Venture Capital In Technology

Europe is losing a generation of founders. And it's 100% self-inflicted. I've invested in US startups from my laptop in 48 hours. I've also sworn never to invest in certain European countries again. Not because of bad founders or startups. Because the legal complexity makes it impossible. That's not just sad. It's a tragedy. Here's the brutal reality: 🚨 Delaware works: → 48-hour digital incorporation → Standardized investment docs (SAFE notes) → No notary fees eating chunks of small investments → One system. Done. It's not what fuels Silicon Valley. It's the oil that keeps it running. Europe's mess: → 27 different legal systems → Deals taking MONTHS because of cross-border complexity → €800 billion annual investment gap → Klarna, Revolut, and countless others forced to list in New York Some angel investors face notary fees consuming 30% of a €10K investment. Others simply can't make micro-fund economics work because fixed costs and fragmented regulations make it uneconomical. The solution we need: EU–INC One unified European corporate form. Digital-first. Standardized stock options. EU-wide registry. Think "Delaware meets Stripe Atlas" but for all of Europe. Why this matters: As I build Vota and invest across Europe, I see brilliant founders relocating to Delaware not because they want to, but because they have no choice. Every startup that flips to the US is a loss for European innovation, jobs, and competitiveness. The infrastructure EXISTS in the US. Europe needs to build its version. Not in 10 years. Now. Are you supporting EU-Inc? This isn't just policy. It's infrastructure that determines whether Europe produces trillion-euro tech companies or keeps watching them leave. #euinc #europe #startups #venturecapital #innovation #entrepreneurship

The Army Just Launched FUZE. A $750M Annual VC Fund for Defense Startups. Secretary Dan Driscoll unveiled the Army's new venture capital model at the Demand Signal Forum in Arlington. Former private equity exec turned Army Secretary just flipped the acquisition playbook. FUZE channels $750M annually into nontraditional contractors. The man behind it? Driscoll ran a $200M VC fund before taking office. Iraq veteran with 10th Mountain Division. Yale Law grad. Sworn in by VP Vance in February. He calls traditional acquisition a "calcified bureaucracy" and he's not wrong. How it works. • Scout external tech, not internal solutions • Live pitch events starting October at AUSA • Other Transactional Authorities for rapid contracts • "Colorless money" flexible funding across programs First targets. • Counter-drone systems (interceptors, jammers) • Electronic warfare for spectrum dominance • Energy resilience (batteries for -40°F operations) • AI-driven autonomy and command systems Two prizes already announced. • $500K for emerging tech (October 2025) • $2.5M for counterstrike capabilities with U.S. Army Europe The shift is stark. Traditional acquisition takes 10+ years. FUZE promises prototypes to programs of record in months. Army labs and 75th Innovation Command vet the tech. Winners scale to production. Critics worry about over-focusing on tech while recruiting struggles. But Ukraine proved agile beats legacy. When commercial drones outpace billion-dollar programs, the model needs disruption. Three ways in. • SBIR/STTR grants for early stage • xTech challenges for specific problems • Direct pitches at AUSA mid-October Startups like Anduril benefit. Legacy primes lose their moat. The Army's telling innovators "we're open for business." Is your tech ready for a VC-style pitch to the Pentagon?

𝗘𝘂𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗲’𝘀 𝗹𝗮𝗴𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗥&𝗗: 𝗠𝘂𝗰𝗵 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗸 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗱𝗲𝗱 ‼️ Last week the International Monetary Fund published a very interesting and comprehensive paper about the need for more venture capital in Europe to tackle our continents challenges. To name a few: ✔️productivity per hour worked is app 30% lower in 🇪🇺compared to the 🇺🇸 ✔️R&D investments are still way below the target of 3% per annum ✔️Within the top 100 tech companies worldwide merely a handful are European Is it all about 💶 I here you say? No it is about keeping up our welfare for future generations. And about a liveable planet. And increasing our innovation and competitiveness are crucial to do so. Which is also the key message of Mr. Draghi’s report I hope. The IMF report takes a deeper dive into the underlying issues: ✔️ VC investments are only 0,4% of GDP. In the US it is 3x as much ✔️Europeans park their savings in bank accounts. And banks are very risk aversie when it comes to financing hightech startups. ✔️Long term savings go primarily via pension funds, who hardly invest in VC in Europe (despite some positive signs recently) ✔️The EU has fewer and smaller VC funds leading to smaller rounds, less opportunities for scale-up financing and limited exit options ✔️ European scale-ups end up listing in the US instead of Europe itself ✔️ National fragmentation within the EU leads to a lot of barriers for scaling What has to be done? ✅ Increase efforts on a real single European market, for example by consolidating stock market exchanges and diminishing cross border red tape ✅ Make it more attractive for pension funds and insurers to step into VC ✅ Enhance the capacity of European Investment Bank (EIB), European Investment Fund (EIF) and national promotional institutes, like Invest-NL ✅ Implement preferential tax treatments for equity investments in startups and VC funds ✅ Encourage more funds-of-funds And I would like to ad to the findings in the report two things: 1️⃣ We need a cultural mind shift, more urgency and embracing true entrepreneurship 2️⃣ We have to step up our game when it comes to tech transfer. Transforming our high quality academic knowledge into economic and societal impact via startups.

