather than absolutely. I mean, I'll give you the most obvious recent example is just the sheer number of CD 19 car ts that are in development. So had companies incorporated earlier perspective on the competitive intensity for a specific indication, they might have made different strategic choices. Right? And so, and because cell therapy is so competitive back to my comment on the number of Therapeutics in development, both preclinical and clinical. You have to start thinking about what I would call classic commercial perspectives on these things earlier. Because, you know, as simple as what indication should you go for? How many products might end up approve around the same time your therapeutic is approved? What market share do you think you're going to capture? Will you actually bring a differentiated product to market at a time that will be valuable? You need to start thinking about that perspective as one of several earlier and earlier and earlier in the product development for all of cell and gene therapy, but definitely until therapy. How might some of those choices you make influence the pricing that you're able to command? So I'm absolutely. Pricing that you're able to command, were you deploy your resources, you know, do you spend another 20, $30 million on developing the 17 CD 19 CAR-T or maybe you go to another novel area? Interesting. So when did you take the plunge? Work up the courage or the gumption or whatever it was to dive all in on this and start a company. Yeah, so I left the Tara in late 2019 and had the idea as I was walking out the door there and talked to a few folks just more concept about what became sell evolve and, you know, I was expecting folks to be like, oh, that will never work. Or this is a bad idea for the following reasons. And I did not get that. Frankly, when I talk to, I got a handful of times, but the overwhelming majority was, I think you have something here. And so I decided to form the company in March of 2020. And started talking to investors and you'll note that march of 2020 was the beginning of the pandemic. Great time to start a company, huh? Great time to start a company. And frankly, several of my advisers said, hey man, maybe you want to pause this, right? And see what happens. But the world pause for me. Meaning that when I was talking to investors, you know, universally towards the end of March and through late summer, they basically said, hey, we're not making any new investments where I'll hold. And so therefore I was on hold. And I continued to work on the idea and the concepts with the hope that the markets would reopen and unfortunately they did. So what were you thinking in terms of fundraising strategy? How much did you think you needed and did you need a big VC round or not really? Yeah, it changed and I'm sure here this from many entrepreneurs, right? It's constantly evolving your thinking. I had one product that I was confidentially trying to in license. And the deal terms for that first product were meaningful was more than a $1 million. And so therefore I needed a more substantial initial round of financing, which is what I pursued. But what I quickly learned is that a lot of the VCs were less interested in this particular product. And frankly, just didn't see the promise in the way that I saw it. And so I struggled with financing that particular in licensing deal. And so I pivoted. So I had several other potential collaborations that I was working on, but they were lower priority and I shifted my priorities. And that one was more attractive to the VC community. Number one, but it was a smaller amount of capital that I needed to get started. And that's where we ended up landing and being successful. And so that was the QI MR collaboration for the virus specific T cells and ultimately we raised a total of $6 million. Okay, can you say a little bit about how your business model is supposed to work? What's your proposition to your partners? Yeah, so we what we do is we are striking traditional licensing deals with a few bells and whistles to them. So our licensing deals have the following characteristics. So first, it's usually multiple products. So we're not doing kind of the more traditional single asset deal. We typically do two or more. Number one, number two, it has a research component to it. That the principal investigator or the scientist, we continue to support him or her in their work going forward. So we continue to support discovery of novel products or novel innovations. So that's number two. Number three is we tend to lean on their GMP manufacturing, at least for early clinical development. And so phase one, possibly face to typically phase one phase one. So those are the kind of partnerships that we're doing..

pharma Merck
"long" Discussed on The Long Run

The Long Run

07:02 min | 1 year ago

"long" Discussed on The Long Run

"David Baltimore, welcome to the long run podcast. Thank you. So I want to start off by giving you a congratulations for this lasker award which she picked up recently, special achievement, lifetime achievement that really recognizes not just your contributions to biology, but also your work as an administrator and as a mentor to so many scientists through your career. And a contributor to public policy debates. There's a lot of breadth in here. And so I wonder, when you got that just curious, did you just stand out for you among all the various awards that you've gotten through your career as special in some way? Well, yes, it did. And for a number of reasons, one of them is the breadth of recognition because I have in my life try to participate in all the various aspects of being a scientist. And that includes administrative work, it includes mentoring, it includes doing of science, the publishing of science, and there are really are very few awards that take into account all those aspects of scientific life. And so I was very honored by the last reward. Also, I knew Mary lasker, and admired her devotion to science, although she herself had no scientific training. And so I really appreciated the connection. Yeah. Yeah. Well, there was a great scientifically minded citizen. I guess you could say someone that champion research. And was a very effective advocate on Capitol Hill. Yes. Okay, so I think one of the through lines, listeners of this show recognizes that we like to talk about where scientists and scientific entrepreneurs come from. And they come from many different walks of life. Many different backgrounds. So where does your story begin David? Where'd you grow up? I grew up in a suburb of New York City. On Long Island, great neck Long Island. And I went to public school there. Through high school and had the remarkable good fortune that my mother was interested in experimental psychology and was studying at the new school for social research in New York. And she saw there an ad for a summer program by high school students. At the Jackson laboratory in bar harbor Maine. And she brought it home and said, would I be interested? And I said I would and I applied and was accepted and spent. 6 or 8 weeks that summer between my junior and senior years of high school now, why do you think she brought this ad? Well, I think she had seen that I did well in science related activities, mainly mathematics that at that stage. And that I got a real sense of excitement about learning the underpinnings of the world. As a scientist does and so where do you think that came from? That desire to learn that curiosity as a kid. I have no idea. Clearly, not many kids have it. But when you do have it, it's pretty obvious to people around and I've always credited my mother with having recognized this in me. And it really was a record issue of my inheritance from her because she was a scientist. Now, were you bored in school were you not really challenged was she seeking to give you a little more challenge? And yes, absolutely. I was bored completely and in the science part of school. Because I wasn't challenged. And. Doing the kind of math that we did in high school was a trivial exercise for me. So you went to Jackson lab for part of a summer when you were in high school. What was important about that experience? What was important was that I first of all admit real scientists, many scientists came and spent the summers at Jackson lab, the program that I was in was for 27 or something high school students and each of us had three mentors. Who asked us to do simple experiments? In their own interests. And so I was doing experiments working at the forefront of science. Because I was asking questions that had that didn't have a known answer. And that was just incredibly exciting. To discover that the frontiers of knowledge were accessible to me as a high school student without a whole lot of background. And.

David Baltimore Mary lasker school for social research Long Island Jackson laboratory Capitol Hill bar harbor New York City Maine David New York Jackson lab Jackson
"long" Discussed on The Long Run

The Long Run

02:18 min | 1 year ago

"long" Discussed on The Long Run

"Well, I think the biggest goals are to really serve our customers by driving a series of platform launches that really enable them to leverage long reads in a way they've never been able to leverage. And then on the short read side, drive and create a beachhead in some of these really important fast growing applications in oncology using the omnium technology. On top of that, it's continuing to drive the value of long range sequencing in particular in clinical whole genome applications. And so you see we have a very big partnership with in vitae, which is another great company and their belief is that long reads will be the primary way in which people look at whole genomes into the future. And so I believe that down the road, millions of samples per year could be processed on PAC biotechnology using long reads to really deeply understand what's going on with the biology and that will help us build that will help us serve customers. It'll help us drive our mission and will help us grow. And so I think over the next two to three years, you're going to see continued acceleration out of the company, continued ability for us to inspire the world on how powerful long reads are and also how PacBio as a company is easy to work with on the same side as customers and really wants to be part of the community driving driving the pace of innovation and scientific understanding forward because we believe that we still understand very little about the genome and our technologies will help scientists in that pursuit. I mean, you didn't even mention viruses and bacteria and plants. And everything you just said about long reads, it applies. To our knowledge about all of these different species on earth, you give it better. You give it better underlying information that you feed into the sequencer, you should be able to get a highly accurate, reliable result. That's you couldn't have said it better, Luke, and one of the things that, you know, I didn't even talk about your right. We.

