Work that demonstrates clarity, structure, and measurable progress.

A European biotech and a US company had reached an impasse in a cross-border licensing negotiation, unable to agree on what either asset was worth. We built independent, probability-adjusted valuations for both products and led the deal-terms modeling that both parties ultimately adopted as the shared benchmark, shifting terms materially toward our client: a swing of more than $10M in upfront and milestone value.

A public biotech's pipeline had split into two halves, the high-risk platform science it was originally built on and a newer, more conventional clinical program, and the board was divided over which defined the company's future. We ran a probability-weighted portfolio review across every asset and showed the newer program decisively outperformed the legacy platform on return per dollar invested. The board approved a strategic redirection: divesting the legacy franchise and backing the program that later carried the company to its first commercial launch.

A biotech CEO was ready to walk away from a licensing negotiation, convinced the terms undervalued the company's enabling technology. We took apart the partner's assumptions and showed the technology's true value: it improved the partner's margins, which the partner had already acknowledged, and sharply reduced capital expenditure, which had gone unrecognized. The partner returned with revised terms, a 50% increase in upfront and milestone payments and a 30% increase in royalties.

A public, clinical-stage biotech had more programs than its roughly 18 months of cash could support, and the board wasn't aligned on a path forward. We led a portfolio analysis evaluating a dozen candidate indications against partnering worldwide, partnering outside the US, or retaining rights and self-commercializing. The C-suite and board aligned on a reprioritized plan, chose to retain and self-commercialize the lead product, and shelved a weakening in-licensed program.