Breakthrough drugs aren't always driven by novel biological targets. Major successes like Humira or GLP-1s often succeeded through a superior modality (a humanized antibody) or a contrarian bet on a market (obesity). This shows that business and technical execution can be more critical than being the first to discover a biological mechanism.

Instead of fearing competitors who copy their product, Synthesia's founder sees them as a net positive. The increased competition generates more market iterations and signals, helping them discover the most valuable use cases for the new technology faster than they could alone, while also sharpening their focus.

Voyager CEO Al Sandrock views partnerships as more than just revenue. He emphasizes that strong scientific collaborations are invaluable because direct interaction between partner scientists accelerates learning and overall progress for both organizations. This intellectual cross-pollination is a key, often overlooked, benefit of partnering out platform technology.

When a competitor (Beijing) presented similar positive data for its BTK degrader, the CEO of Neurix viewed it as a positive reinforcement for the entire drug class. In a novel field, parallel success from independent companies de-risks the underlying biological mechanism for investors, partners, and clinicians.

Contrary to the expectation of fierce rivalry, startups in crowded spaces like voice AI within the same YC batch often form collaborative groups. They share learnings on common technical hurdles, turning potential competition into a support system.

Venture investors aren't concerned when a portfolio company launches products that compete with their other investments. This is viewed as a positive signal of a massive winner—a company so dominant it expands into adjacent categories, which is the ultimate goal.

Fears that universal tools reduce differentiation are misplaced. Instead of just leveling the playing field, open tools like OpenFold raise the entire industry's baseline capability. This shifts competition away from who builds the best foundational model to who can ask the most insightful scientific questions.

When seeking partnerships, biotechs should structure their narrative around three core questions pharma asks: What is the modality? How does the mechanism work? And most importantly, why is this the best differentiated approach to solve a specific clinical challenge and fit into the competitive landscape?

Gene therapy companies, which are inherently technology-heavy, risk becoming too focused on their platform. The ultimate stakeholder is the patient, who is indifferent to whether a cure comes from gene editing, a small molecule, or an antibody. The key is solving the disease, not forcing a specific technological solution onto every problem.