Need for Speed

This week started a day early for us, with Hannah Prevett in The Sunday Times kicking off a flurry of media coverage for Full Speed Ahead, our latest report that probes how Britain can upgrade its network of startup support programmes.

As our Patron, Steve Rigby, writes in his foreword for the report:

“The problem is not a lack of public money. Each year, local and central government backs hundreds of incubators, accelerators and regional growth hubs. What is missing is coherence. Too much funding is awarded on short grant cycles with scant evaluation, leading to a long tail of well-intentioned but underperforming programmes.”

We conclude the report with four requests. First, the creation of a taxonomy and accreditation scheme for support programmes, tying public funding eligibility to minimum standards. Second, the adoption of a dual-track assessment that captures both company performance and entrepreneurs’ development.

Third, we’d like to see short-term grants replaced with 3-5 year outcome-linked support plus rolling reviews and bridging finance. And fourth, we’d like to see demand-led funding vouchers piloted, redeemable with accredited providers.

In essence, we want to put the interests of the founder front and centre. As Anastasia argues over on our Substack, the way we measure success is central to this:

“As impressive as charts showing ‘total investment raised by alumni’ may look, they only reveal which companies were visible at the end, not whether the support system helped people progress as individual entrepreneurs. Founders often move through multiple programmes, so attribution blurs and long-term capability building disappears from view. Adding the entrepreneur as an additional unit of analysis and tracking progression over time – skills gained, roles taken, ventures started or joined – and linking those trajectories back to the support they used, would shed more light on what works.”

This is how entrepreneurial ecosystems learn and improve:

“It then becomes easier to check how the funnel is behaving: are enough founders with the right competencies emerging at pre-seed? Are they progressing to seed and Series A on schedule? Where are they stalling? What kind of intervention helps them move again? Getting clarity on questions like these would be invaluable for a better understanding of progression, and enable adjustments to support accordingly.”

But here, we should tread carefully. As Goodhart's Law and Campbell’s Law remind us: “When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.” In other words, if we focus too narrowly on metrics like investment raised or survival rates as proxies for impact, we risk distorting behaviours and overlooking what really matters: long-term entrepreneurial development.

While the media coverage is welcome, we’ve been overwhelmed with the support and insightful reflections from the business support community in the UK and across the world. For those wanting to take part in the debate, I’ll point you in the direction of the many comments on my LinkedIn post, the post and article by Rachel Stockey of King’s College London, as well as Steve’s post.

While we obviously take responsibility for the policy, the ideas came about from deep engagement with those on the frontline. Whether that’s Jonathon Clark of Capital Enterprise, Hamish McAlpine and Fabio Bianchi of Oxentia, Neil Marshall of Change School, Chris Fellingham of Kindling Ventures, David Herbada of Zinc Ventures, Steve Aicheler of Enterprise Educators UK, Laura Bennett of the Enterprise Hub at the Royal Academy of Engineering, Tom Forth of The Data City, independent adviser Jamie Clyde, James Phipps of the Innovation Growth Lab, Gareth Jones of Townsq, as well as the many more we’ve spoken with over recent months.

The Government should take the reaction to our report as a strong signal that this is an area of policy that is ripe for reform. Ours isn’t the first or last word on this, but with your help, it looks likely to be the catalyst for change.

If you would like to be notified the same day a report launches, fill in this form or join our WhatsApp Community.

Mother of Invention

I’m no economic forecaster, but the latest unemployment figures and inflation data suggest that there may be some storms – or at least some drizzle – on the horizon. Britain’s official unemployment rate rose to 4.7% in the three months to May, up 0.1% from April to reach the highest level since June 2021, while last month inflation rose to 3.6%.

This concern for the wider economy was reflected in the results of our inaugural Entrepreneurs Survey (though, true to form, entrepreneurs were bullish about their own businesses’ prospects).

The unemployment increase is the result of the £25 billion increase in Employer National Insurance Contributions and a 6.7% rise in the National Living Wage. As Richard Parrington writes in The Guardian, “the evidence would suggest a clear impact from the chancellor’s tax-raising measures. Figures released on Wednesday showed inflation rose by more than expected in June as firms passed on higher employment costs to the price of restaurant meals, hotel stays and supermarket groceries.”