3 European Deeptech unicorns faltering in a single year is hardly just a coincidence. I'm a deeptech investor in Europe, but you won't find here the typical VC post saying the usual: "the government should have helped" "we don't have scale up capital" "it's the founders who weren't capable". The first is just BS. The answer to a capitalist shortcoming is hardly a socialist one. If European deeptech titans are to emerge on similar scale to the US, we can handly expect the government to be the babysitter. The second may be true in a general sense, but Northvolt specifically had raised over $15 Billion from global investors. Lilium was also a global firm by the time it tanked. And Graphcore, which successfully exited, but was effectively a fire sale to a foreign conglomerate instead of a unicorn or decacorn Nvidia challenger listing, had Sequoia as backers. In a deeper sense, however, you wonder if the capital story would have been different, had they moved the main operations to the US, where deeptech scaleups are able to raise several billions in capital once they hit product market fit. As for the third, that's clearly not the case. All these founders had proven themselves in previous ventures and the very fact they had achieved unicorn status raising global money is a testament to the fact it's not a simple case of "they made a mistake, the company collapsed". Companies don't explode nor collapse for single decisios. Yet there is an element of broader talent and process building issues when the FT reported that Northvolt failed to go past 1% of their production capacity. And industry experts I know through my portfolio (I invested in both fields at seed by the way) told me they were extremely skeptikal of Lilium's product and progress. So easy answers are clearly not the way to go. But I am at least going to be asking myself questions. Meanwhile, European banks and countries continue their silly in-flights over where they want VCs to deploy the capital or how they look at startup legislation (spoiler alert: only in their little backyard!) Maybe we should just accept European deeptech founders should raise seed, move to the US, and keep an R&D facility here? It's not a stupid question to ask. Even for someone like me who is fully dedicated to the sector here in Europe. #venturecapital #deeptech #europeantech

This map tells a story Europe should not ignore. The distribution of VC-backed European Deep Tech and Life Sciences university spinouts is highly concentrated by institute of origin. ➡️ A handful of universities dominate the landscape — while much of the EU, and especially Italy, is largely absent from the map. This is not about lack of scientific excellence. Europe produces outstanding research. The gap emerges between research and company creation: tech transfer effectiveness, incentives for faculty entrepreneurship, access to early-stage capital, and the ability to scale spinouts beyond the lab. The result is a paradox: strong science, weak industrialization of research. Until Europe — and Italy in particular — addresses the structural bottlenecks that turn research into venture-scale companies, it will remain underrepresented where value is actually created. The map is not just descriptive. It is a warning. Source: Deeptech and Life Sciences spinout value creation by universities in Europe by Dealroom.co Northern Gritstone Oxford Science Enterprises MITO Technology Cambridge Innovation Capital Atlantic. Here is the link for download: https://lnkd.in/dntZngyw #startups #universities #VC Mind the Bridge Alberto Calvo

