A Boehringer Ingelheim executive noted a key differentiator of Korean biotechs: they enter initial partnership discussions with a well-defined strategy and understanding of their needs. This "readiness to partner" accelerates deal-making and demonstrates a higher level of business sophistication compared to many global counterparts.
A VC advises Korean entrepreneurs to abandon gradual US entry strategies. The effective model is to "parachute" in—relocating solo to a hub like Boston and immersing oneself in the network. This radical, face-time-centric approach is deemed essential for building the momentum needed for US investment and partnerships.
Contrary to common belief, a BioCentury analysis revealed that two-thirds of out-licensing deals from Asian innovators were with Western biotechs, not large multinational pharmaceutical corporations. This indicates a significant trend of smaller Western companies actively sourcing innovation from Asia.
The CEO of Korean startup Apollon, who moved his family to Cambridge, argues that sending a representative is insufficient for US expansion. He advises that the CEO must be physically present "on the ground" to build trust, navigate the ecosystem, and demonstrate commitment—a crucial lesson for any international startup targeting the US.
Despite representing only 12% of total Asian out-licensing deals, Korean biotechs account for a disproportionately high 20% of "first-in-class" partnerships. This indicates a strong appetite for novel science and high-risk, high-reward innovation, challenging the stereotype of Asian biotech as purely "fast followers."
As CFIUS reviews increasingly complicate US venture investment in Chinese companies, investors are seeking alternatives. South Korea is emerging as a key "CFIUS-safe" location, offering access to high-quality, early-stage healthcare assets without the geopolitical and regulatory risks associated with investing in China.
With a highly concentrated population, a single-payer system, and vast hospital capacity (90,000 beds in Seoul vs. 4,000 in Boston), South Korea offers a significant advantage for clinical development. This infrastructure allows trials to be completed 40% faster and at 40% lower cost compared to the US.