PacBio Luke
"long" Discussed on The Long Run

The Long Run

06:08 min | 1 year ago

"long" Discussed on The Long Run

"Like fleshing out that portfolio of products that you have to offer. That's exactly right. So we closed the omnium transaction just a couple of weeks ago. And what omnium is is a short read sequencing technology that has some unique characteristics relative to Illumina and any other short read sequencers in that the technology is highly highly accurate. In fact, it's well over an order of magnitude more accurate than the Illumina technology and the implication of that is that in areas that are growing really fast, such as oncology, residual disease, liquid biopsy, these market areas. This technology could be highly highly useful. And our belief is that rather than having one technology to serve the entire market that if we have multiple technologies, we can use those technologies to solve the customer problem. In other words, as I said before, we're providing the solution to the customer, not just the technology. And so we see having a lot. We're really the only company now that has a long and short read technology and capability in-house and what we'll do is create unique combinations of products will create cross selling opportunities. So people that are engaged in short read sequencing will be able to go and speak to them about our solutions, in short reads, but then also talk to them about why long reads can be appealing and interesting if they're, you know, if their solutions warrant that. So it's a really exciting opportunity for us. There's incredible R&D synergy as well. They have, they have experts in engineering, opto mechanics, biochemistry, a lot of the things that we have a lot of expertise in as well. And so we're starting the integration actually where knee deep in it now and I think it's going exceptionally well. And soon we will have products that we can ship from the omnium. So that's a little bit about omnium. And you're also getting a San Diego site, which you obviously are in the Bay Area. It's nice to have another location where you can recruit people, particularly who might already have roots there. With relevant experience. Well, it's been tremendous and it is tremendous to have. They have a beautiful facility and San Diego is a hotbed of genomics. There's no question about it. And so they had over a hundred employees that came across and are now packed bio employees, but we have over the course of the past year hired a significant number of employees that are based in San Diego. And so now they'll have cubes in offices and laboratories in San Diego. And we will truly integrate as one company just with two very powerful locations. And this company costs something like 300 million for you to acquire. Well, it was a little more than that. It was the total price we paid about $600 million up front. And we have a milestone payment of 200 million once we launched the product. So assuming we get the products launched, it'll be roughly $800 million. So a little more than 300. Okay. And I know you raised a lot. You got 900 million from SoftBank. You got over a billion in cash last I looked. And you use some of that as well for the circular mix, just real briefly. I mean, that's a sample prep company. What was important or attractive about that one? Well, so part of our strategy is on the long read side. We need to build the ecosystem and drive the workflow and simplify it from when you get extract DNA to when you do your bioinformatics. And circular absolute world experts in DNA extraction. And so they have exquisite technology that allows you to very gently extract very long fragments of DNA. And those fragments of DNA, then, you know, go into the sequel to sequencing platform and the better the higher quality the DNA is out of extraction, the better sequencing results you're going to get. And so this was really critical, critical acquisition because it gives us core competency in that. They also have a business and they have over what 700 customers roughly already. And so that also gives us access to customers that may or may not be using our technology already. And so we're using we're leveraging that. And then finally, they have a lot of expertise in automation and automation as we drive to scale in long reads. Automation is an important component of that. And so we're developing fully automated capabilities so that it makes it as easy as possible for customers to get super high quality long read sequencing. The sample prep is not the most glamorous thing to talk about. But I mean, if you make it simple and easy for people, it just makes it that much easier. It's really quite a run. I mean, you know, I think back to when I covered this company when it was a startup and it had a pretty big IPO ten years ago. And there was a time when it really hit the wall and I think it was people thought it was going to go out of business. It was worth less than its cash in the bank. Activist investors were circulating. And Illumina seemed to be just in total control of the market. And now you can begin to imagine things turning a little differently over time. Where do you see this thing going in the next few years? What are your goals?.

San Diego Illumina Bay Area SoftBank
"long" Discussed on The Long Run

The Long Run

07:34 min | 1 year ago

"long" Discussed on The Long Run

"With respect to the implication of structural variations, which I think will continue to push the notion of long reads into the community. And so when you join the board, you say this is 2018. Things were starting to look up. You looked at this and thought there's more potential here than there used to be. What your old friends and alumina say? Do they think you are nuts? I think once I once I joined on as the CEO, I did the phone did ring. As the board member, you know, that was great. It was fine. And it wasn't really that big a thing. But once it was announced that I was going to become the chief executive, my phone started ringing and in fact, you know, I feel so fortunate today because we've been able to build a very, very experienced, powerful leadership team with many people that came directly from alumina through my long-standing relationships, including our chief operating officer, Mark van Owen, our chief commercial officer, Peter frohman. And a whole host of executives. And so I think that I've been very fortunate to have strong followership and people see the vision and the mission that we're on. Here that long reads can become an important part of the story and the community and you know, I think that the growth opportunity is tremendous. And so they were intrigued and then I was able to inspire some to come join and now we've had many, many people join the company and completely new trajectory. But this wasn't preordained by any means. We're on the board and at the time, a agreement was struck for Illumina to acquire PAC bile. Now that did not happen. I know the FTC had some things to say about this. But how did this go down from your side? Were you disappointed or did you see this as an opportunity when it fell apart? Well, I think at the time we were all disappointed that the deal didn't go through because Illumina has some amazing people and has incredible reach and resources that could have empowered the long read technology. However, you know, when you're down, you got to get it back up off the mat. And that's when I really started thinking, you know what? There is a real business opportunity here. And over the course of the summer, the board, the board asked me to become the CEO and I joined because I saw a very straightforward set of strategies that would get the company moving in the right direction. And then really grow. And it was really all about building out a strong commercial organization because there was very little developing the next generation of products and then proving the utility of long reads, particularly in clinical whole genome settings. And we've been moving very quickly against all of those. And now, you know, hindsight being 2020, alumina was going to pay roughly 1.2 billion for the company. And where we are today, you know, we're roughly $5 billion valuation. So from a pure economic perspective, it turned out this was a good idea. The shareholders should be pretty happy with that. Now, so when you're looking at what resources you had at your disposal as the CEO of pack bile. And this would have been spring of 2020. So a little over a year ago. What were some of the things that you saw that were missing that you wanted to add or layer in? Yeah, really two fundamental things. First, there was very little commercial organization. And what I mean by that is, you know, very small Salesforce outside the United States. Very small Salesforce inside the United States. When I was doing my diligence to join the company, you know, I called some customers and those customers indicated they didn't even know who their PacBio sales rep was. And so it was very clear to me that we needed to create more interest in the company. We had a great product. The Hi-Fi chemistry and the sequel to we're already on the market when I joined, but we just weren't getting the word out. And so we needed to build both sales and marketing capabilities first and foremost. Secondly, we needed to start thinking about, we needed to start thinking really big and thinking about how do we scale the R&D organization so that we can develop multiple platforms simultaneously because one of the core strategies of the company is to launch different platforms for different parts of the market by a platforms I mean different sequencers that have different characteristics, both price and throughput so that you could have more inexpensive sequencers for those that don't have the budget, but still want to be engaged in long range sequencing. And you could have very high throughput sequencers that, in fact, cost more to buy the sequencer, but the reagents and costs give you get you to that under a $1000 genome and allow science to happen at scale. And so we needed to invest in that. And I was very fortunate to that we've been able to raise gosh over a billion and a half dollars since I've joined the company. Yeah, that product portfolio sounds a little bit like aluminum back in the day. I remember when the high seq was around and then they came out with the MySQL. And that was the bench top. The quicker, cheaper benchtop thing that could compete against the ion torrent semiconductor system from years ago. And it was a way to kind of lock in your customers. If they liked the high sake, they had it, and they needed to do something quick and easy, like a confirmation run. And it needed to align with their previous publications from years ago. You make it easy for them. And you should be able to do that with a full lineup from PAC bile, similarly. Well, there were some really smart folks putting together that product strategy that are now over at PAC bio. So I'm not surprised that you see the similarity. I think it is a really really powerful strategy because it really is all about solving problems for the customer and they're creating solutions for them. Instead of being so technocentric that here's technology, I'm just going to throw it over the wall and whether you can really use it or forward it or not it's not really what I'm focused on. PAC bio, we're very, very focused on the customers. Their needs, the scale. And I think having a multi platform portfolio will allow us to serve many, many more customers than we even do today. Can you talk a little bit about a couple of acquisitions I've noticed you've made? One is omnium and the other circulations. Maybe I want to start with omnium, which is understanding a type of short read sequencing..