Caught between hype and hesitation? Don’t let FOMO make you cast all the wrong spells. 𝐅𝐎𝐌𝐎'𝐬 𝐏𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐜: This card isn't just any ordinary spell; it taps into the deepest recesses of your mind, exploiting your anxiety about lagging behind in the latest AI advancements. Suddenly, you're forced to cast every spell in your hand, regardless of its usefulness or effectiveness. Every. Single. One. 𝐔𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐅𝐎𝐌𝐎 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐈𝐭𝐬 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐬 FOMO, or the Fear of Missing Out, is a psychological phenomenon that can lead to rash decisions and impulsive actions. In a business context, FOMO can create a sense of urgency and panic, compelling companies to adopt new technologies or trends without thorough evaluation. This reactive approach can lead to wasted resources, ineffective implementations, and ultimately, missed opportunities for genuine innovation. 𝐆𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐀𝐈 𝐚𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐔𝐥𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐅𝐎𝐌𝐎 𝐓𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐠𝐞𝐫 Generative AI has taken the world by storm. From creating art to writing poetry, and even composing music, it seems there's nothing this technology can't do. The hype is palpable, and as a manufacturer, you might feel the pressure to jump on the AI bandwagon immediately—or risk being left behind. 𝐀𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐀𝐝𝐯𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐍𝐚𝐯𝐢𝐠𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐅𝐎𝐌𝐎 𝐢𝐧 𝐀𝐈 𝐀𝐝𝐯𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬: 𝟏. 𝐀𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐑𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐯𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐘𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐁𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐬: Not every AI advancement will be relevant to your manufacturing processes. Take a step back and evaluate how generative AI specifically can benefit your operations, whether it's in product design, quality control, or supply chain optimization. 𝟐. 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐭 𝐒𝐦𝐚𝐥𝐥, 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤 𝐁𝐢𝐠: Instead of overhauling your entire system, start with small, manageable AI projects. This could be as simple as automating a specific task or implementing AI-driven predictive maintenance. Small successes can pave the way for larger implementations. 𝟑. 𝐈𝐧𝐯𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐢𝐧 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐮𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐋𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠: The AI landscape is ever-evolving. Encourage your team to stay updated with the latest trends and advancements through courses, webinars, and industry conferences. Knowledge is power, and staying informed can help you make better decisions. 𝟒. 𝐂𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐄𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐭𝐬: You don't have to go it alone. Partner with AI experts and consultants who can provide insights tailored to your specific needs. Their expertise can help you navigate the complexities of AI implementation effectively. 𝟓. 𝐅𝐨𝐜𝐮𝐬 𝐨𝐧 𝐕𝐚𝐥𝐮𝐞: Before diving into any AI project, conduct a thorough cost-benefit analysis. Understand the potential return on investment and prioritize projects that offer the most significant impact on your bottom line. ******************************************* • Follow #JeffWinterInsights to stay current on Industry 4.0 and other cool tech trends • Ring the 🔔 for notifications!

Some thoughts on the state of the AI Industry today: Hype is omnipresent in the rapidly evolving world of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Every day, new breakthroughs and advancements are touted as the next big thing, promising to revolutionize industries and solve complex problems. However, amidst this excitement lies a significant danger: the risk of being misled by the noise and falling victim to inflated expectations. One of the primary dangers of AI hype is the potential for misallocation of resources. Companies and individuals, driven by the fear of missing out, often invest heavily in AI technologies without fully understanding their capabilities and limitations. This can lead to wasted resources and failed projects. For instance, the AI bubble of the 1980s, known as the "AI Winter," saw massive investments in AI technologies that were not yet mature. Many investors suffered significant financial losses when these technologies failed to deliver on their promises. To avoid falling prey to the hype, it is crucial to filter out the noise and focus on the signal – the true, sustainable advancements in AI. Here are some practical steps to help navigate this landscape: - Do Your Research: Before investing in or adopting any AI technology, conduct thorough research. Understand the technology's underlying principles, its current state of development, and its realistic applications. Be wary of exaggerated claims and seek information from reputable sources. - Look for Proven Use Cases: Focus on AI solutions that have demonstrated success in real-world applications. Case studies and testimonials from credible organizations can provide valuable insights into the technology's effectiveness. - Adopt a Skeptical Mindset: Approach AI innovations with a healthy dose of skepticism. Question the feasibility of grand promises and seek out expert opinions. Remember that if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is. - Learn from History: Historical examples, such as the Dot-Com Bubble and the AI Winter, serve as cautionary tales. During the Dot-Com Bubble of the late 1990s, many internet companies with unsustainable business models received exorbitant valuations, leading to a market crash when reality set in. Similarly, the AI Winter reminds us of the importance of aligning expectations with technological realities. In conclusion, while the potential of AI is immense, it is essential to navigate its landscape with caution. By filtering out the noise and focusing on substantiated advancements, we can harness the true power of AI without falling victim to the dangers of hype. Let's learn from the past and approach the future of AI with informed optimism and strategic discernment.

