ENTREPRENEURSHIP
Diego Silva Russi
CEO NanoCell Farms
Jacob P. Rohn
CEO SeedForward
Judging criteria
For your convenience, we have summarised how we have addressed the iGEM entrepreneurship criteria in the following section.
By integrating human practices into the entire decision making process, we made sure that our product, BCoated: Slow Release, is adjusted to market demands. For example, SeedForward told us that a seed coating to deliver insecticides to seeds is in high demand, yet no appropriate solution is available. Based on this information, we started working on developing seed coats that are both sustainable and tailored for the slow release of compounds, such as insecticides. Based on our promising wet lab results, Seed Forward has also expressed interest in helping us perform field trials with BCoated: Slow Release. If these field trials give promising results, we foresee a strong potential customer in Seed Forward. We have scheduled a visit to their headquarters in Osnabrück to discuss the possibilities.
Based on our wet and dry lab results, we have shown that our coatings are able to keep hungry insects away, can improve germination rates, and can be easily modified according to inducers and culturing conditions. We have also shown that applying the BC coatings to the seeds is possible both ex situ and in situ.
Scalability is, as with many biotechnological processes, a major challenge. We have shown that scaling up in accordance to the ex situ coating method is possible, but that scaling up the in situ method is a greater hurdle. For that reason, BCoated will initially focus on ex situ approaches to build a trusted customer base and develop ourselves as a company. Our R&D will focus on improving our in situ production and downstream processing. This will eventually enable us to enter the market with a novel product line: coated seeds straight from the bioreactor!
Based on stakeholder analysis, we have found that our modular production platform is the first of its kind. To the best of our knowledge, no other company has ever tried to combine synthetic consortia, modular inducible genes, and embedment of active compounds to easily produce various kinds of bacterial cellulose from a single production process.
We have performed a detailed financial analysis, where we have divided our finances in investment costs, production costs, and capital costs. We have based our cost analysis on a lecture presented to us by Dr. Giuseppe Olivieri, an expert on bioprocess design, followed by extensive literature research and calculations. All of our production costs are based on the amount of BC we would have to produce to fulfil our desired market share. Using our estimated investment costs, production costs, and capital costs, we have performed a cash flow analysis and calculated the net present value of our company. We estimated the net present value of our company to be €8.26 million, indicating that the business is worth pursuing.
We have also presented a timeline ranging from the present to 2042. In the timeline, we give a detailed description of our journey from an iGEM team to a fully operational company, highlighting important milestones. We also took input from our stakeholders into account. For example, representatives of the RIVM and European Commision told us that the legal approval of a novel seed coating can take up to three years. In addition, we have performed a risk analysis in which we outline a back-up strategies for every major risk we might encounter on our journey.
We have investigated what skills are required to successfully operate our business and what skills we currently possess. Based on this, we were able to identify any skill-gaps and determine how to address these. To assist us with this, we have partnered up with our university’s own start-up incubator programme: STEP . At STEP, we are part of a thriving community of entrepreneurs, under the guidance of experienced business developers. Making use of this network, we will be able to develop not only our business, but also ourselves and the Wageningen community.
We also identified and approached external stakeholder to help us develop BCoated further.
First, we have considered positive impacts of our solution. These are the main issues we wanted to address when we started with BCoated: sustainable and modular seed coatings with less microplastic pollution, yet high crop yields. However, like every technology, BCoated comes with several possible caveats, both scientific and societal.
Even though we are not releasing living microorganisms into the soil, we are putting BC into the soil, which has been reported to affect microbial abundance and diversity1. To get a better understanding of the impact of our solution on the soil, we will perform field trials and microbiome analyses. Another issue that can occur when a disruptive technology like BCoated enters the market is the exclusion of small-scale farmers, who cannot afford novel technologies. Because we believe that everyone should have access to healthier and more sustainable crops, and because we believe in giving back to local communities, we will make special price arrangements with seed coating companies that resell to small scale farmers. We have also reached out to several farmers to discuss their thoughts and concerns.
Background
Food demand is predicted to increase by 40% in the next 30 years2. To meet this increase in demand, agricultural yields need to be increased. Seed coats have been reported to increase crop yields by 20-50%, and are a commonly used tool to increase yields3. Nevertheless, concerns have been raised about conventional seed coats, as they are contribute to microplastic pollution, require harsh chemicals, and/or lack modularity4,5. Due to this lack of modularity, scaling up seed coating production is difficult, as every application requires a different production process. BCoated aims to circumvent these problems by producing seed coats from bacterial cellulose (BC). BC is fully biodegradable and does not require harsh chemicals during downstream processing6. Moreover, the properties of BC, such as water-holding capacity and porosity, can be adjusted by making use different carbon sources or inducible promoters7. The European Union has recently approved a ban on the intentional addition of microplastics to agricultural products, which will come into effect in 20288. The latter is suspected to increase demands for microplastic free seed coatings. BCoated is ready to fullfil these demands and contribute to a more sustainable world.