Illumina Mark van Owen Peter frohman Salesforce FTC alumina United States
"long" Discussed on The Long Run

The Long Run

07:39 min | 1 year ago

"long" Discussed on The Long Run

"And that's a short read technology. And what short reads mean is that you sequence smaller fragments of DNA. So these fragments of DNA can be anywhere from a 150 to say 300 bases long, give or take. And the reason why that's useful is that you can sequence lots of these little pieces and then using bioinformatics, you can put the puzzle back together. But you have a big puzzle with a lot of pieces. That's useful because it's fast and reasonably inexpensive. However, it has some limitations because the smaller the pieces of the puzzle, the more difficult it is to match the puzzle pieces or the fragments of DNA against the reference. And in fact, there are certain areas of the genome that short read technologies like illuminous can't access because they don't have they don't have the specificity to reach the genome, where you start to think about long read technology, pack bio has what we call smart sequencing, which is single molecule real-time sequencing. And back bio looks at single molecules, individually at lengths of like 20,000 bases per molecule. So with a 20,000 base pair 20 KB read, you can map fewer puzzle pieces to put the puzzle together, which makes it easier to put the puzzle together and makes it easier to reach all facets of the genome. In fact, just this year, it was announced that finally the human genome has fully been sequenced, even though you're right, it was announced in 2003. There was about 10% of the genome that had not been able been sequenced and it required back bios technology in order to reach those hard to reach places. And so yeah, now pack bile has had this advantage for a long time, but it also had a certain disadvantage. As I recall, you know, when it came out, went public ten years ago. It was an expensive instrument. Or at least it was perceived that way by customers. And it was lower throughput slower. It was just like a big bulky thing that needed special room or something to reinforce. So people needed to have, they needed to see a really strong benefit to justify some of those tradeoffs. And I guess you would know this well from being in that arena. But Illumina with the better with the faster, cheaper solution. It ended up taking over the market, establishing that installed base, which then made it very, very difficult for anybody to justify the switching costs or the extra expense of getting it would be like having Microsoft machine and an apple machine, like you kind of pick one or the other and it's hard to switch once you've got one. Is that I think yes, generally you're correct there. I think the limitations of the PAC biotechnology in the past were all centered on cost and throughput. And you know, I think it's generally recognized by the community that if I can have long reads at similar economics to short reads, I'm going to choose long reads every time. In fact, I will even pay more for long reads generally, but not so much more that I can't do my experiment. And historically, PacBio's technology was lower accuracy, much, much more expensive, much more cumbersome and challenging to use and over the course of 2018 and 2019 when the company launched the sequel to platform and then launched the Hi-Fi chemistry, the world changed that now, the accuracy was on par or better than short reads, so you had more fidelity to the genome. And the costs were starting to come down into a range that's acceptable. And that's why you've seen PAC bio do great partnerships with groups like children's mercy hospital and in vitae, because they see the benefit of long reads. And now they're starting to see the economics. And that's actually why I decided to join as the CEO is that I see the next wave of PAC biotechnology continuing to transform the power of short reads versus short power of long reads versus short reads and take us to a spot where now you can look at use long reads, which people are generally going to prefer with the throughput and the cost profile that makes it viable at production scale. And that's really where the magic is starting to happen because it's going to open up and unlock markets that didn't really exist such as whole genome sequencing in clinical applications. Today, today, the world uses proxies such as exomes, which are just the coding regions of the genome that you short read technologies there, but they're missing a lot of information. And we are moving very quickly to launch a generation of products that will allow us to sequence well below that magical $1000 genome. And enable us to convert the exome world into whole genome because you can see more and get deeper resolution associated with the biology. Can you talk real briefly about that completion of the some people call it the platinum genome, the new reference that, as I understand it, the long reads enable you to capture these long repeat regions or structural variations or copy number variations that just have traditionally been lost or with the short read. We have a better reference now. We do have a better reference. And in fact, we have really for the first time in history, the entire telomere to telomere. So it's always been really difficult to sequence through the repeat regions like you talked about in the structural variation. But it's also been extremely challenging to look at the centromere and get through sequence through the centromere on a chromosome and then all the way back out to the other telomere. And now using the PAC bio Hi-Fi chemistry, coupled with short reads and the combination have allowed researchers to finally complete the human genome. And that's a landmark in history here. And it did get some fanfare earlier in the year when it was announced. And so we're proud to be part of that. But it's really just the beginning of the power of long read technology because as more users use long reads, more applications are uncovered, more biology is discovered.

PacBio Illumina PAC Microsoft apple
"long" Discussed on The Long Run

The Long Run

06:32 min | 1 year ago

"long" Discussed on The Long Run

"And our vision, which is similar to what Illumina is, the genomics is improving the lives of everyone. And we make the picks and shovels, but it was great spending time with the people that actually transform the genomics and transform the industry. So it looks like you left in 2017. So you're there 1112 years by this point, Illumina's dominant in the market, number one DNA sequencing, better, faster, cheaper sequencing had really been popularized around the biomedical research enterprise worldwide. Why do you leave? Well, you know, I run really hard. And so I had been working very, very hard, even from the as soon as we, you know, even from the very beginning. And it was an absolute thrill, but at some point, you know, I needed to really spend some time with my family. I had a young family at the time and we had been very successful at alumina in my wife encouraged me to take some time. And so we decided to retire and we bought a sailboat and took the kids out of school. And we homeschooled them as we went on an adventure to a sailing adventure, which lasted almost three years. And the reason why we did that fundamentally was we wanted to teach our children about how big the world is and how much opportunity and possibility there is out there for people. And also about change and about learning about adversity and resilience and managing your fear, you know, 'cause sometimes when you're out on the ocean, you know, you're reliant on yourself and we were able to teach our kids those lessons and we sailed as far as north as Nova Scotia and as far south as Venezuela and everywhere in between and so it was time to really give back to my family. And so that's what we did. I still maintained my connections and managed still sat on some boards of directors. One of the boards I still sit on today is ginkgo bioworks, which is in synthetic biology and we recently went public through a spac and so that's been very exciting. But yeah, so I decided we needed to give to our kids because we just wouldn't get that time back. And how old were they? At this time? They were my little one was 5 and my older one was like, let's see, 12. So she was the older my older daughter was going into 8th grade and my little one was going into kindergarten. And you really did this for three years. We did. We did. And it was incredible. And quite frankly, the principal reason why we got off the boat was COVID. We were down in the Caribbean. And it was becoming very, very difficult to get around. By this time, I had already joined the PAC bio board too, by the way. And it was very difficult to get around, so we decided we needed to get the boat out of the water so we raced down to Antigua down to Grenada. And we got the boat out of the water and then we got the second to last flight out of Grenada to New York. Before they shut the airport for 6 months. And so along the way, we had purchased a home in Kenny bunk port Maine, which is where I am today. And we hunkered down for COVID here. And so that's what kind of ended the trip, are my older daughter, though, she did go, she ended up living on the boat with us for about a year and a half. Give or take and then she went off to boarding school. So she's a senior now at Hotchkiss in Connecticut. Which is one of the reasons why we're still on the east coast. Well, that's such an interesting story. But you were pretty young to retire as you say. And you did keep your connections alive with ginkgo as you referenced a couple other boards. How did you decide? And I suppose you probably recharge your batteries naturally out there in nature. How did you decide to join the pack bio board? Because this would have been like Illumina's wonderful competitors. You knew this company quite well. From a competitive distance? Sure. Why join the board? Well, so I joined the board in 2018 prior to aluminum making the bid to acquire PAC bio. And the reason why I joined the board is that first of all, if you look at the board super high quality individuals and I wanted to I wanted to learn from them. And then second, the technology was coming into its own in the sense that they were getting ready to launch a new chip, the 8 M chip, which is really the sequel to the foundation of the sequel too. And so I believed that this new chip and the new tech, the new technology would help drive the business. And I also believe at a fundamental level long read sequencing technologies extremely important to the future of diagnostics. And I believe that back in 2018. And so I decided to join the board. Months later, alumina came knocking to acquire the company because they saw, let's hold there and come to that later. For those not familiar, can you kind of juxtapose Illumina and pack bile like the fundamentals of their technology? They're short read at alumina and long read at PAC bile. What does that mean? And why is that important? Yeah, so Illumina has a technology called sequencing by synthesis. And that's a short read technology. And what short reads mean is that you sequence smaller fragments of DNA. So these fragments of DNA can be.

