I work in tech and have been in many a pitch room to venture capitalists (VCs). And after reading this article, you might be wondering how a company like Evvy even got funded. I can imagine exactly how this thing got funded. Note that all of what I am writing here is speculative. But this is how it happens in the room where it happens.
Some well intentioned (or maybe not) female entrepreneurs pitch the idea to a bunch of VCs that there is a dearth of health care data on people with vaginas and specifically on the vaginal microbiome. But they are going to build a database of information they can sell to big Pharma and other researchers for lots of $$$. They will have THE VAGINAL MICROBIOME DATABASE TO RULE THEM ALL. Everyone knows there is huge money in this so there doesn't need to be a long discussion about the TAM (total available market). Plus, once you have the best database, it is a natural monopoly. Everyone wants to contribute to your database and so it only ever gets better.
But first, they have to build the database. VC asks, "How will you do that?"
Evvy replies they will create a test for the vaginal microbiome and will offer actionable results and a personal wellness plan that people with vaginas will pay for. There is no detailed discussion whether or not this wellness plan is of any value. The VC doesn't actually care or probably even know enough to ask. All they care is that the entrepreneur has a strategy for collecting the data and specifically a cost effective strategy to gather all that rich, delicious juicy data (insert lip smack here). They know that once the company has all this great data on a large cohort of people with vaginas, and cross reference it with 23andMe genomic data, they can provide even more valued feedback to these same people, they will be able to sell the database. And if the consumer doesn't already have 23andMe, no problem, because they will craft a referral deal with 23andMe and get revenue from sending Evvy customers to 23andMe as well.
It isn't important whether or not the Evvy test provides value to the people who pay for it. It is only important there is a good story to gather the data. The data is the product, not the test. The test is just a means to an end.
But if the test is so weak, how do you get all of these OB/GYNs to become advisors? Well, you sell them on the value of the database they will eventually be able to use and hope they don't poke to much into the process of how your are going to collect that data. Ask enough busy physicians and you will find plenty who get excited about your mission without digging enough into the gaps in your story. There is a reason you don't see Dr Jen on those advisory boards and it is because she starts asking hard questions right away and the response is usually, "we don't know the answer to your hard question, that is why we need you on our board, to help us figure that out." That line will work on lots of Silicon Valley OB/GYNs who want to participate in the tech game. Because they go to the parties with the tech people, and their buddies are on advisory boards but they aren't. So because of FOMO ( fear of missing out) the physicians join on.
So now you have some advisors who are not paying close attention because they only get called for advice one a quarter, if that, in exchange for some stock. And those advisors will validate that if a database existed like the one the entrepreneur described, they would use it.
But what about this test? Well... the entrepreneurs and the advisors acknowledge sheepishly that the test will need some work and may not provide that much value in the beginning, but as the database grows, it will provide more value over time.
So while there are some "small" issues, the data gathering being one of them, it is worth $5 million in funding to launch the initial tests to figure out the economics behind how much marketing dollars have to be spent to build out the dataset. And while $5 million sounds like a lot, it is chump change. VCs invest in 10 companies to get one hit, and two OK companies and the remaining seven either go out of business or get sold for pennies on the dollar. So $5 million is a drop in the bucket to find out if Evvy can in fact collect enough data to start creating a database that might be interesting.
It's OK if there are holes in the story. Every startup has holes. Every startup has risk. What these folks do is dream about the end state, a company with shit tons of data about the vaginal biome they can sell, and then invest in some smart people with the hope they will figure out the rest of the issues. That is how fortunes are built in the tech industry.
The result? Articles like the one Jen just wrote are like water off a ducks back to these folks because the VCs are willing to ignore the ethical issues, (no one is dying, right?) and willing to lose $5 million, and much more, just on the chance that Dr Jen Gunter is wrong about this because the potential pay out is so huge.
I read this article as I am struggling with recurring DIV. I’d very much appreciate your take on this condition as it’s been frustrating to understand and try to treat.
Ugh. I would laugh, because there are some laughable quotes in here, but it’s too sad. They discuss this test in the article and recommend it as well. Sigh.
I work in tech and have been in many a pitch room to venture capitalists (VCs). And after reading this article, you might be wondering how a company like Evvy even got funded. I can imagine exactly how this thing got funded. Note that all of what I am writing here is speculative. But this is how it happens in the room where it happens.
