Most scouting tells you a technology exists. We tell you whether it can be made — at what cost, at what risk, and whether it is worth acquiring.

[Book a 30-minute call] [See how we work]

The problem we solve

Pharma and biotech teams do not lack information. They lack judgement applied to it.

Databases return hundreds of hits. Generalist consultancies deliver market maps. Neither answers the question that actually costs money when you get it wrong:

Will this asset survive contact with a manufacturing plant?

A molecule can be scientifically elegant and commercially dead — because the route does not scale, the COGS lands above the reimbursable price, or a critical step depends on a reagent no CDMO will handle at scale. These are not clinical risks. They are chemistry and process risks, and they are usually discovered far too late.

We assess them before you commit.

What makes this different

We evaluate feasibility, not just novelty. Every landscape and every asset review includes a manufacturability read: route, scale-up risk, indicative COGS, CDMO availability.

We have sat on the buy side. Thirteen years running R&D programmes and external innovation inside a global pharmaceutical company — evaluating in-licensing candidates, negotiating with academic and biotech partners, and being accountable for what came after the deal.

We are built for teams that are not Big Pharma. Large consultancies are structured around large projects. Enterprise intelligence platforms are priced for enterprise budgets. Funded biotechs and mid-cap pharma sit between the two, with the same need and none of the access. That gap is our market.

AI does the volume. A human does the judgement. We run proprietary automated monitoring across global pharma and biotech sources. It handles scale. Every conclusion that reaches you has been filtered by someone who has run the experiments and signed the contracts.

Services

Technology Landscape — 4–6 weeks · from € 35'000. Map a therapeutic area or platform space, qualified for industrial reality. Know who matters, who is real, and who is worth approaching.

Asset Feasibility Review — 3–4 weeks · from € 25'000. A go / no-go verdict on a specific molecule or platform: asset value, innovative credibility, route assessment, indicative COGS, hidden CMC risk, considering phase I, II, III clinical studies.

Innovation Watch — monthly · from € 3'000/month. Continuous expert-filtered monitoring of your domain. Signal, not volume.

Who we work with

A good fit:

• Funded biotechs (Series A onward) preparing partnering or out-licensing conversations
• Mid-cap pharma running BD&L or external innovation with a small team
• Life sciences investors needing technical diligence on a chemistry/bioconjugate-driven asset
• CDMOs and specialty manufacturers assessing incoming programmes

Not a good fit:

• Companies looking for a generalist strategy consultancy
• Purely biologics or cell-and-gene programmes with no small-molecule, microbubbles, nanoparticles, peptides or CMC dimension 
• Organisations wanting headcount rather than a defined deliverable

We say this plainly because a mismatched engagement wastes your budget and our time.

Track record

• 20+ years across pharmaceutical R&D, CMC/GMP development, external innovation and BD&L
• 13 years as Global R&D Program Manager at a global pharmaceutical company (Geneva)
• 7 patents as inventor or co-inventor
• Proprietary AI monitoring infrastructure — built and operated in-house: automated ingestion pipelines, retrieval-grounded analysis, and computer vision applied to technical documentation
• Academic and biotech partnerships
• Ph.D. in Organic and Medicinal Chemistry (University of Bern) · 
• Executive MBA (University of Geneva, GSEM)
• Awarded an international open-innovation challenge for the rational design of a degrader-antibody conjugate in autoimmune disease [2025]

Closing CTA

Not sure which service fits?

Send a short description of what you are evaluating. If we are the right people for it, we will tell you which format fits and what it costs. If we are not, we will say so — and where possible, point you somewhere better.