My previous startup was acquired for millions of dollars by a company valued over $300 million. Ever wondered how exactly do startups get acquired for millions? Here is how: I had been in touch with investors of the acquiring company well before the acquisition. One of their Managing Directors was a college alum I met at an event. That connection later led to conversations with the Partner who had led the acquirer’s Series A and eventually helped drive and mediate the acquisition. There was trust and context long before there was a term sheet. Second, our books were extremely clean. Every single bank entry had a corresponding invoice. My CA was meticulous about this. During due diligence, Deloitte went through everything in depth and did not find much to flag. Clean fundamentals remove enormous friction in M&A. Third, while we were small, we were disproportionately strong in the Financial Services market. Multiple large BFSI companies were actively using our product. That made us strategically valuable, not just financially interesting. Fourth, we were at around $1 million in annual revenue. Large enough to clearly prove product market fit. Small enough to be affordable and attractive to acquire. This "in between" stage is a powerful but often misunderstood position. Fifth, we were bootstrapped. Harshita and I held the majority of the equity and did not have any institutional investor on the cap table. That meant when the decision to sell came, it was just the two of us deciding. No board approvals, no misaligned incentives, no forced outcomes. Speed and clarity matter a lot in acquisitions. Finally, optionality changes everything. The acquirer was not the only company interested in buying us. Multiple companies were in active conversations for the same reasons above. That leverage allowed us to dictate terms instead of reacting to them. The biggest myth founders believe is that acquisitions are planned exits. In reality, they are outcomes earned by building something valuable, trusted, and hard to replace, while keeping relationships and fundamentals strong. Ironically, the less focused you are on "selling", the more likely someone wants to buy. Now that I have sold my first venture and am financially independent, my motivation has changed. I am building GreyLabs AI to be a long-lasting institution, not something optimised for a quick exit. Ironically, that mindset often creates the most durable outcomes. #startups #business #entrepreneurship

The Gulf crisis just created the biggest startup opportunity in a decade. Five things Silicon Valley leaders need to understand right now: 𝗗𝗮𝘁𝗮 𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝗺𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝘁𝗮𝗿𝗴𝗲𝘁𝘀. Iranian drones hit three AWS facilities. The Strait of Hormuz and Red Sea both data chokepoints are closed. The security frameworks behind the Gulf’s AI partnerships were built for chip export control, not for protecting buildings during a war. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗱𝗲𝗳𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗲-𝘁𝗲𝗰𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗶𝘀 𝗶𝘀 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗲𝗹𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴. The Pentagon set a $13.4B AI budget for FY2026 which is the largest in U.S. defense history. $130B+ in VC has flowed into defense-tech startups since 2021. → Palantir’s Maven system ran intelligence across five combatant commands → Anduril ($30.5B valuation) — Lattice OS selected as the Army’s fire control platform, Arsenal-1 factory producing autonomous systems at scale, OpenAI partnership for counter-drone AI → Shield AI ($5.3B) — Hivemind autonomous piloting completed AI vs. manned F-16 combat maneuvers → Epirus ($1.5B) — directed-energy counter-drone systems integrated with Anduril’s Lattice, directly relevant to Gulf drone defense → Saronic ($1.5B) — autonomous naval vessels applicable to Strait of Hormuz patrol → Hermeus ($1B+) — hypersonic aircraft for ISR and rapid strike → Ares Industries — Y Combinator’s first weapons company, building low-cost anti-ship missiles → Ursa Major ($2.5B) — rocket propulsion for supply chain independence Early-stage investors in this space are looking at generational returns. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗹𝗶𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘁𝘂𝗽 𝘄𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗶𝘀 𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲. Every hyperscaler is now rethinking geographic risk. That creates massive demand for: → Sovereign cloud infrastructure (hardened, government-grade, physically defensible) → Multi-region failover and edge computing platforms → Satellite backup connectivity (Aetherflux, Astranis) → Underground and modular data center designs → Cybersecurity for critical infrastructure against nation-state actors → Alternative compute capacity for displaced AI workloads (CoreWeave, Vultr) Startups solving resilience at the infrastructure layer will command premium pricing from both governments and hyperscalers. This is the next $100B+ category. 𝗚𝘂𝗹𝗳 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗶𝘀 𝗽𝗮𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴. Sovereign wealth funds holding $2T+ in U.S. assets are reviewing commitments. The Stargate UAE mega-campus, Amazon’s $5.3B Saudi cloud all in limbo. But post-conflict, these governments will double down on tech diversification away from oil. Startups that maintain Gulf relationships now while diversifying their own risk will be first in line when capital flows resume. The Gulf’s structural advantages with sovereign capital, energy, ambition haven’t disappeared. But the risk has permanently shifted. Rapid de-risking without full retreat.