Illumina Grenada Kenny bunk PAC Nova Scotia Venezuela Antigua Hotchkiss Caribbean Maine east coast Connecticut New York alumina
"long" Discussed on The Long Run

The Long Run

07:09 min | 1 year ago

"long" Discussed on The Long Run

"First draft of the human genome project had been sequenced and published and like 2003, I think. And largely it was the applied bile systems technologies that were in sort of the big genome sequencing core centers that did a lot of that. But next gen was not widely adopted. It certainly wasn't at everybody's lab bench. So this was you guys looking out into the future. And imagining where people talking about the $1000 genome, like even then or did that just come like a few years later when you kind of got on that Moore's Law curve. No, the $1000 genome was still a fantasy at that point in time. And we didn't start talking about that in earnest until we launched the high seat product line. And then we started to see a path to get to the $1000 genome. But back then, you know, we really had some great partners and a key lesson that I learned from that time horizon that I I'm using today is building those deep customer relationships, selects had built an incredible relationship with the broad institute and Eric lander was an absolute visionary. Believing that this technology could be revolutionary. And so, you know, there was constant collaboration going back and forth between the broad and the selecta team. In fact, so much so that when we were doing our initial road show when we announced the deal, one of the we went to New York, and then we went to the UK because selects a had a group at Cambridge and we wanted to reach out to those folks. And then we immediately came back to Boston and met with the broad and had a meeting with them because they were so instrumental in collaborating to get to get the selects of product working because they saw they saw a huge opportunity. And so we sat down with doctor lander and had a great conversation. And that really started a partnership that had that blossomed over the years into a substantial, not only substantial customer for alumina, but a substantial partner and fast forward to where I am today and we'll talk about that more later. But the broad continues to be a great partner and I continue to have very deep relationships with really amazing people that are there. Many of which are still there from back in those days of O 6 O 7. Well, let's just try to talk a little bit about your overall experience there and aluminum briefly. I mean, you started out as CFO, like you said. But this was you're a highly integrative kind of guy. Like you say you're talking with customers, you're talking to the engineers, you're scoping out this market. You take on commercial roles as time goes on. So it really and the product development are the product portfolio. I mean, it's growing through these years. The market is maturing. How did your sales skills, your commercial skills really develop over those years? And maybe you can lay on the aluminum sales pitch on me at some point. You can do both, right? Well, let me backpedal just a second and I'll give you kind of my alumina career arc because actually it really set me up well to be a chief executive. And you know, I've got to give all the credit in the world to Jay flatley to one of his fundamental strategies was to hire great people and then move them around in different roles and stretch stretch their capabilities and he did this time and time again with many of us on the executive team. And so I was a CFO and then I ran the selection integration, the integration went so well that J asked me to he basically said Christian, we can find another CFO, but can you run the life science business? And so I started running the life science business and encompassed in that along the way I was also running corporate and business development at this simultaneous to that. But I was running all of the product development groups for sequencing NRAs under this life science and all of manufacturing and operations. And then we did another reorganization and my title changed a bit to what we call genomic solutions and what that was as we started to develop diagnostic capabilities. We wanted to have a bit of a separate business unit that would focus that. And I stayed focused on the entire research portfolio. With product development, all of the product strategy and marketing associated with that. And then we did and including operations and all of that. So I did that for many years as well. So I had that experience. And then from there, we did another reorganization to where I became chief commercial officer. And that, in that role, I was accountable for all of global anything that touched the customer globally. And so the reason why I kind of go through that career arc is it gave me the opportunity to manage every part of the business but legal and HR and Mustafa ranna he had a research organization. And so that opportunity for me when I got to the customer front, I already had such a deep knowledge and understanding of what was going on in the business where the products were going. What were the key customer issues and that gave me that gave me the capability to manage at this point a large organization. It was well over a thousand people at that point in time and we had operations around the world. I was instrumental in putting the Singapore manufacturing and build out together in my time running genomic solutions. And so when I got into commercial, my relationships in Asia were strong in Europe as well. And so having that long tenure and that deep experience across the board really helped me drive customer trust and also drive the strategy with the Salesforce. And since I'm still a numbers guy and super competitive, you know, bring in the trains home every quarter, making sure we achieved our revenue. Goals and targets and did everything we need did everything we needed to do from that perspective was also part of the job and I enjoyed it. I enjoy the customer interaction immensely because that's where you see the rubber hit the road and our vision, which is similar to what Illumina is, the genomics is improving the lives of everyone..

Eric lander Jay flatley Moore Cambridge Boston Mustafa ranna New York UK Singapore Salesforce Asia Europe Illumina
"long" Discussed on The Long Run

The Long Run

05:41 min | 1 year ago

"long" Discussed on The Long Run

"And he saw that he and others saw this technology at celexa. Can you tell us a little bit about that story and what you saw? Yeah, sure. So what was interesting was in early 2006, we were growing our revenues quickly and we are market capitalization was going up, but we weren't content with that. And we had a great product forward product lineup. But we had been interested in next generation sequencing. And Jay John stoop nagel, who was the chief operating officer and one of the founders of alumina. Jay and I were Jay and I were at Jay's house in Rancho Santa Fe in the springtime and Jay was making margaritas for us and we were talking strategy. And that's where we really crafted this strong strategic desire to, you know, we need to make a move in next generation sequencing. And so we evaluated the different technologies, the technology that ultimately became the solid system and four or 5 four and some of the other technologies that were emerging at the time, and we were intrigued by this Alexa sequencing by synthesis capability. And of course, John west, who was the CEO of selects at the time, wasn't really interested in selling the company. And they were more interested at the time affymetrix was wanting to do a partnership with celexa. Which didn't ever come to fruition because the affymetrix team appeared believed that they should do sequencing on chips versus on flow cells. And so that was fortuitous for us because then we started looking at a partnership with them and that was kind of in the summertime of 2006 and by the fall, it became very clear that there was tremendous synergy technically we had a very strong engineering team at alumina and they had a very strong chemistry team and putting the sequencer really wasn't working yet, but it was close and our dream was, wow, if we could get this to be one Giga base of output, this would be incredible sequencer maybe one day that we could get the three gigabases of output. And so that's what we were thinking and we were doing 35 base pair reads at the time. And that was that was when the sequencer would actually sequence. And nonetheless, we weren't deterred. We were enthusiastic. They had the same kind of culture that we did and so by the fall, we finally put the merger together and John west, Jay and I went to New York to meet with investors with the investment bankers and the first day I'll never forget this. Our stock was down a ton. And we had just had record record earnings the quarter before and investors were really excited about Illumina. And then we announced this deal and we're in New York and we go to see we start with a lunch with about 20 investors around a big table and we're going to tell them about the deal and why why they should why they should be supportive. I'm telling you, if there were tomatoes on that table that day, none of us would have got out of there with a clean suit. Investors were not happy about this. But why didn't they like it? Well, they didn't like it because we had a great array business. And the celexa technology didn't work yet. And we didn't know when it was going to turn into revenue. And the array business was on a tear. And our stock had gone up tremendously. In fact, the stock went up so much over the course of that over the course of 2006, it really gave us the financial wherewithal to do the acquisition. And so, you know, they're ray business really helped us get to a point. And we believed that becoming the first company that could offer next generation sequencing and microarrays that we would be able to create combination products integrate the technologies and different sorts of ways and serve customers in ways no one else could. And that would give us a significant advantage over a few metrics. And anyone else that came along and so it was really intriguing to see the investor reaction. They didn't really like it at first. By the time we got through all of the meetings, people started to understand what this might mean. And then we, when we launched the product in early 2007, we our goal was to ship 20 instruments in the first quarter of launch and we did. And once we achieve that goal, we were really we're off to the races and I had the luck. I had the pleasure of leading the integration. And so I spent I spent about 60, 70% of my time up in the Bay Area. At the selecta facilities, integrating the two companies while maintaining my CFO job and that was a great experience. And I was uniquely qualified to do that because I had seen so much at.