Some entrepreneurs may feel temporarily emboldened by the shift in power between employers and employees, and by easier access to talent. But more importantly, rising unemployment reduces demand across the economy. While we may see more necessity entrepreneurship, opportunity-driven entrepreneurship – the real engine of innovation – tends to decline.

The key under these circumstances is turning necessity into opportunity.

That’s why the government should consider reinstating a form of the Enterprise Allowance Scheme (EAS), which supported unemployed people who set up their own businesses. While it was an initiative devised by the late, great Lord Young for Margaret Thatcher’s Conservative government to try to temper high unemployment at the time, it’s very much ‘left coded’ and was embraced by creators who were otherwise not fans of Thatcher (to say the least).

As I wrote last year in Empowering the Future, written in partnership with Youth Business International, the original EAS was instrumental in supporting now-renowned entrepreneurs such as Superdry’s Julian Dunkerton, Creation Records’ Alan McGee, and the artist Tracey Emin.

Nearly two-thirds of EAS participants continued to run their businesses 18 months after enrolling, and one-fifth of these businesses employed at least one additional person. According to World Bank analysis, the cost per job created under the EAS was approximately £1,729 at that time, equivalent to around £6,000 today. That’s remarkably good value compared to paying benefits and other interventions.

The EAS was eventually replaced by the much less generous New Enterprise Allowance (NEA), which has also been discontinued.

It goes without writing, I hope, that there are many more policy interventions – indeed, some more urgent – needed to fight unemployment. Not least, we must decrease the taxes on employment, not bring in regulations to disincentivise hiring, liberalise planning to increase labour mobility, and ensure job-creating immigrant founders can continue to stay and thrive in the UK.

But if unemployment returns to levels seen in the early 1980s, early 1990s, or late 2000s, the umbrella of a revamped EAS could be essential.

In the Works

Are you a student or recent graduate excited to break into public policy work? Or perhaps you’re working in another field and are just curious about entrepreneurship policy? If so, we have formalised work experience opportunities that give highly motivated people a front-row seat to how entrepreneurial ecosystems work and how evidence informs policymaking. You may even get the chance to write something for us, as Florian Gosler did in this week’s Three Big Ideas. Find out more here.

It’s a Feature

Regular attendees of our events won’t be surprised to hear that around half our network is made up of female founders. Much of this is a result of our Barclays-supported Female Founders Forum.

At the forefront of this work are the 100+ featured members who have contributed to our events and reports over the years. As I’ve shared previously, this year’s report will focus on university spinouts, so it would be great to get requests for interest and nominations for female-founded spinouts we should speak with and feature as case studies in this new report and featured as members on our website. Let us know.

Knowledge of Funds

The big news this week was yesterday’s Government announcement of a £400 million package to back investment fund managers from underrepresented backgrounds, as well as an extra £50 million into female-led funds to support the aims of the Invest in Women Taskforce.

From 2026, the British Business Bank will deploy a £400 million programme aimed at women, ethnic minorities, people with disabilities and communities from deprived areas. The initiative will expand its Enterprise Capital Funds so that more diverse managers can access early-stage finance, while also boosting investment in micro-funds of around £10 to £15 million – the first rung on the venture capital ladder for emerging investors.

Alongside this, the Bank will work with venture capital partners to provide modest capital injections and training for talented individuals who lack personal wealth or industry connections, helping them build a track record and break into investing.

This aligns very nicely with the sorts of arguments we’ve made through our Female Founders Forum, which we’ve been working on with Barclays for nearly a decade. Also, back in 2022, Anisah Osman Britton made the case for the British Business Bank supporting more diverse fund managers in a project we undertook with Morgan Stanley.

As Andy Davis, Co-Founder of 10x10, argued at the time:

“It’s probably unrealistic to force private angel-owned funds to change their behaviour. The way they invest is going to be at their discretion, and they are going to do what they want. But I do think the BBB [British Business Bank] is the answer. It should be made to invest in diverse fund managers. That’s the simplest and most straightforward solution.”

