BioCrossroads launches second seed fund

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

BioCrossroads Inc. has raised an $8.25 million seed fund in its second attempt to help fledgling life sciences companies grow to the point where they can attract venture capital or a corporate funder.

The Indianapolis-based life sciences development group announced the fund Monday—seven years after it raised its first, $6 million seed fund. That fund plowed its money into 11 different companies, helping a few receive venture capital and at least one get regulatory approval for a product.

But the need for early-stage funding has only grown the past seven years, as more investment has shifted to information technology companies, and those still in the life sciences space want to wait later and later before putting their capital at risk.

“It’s important because there just isn’t much of this kind of money out there,” David Johnson, BioCrossroads’ CEO, said in an interview. He added, “If we don’t have an investment fund, we’re missing some of the most important tools to build that opportunity.”

The Indiana Seed Fund II LLC was kicked off in late 2010 when Eli Lilly and Co. agreed to invest. The Indianapolis-based drug giant has funded BioCrossroads since the group’s founding in 2002.

Also chipping in are Indianapolis-based health insurer WellPoint Inc., Indiana University’s Research Technology Corp., Purdue University, the University of Notre Dame, the Richard M. Fairbanks Foundation and BioCrossroads’ own for-profit arm.

All those organizations are on the board of BioCrossroads. Johnson declined to reveal the amounts of any of their investments.

Because the companies the Indiana Seed Fund invests in are waiting longer to attract venture capital, BioCrossroads is increasing the amount of money it can invest in a single company: up to $1 million in Indiana Seed Fund II, compared with a cap of $500,000 for Indiana Seed Fund I.

“In this market, it’s proven that we need to stick around a little longer,” Johnson said. He noted that the idea behind the first seed fund was to be a company’s first institutional investor, but that within a year or two, a bigger investor would come in.

Many of the companies financed by the first seed fund have yet to receive any venture capital, instead remaining viable by attracting a corporate funder or buyer.

The companies in which the Indiana Seed Fund I invested include SonarMed Inc., ImmuneWorks Inc., FlowCo., Fast Diagnostics, Zorion Medical Inc., AgeneBio, Bioscience Vaccines Inc.

Some, like SonarMed, have won FDA approval for products. Others, like CS-Keys Inc., have fizzled.

The first Indiana Seed Fund was funded by only two investors—the state of Indiana and BioCrossroads itself. But by having a track record, Johnson said, it became easier to raise a second fund.

“It is always a little easier to raise money for something called Seed Fund 2 instead of Seed Fund 1,” Johnson said, adding, “I think there is at least more confidence that we could pull it off this time around.”


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. You are correct that Obamacare requires health insurance policies to include richer benefits and protects patients who get sick. That's what I was getting at when I wrote above, "That’s because Obamacare required insurers to take all customers, regardless of their health status, and also established a floor on how skimpy the benefits paid for by health plans could be." I think it's vital to know exactly how much the essential health benefits are costing over previous policies. Unless we know the cost of the law, we can't do a cost-benefit analysis. Taxes were raised in order to offset a 31% rise in health insurance premiums, an increase that paid for richer benefits. Are those richer benefits worth that much or not? That's the question we need to answer. This study at least gets us started on doing so.

  2. *5 employees per floor. Either way its ridiculous.

  3. Jim, thanks for always ready my stuff and providing thoughtful comments. I am sure that someone more familiar with research design and methods could take issue with Kowalski's study. I thought it was of considerable value, however, because so far we have been crediting Obamacare for all the gains in coverage and all price increases, neither of which is entirely fair. This is at least a rigorous attempt to sort things out. Maybe a quixotic attempt, but it's one of the first ones I've seen try to do it in a sophisticated way.

  4. In addition to rewriting history, the paper (or at least your summary of it) ignores that Obamacare policies now must provide "essential health benefits". Maybe Mr Wall has always been insured in a group plan but even group plans had holes you could drive a truck through, like the Colts defensive line last night. Individual plans were even worse. So, when you come up with a study that factors that in, let me know, otherwise the numbers are garbage.

  5. You guys are absolutely right: Cummins should build a massive 80-story high rise, and give each employee 5 floors. Or, I suppose they could always rent out the top floors if they wanted, since downtown office space is bursting at the seams (http://www.ibj.com/article?articleId=49481).