Jay Jay John stoop nagel affymetrix Jay's house Rancho Santa John west Alexa alumina Illumina New York Bay Area
"long" Discussed on The Long Run

The Long Run

09:30 min | 1 year ago

"long" Discussed on The Long Run

"There's the manufacturing act execution aspect. And so there's a lot of components and it was very interesting to me. And finally, you know, in the life science tool space, in particular, there is a, on the innovation side, it is the marriage of genetics and engineering and optics and so it's so multi disciplinary to create great products, data science, and I think that was always intriguing rather than just one chemical chemistry process or something like that. It was very diversified on how you do that innovation. So it looks just looking over your resume. It looks like you had an important early experience there. First real operating job, maybe, in tools at afi metrics. Can you tell me a little bit about tell me a little bit about affymetrix? Because for the kids in the audience who may not remember, this is a big deal. The original gene chip company that evaluated gene expression came up in the 90s and early 2000s. And that's right around when you got there, right? That's right. Yeah, so I was really attracted to affirms because here was using semiconductor technology to explore the explore the genome in ways. No one had ever done before. And Steve foder, who was the founder and CEO, just this incredible dynamic visionary and I was enthralled. I mean, the first day I sat in his office and he white boarded the technology and where the future of the technology was going. Just had me hooked. And I also sue Siegel, who was the president at the time. She had just recently started with the company when I joined and she was she very quickly was running commercial and then became the president. And she is just a fantastic manager and driver, and so I had the privilege of working working with both of them and I reported when I first got there, I reported to Ed herwitz, who was the chief financial officer at the time, but eventually I ended up working directly across the company in all aspects from M and a to pricing and to all of the finance functions as you can imagine. And so I got a very front row seat so to speak in the emergence of genomics and chip based genomics and it was just a really great time. We grew very, very quickly had fantastic customers and gene expression then gave way to genotyping and then Illumina came along, of course. And the rest is history there. But it was a great. Let's get there in a minute, but this sounds like one of those classic great early career experiences where your young person entering a fast growing company, you've got exposure to top management. And you're working on a whole bunch of different functions. So this is like a great learning experience. And furthermore, I remember writing a story about the iffy metrics alumni group at some point later on. And there was a lot of talent. Like a lot of smart people in every department of this place who scattered off and did a lot of interesting things after. Oh, clearly, you know, if you look at that executive team and you look at the scientific ranks. I mean, you can go up and down the management team, Greg Fergus, who was running sales. He went on and had a fantastic run at torn has been in this space for a very long time. Vernor norville was the general counsel at the time and he, you know, he's legendary and his ability to kind of navigate intellectual property and is just a fantastic person to work with. And so I was I was very fortunate that I was curious about and that I believed that finance could be the jumping off point into any part of the organization if you had that curious mindset and also the scientific background. I had enough scientific background that I could sit in any meeting and actually contribute both from a business and finance perspective, but also I could understand the science and where we were trying to get to. And so sue Siegel in particular really took me under our wing and gave me opportunities in the boardroom in business development and then in all of the core operational and R&D execution. And so you're right. At a very young age, I was participating on the earnings calls. I wasn't necessarily in a speaking role, but I was in the room developing the strategy and the story alongside the team and that was a great experience for me. That curiosity is really important and I suspect that's a through line because in finance, right? Scientists listening to this might think, well, you know, aren't those the guys who wear ties and crunch the numbers or something. But no, I mean, you were curious about the science. And you ask questions, you learn things. You seek to connect dots? That's right. That's exactly that's exactly what it was and it was, you know, if you have the right mindset and finance, you can really get a lot of accomplished because one of the keys to being successful in the finance side is demonstrating how different groups across an organization can collaborate together to come up with even better products because you're sitting in all of the meetings so you can see and help connect the dots in a way. Others can't. And then on top of that, I have always been a very customer minded person, and so I spent a lot of time with sales and marketing, thinking about pricing strategies, thinking about, how do we empower our customers to do more? And at affymetrix, I was able to spend time with our customers. And so I was a bit of a unique bird, so to speak in finance because I was just as willing and eager to go on customer calls as I was investor calls or figuring out the budget for the next year. So I was, I was all over the place. And it was a great experience for me. Interesting. So how did you end up going to Illumina? Which was competitor at the time. This would have been before it got into the DNA sequencing with the technology from celexa. I think is when you joined. Well, I joined before we acquired celexa even. And so what happened was, you know, I was very happy to have you metrics, but my wife, we were expecting our first child and we moved. We wanted to get closer to our families in Southern California. So we moved out of the Bay Area and I took a job as a CFO of another company. And I did that for about 18 months and then sold the company and when that deal was completed, that's when a luminous started recruiting me to be the chief financial officer at alumina. And so I was lucky that I had about 18 months to kind of cleanse myself, so to speak of any competitive strategies or anything like that. And I was able to join Illumina and joined Illumina in 2005. And we were just getting ready to launch our first whole genome genotyping chip. And so that was a few metrics actually launched their genotyping chip before Illumina did. But we believed we had a product that actually would be better. And in the first part of 2006, a few metrics had significant manufacturing challenges. And that gave us enough of an opportunity where we were able to get our product into many different customers and started rapidly growing from that point, which then enabled the selects acquisition, which we can talk about later. So that's how I ended up arriving. I arrived as chief financial officer at Illumina and the reality is it's from the first day Jay flatley and I met each other. We shared and Jay was the CEO of alumina, of course. We shared the same sensibility about how to build a business about leadership and management and just a passion for the science and for driving something forward being at the frontier of science, so to speak. And so that was, it didn't take very long to recruit me. Now maybe 5 minutes. Yeah, he's a forward leaning aggressive competitive kind of guy. Oh yeah. He wanted to win..

sue Siegel Steve foder Ed herwitz affymetrix Illumina Greg Fergus Vernor norville alumina celexa Southern California Bay Area Jay flatley Jay
"long" Discussed on The Long Run