As you might have read on our wet lab pages, we have researched two different approaches to coating seeds: ex situ and in situ. Both of these approaches have their own (dis)advantages. For the sake of clarity, we will be considering the ex situ coating approach as the production method of choice when developing our company, as this method has been proven to have a much higher capacity for scaling up. However, as we are establishing ourselves on the seed coating market, we will use part of our revenue to focus our R&D towards improving our knowledge on in situ coatings.
About BCoated
BCoated is a prospect company that aims to develop seed coatings from BC. BCoated will obtain seeds from a seed company which they will coat with a layer of tailored BC using their uniquely designed production process. Once coated, BCoated will return these seeds again to the seed company, which can sell the coated seeds to farmers. Therefore, BCoated will sell business to business (B2B). The main advantage of selling B2B is that we need to market ourselves to a few large seed companies compared to many small farmers, saving marketing costs. Additionally, we learned from our human practices that farmers are cautious of new products. By selling B2B, we make use of the brand name of our B2B clients and circumvent any trust issues that the farmers may have. Additionally, we may close strategic partnerships with one of our B2B clients in order to raise funding.
Market size analysis
The aim of a market size analysis is to show that there is a large, unmet market for our product. To show our understanding of the market, we have used the total addressable market, serviceable available market, and serviceable obtainable market framework.
The total addressable market (TAM) refers to the size of the total market for a product or service9. In our case, the TAM refers to the size of the global seed coating industry. This includes all types of seed coatings (e.g. slow-release or nutrient supplementation).
The TAM for the global seed coating industry is estimated to be €2.05 billion in 202510. The market value is projected to grow to €3.03 billion by 2030, showing a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 8.2% over the next five years10. CAGR is a measure for the performance of a specific market and provides insights into the prospects for the market. Although slightly less than the average S&P 500 return (9.36%), a CAGR of 8.2% for the market is promising11. By expanding our market share at the cost of competitors, the CAGR of our business may be higher than the CAGR of the seed coating market, thereby also outperforming other investments, such as the stock market. Furthermore, the seed coating market is currently only about 16% of the total seed market, further highlighting the potential for future growth10,12.
The main opportunities for growth are in the field of vegetables and crop seeds (combined market share of 94%)13. Application-wise, the industry mostly focusses on colouring the seeds and adding protectants, such as pesticides or herbicides (also a combined market share of 94%)13. Drivers for this market are increased yields and legislation regarding microplastic pollution8.
The serviceable available market (SAM) refers to the portion of the market that a company can acquire based on their business model9. An important factor determining the SAM is the target market. Below, we use an SPA-canvas to determine which target market our business should initially focus on. The suitability of the market segments was scored by considering the current size, the future potential, and the accessibility of the market segment. We weighed these aspects based on a scaling factor representing their importance. Access was deemed most important, as the market must be enterable for our business. Market size was regarded as the second most important, as this indicates many potential customers. Market potential was deemed least important.
Table 1: SPA-canvas to help identify initial target markets. Target markets were scored on market size, market potential, and market accessibility. The final score was calculated as a weighted average of the individual scores.
| Market Segment | Market size (Million euros 2025)* | Market size score (2x) | Market potential (Million euros, 2030)** | Market potential score (1x) | Market accessibility score (4x) *** | Average score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Africa | 88 | 2 | 130 | 3 | 2 | 2.14 |
| Asia | 177 | 4 | 261 | 5 | 2 | 3 |
| Europe | 1,443 | 10 | 2,135 | 9 | 7 | 8.14 |
| Northern America | 277 | 6 | 409 | 6 | 4 | 4.86 |
| Latin America | 65 | 1 | 95 | 2 | 2 | 1.71 |
* Local
seed coating market sizes were estimated based on their share of
the global seed market12. Their proportion of the
global seed market was multiplied by the TAM of the seed coating
market, assuming equal proportions of seed coatings usage among
imported seeds.
** Market potential by 2030, assuming a CAGR of 8.2%.
*** Access scores were determined based on assessment of our own
network and by talking to experts.
The SPA-canvas revealed that Europe is the best target market. Europe stands out as a target market due to its high market size, high market potential, and high market accessibility. Additionally, while not considered in the SPA-canvas, recent legislation imposed by the EU may further incentivise the use of a BCoated: Slow-Release. Northern America seemed to be a suitable second target market. However, for the foreseeable future, we focus on Europe as our target market. The seed coating market is competitive, and therefore, we estimate to obtain a market share of 30%, bringing our SAM to €640.5 million by 2030.
