Figure 1:

The market is presumed to be worldwide. The distribution of teams, which can be viewed in figure 1, shows an even distribution in all but one region. This underrepresentation by Latin America can be caused by several factors, but for now it is considered a future market, and no correlations will be made.

Figure 2:

It has also been investigated, how many teams used antibodies in regards to the regions, the result is represented in figure 2. Though Europe only represents 28% of the total teams, these team teams use antibodies significantly more at 55% out of all teams. Whereas North American teams used antibodies half as much. Several reasons can be responsible for this under- and overrepresentation. If it is assumed, that all teams producing proteins could potentially use antibodies, it is a possibility that projects on this subject is more common in Europe than in North America,this will be investigated next.

Figure 3:

Figure 3 shows that the teams producing proteins follow the general distribution globally, therefore it can be concluded that subject is not the issue in antibody usage. It has not been possible to determine if resources is the cause of the bias, but it does not seem unreasonable. If this is the case, teams will benefit from PAST’s product globally.

Still investigating whether resources play a role in choice of antibody usage. Teams producing proteins and teams using antibodies has been compared in figure 4. This shows that only a few actually use antibodies. This could be due to teams not reaching a point, where assays using antibodies is needed, rather than a lack of resources. It has been decided to ignore this as a reason, since it must be assumed, that research projects generally have more time to evolve. Therefore it has been decided to base the estimate of production size on the protein production rather than antibody usage.

Figure 4:

Now the estimate can be made. In all 123 teams where involved in such projects producing proteins, and on average the teams used two types of antibodies per project. Therefore a production of approximately 250 varieties of peptide aptamers is presumed appropriate. Though this estimates the number of batches per year, each project will only buy a small amount of the production. Therefore it should be evaluated if, it is reasonable to assume that the rest of the production can be sold as well. To reach a conservative estimate the European market has been evaluated, as this is the region where most antibodies where used. 63 universities were represented at iGEM 2014 out of approximately 4000 academic institutions in Europe. Reference: European Union. The role of universities in the Europe of knowledge. (Link) (Accessed August 21^st 2015). Taking these numbers into account iGEM 2014 represents 1.6% of the market. Assuming only one research project per university is using antibodies, which is unlikely. This evaluation reinforces the assumption, that the remaining product can be sold. In some instances this will not be the case, due to the specialized nature of production or property rights therefore it is estimated that 30% of the production will be lost.

To estimate how much capital is needed to build the plant, the Busche model (1995) with modifications has been used. Reference: Seider, Seader, Lewin and Widagoo. Product and Process Design Principles - Synthesis, Analysis, and Evaluation; Third Edition - International Student Version; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2010 The size of the factory has to be estimated before costs can be calculated, therefore it is necessary to evaluate the number of units needed. As established under entrepreneurship it has been decided to produce several small batches, and the market analysis estimated the amount of batches to be 250 year. According to the timeline a batch cycle is 63.5 [h], and the next batch can begin after a flash sterilization of the fermenter, after 42.5 [h] from the start of the batch. This implies, that the cycle time for two batches is 106 [h]. It is assumed that the plant is closed for 4 [weeks/yr] and a work week consists of 5 days (120 [h]). Which means that 3 set-ups are needed. This assumption leaves a time buffer in case of unforeseen maintenance or orders.

Note: several minor cost calculations such as that of pumps has been ignored.

This calculation shows that an investment of 24.9 [million USD] is needed to get the plant up and running. From this amount 14.4 [million USD] is depreciable.

Now it needs to be approximated how much it will cost PAST to run production annually, this is achieved by usage of a model, Busche (1995) with modifications. Reference: Seider, Seader, Lewin and Widagoo. Product and Process Design Principles - Synthesis, Analysis, and Evaluation; Third Edition - International Student Version; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2010

This concludes that according to this model, it will cost 8.8 [million USD/yr] for PAST to produce 250 batches.

The challenge of biotech companies is to price a product that is of yet not on the market. This has to be an evaluation of the costs estimated above and the investments needed for maturing the concept on the one hand. On another how much customers are willing to pay. PAST aims to replace mAbs, and it must be assumed that though there are concerns of animal welfare, the customers will be inclined to keep using mAbs, if the price of the peptide aptamers are not considerably lower. Therefore an average of the price mAbs has been estimated by 50 products from Sigma-Aldrich, details can be viewed in pdf (Sigma-Aldrich antibodies). Showing an average price of 1.7 [million USD/g]. This method of pricing presupposed that the peptide aptamers have the same affinity and specificity as mAbs. The definition of sales can be viewed in equation 1, it should be noted, that it is assumed that 30 % of production is lost. Reference: Seider, Seader, Lewin and Widagoo. Product and Process Design Principles - Synthesis, Analysis, and Evaluation; Third Edition - International Student Version; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2010

S=Price x 0.70Production (1)

In the figure the development of sales and net earnings in relation to a price of 1-100% of that of mAbs can be viewed. Net earnings has been calculated from equation 2. Reference: Seider, Seader, Lewin and Widagoo. Product and Process Design Principles - Synthesis, Analysis, and Evaluation; Third Edition - International Student Version; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2010

Net earnings = (1 - t)(S - C) (2)

This confirms the assumption, that this production method can render profit at a price lower than that of mAbs. Though it does not take into account the investments in the plant. Therefore three different methods are used for estimating the profitability, see table. These methods cannot be compared directly, but if all shows profitability, it must be assumed, that grounds to work further with the idea is established. Reference: Seider, Seader, Lewin and Widagoo. Product and Process Design Principles - Synthesis, Analysis, and Evaluation; Third Edition - International Student Version; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2010

Figure 4: Development of sales and net earnings

Figure 5: Evaluation of profitability

The goal is to sell the peptide aptamers at least at 50% of the price of mAbs, therefore the methods are used for a price range between 1-50 %. Parameters for profitability of the three methods are: ROI>0 %, PBP<2 [yr] and VP>0 [million/yr]. Results can viewed in figure. Reference: Seider, Seader, Lewin and Widagoo. Product and Process Design Principles - Synthesis, Analysis, and Evaluation; Third Edition - International Student Version; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2010

The evaluation shows, that PAST will be profitable at a price above 4 % that of mAbs, which corresponds to a price of 0.07 [million USD/g]. It is most unlikely that investors can be paid back at this price, and should be taken as an indication of the margin in pricing. In this estimate it will be possible to raise prices by 44% before exceeding the goal. Another uncertainty is the validity of the estimate, since this is only an approximation of reality. Therefore the same calculations were done, if the cost turns out to be double. This showed profitability at a price set at 8% that of mAbs, which corresponds to a price of 0.13 [million USD/g]. This leads to the conclusion, that there is a good possibility of making a profitable enterprise, and it should be encourage to keep working towards more accurate estimates and finally the realization of PAST.