The Long Run

08:02 min | 1 year ago

"long" Discussed on The Long Run

"Christian Henry. Welcome to the long run. Well, thank you very much for the opportunity. So Christian, it's been a few years since we've spoken this sort of been back in your Illumina days. I'm really excited to hear about this latest chapter for you at PAC bio. But before we get into all the current events, I like to start with a little bit about where you come from. So you look like a California boy through and through. Is this true? Absolutely. I grew up in Southern California. I went to UC San Diego, got my degree in biochemistry, and then was trying to figure out where to go in my career and worked in a worked in a lab at the bench and worked in an ER and tried to figure out which direction I was going to go and decided I wanted to be on the business end of life sciences even as far back as in college. And so I went directly from my biochem program at UCSD to UC Irvine got my MBA moved up to the Bay Area. Well, no, wait. Why did you decide that you wanted to go to business and not carry on in science? Well, I think there were a couple there were a couple of things in particular first and foremost was I am a very extroverted personality. And I love to be out with people. And I was, I was working on characterizing proteins that at the time. And the bench, the bench just wasn't really for me. I wanted to think bigger about how you could put money and technology together to better the world. And I thought my contribution could be along that front as opposed to just sitting in the lab, not just sitting in the lab. But versus sitting in the lab. I explored going to be a physician and I found that that was super gratifying, but I was just compelled to want to build companies. And so from a very early age, I was very focused on that. And so I found myself at UC Irvine getting my MBA straight after my degree at UCSD. Now you were also a water sports guy. Is that right? Yes, I played I played water polo for UC San Diego and obviously in high school. I grew up a big surfer, lifeguard, sailor, in fact, you know, fast forward to after I retired from Illumina, took my family sailing for a few years. I took the kids out of school and so I'm very passionate about all things all things water related. You're absolutely right. Was there something about that? The teamwork or being around people you mentioned being extroverted, where there's some lessons that from those days that you look back now and say, yeah, that kind of propelled me toward business. Oh, yeah. Well, I think one of them is at UC San Diego when I was playing water polo. We had a sports psychologist who would come in and teach us how to visualize your performance and how to improve your performance through psychology and thinking it through. And one of the things I'll never forget this as long as I live, the psychologist said, fake it till you make it. You know, believe you can do something. And act like you can do it, and then work as hard as you can to make it a reality. And I think that fundamental philosophy really stuck with me and I always jumped at next level opportunities in my career with the belief that, okay, well, I've never done it before. But I believe I have the tools to do it and you know so I'll go in and fake it till you make it and eventually by working hard enough, you know, I was able to demonstrate that I could make a lot of good things happen. And so that's probably that comes straight from those water polo days and the team sport. So it's funny you mentioned that because some people will hear that and I mean, you're speaking to the growth mindset kind of aspect of that. Not being afraid to take on challenges and move outside your comfort zone, it's positive, but the downside to that is fraud in some cases. Let's use fake it in a figurative sense. To be honest, it really is about belief in yourself. And the ability to be courageous in your leadership, you know, not only around other people, but inside your own self and have a clear perspective of who you are and I was very fortunate that in the team sports environment, you learn a lot of lessons about who you are about leadership and about doing things you didn't think you could do. And I think that benefited me exceptionally well throughout my career. So you went to UC Irvine for business school. Did you have an idea of what you wanted to do with that or not at the beginning? Well, I definitely had a focus on finance and I had a focus on putting putting money and biotechnology together and building companies in that sort of way. And so I was very intrigued about finance, how financial markets worked. At the time, this was the early 90s. And so there was that first BioTech boom happening in the Bay Area with a lot of companies going public, a lot of capital. It was Genentech was really driving a vibrant community of life sciences in the Bay Area. And so that was intriguing to me and so I focused principally on finance, the driving it into kind of life science and biotechnology and I ended up in Ernst and young after business school because for the simple fact that they had clients of all the leading biotechnology companies of the day and I was able to do consulting projects because I had my MBA looking evaluating M and a opportunities and this is when Ernst and young could do a lot more consulting on the M and a front than they do today. Okay, so that's kind of a classic first job coming out of business school. And you get exposed to a lot of different companies and different issues. But you don't really have to own the problem. That's right. Yeah, that's exactly right. And you know, you could see how it was done well. And how leadership, how leadership varied and different, you know, there wasn't exactly one recipe for success. And so you got a lot of I did get a lot of exposure to a lot of different ways of working different technologies. And that's actually during that time is where I really started to get excited more about the life science tool space of it rather than say classic biotechnology or Therapeutics. Now, I did work at a few of those kinds of companies over the years. And I learned very specific things, but I was extremely passionate about the picks and shovels, the tools and how they would fundamentally impact everything. And I think it's worked out pretty well. Why do you think you were so drawn to the tools? Well, I think it's a combination. I love holistically all aspects of business. Everything from thinking about the customer to developing products that will meet the customer needs, so the product creation and ideation around and innovation..

Christian Henry UCSD San Diego Bay Area UC Irvine Illumina Southern California UC Irvine for business school California sailing polo Genentech Ernst
"long" Discussed on The Long Run

The Long Run

06:05 min | 1 year ago

"long" Discussed on The Long Run

"Them from scratch so this is going to be a long risky expensive proposition. And so how you bridge that gap from that vision to real drugs and where you get the money to do. That was really an unsolved problem. And you couldn't look to the capital markets for it and so really. We had to think about beauty. And i think if we hadn't been able to do that kind of a cell gene deal without amount of capital came in early we would have just had to be much more narrow in our focus. You take two or three targets and you develop some drugs you hope for the best but with the cell gene deal and it was great that they shared this vision. We suddenly have the capital. Go after a much bigger pool of targets in really run a big platform funnel to identify the best targets out of out of that group and that was a really important enabling. I think you know it was a big reason. Why in sort of the first wave of targets. That came out of agios that you know. We've had several drugs. You and others on the senior management team could More bold planning for the future rather than honing in on just that one thing that you hope and pray fingers crossed will make it through phase. Two right yeah. I mean you remember those. Those were dark days. I i think it's important that people know their history and biotech and and it was tough. I think in many ways third rock. She gets a lot of credit for being that bold in that visionary during that era i mean it was it was. It's really remarkable And in in many ways. I think that this also for shadows which we'll get to later my my time at being. Now which is again a huge platform effort. And i think for me. I just drawn to that scale of thinking. I i like having that many possibilities in front of me And then the challenge of how to Outta we unlock that over time. Okay so you left audio surround winless. This twenty sixteen seventeen. So it's twenty seventeen. And so i've been there for eight. Years is amazing run I learned so much from david on the entire team there And so i. I ended up Joining arch as venture partner actually As my next step i had. I had sort of known the third rock folks. I've known a lot of different venture groups and and had some conversations with all of them. But but actually bob nelson had been on our border dodgy since the beginning as well so i've really gotten to know him and i just i just love the way arch thinks about building companies. That really taking a long-term view seeking out disruptive technologies trying to build for the long-term building public companies building great organizations and taking risk. And and you know that's that's unusual in in some some areas of the venture in the startup community. And it really it really resonated with me And so between bob and christina bra and c. l. sat. i obviously joined arch venture partner. There's a few different things in view. that i was gonna work on during the course of twenty seventeen which i was excited about One of them was being Base batting and and and that was already a little bit in in the in the scope for me But but did several other things during that year and and it was. It was a great year although pretty much by the end of the year. I done enough with being that. I ended up becoming a full-time ceo there now. What's the understanding that you would. You know look at a variety of startup opportunities and sort of like an entrepreneur residents like maybe he finds something that really wants to invest in. And you'll go run. It was that the understanding or that kind of hang out in the bullpen. For a while. And figure out what you'll do. I mean one of the great things about arch is there really are no rules and there are very few expectations other than do cool stuff as as babo says And so So it was really up to me So i think for for a period. I think i had had a long operational run. It was really nice to work on several different things. End up working with the vivian team on an early deal. They did I did some work The sort of in the space the became something that became And then and then helped build beam. I think for me. It was more trying to figure out what i what i was ready to do next. And that's where i think ultimately you know being sort of just growing grow and i was just and we can talk about that i was. I was just so fascinated by technology and by the potential impact Of working with david liu working with funk john keith drawing the other founders and then obviously bob and steve knight at prime You know i love the team and then as we started to grow the team and grow the culture i could see how special it was both in terms of technology but also in terms of of the people. We're working with so so that was enough for me I do think. I'm at the end of the day an entrepreneur and an operator and just want to build things and so it was. It was certainly a great fit. So i think it was by the end of two thousand seventeen was sitting down with bob and saying you know i think i gotta do this. One and And he was of course very supportive. Okay well let's back up just a little bit with some of the context here because you know twenty sixteen. I think david liu publishes the first article on bass editing. And of course. I think it was twenty fifteen. That crisper itself was sciences. Break through the air. So crisper and intel. An edita's had all been funded to you know. A prominent dollars and big people involved and there was the patent dispute. All this stuff was going on and this paper comes out. That says there's a different way to do crisper editing. Maybe a better mouse trap. What what what was it about that science at that moment in time that captivated the arch team of prime. And you. yeah it's a great background so there had been a lot happening. I mean really right at the end. The twenty twelve of course is the famous stout and a paper and then twenty thirteen from john and others. there they're applying them in mammalian cells. And then then over those coming years you had at a toss and talia and christopher therapeutics of course yes the patent battles and and things like that so there is an incredible amount happening..