The serviceable obtainable market (SOM) refers to the portion of the SAM that a company can realistically capture9. Our company will be based in Wageningen, the Netherlands. Wageningen is a suitable location for our business as 1) The Netherlands is the largest exporter of seeds, exporting almost 20% of all seeds globally14 and 2) Wageningen is a renowned agricultural university (#1 in the world by QS rankings) and there are many companies and organizations within close proximity active in related fields, such as Foodvalley; a non-profit organization that assists both start-ups and larger companies with sustainable innovation, or the Wageningen Seed Science Centre; an organization committed to bridging fundamental research and applied practices in seed science and technology. Given that we have shown that our seed coating works as a slow-release system, and that we are based in the Netherlands, our SOM will include the use of slow-release system seed coatings in the Netherlands. It is reported that 33% of all seed coatings focus on slow-release systems13. Additionally, as the Netherlands imports 12% of all seeds in Europe, our SOM will be €640.5 million x 0.12 x 0.33 = €25.36 million12.
With this initial revenue, we can further develop our in situ seed coating production. We can also further expand the function of our seed coat to other applications, such as BCoated: Nutrients or BCoated: Colour. Additionally, we will focus on further expanding BCoated: Slow-Release into other European regions. These steps will help us achieve our SAM.
Competitor analysis
As a business, it is important to be aware of market trends and have a clear view of what competitors are doing. Therefore, we performed a competitor analysis. We distinguished between direct, indirect, and future competitors.
Direct competitors are businesses that also produce seed coatings.
We have focused on businesses that operate in the Netherlands and some parts of western Europe, as BCoated will experience most competition of these companies in the early phases.
Syensqo: Large company that is active in many sectors, including seed coatings. Has developed five different seed coating products.
Covestro AG: Large company that is active in many sectors, including seed coatings.
Centor Group: Company focusing on seed improvement technologies. Not just seed coatings, but also other materials and equipment.
Agathos BV: Company focusing on seed technology. Has developed four different seed coating products.
BIOWEG: Highly customisable biobased seed coatings.
Carapace Biopolymers: Produces biodegradable seed and fertiliser coatings.
SeedForward: Produces custom film coatings for seeds.
Indirect competitors are businesses that offer different products than our biodegradable seed coatings, but generally target the same customer segment and fulfil similar customer needs.
Examples of indirect competitors include businesses that aim to improve crop resilience through other means, such as plant breeding or fertilisers. Because there are a great number of competitors that fall under this category, we have decided to focus on businesses that work in close contact with Wageningen University & Research, as BCoated will be competing with these businesses in the same direct network.
Keygene: Research company focusing on the development and application of breakthrough technology for crop improvement.
Hudson River: Biotech company using Protoplast CRISPR technology to boost crop resilience and yield.
Delphy: Optimises agriculture with data-driven models and offers consultancy and practical research to agricultural professionals.
Genetwister: Biotech company specialised in molecular breeding and bioinformatics of agricultural, horticultural, and ornamental plants.
Evja: AI-based company that supports growers in optimising the management and monitoring of irrigation, nutrition, and protection of their crops.
Fermata: AI-based company aiming to reduce crop losses by detecting pests & diseases.
Plantik: Company focusing on plant breeding using genome editing technologies.
Future competitors are businesses that will emerge in the future and have either direct or indirect competition with BCoated.
Keeping in mind the ban on agricultural plastics in the European Union by 2028, there is a high incentive to develop more biodegradable alternatives8. From interviews we have conducted with stakeholders, we have learned that there is still space on the market for new products, but that getting the required certificates, performing the necessary field trials, and building trust with customers can be a time-consuming process. As 2028 is already approaching, we have an edge over future companies that have yet to develop a proof-of-concept. This makes it harder for other companies to compete with BCoated.
The seed coating industry is very secretive. This makes a conclusive competitor analysis challenging. Most industry leaders do not exclusively focus on seed coatings, or even on agriculture. Companies that do focus only on seed coatings are often small and in the start-up phase. We strongly believe that we will be able to carve out our own niche in this competitive environment, as no company is doing what we are: microplastic free, modular seed coatings.
The Netherlands, and especially Wageningen, is a global centre of agricultural innovation. This will allow us to easily access the knowledge of expert researchers and industry leaders in the agricultural sector. On the other hand, it imposes a disadvantage as well: competition. Many companies in various stages of the business life cycle that focus on improving crop resilience are based in Wageningen, or work closely with the university.
To make sure BCoated will be able to keep up with new innovations from existing companies and competitors that might emerge, we will ensure that building a strong and collaborative network with research institutions, regulatory bodies, and customers is one of our highest priorities. Wageningen University & Research has an international leading position in plant research, and is a trusted partner to many farmers and seed companies. We will leverage our position within this environment by building on these relationships to maintain close contact with expert researchers and valued customers.
Cost analysis
So far, we have seen that our solution is innovative, meets an unmet need, and has a potential market with some direct and indirect competitors. Below, we focus on the finance related aspects of our business. We have divided our finances in investment costs, production costs, and capital costs. We have based our cost analysis on a lecture presented to us by Dr. Giuseppe Olivieri, an expert on bioprocess design. Moreover, we performed an extensive literature search to obtain accurate costs estimates. As is common practice in financial analyses, most of the costs are calculated as a proportion of other costs — e.g. installation costs are a proportion of the equipment costs.