If these interventions are going to be a success, the British Business Bank needs to make sure the hands of the fund managers aren’t tied too tightly though. On that front, Leo Ringer at Form Ventures has a brilliant article on the many, varied and confused definitions of what it means to “back British businesses” across government and the rules that flow out of this.

For example, the Enterprise Capital Funds programme, which is where yesterday’s announced initiative sits, has recently swapped its “demonstrable UK benefit” rule for a tight four-part test. Funds now need a UK principal place of business and two-thirds of executives tax-resident here – conditions unseen in other policies – and they must hold a UK parent company. This collides with the rising trend of British founders placing a Delaware entity to woo US capital.

I recommend reading Leo’s article in full, which unpicks lots of definitional differences across the whole startup ecosystem.

Wealth of Knowledge

I know where our comparative advantage lies, so today I’ll draw just share a paragraph from the IFS’s statement in response to speculation that the Government might bring in a wealth tax:

“In practice, implementing a wealth tax would be difficult. It would require the government to set up a new administrative apparatus to value wealth – and valuation would be extremely difficult for some assets, such as private businesses: it is much easier to observe and tax the stream of income they generate. An annual wealth tax would need to apply broadly to all assets to ensure that it was not easy to avoid. Such a tax could raise significant revenue if it applied to the bulk of the UK’s wealth – that would include the homes and pensions of the middle class. Trying to raise large amounts of revenue from only the very wealthy would make the UK a less attractive place for those people to live.”

Get Connected

At the end of the month, we’ll host our second TEN x Connected.Ventures: Ecosystem Builders Meetup at the London School of Economics. This project is all about connecting the connectors, and we’re now committed to quarterly meetings of the group. Those who are accepted onto an event are also invited to join the WhatsApp group, which will hopefully grow into a way to reach the UK’s ecosystem builders in one place.

Clearly, we would be missing a trick to just do these in London, which is why we’re looking for partners to take this on the road. Get in touch if you’re as passionate about this as we are.

Venture Out

To hunker down, or not to hunker down, that is the question I explored in our fortnightly Big Ideas feature. While I sympathise with the advice that entrepreneurs should focus on what they can control, I don’t think this means they should just mind their own businesses. Instead, I suggest they venture into the world of policy and find a way to “channel their rage” (or whatever emotions they‘re feeling).

As if to prove my point, yesterday we saw the Government shelve reforms to Companies House that would have required businesses to file their accounts in a more onerous manner. Under legislation brought in by the previous government, small and micro companies would have had to disclose their profit-and-loss statements for the first time as part of their annual accounts.

This volte-face didn’t happen by chance, but because lots of business owners and business groups alerted the Government about the impending problem. While governments don’t listen to every gripe, if we can make a strong case that entrepreneurs are actually aggrieved, and that it will negatively affect the economy and, potentially, as a consequence, politicians’ election prospects, they’re all ears.

Also, many of the UK’s most exciting startups are in sectors where ignoring politics and policy isn’t a choice – whether because they’re in a highly regulated market, or because it’s a completely new one where policy is still evolving.

Here are just three examples. If you want to run a consumer-facing website, game or social app that children might use, you must comply with the Online Safety Act. If you want the NHS to buy your software, devices or supplies, your tender must include a Carbon Reduction Plan. If you want to offer budgeting tools, payment initiation or any service that connects to UK bank accounts, you have to implement Strong Customer Authentication under the FCA’s PSD2 regime.

All that being said, there are exceptions that prove the rule. Just this week, I received a bulleted list from an entrepreneur setting out how to reform the entire tax code. It happened that I agreed with quite a lot of it, but I don’t fancy his chances of convincing the Chancellor when the peerless Mirrlees Review hasn’t succeeded yet. There is no point in fighting a lost cause.

Also, not every idea is one worth pursuing. Entrepreneurs or business groups can come up with bad policies. Sometimes they don't adequately understand the problem or justify government intervention. Sometimes the policies are poorly constructed, too costly or impractical to implement. Sometimes they are impossible due to the political landscape or public sentiment. Sometimes they would undermine good governance. I could go on.