christina bra arch venture david liu bob nelson babo bob funk john keith steve knight david vivian intel talia john christopher
"long" Discussed on The Audio Long Read

The Audio Long Read

04:54 min | 1 year ago

"long" Discussed on The Audio Long Read

"Making it money. This intern makes it hard to stop it. Profiting from vulnerable consumers in particular from young people hooked in by the promise of easy wealth in two thousand and five. The labor government liberalized gambling advertising and created the gambling commission to regulate commercial gambling and protect vulnerable people including anyone under twenty five. Tom watson the current deputy labour leader admitted that legislation didn't take the digital era into account the yields taken from loses in. The industry has gone up from eight billion pounds in two thousand and eight to thirteen billion pounds in two thousand sixteen watson said. That's a lot of money and when you combine that with recent news that companies targeting the most vulnerable people who is susceptible to becoming problem gamblers. I think we've got a problem. And our current regulations and laws and not fit for purpose matt zarb cousin of the campaign faira gambling alleges that the wolves instagram posts are breaching to asa regulations. The first of which is you can't market to young people and the second is gambling cannot be offered as a way of making money. So these adverts would never past the regulators if they were conventional the gambling commission has admitted that it had received a growing number of complaints when it was in the process of trying to regulate binary options but the campaign fair gambling says neither it nor the air say the taken strong enough action on the advertising such prophets to vulnerable young adults. The gambling commission acknowledged it had never even written to instagram relating to advertisements or posts promoting gambling that breach the uk advertising codes during the time of the steepest rise in complaints. Both regulators blamed the two thousand five legislation. The gambling commission said that although binary options were regulated. The rules only applied if the firm had remote.

labor government matt zarb Tom watson watson asa gambling commission uk
"long" Discussed on The Audio Long Read

The Audio Long Read

02:52 min | 1 year ago

"long" Discussed on The Audio Long Read

"Nothing is native. everything is visiting the pierce. The alleged damage caused by most invasive species. Such as japanese knotweed is overstated by grant seeking bureaucrats and sensationalizing media. The government claims knotweed costs the british economy. One hundred and seventy million pounds a year but pierce calculated as follows. The environmental agency calls it. Indisputably the uk's most aggressive destructive and invasive plant but only spends two million pounds each year on not weed eradication pierce also notes that in two thousand and nine the racist bnp branded the north american signal crayfish. The mike tyson of crayfish. A diseased psychotic evil illegal immigrant colonist that totally devastates the indigenous environment. I also bryant why he thinks wildlife lovers and scientists are killing grace girls. It's this immigration thing. It looks as if the whole of europe is turning into a barricaded society. We don't mind people as long as they are our people. We don't like these foreign squirrels coming in and taking over its intolerance and it's illogical opponents of culling. Grace girls believe there must be a way to save the red without killing graze. There are three technological solutions but it is unlikely any of them will work quickly or thoroughly enough to deter volunteers from their efforts at gray squirrel eradication. one is a vaccine to save reds from squirrel pox. Dr colin mckenna scientist the more done research institute institute in scotland. Developed a prototype vaccine. It gave us hope that we were on the right lines but unfortunately we have no funding at the moment became his told me vaccine. Research is not cheap. If granted further funding scientists must develop a method of delivery. Such as an oral bait and trial and licensed the vaccine mckenna's doubts that vaccine would ever be cheap enough to save reds across the land. We always envisioned that. The vaccine would probably be used to protect specific vulnerable. Red populations that we could trap and inoculate he said another option is a contraceptive for grays which the government is currently funding but a workable formula is at least a decade away a contraceptive could never eradicate gray populations nor could it be used in territory shared by read some grays such as cumbria for fear of accidentally sterilizing the reds. There's more excitement about a third fix a biological control. The pine marten is a predatory member of the weasel family which is also a native species research by emma she. An island has linked to surprising gray squirrel population crash..

"long" Discussed on The Long Run

The Long Run

08:05 min | 1 year ago

"long" Discussed on The Long Run

"Maybe in the last year to well you know is front and center. I think for all avesta given the events of the past year and that's been happening and i it almost pains to say that that this is something. That's been heightened over the last year because it's it's like this it's like watching the flintstones you go pass this same scene over and over again. We've seen this happen over and over again. We always lapse back into poor behaviors. I hope that doesn't happen again. We started about three or four years of program really focusing on diversity equity and inclusion. And you know some of the things that we're doing. I don't know that they're different. Luke but maybe variations on a theme is really building not just behavioral mindset but real infrastructure to enable a diverse inclusive environment. You know be good because it's a fallacy to think that it's just about how we how we behave it's tangible and concrete numbers having metrics that you track in and the the problem that we face is not so much at entry level certainly for gender diversity when we start to look at other tiers of diversity. There's still a long way to go but as you start to as you start to march up the ladder you start to hit broken wrongs and as you start to look at more senior spots in organizations like ours academia's well there are huge gaps. And i think the two things that we're doing gone the infrastructure one is really key creating environment but people feel comfortable and included and the second is really making tangible effort to change what the leadership profile looks like really enhanced the leading the diversity of the leadership. What's an example of one of the metrics on your dashboard. That you look at and that you want to have your eye on. Yeah i want to improve for the next year or two examples. Pay equity in a huge imbalances in pay particularly. We know that for gender that's across also their lines of diversity. A second is attrition. we look at attrition measures. We ask you know what had is. Attrition compare what we look across different demographic groups those would be two examples in there are many more than we tracked out to enable our efforts j. what are some of the metrics on your dashboard. Is you think about on ramps for more diverse young. I think this is an area of real leadership to be honest with you in the industry. You don't see results. You don't measure and We very closely track an increasingly disquiet. Leigh report our successes against measures of the gender pay gap. Which i'm proud to say. Our company is negligible measurable at all on gender balance at every level at entry at mid career rockstars as i call them all the way through our board of directors We measure of the number of diverse candidates on every final slate for every role that never because it has been learned largely in multiple from competitive communities of employee that unless there are too diverse candidates on a final slate. There isn't one. There's no no real effective chance of hiring the diverse candidate in the end. I wanted to give you comfort. Those are companywide kind of principles. I think you're discussing there but Specifically for the young people like that next generation of young scientists. That hopefully will fill up that pipeline. And you know become the leaders of tomorrow like andy. Yeah let me double. Click on that for you if you look at the heads of rnd and we assemble actually symbol quite a lot Through cove it. You'd be hard pressed to find a less diverse group of people and think about this in a field. That is entirely predicated on innovative. Impact to have such a lack of diversity is is quite the workforce in the natural sciences begins with total parody fifty fifty men and women in the gender dimension the parody is i think less apparent along ethnic and racial lines by the time in academia in the sciences that Tenure is allocated twenty. Four percent are women in biotech in leadership. Thirty percent are women board of directors in biotech eighteen percent. And we actually just read a study by deerfield that forty eight point. Five percent of biotech companies. Don't have a woman on their board directors and so we can do a lot better in especially in an environment like never which regrettably from you. My leadership team is the source of many. Cso's in the biotech industry. We have stated the goal across actually all of novartis orbit in particular in the sciences that we will achieve fifty percent gender balance in leadership and management in this company. And we're fifty fifty in the workplace. Where forty five fifty five women and men in management right now over one hundred forty nine nationalities in the in the business and. There's an awful lot of diverse thinking around the table. Innovation that is required. Our board of directors is about a quarter from a female. This is a work in progress. Luke but in my five years here we have made year on your progress against these stated. Metrics that are baked into our strategic plan into our bonuses into reports that we give to espn investor communities These are these are real targets in requiem organized around hitting them sound like you're talking mostly about gender there though what about people of color now. This is equally important question. And i'd be the first to say that you know there are for sure. Altruistic reasons to care about gender racial ethnic diversity and beyond diversity to make the culture inclusive enough that you're benefiting from this diversity that we we actually need diversity in all dimensions around a table of project team leaders in a drug discovery institute chemists with different perspectives in training. And of course you know a black white stanic asian as well and it is as it turns out luke harder to measure the dimensions of race in a multinational company and to have accurate data. Just based on you know what is was ethical legal in different regions of society And so it's harder to navigate through the numbers there. Except in some locales. But i can tell you we. We care equally about diversity in that dimension and it's actually quite a bit more challenging in the physical sciences to achieve our goals in racial diversity are hard at work at this okay all right well. Hey folks out there want you to know you're welcome to raise your hand Chime in with questions of your own at any time. And i can call you up onto the stage tasks your questions of j. andy We come back a little bit before while we wait for questions to come in about pandemic times. Andy you can afflicted this that the need for more understanding for people. Have you discovered like something about mentoring for staying in touch with people during this time. That's that's actually helping them like stay engaged with their science and be be more productive and.