The investment costs include all costs needed to obtain an operable production facility, including R&D. Therefore, the investment costs refer to the amount of money that needs to be acquired through funding. The investment costs are subdivided in purchase costs (PC), direct costs (DC), indirect costs (IC), and other costs (OC). Investment costs also include start-up and validation costs, and working capital for the first few months of operation. The PC, DC, IC, and OC are also together called the Fixed Capital Costs (FC). The investment costs are all calculated as a certain fraction of the main equipment costs, so to estimate our investment costs, we first have to determine how much BC we need to produce to fulfil our initial market and reach our SOM.
The investment costs are all calculated as a certain fraction of the main equipment costs, so to estimate our investment costs, we first have to determine how much BC we need to produce to fulfil our initial market and reach our SOM.
Below, we give a brief description of all investment costs. After the description, a more detailed explanation is provided for some of the costs.
Purchase costs
Equipment - Equipment used to produce seed coatings, including bioreactors, stirrers, and freeze dryers.
Unlisted Equipment - Small equipment not listed above that is also needed.
Direct costs
Installation - Costs needed to put the equipment in place.
Piping - Costs needed to connect the installed equipment to a working operating system.
Electrical - Costs needed to establish a functional electricity network in the production facility.
Control - Costs needed to implement the appropriate control systems throughout the process.
Insulation - Costs needed to insulate the appropriate equipment. E.g. maintain optimal temperature in the bioreactor.
Building - Costs needed to build the physical foundation of the production facility.
Land Improvement - Costs needed to make the land suitable for building the production facility.
Auxiliary Facilities - Costs needed for supporting facilities, such as a warehouse and a cooling tower.
Indirect costs
Engineering - Costs needed to design and plan the production facility.
Construction - Broader costs related to construction of the production facility not yet covered above — e.g. managing costs.
Other costs
Land - Costs needed to acquire the land on which the production facility will be built.
Contractor’s fee - Costs needed to hire external labour required for building the production facility.
Marketing - Cost needed to raise brand awareness among potential customers while the production facility is not yet operating.
Contingency - Costs needed to cover unexpected expenses.
Start-up and Validation - Costs needed to develop and validate the product.
Working Capital - Costs needed to operate the first few months of the production facility before revenue has been generated.
We will assume that 1% all of the seeds are coated. As 33% of these coated seeds focusses on slow-release systems, we obtain a market of 0.33 × 0.01 × 578 million = 1.9 million kg seeds per year12,15. Assuming 10,000 seeds per kg, we would need to coat 19 billion seeds16. Based on our own wet lab results, we anticipate that we need approximately 1 g BC to coat 1000 seeds, meaning we would have to produce 19,000 kg of BC (dry weight) per year. Assuming that a BC hydrogel contains 99% water and 1% BC, we would need to produce 1,900,000 kg of BC per year, which is equal to 5,205 kg per day, assuming constant operation.
Based on an estimate by BioBase Europe, constructing an production plant of this size requires an investment of roughly €20 million on average. Based on this estimate, we have set our main equipment costs to €3 million, resulting in a FC of €22.40 million.
The production costs include all costs needed to operate the production facility once it has been built. Therefore, these are annual costs. The production costs are subdivided in variable and fixed costs. Variable costs scale with production output, whereas fixed costs are independent of production.
Below we give a brief description of all the production costs. After the description, a more detailed explanation is provided for some of the costs.
Variable costs
Material - Costs for the materials needed to produce the product
Utilities - Costs needed for the utilities required to operate the production facility.
Labour - Costs needed for labour to operate the equipment in the production facility.
Consumables - Costs needed for products that are used during the production process, but do not end up in the final product.
Waste - Costs needed to dispose waste generated in the production process.
Transportation - Costs needed to distribute the product to our customers.
Quality Control - Costs needed to ensure that the product is of sufficient quality.
Royalties - Costs needed to use other company’s intellectual property.
Fixed costs
R&D - Costs needed to further improve the current product or develop new products.
Marketing - Costs needed to raise brand-awareness among potential customers.
Maintenance - Costs needed to keep equipment and other systems in good quality.
To reduce the production costs of our BC seed coating, we aim to develop our BC from a waste stream. Dr. Zohaib Hussain , a physical chemistry expert who has previously written a review about valorising waste streams for BC production, recommended us to use waste beer yeasts (WBY), a waste product of beer production18. WBY are highly abundant, high in glucose, and serve little other use, Heineken is estimated to produce 120 million kg of WBY in its production facility in ‘s Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands alone19,20. To validate that BC can indeed be produced from WBY, we obtained our own WBY from our local brewery, Rad van Wageningen and used it to grow BC.
The maximum achievable titre of BC production from WBY is 7.02 g BC per L WBY according to literature21. As mentioned previously, we anticipate that we need approximately 1 g of BC to coat 1,000 seeds. Thus, 1L of WBY would suffice to coat 7,020 seeds. WBY costs around €0.473 per L22. Based on our initial calculation of 19 billion seeds per year, this would cost (19 billion seeds / 7,020 seeds per L WBY) × €0.473 per L WBY = €1.28 million per year.