Some well intentioned (or maybe not) female entrepreneurs pitch the idea to a bunch of VCs that there is a dearth of health care data on people with vaginas and specifically on the vaginal microbiome. But they are going to build a database of information they can sell to big Pharma and other researchers for lots of $$$. They will have THE VAGINAL MICROBIOME DATABASE TO RULE THEM ALL. Everyone knows there is huge money in this so there doesn't need to be a long discussion about the TAM (total available market). Plus, once you have the best database, it is a natural monopoly. Everyone wants to contribute to your database and so it only ever gets better.
But first, they have to build the database. VC asks, "How will you do that?"
Evvy replies they will create a test for the vaginal microbiome and will offer actionable results and a personal wellness plan that people with vaginas will pay for. There is no detailed discussion whether or not this wellness plan is of any value. The VC doesn't actually care or probably even know enough to ask. All they care is that the entrepreneur has a strategy for collecting the data and specifically a cost effective strategy to gather all that rich, delicious juicy data (insert lip smack here). They know that once the company has all this great data on a large cohort of people with vaginas, and cross reference it with 23andMe genomic data, they can provide even more valued feedback to these same people, they will be able to sell the database. And if the consumer doesn't already have 23andMe, no problem, because they will craft a referral deal with 23andMe and get revenue from sending Evvy customers to 23andMe as well.
It isn't important whether or not the Evvy test provides value to the people who pay for it. It is only important there is a good story to gather the data. The data is the product, not the test. The test is just a means to an end.
But if the test is so weak, how do you get all of these OB/GYNs to become advisors? Well, you sell them on the value of the database they will eventually be able to use and hope they don't poke to much into the process of how your are going to collect that data. Ask enough busy physicians and you will find plenty who get excited about your mission without digging enough into the gaps in your story. There is a reason you don't see Dr Jen on those advisory boards and it is because she starts asking hard questions right away and the response is usually, "we don't know the answer to your hard question, that is why we need you on our board, to help us figure that out." That line will work on lots of Silicon Valley OB/GYNs who want to participate in the tech game. Because they go to the parties with the tech people, and their buddies are on advisory boards but they aren't. So because of FOMO ( fear of missing out) the physicians join on.
So now you have some advisors who are not paying close attention because they only get called for advice one a quarter, if that, in exchange for some stock. And those advisors will validate that if a database existed like the one the entrepreneur described, they would use it.
But what about this test? Well... the entrepreneurs and the advisors acknowledge sheepishly that the test will need some work and may not provide that much value in the beginning, but as the database grows, it will provide more value over time.
So while there are some "small" issues, the data gathering being one of them, it is worth $5 million in funding to launch the initial tests to figure out the economics behind how much marketing dollars have to be spent to build out the dataset. And while $5 million sounds like a lot, it is chump change. VCs invest in 10 companies to get one hit, and two OK companies and the remaining seven either go out of business or get sold for pennies on the dollar. So $5 million is a drop in the bucket to find out if Evvy can in fact collect enough data to start creating a database that might be interesting.
It's OK if there are holes in the story. Every startup has holes. Every startup has risk. What these folks do is dream about the end state, a company with shit tons of data about the vaginal biome they can sell, and then invest in some smart people with the hope they will figure out the rest of the issues. That is how fortunes are built in the tech industry.
The result? Articles like the one Jen just wrote are like water off a ducks back to these folks because the VCs are willing to ignore the ethical issues, (no one is dying, right?) and willing to lose $5 million, and much more, just on the chance that Dr Jen Gunter is wrong about this because the potential pay out is so huge.
P.S. Jen's right.
I read this article as I am struggling with recurring DIV. I’d very much appreciate your take on this condition as it’s been frustrating to understand and try to treat.
Related: this lovely article about BV prevention and treatment products based on very little actual science:
https://nymag.com/strategist/article/how-to-prevent-treat-bacterial-vaginosis-bv.html?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Strategist%20edit%20newsletter%20-%2020210729%20-%20Thu%20Jul%2029%202021&utm_term=Subscription%20List%20-%20Strategist%20%28MASTER%29
Ugh. I would laugh, because there are some laughable quotes in here, but it’s too sad. They discuss this test in the article and recommend it as well. Sigh.
I was looking forward to hearing what you had to say about Evvy, Jen! thank you!
Jen, thanks for this. Great article.