Andy fifty percent Five percent eighteen percent Thirty percent five years last year Four percent twenty next year j. andy first past year four years fifty fifty forty eight point Luke fifty fifty men over one hundred forty nine na forty five fifty five women
"long" Discussed on The Audio Long Read

The Audio Long Read

03:38 min | 1 year ago

"long" Discussed on The Audio Long Read

"The guardian. i'm scott sayer. i'm a magazine writer. I was based in france for a long time and now based in the us in new york but the story. Here was one that i wrote while i was in france in two thousand seventeen. This piece was written in a period of astonishment. I think at the rise of a sort of reactionary populism across the west brexit had happened in the summer of two thousand sixteen trump had been elected president of the us that fall. And i've been following the the national front as it was then known the fullness journal and its leader marine le pen and they were on the rise but that rise was really much less if a surprise than the the sudden emergence of of this reactionary populism elsewhere. She'd been around for decades. The party had been around for decades and they'd been laying the groundwork of their emergence. The elections in two thousand seventeen were being seen as perhaps. The party's first big breakthrough and i was particularly curious about how the media were covering them. The way that the french media covered the national front which is to say with with all sorts of opprobrium and denunciation didn't seem to have the effect that the french journalists seemed to be after say the national front just kept rising in popularity. All of that the spoke a certain failure within within the french lead to understand that its own prescriptions and even its attention to this phenomenon that had detested might have the opposite effect of the one that they desired. When the piece was written marine le pen had been for several years in the midst of of a campaign of what of what infringe was called. Did jeffords official which means demonization marina pen was trying to normalize the party more palatable to the electorate in general and she was widely seen as as having been quite successful and this is going to be her first big electoral breakthrough. The piece came out three days ahead of the first round in the french elections and she got twenty one percent of the vote which was good enough to get into the second round the second round run-off and in the second round she did thirty four percent which is the highest score by far the national front has ever received. I was just looking at the polls this year. There's an election coming up. I suppose next year in twenty twenty two marine. The pen remains as she was in two thousand seventeen and really as the national front has been for the past twenty years the most important political force in france. She is currently polling at twenty eight percent in the first round which would make her the winner of the first rammed and she's pulling it forty four percent in a run-off with mackall the current president in the second round so ten points ahead of where she was in in two thousand seventeen. I think the press has learned some of. Its some of its lessons. My sense is that the french press despite wishing that my independent was not the political force that she is has resigned itself to that reality and has begun to cover her mostly as a normal candidate. And i suspect that that's going to be the reality moving forward for at least the next several years. If not decades marine le pen is not going anywhere and the press accepted that. Welcome to the guardian long read showcasing the best long form journalism covering culture politics new thinking for the text version of this in all our long reads. Go to the guardian dot com for slash among.

new york france second round thirty four percent twenty eight percent first round forty four percent scott sayer first trump next year mackall this year twenty one percent three days ten points two thousand seventeen first big electoral breakthrou several years decades
"long" Discussed on The Long Run

The Long Run

06:26 min | 1 year ago

"long" Discussed on The Long Run

"I spent my summers Interning and biopharmaceuticals as a way of getting professional experience and then again earning a few bucks. Over the summer. I spent the summer of nineteen. Ninety s was nineteen ninety six at genentech scaling up. What became toxin through their cell culture processes Spent a summer after that at merck in vaccine production facility Doing scale up work. And so i got a real sense of what bio manufacturing was. A comment was made to me though that second summer when i was at merck that changed how i was thinking about my career. My my supervisor. There is an mit chemical injuring phd. Allom he said to me offhand. One day you know the gross margins on chicken pox vaccine are like ninety plus percent. So even though you've helped improve yield this summer it's unlikely that your work will ever be implemented because it's so hard to go back to the fda and change a process that ended so profitable already that it's unlikely we'd be Implementing your changes. I thought well that's a bummer. You know i i. I spend my whole summer in the lab trying to eke out a little more yield and productivity and now i realize that seems to be not where at least at that moment of the industry the action was so i went back to school my senior year i really had a different mindset about looking for where technology industry wanted to participate and kind recognizing that the manufacturing in might not yet So you know at that point. In time i began to think kind of debate for myself between applying for a phd in chemical engineering which had been kind of the path. I was on versus. Maybe thinking about business as a part of that industry. I wanted to learn more about so. Is this when you decided to go to oxford. And pursue the business and economics angle. Yeah decided is an overstatement. I you know. I was blessed with an opportunity To go to england on a scholarship and shows us that scholarship to to kind of diversify intellectually into business and And it was great. It was a whole new frontier for me to learn Yeah i've found oxford pretty much. The polar opposite of mit were in it. You're always on the bleeding edge. You're always thinking about technology in the future. Oxford is a place where you have dinner. And a whole. That looks like it's straight out of harry potter at a long table wearing a black robe and saying a latin grace before dinner and talking politics in history and social justice over over the dinner table and i was. I was a fish out of water. If i had been. You know a pig in new york you know what at at. Mit fish out of water at oxford. But it really did broaden my horizons and change the way i thought about what i wanted to do with my life. And how long are we there. I was there for two years From one thousand nine hundred eighty two two thousand okay. Okay so by this point what. How did you think about the future. Two thousand this was. This was the year of the first draft sequence of the human genome. biology biotech was looking. Pretty interesting Were you thinking like hey. This is time to get a job or maybe go to graduate school for some more. Yeah it was it was. It felt like the the future was happening in two thousand. Remember the nasdaq was breaking records. Young people were flocking to start their own. Companies dot com were were underway of the human genome was happening. It felt at that moment when i wrapped up at oxford that you know four or five more years of schooling was not what i wanted to do. I wanted to get out there in kind of get into fight I i at that being said i was pretty risk intolerant And so a very low risk way to become involved in the industry was to join a consultant firm. Yeah joined mckinsey and company in their boston office. Where a lot of the practice was focused on the biopharmaceutical industry and it seemed like a good way for me to be close to the science and learn an apprentice on some of the business aspects of things that i still filled the field felt. I needed to learn. So i moved back to boston. And joined the kinsey in two thousand. And this is a classic experience for a lotta people out of school where you get exposed to a lot of different clients. They've all got their own specific set of issues. You come in there yes situation. You learn something you write something up but it can be a really good education for for learning about a variety of companies and industries. What was your experience like. My experience was really very positive. I mean it's it's more than apprenticeships than it is in education. I mean you're parachuted in to high pressure tough situations navy. It's the integration of two companies that just merged a major restructuring and cost cutting effort of accompanying crisis or you know a total rethink on the strategy of a drug launch based on clinical trial results. And you know at that time. Our model was to spend four or five days a week on site with our clients. So you're really parachuting into the physical offices of these companies and you're getting a chance to spend time with executives With a variety of different leadership approaches on a variety of different topics. And i really spent a lot of time watching you know in addition to doing my work watching the successful executives at my client's understanding how they lead How they made decisions how they communicated in the board room And soak up as much as i possibly could now. How did you end up at genzyme. After four years in consulting you really kinda hit a fork in the road where you gotta decide you want to be a partner in the consulting firm comment professional consultants or do you want to.

new york two years mckinsey ninety plus percent four england one thousand two companies harry potter genentech Two thousand two thousand Allom first draft latin nine hundred eighty kinsey five more years five days a week Oxford