Up to this point, we have been growing our BC at laboratory scale on YPD medium, which contains:
10 g/L Yeast Extract
10 g/L Peptone
20 g/L Glucose
If we are to assume a similar yield of BC on YPD as on WBY, we would require:
27,065.5 kg Yeast Extract
27,065.5 kg Peptone
54,131.1 kg Glucose
Based on current retail prices, this would cost roughly €5.40 million. So, according to this estimation, switching to WBY would save approximately €4.12 million per year.
The cost of labour for the operational part of the company can be defined as:
∑k FLabour(k) × cLabour(k) × hOperation y−1
Where:
k is any specific operation
F_{Labour(k)} is the amount of
labour hours per operating hours for a given operation
c_{Labour(k)} is the cost of
labour for a given operation
h_{Operation}y^{-1} is the annual
operating time
The operations required for our production process, and their respective labour hours per operating hours, are given below:
Table 2: These values are based on the lectures of Dr. Giuseppe Olivieri. For a conservative estimate of labour costs, we have assumed the upper limit in our calculations.
| Operation | F_{Labour} |
|---|---|
| Batch fermentation | 0.3 - 2.0 |
| Vacuum filtration | 0.1 - 0.2 |
| Evaporation | 0.1 |
| Decontamination | 0.1-0.2 |
| Processing into coating | 0.4 - 1.0 |
These values are based on the lectures of Dr. Giuseppe Olivieri.
For a conservative estimate of labour costs, we have assumed the
upper limit in our calculations.
The average salary for a full-time (40 hours/week) production worker in the Netherlands is € 2,390 per month23. Because the company also has to pay additional fees to contribute to social security and insurance, and to account for unexpected costs because of illness or pregnancy, we will account for an extra 50%. This translates to € 3,585, which is approximately € 22.41 per hour. Because we aim for constant operation of the factory, part of the labour will be performed at night. We will assume a 20 % higher salary for night shifts, and that each day contains 12 hours of day shifts and 12 hours of night shifts (in other words: 4,380 hours of day shifts and 4,380 hours of night shifts per year). Using the operational costs from the table above, the annual operational labour costs would be: ((2 + 0.2 + 0.1 + 0.2 + 1) x 22.41 x 4,380) + ((2 + 0.2 + 1) x 22.41 x 1.2 x 4,380) = €755,799.66 per year.
Other labour that has to be accounted for includes cleaning and sales. The average wage for a full-time cleaner and a full-time sales associate in the Netherlands are respectively € 1,780 and € 3,470 per month, which becomes € 2,670 and € 5,205 considering the additional costs.24,25. Assuming three full-time cleaners and two full-time sales associates are required this would cost (2,670 x 3 x 12) + (5,205 x 2 x 12) = €221,040 per year.
To sterilise the BC, we currently use 0.1 M NaOH at 80 °C. Again under the assumption that 0.250 mL of 0.1 M NaOH is sufficient to sterilise 1 kg of BC, we would need 1,900,000 x 0.25 = 475,000 L/year of 0.1 M NaOH. The price of NaOH varies and depends on several factors. In Europe, we will assume a price of 540 €/ton26. The molar weight of NaOH is 40 g/mole, meaning that one ton contains 25,000 mole. This results in 475,000 x 0.1 / 25,000 = 1.9 tonne of NaOH/year, which would cost approximately €1,260.
When we heat up the NaOH to 80 °C, this will cost a lot of energy. Assuming the same specific heat capacity as pure water (4184 J/kg x K), it would cost 475,000 x 60 x 4,184 = 1,197,000,000,000 J = 1.197 GJ/year to increase the temperature of all our NaOH by 60 °C. If we assume a heat transfer efficiency of 80%, this would require 1,496.25 GJ/year. In the Netherlands in 2023, the price for electricity for industry was €0.508/kWh on average27. This would give 1,496.25 x 277.78 x 0.508 = 211,139.19 €/year for heating costs alone. In literature, we have found that sterilisation is also done with 1M NaOH at room temperature28. Doing this would increase our yearly NaOH cost to €12,600, but would eliminate the aforementioned heating costs.
The cost of waste can be defined as: ∑w × FWaste(w) × cWaste(w)
Where:
w is any specific waste
stream
F_{Waste(w)} is the amount of
waste generated per year for a given waste stream
c_{Waste(w)} is the cost of waste
processing for a given waste stream
Our waste streams would consist only of the discarded medium, and the water and NaOH required for washing and sterilising the BC. As calculated before, this would amount to 2,706.55 MT of medium, 1,425 MT of water and 475 MT of NaOH.
The magnitude of c_{Waste(w)} can vary greatly, but generally falls between 50 - 250 € MT, according to lectures of Dr. Giuseppe Olivieri. This difference in cost is mainly attributed to the waste being hazardous or not. Because we are not working with highly reactive chemicals or pathogens, our waste will fall on the lower end of the price spectrum. For simplicity, we will assume an average price of €75 MT for all of our waste streams. This would bring our total costs for waste to: (2,706.55 + 1,425 + 475) x 75 = 345,491.45 €/year.
