Jump to content

Talk:RA Capital Management

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Page updates

[edit]

This article doesn’t seem to have been significantly updated since 2019. I’m an employee of RA Capital and I’d like to suggest some updates to the page. I was advised by User:Brucemyboy1212 of WhiteHatWiki and am following COI procedure per Wikipedia:FAQ/Article subjects. Would a neutral editor mind having a look, as suggested at the Wikipedia conflict of interest page?

1. What I think should be changed:

Please change the title of the Background section to “History” and replace the first paragraph:

Change from:

“Background”

RA Capital was founded in January 2002 by Richard Aldrich and Peter Kolchinsky. Aldrich was the chief business officer Vertex Pharmaceuticals who left to set up his own company. He invited Kolchinsky, a PhD student at Harvard University to join him due his technical expertise. The firm's name comes from the initials of Richard Aldrich.[1][2][3]

Change to:

“History”

The company that would become RA Capital was started in 2001 by Richard Aldrich, a co-founder of Vertex Pharmaceuticals.[2] In 2002, Aldrich hired Peter Kolchinskly, who was earning his doctorate in virology from Harvard, to invest $4 million of seed money in biotech.[3] RA Capital, named after Aldrich, was officially formed in 2004.[2]

Why it should be changed:

The section describes the company’s development from founding to present, making History - which seems to be the standard section header in articles about companies Tesla, Inc., Chicago Options Associates) - the more accurate title. I suggested a rewrite of the first paragraph to correctly order the sources so that they support each sentence. I suggested cutting the Institutional Investor source because it was only used to support Kolchinsky’s education, which is already supported by Barron's article.


2. What I think should be changed:

In the current Background section, please add a new ninth paragraph:

In 2019, the firm started an incubator called Carnot to test the viability of early-stage biotechnology companies.[4] As of 2020, the firm had begun operating an incubator program called RAVentures to help develop new and early-stage companies working in biotechnology.[5]

Why it should be changed: As it is now, the article is missing information about the company beyond one mention in 2019.

3. What I think should be changed:

In the current Background section, please add a new tenth paragraph (following paragraph proposed in item B):

In 2020, the firm’s second venture fund, Nexus Fund II, raised $461 million.[6] The firm’s third venture fund, Nexus Fund III, raised $880 million in 2021.[7]

Why it should be changed:

The article currently has information about the company’s first venture fund, but is missing info about the second and third.

Thank you for taking the time to review these suggestions. Landis215 (talk) 17:46, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Likeanechointheforest (talk) 19:55, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Page updates

[edit]

I have a few suggestions for bringing this page more up-to-date. I’m an employee of RA Capital, advised by User:Brucemyboy1212 of WhiteHatWiki, and am following COI procedure per Wikipedia:FAQ/Article subjects. @Likeanechointheforest: Pinging you since you reviewed the first round. I appreciate the help of any editor willing to take a look. Thanks.

1. What I think should be changed:

In the History section, please add a new eleventh paragraph:

In 2023, the firm founded a team to focus on investments in planetary health.[8] In its first year, the team, called, RA Capital Planetary Health, participated in a $30.5 million series C round for a recycling startup that uses AI.[8]and a $30 million series B round for a battery equipment startup company.[9]

Why it should be changed: The creation of a new venture team to invest in developing technology around planetary health was a milestone in the company’s history featured in several publications. Please note I have provided an internal link to the Wikipedia page on planetary health in order to emphasize that this is now a well-established discipline.

2. What I think should be changed:

In the History section, please add a new twelfth paragraph:

In 2024, the firm created a team to focus on structured capital deals for healthcare companies.[10]

Why it should be changed: The suggested sentence adds information about a noteworthy expansion in the company’s practice that was reported by the Wall Street Journal.

3. What I think should be changed:

In the History section, please add a new 13th paragraph:

In 2024, RA Capital made 56 investments in life sciences.[11]

Why it should be changed: The proposed sentence adds information about the scope of the company’s activity in its field, as covered by a prominent reliable source.

4. What I think should be changed:

In the SEC Fine section, please replace the first paragraph:

Change from:

In September 2014, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission announced it had sanctioned nineteen firms that illegally participated in stock offerings less than five days after short selling the stock. RA Capital was one of the firms and agreed to pay the largest amount out of them with disgorgement of $2.65 million, interest of $73,000 and a $905,000 penalty.[3][12]

Change to:

In 2014, RA Capital agreed to pay a disgorgement of $2.65 million and a $905,000 penalty to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission[13] to settle claims that it had violated rules related to short-selling.[3]

Why it should be changed

The suggested replacement combines the existing sentences to keep the focus on details that relate to RA Capital. I’ve also moved the citations to properly support the information.

5. What I think should be changed:

Please move the first paragraph of the SEC fine section into the History section as the new eighth paragraph. Then delete the SEC fine section as it will be empty.