To make our production process more (economically) sustainable, recovery of wastewater and NaOH can be integrated into the process. This would not only decrease waste treatment costs, but also reduce material purchase costs.
Royalties are received when you license your patent to another company. To legally use your patent, they pay a small royalty fee, usually around 5%29. In our case, this would mean that another seed coating company could use our strain to produce their own BC seed coats. We do not plan on licensing our patent to other companies. Instead, we prefer to produce the BC seed coat ourselves and then sell it to the company. Therefore, we will not be receiving any royalties.
The capital costs refer to the annual expenses made to further improve the factory. This may include expansion of the production facility, renewing production equipment, or training employees. These are annual costs. In our business plan, we have defined our capital costs as a proportion of our revenue.
Timeline
In 2025, we finish iGEM, work on our proof-of-concept, and start acquiring funding. We plan on further optimising our proof-of-concept in 2026 and on registering ourselves at the Dutch Chamber of Commerce. By 2026, we also hope to have made substantial progress in order to start filing a patent for our strain. This takes between 3-5 years. We also hope to start our field trials in 2026. We have scheduled a meeting with Seed Forward at their office in Osnabrück to discuss the potential for a collaboration regarding field trails. We also aim to file for legal approval in 2026. From our interaction with European Commission - DG SANTE - E4 Unit, we found out that obtaining legal approval can take between 2.5-3.5 years. Potentially, Seed Forward may be our first client, given their expressed interest. From 2026 onwards, we will also invest in R&D, further developing our proof-of-concept and improving the in situ coating method. We also aim to expand to other seed coating demands (e.g. BCoated: nutrients or BCoated: colour). In 2028, we aim to source our first clients and start the small scale production of BCoated: Slow Release. Potentially, Seed Forward can be our first client, if our field trials show promising results. In 2029 and 2030, we aim to build production facility. From 2031 onwards, we plan to start operating on a large scale.
Financial analysis
Using the cost analysis and the time planning, we performed a financial analysis regarding the investability of our company. To do so, we performed a cash flow analysis and calculated the net present value (NPV). These topics were introduced to us by Dr. Giuseppe Olivieri, an expert on bioprocess design. The cash flow analysis reveals how money flows in and out of the company over time. The net present value reveals whether the investment is worth pursuing by comparing the value of future profits to the initial investment. These future profits are discounted, as obtaining one dollar today is worth more than obtaining one dollar in 10 years.
For our cash flow analysis, we have assumed that our SOM will be our revenue. The inflow of money increases overtime. Initially due to an increase in production capabilities, later due to an increase of our SOM by 8.2% annually. The outflow of money also increases overtime. Initially due to an increase in production capabilities (higher production costs), later due to an assumed inflation of 2%. From 2033 onwards, our cash flow is predicted to be positive. To discount the cash flows, a real cost of capital (RCC) of 10% was used, in line with investments in the biotechnological sector30. The discounted cash flow (DCF) was calculated by DCF = cash flow/(1+ RCC)^t, where t refers to the time passed since the initial investment. The present value was calculated as the sum of the discounted cash flows of the first 15 years of operation. To obtain the net present value (NPV), the initial investment costs were subtracted from the present value. In our case, the NPV was €8,261,501.92, suggesting that the investment is worth pursuing.
Risk analysis
In order for our business to thrive, we needed to address
potential risks. Across different stages of development and
establishment of BCoated, we identified potential risks that we
could encounter. Based on these, we classified the stages as
follows.
(I) Experimental Stage.
(II) Scale-up.
(III) Production.
(IV) Market Entry.
(V) IP & Licencing.
(VI) Partnership Establishment.
(VII) Customer Adoption.
The risks that BCoated is subjected to, along with potential solutions are displayed in the table below.
| Phase | Risk | Solution |
|---|---|---|
| Experimental stage | Failure to demonstrate inducible control of cellulose production in the consortium. | Conduct iterative lab testing, optimise promoters, and explore alternative inducible systems. |
| Experimental stage | Failure to establish a stable consortium. | Identify alternative cross-feeding mechanism to improve dependancy. |
| Scale-up | Low yield or inconsistent cellulose quality during scale-up. | Perform process optimisation, implement bioprocess monitoring and control strategies. |
| Production | High production costs compared to conventional cellulose coatings. | Identify cheaper alternative growth media streams. |
| Market Entry | Seed coating companies resistant to adopting new bio-based material. | Negotiate partnerships, to establish a long-term committed conglomerate, in return for shares within BCoated. |
| IP & Licensing | Risk of IP disputes or weak protection. | File patents early, seek strong legal IP advisors, and develop freedom-to-operate analyses. |
| Partnership | Loss of autonomy or misalignment with parent company’s vision. | Negotiate terms securing team independence, rights to continue R&D, and royalties or milestone payments. |
| Customer Adoption | Limited farmer trust in biotech seed coatings, and new product. | Improve HP, awareness campaigns for ‘safe biology’, and conduct transparent field trials. Enter market in association with a well trusted product/producer. |
Obtaining capital
Entrepreneurial grants
Our strategy for obtaining financial capital during the early stages of our development involves applying to various grants available in the Netherlands, such as:
EIC Pathfinder: is a programme that financially helps an ongoing research to improve its scientific basis for breakthrough technologies, aiming to build on cutting-edge directions in science and technology, to create new opportunities. Pathfinder in itself has two categories of funding that we can apply to, the first being EIC Pathfinder Challenges, which gives access to grants up to €4 million, and the second being EIC Pathfinder Open, which gives access to grants up to €3 million. Given the domain of BCoated, we are eligible for the EIC Pathfinder Open, and plan to apply for the grant in 2026.
Seed Capital Scheme: Upon completion of seven years in the market, The Ministry of Economic Affairs and Climate Policy of The Netherlands supports start-ups by availing interest-free loans as an investment of up to €12 million.
Biotech Booster: Biotech Booster is a national programme to support the commercialization of biotechnology findings in the Netherlands. They offer financial support up to €200,000 for projects in the proof of principle stage, and up to €1.9 million for projects in the proof of concept stage. Additionally, they offer mentorship and networking opportunities to help guide founders from the idea stage to the development stage.
Additionally we also plan on approaching Venture Capitalists, such as ValleyDAO to cover our remaining financial requirements.
Long-term fiscal security
One of the ways in which we plan to secure our financial requirements is through an M&A (Merger and Acquisition) partnership with an established entity. The M&A could also potentially involve larger companies buying stocks of BCoated, as a result of their investment.
The merger would allow us to enter into a partnership with the parent company by being partly bought by the larger company, on agreeable terms. This would allow us to retain our autonomy as a corporate organisation. We strategise that an ideal outcome of this merger would ultimately enable us to sell our products in the name of the parent company, thus benefitting from their established reputation. The parent company would cover the initial cost of production and establishment while allowing us access to their resources, and clientele through their outlet sources.
Based on our interviews, we foresee a potential successful merger with SeedFoward, who has expressed interest in our project, and willingness to help us realise BCoated.
A successful merger with such entities, would satisfy all if not most of our initial requirements for a stable, and long-term establishment of BCoated as the future of Seed Coating production.
The sustainable business canvas
For convenience, we have summarised our findings about our competitors, market size, cost structure, and timeline so far in a Business Model Canvas. The Business Model Canvas provides an overview of our business.
Market entry
Minimum viable product
The minimum viable product (MVP) is "that version of a new product which allows a team to collect the maximum amount of validated learning about customers with the least effort", or in other words, the minimum version of a product that will still allow one to learn31. The MVP for a given technology is subjective and context dependant. It takes judgment and speaking to customers about what they require. From our stakeholder analysis, we learned that the most important driver for farmers to adopt new technologies is price versus performance. If your product makes more expensive seeds but your yield is higher, it is acceptable to have a (slightly) higher price. Furthermore, we learned that the market is very rigid, but that there is still space on the market for new products if a market entry is made before the 2028 EU ban on agricultural plastics. Based on this analysis, we believe that our MVP should have the following qualities:
Financially competitive with comparable technologies
Consistently improve crop yields
Novel and innovative
We have been able to show that our immobilised proteins are able to prevent insects from feeding, and that the coating process does not impede the seeds ability to germinate. The next steps would be field trials to investigate if the insect deterrence translates to improved yields. Furthermore, we need to perform a study on the long-term shelf-life of our proteins. To the best of our knowledge, no such protein delivery system exists to date. The largest hurdle towards achieving our MVP would be entering the market in time due to the regulations regarding approval of active substances, such as pesticides. According to European Commission - DG SANTE - E4 Unit, the pesticide unit at the European Union, this approval will take between 2.5-3.5 years. This means our product could be market ready right around the "deadline", giving us time to finalise the aforementioned final experiments.
First potential customers
As mentioned before, we will be adopting a B2B business model, selling to other companies instead of to the end-users. From the interviews we have conducted, reputation was identified as a prominent factor in the seed coating sector. This is because the risk associated with adopting new technologies for farmers is high, as this could mean reduced harvest and thus reduced profits. The market is also high risk for investors because of the long development time for new products, and thus the slow return on investment. This is why partnering with and selling to a trusted company is paramount to a successful seed coating business. During our human practices interviews, we have encountered several stakeholders expressing interest in investing in our solutions. One of these companies is SeedForward, a company researching alternative solutions for efficient and sustainable agriculture. They have stated that our seed coating platform as a pesticide delivery system would be worth investing in if it can pass the required field trials, because the options for seed pesticides are becoming more limited with bans on chemical pesticide use . Another company is NanoCell Farms , a company producing BC for various industries, who have stated that they would invest in BC companies that show promising results in making the production process more sustainable and scalable.