Why it should be changed:

“SEC fine" is a non-standard section title per WP:STYLE. The settlement paid by the company in 2014 belongs in History. Singling it out in its own short subsection seems punitive rather than encyclopedic.

6. What I think should be changed:

Please update the second sentence of the lead paragraphs:

It is focused on making public and private investments in the Healthcare and Biotechnology industries.

Please change to this:

It is focused on making public and private investments in the healthcare, biotechnology, and planetary health industries.

Why it should be changed: I already proposed adding “planetary health" to the body of the article in item 1. As it is now a focus of the company, I suggest updating the lead to reflect this. Please note I have provided an internal link to the Wikipedia page on planetary health in order to emphasize that this is now a well-established discipline.

Thank you for your help in reviewing these suggestions. Landis215 (talk) 17:18, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Partly done: 1. Done but removed vague AI language.

2. Not done, vague. Can you supply more details about this? 3. Not done. Can you add more details about this? As is, it doesn't seem to make sense in the article, as there isn't a mention of how many investments it made in previous years. 4. Not done. Removes important well-sourced information. 5. Not done, see above. 6. Done. Likeanechointheforest (talk) 16:47, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Likeanechointheforest - thanks for your review. Would you be willing to consider request #5 to move the text to History, instead of its own section, if we flesh out the details more than I originally suggested? The media coverage of the event (one article and one mention) is nothing special so it would seem WP:UNDUE to emphasize a negative event with its own section while positive events with equal or greater press coverage are placed in History without section headings. This emphasis on the negative is a subtle type of bias not in keeping with WP:NPOV. Structurally, wouldn’t it be weird if every event in History with this much press coverage was given its own section? Here is the language I’d propose moving to become paragraph 8 of History;
In 2014, RA Capital agreed to pay a disgorgement of $2.65 million and a $905,000 penalty to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission over charges that it was among 19 firms that illegally violated rules related to short selling the stock.[14] The firms were charged with shorting stocks within five days of a follow-on offering and all reached settlements without admitting wrongdoing.[15]
Thanks for your review of this. Landis215 (talk) 14:40, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That seems appropriate, and also I've made an edit to that! Likeanechointheforest (talk) 17:22, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ "Investing in the Health Care Revolution". Institutional Investor. January 4, 2016. Retrieved May 19, 2023.
  2. ^ a b c Edelson, Steve (February 22, 2016). "BioCentury" (PDF). RA Capital.
  3. ^ a b c d Shari, Michael. "Stocks Picks From a Top Biotech Hedge Fund". online.barrons.com. Retrieved May 19, 2023.
  4. ^ Sheridan, Kate (23 September 2019). "RA Capital launches Carnot, an incubator for early-stage biotechs". Stat. Retrieved 10 December 2024.
  5. ^ Keown, Alex (22 October 2020). "RA Capital Closes $461 Million Investment Fund Aimed at Life Sciences Companies". BioSpace. Retrieved 10 February 2025.
  6. ^ Taylor, Nick Paul (2 October 2022). "Fresh from early successes, RA Capital bags $461M for new fund". Fierce Biotech. Retrieved 1 December 2024.
  7. ^ Smith, Johnathan (20 December 2023). "The Top Five Venture Capital Heavyweights in Life Sciences". Inside Precision Medicine. Retrieved 7 December 2024.
  8. ^ a b De Chant, Tim (5 December 2023). "Veteran life sciences firm RA Capital spins up 'planetary health' team to ride climate tech wave". TechCrunch. Retrieved 10 December 2024.
  9. ^ Fehrenbacher, Kate (4 December 2023). "Exclusive: AM Batteries raises $30M led by Toyota Ventures". Axios. Retrieved 10 December 2024.
  10. ^ Armental, Maria (18 September 2024). "Health Specialist RA Capital Adds a Structured Capital Strategy". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 15 December 2023.
  11. ^ Taub, Steve (10 September 2024). "Hedge Funds Stand to Gain as Biopharma IPOs Heat Up". Institutional Investor. Retrieved 7 December 2024.
  12. ^ Baert, Rick (September 16, 2014). "SEC settles with BlackRock, others over trading infractions". Pensions & Investments. Retrieved May 19, 2023.
  13. ^ Baert, Rick (September 16, 2014). "SEC settles with BlackRock, others over trading infractions". Pensions & Investments. Retrieved May 19, 2023.
  14. ^ Baert, Rick (September 16, 2014). "SEC settles with BlackRock, others over trading infractions". Pensions & Investments. Retrieved May 19, 2023.
  15. ^ Shari, Michael (27 June 2015). "Stocks Picks From a Top Biotech Hedge Fund". Barrons. Retrieved 5 May 2025. Securities and Exchange Commission accused RA and 42 other companies, including BlackRock and D.E. Shaw, of violating a rule against shorting stocks within five days of a public follow-on offering. All settled without admitting wrongdoing.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:RA_Capital_Management&oldid=1290878303"