Patenting
Filing a patent for our production platform would grant us the exclusive right to make use of this technology within the European Union for a certain amount of time. Patenting a novel biotechnological process in the EU requires filing an application with the European Patent Office (EPO) under the European Patent Convention (EPC) . To do this, our process has to be novel, inventive, and industrially applicable. After filing this application, the EPO conducts a search and publishes the application, followed by substantive examination to assess patentability. If successful, the EPO will grant the patent. The entire process typically takes 3–5 years. Our process would then be protected for a maximum of 20 years, although a Supplementary Protection Certificate can be granted to extend this to 25 years. Costs can range from €25,000 to €40,000 up to grant, and much higher once validation and maintenance across multiple countries are included.
Market expansion
We are a company focusing on the production of modular, sustainable seed coatings, but BC is a material with lots of potential besides seed coatings. We believe that our production platform can serve many more industries, both within agriculture and beyond. If BCoated grows beyond its beachhead market of just seed coatings, we will expand to other markets close to use, such as fertiliser coatings.
Other industries that might benefit from our production platform, such as the medical industry or the packaging industry are more detached from our company. We will be less likely to expand into these, as this requires building entirely new customer networks. However, we are firm believers in collaborative science, and we are always open to collaborating with other companies, and may grant licenses to use our production platform if our values align.
Skill gap analysis
BCoated is a passionate team consisting of 11 people with backgrounds in biotechnology and bioinformatics. Our team is distinctly multicultural, spanning the Netherlands, India, Indonesia, Italy, and Turkey, enabling us to approach challenges from diverse perspectives and build stronger, more authentic relationships with stakeholders. In addition, a large team of supervisors, with expertise in biotechnology, bioprocess design, and bioinformatics, supports our work. Some bring first-hand company-founding experience. Their guidance has enabled us to solve difficult problems and will be pivotal as we scale our business.
We operate from Wageningen University’s campus, a globally
recognised hub for agri-food innovation. The surrounding
ecosystem, with industry partners, domain experts, and specialised
facilities, positions us to accelerate development, while
Wageningen’s reputation strengthens our credibility with
investors. We have also connected with actors from
a local start-up incubator StartHub, that will play an advisory
role throughout our process and has successfully guided many
start-ups in the past.
par As we strongly acknowledge the importance of a well-rounded
and skilled team, we have mapped the skills within our team across
eight key areas (Figure 3).
The survey revealed that our team is particularly weak at IP and Patenting. We realise that this is a skill that is pivotal to safeguard key findings and methods from our competitors. To strengthen our IP and Patenting knowledge, we could reach out to Dutch students for Entrepreneurship or the Netherlands Patent Office. To improve our skills in general finance, raising capital, and business management, we can consult our local incubator, StartHub. We will develop our human resources and dry lab expertise by investing resources into the personal development of our current team.
Long-term benefits & disadvantages
Making an impact on the world is key for a business to succeed. For our business, we have identified several positive and negative long-term effects of BCoated: Slow-release.
Positive impacts
Microplastic pollution
At the moment, the agricultural and horticultural sector produce 10% of all microplastics released into nature microplastic pollution32. Microplastics have been shown to accumulate within the human body up to 50,000 microplastics per person33. Severe health effects have been linked to the accumulation of microplastics in the human body, such as DNA damage, organ dysfunction, metabolic disorders, neurotoxicity, and reproductive toxicity, highlighting the need to address microplastic pollution34.
Previous research has shown that BC is fully biodegradable in the soil, showing the potential of BC-based materials to reduce microplastics pollution and contribute to human health6. Nevertheless, a complete Life Cycle Assessment of BCoated: Slow Release will need to be performed before concrete claims about microplastic reduction can be made.
Food security
Food demand is predicted to increase by 40% in the next 30 years2. To meet this increase in demand, agricultural yields need to be increased. Seed coats in general have been reported to increase crop yields by 20-50%3. By developing a novel, modular, and profitable seed coating, our business contributes to ensuring food security in the future, both in the Netherlands and globally.
Other positive impacts are creating labour for new employees and contributing to the reputation of Wageningen University.
Negative impacts
Soil microbiome
BC is reported to influence the composition of the microbial community in the soil1. Given the importance of the microbial community for crop development and soil health in general, we are planning on assessing the effect of our BC-based seed coating on the soil microbiome during our upcoming field trials. Additionally, we need to test multiple soil types to assess any soil type-specific effects.
Exclusion of Small-scale Farmers
BCoated: Slow-release is set successfully enter the seed coating market. However, coating the seeds costs money, and thus our seeds will be sold at a premium compared to naked seeds. Due to this premium, our product may become inaccessible for small-scale farmers who have smaller budgets than large-scale farmers. As a result, small-scale farmers will have lower yields, making it even more difficult for them to compete with large-scale farmers. To prevent these social issues from occurring, we will stay in touch with these small-scale farmers and may make special price arrangements with seed coating companies that resell to small scale farmers.