But all in all, we are definitely underweight in getting the insights of the UK’s innovators into government. Those creating wealth, jobs, and on the front line of regulation should have a louder voice. And when we band together, we believe we can make a difference. I ended my article on the other Substack with this quote from Margaret Mead, and I hope regular readers will forgive me for doing so again:

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.”

Lords A-Leaping

This week, we introduced some of the members of the Young Entrepreneurs Forum to investors (including the youngest partner ever at A16z), but now comes the think-tanking. And for that, we need to hear from the next generation. There are three easy steps:

First, join the Young Entrepreneurs Forum by filling out this short form. Second, answer these questions – your insights will shape the report, and you may be quoted or featured as a case study (if you want), which could gain you media attention. Third, once you’ve done that, request a place at the report launch in October.

Lab to Launch

We’re embarking on research for our next report in the Female Founders Forum series. This time we’re focusing on spin-out founders. We want to understand three key things:

• What speeds up or slows down the path from research to company?

• How do negotiations over equity, support and funding play out?

• Are the 2023 spin-out policy reforms making any real difference on the ground?

If you’ve recently founded (or are in the process of founding) a university spin-out in the UK, we would love to learn from your experience. We’re equally keen to hear from those who support spin-outs – whether you work in a TTO or advise academic founders independently. If that sounds like you, drop Anastasia a line.

Three Big Ideas #38

Three Big Ideas is our fortnightly roundup of ideas (and our takes on them) in entrepreneurship, innovation, science and technology, handpicked by the team.

This week, Philip Salter discusses that entrepreneurs shouldn't just "hunker down" – because governments listen when founders make strong cases, Anastasia Bektimirova writes about different science advice systems, while Jessie May Green reflects on London Climate Action Week.

By a Squeak

It’s been a big week of media coverage for us, as we launched our inaugural Entrepreneurs Survey. As Eamonn Ives, our Research Director, wrote for City AM:

“Last week, the government announced that serial entrepreneur Alex Depledge would be joining the Treasury as Britain’s first-ever entrepreneurship adviser. New polling from The Entrepreneurs Network suggests that this appointment couldn’t come soon enough. Fully 84 per cent of founders we surveyed do not believe the government understands their needs as entrepreneurs, compared to just four per cent who do. If it’s any consolation to Rachel Reeves and Sir Keir Starmer, founders aren’t exactly wowed by any of Britain’s other political parties – 43 per cent replied ‘none of the above’ when given a choice of which party they trust most to know what they and the startups they lead require.”

So what’s driving the current malaise? In a word: tax.

As I said to Henry Bonsu on Times Radio yesterday in response to the British Chamber of Commerce’s Annual Conference (go to 18:30 to listen), Shevaun Haviland is right to call for “no further tax increases on business in the autumn budget.”

Our survey shows that 84% of entrepreneurs have a negative view of taxation (only 8% positive), and the 1,000 founders who signed our letter against equalising Income Tax and Capital Gains Tax shows this has become a – if not ‘the’ – major gripe for founders.

The other big issue is the Employment Rights Bill, which, combined with the immediate pain of increasing National Insurance Contributions, is driving many to outsource and offshore. We find that in the next 12 months, 12% of founders are looking to sell their business, and when asked why it’s not for reasons you would hope. For the brave, click through to slide 13 of our deck.

But I don’t want to fall into a position of pessimism. While only 19% are optimistic about the next 12 months for the UK economy, 69% of founders surveyed are optimistic about their business. The truth is that the UK is still an incredible place to be an entrepreneur. It’s just that when the pips start squeaking, don’t be surprised if Britain see less entrepreneurship.

A massive thanks to readers who completed the survey. If you want to make sure you don’t miss out next time, sign up here.

Where It's At

On Wednesday, we host our third event of the Young Entrepreneurs Forum. If you are or know a young person who would benefit from this event, please send them here. We will be joined by Sean Kohli, Chair of the Young Entrepreneurs Forum, alongside other invited guests from Silicon Valley.

We aren’t just looking for those who have started a business. We are looking for people who like to build, which could be a technology, charity, fund, campaign or anything entrepreneurial.

If you want a testimonial, take a look at Malindi Mwangi’s LinkedIn post. Off the back of hearing from Chris Hullat, she found out about the Octopus Energy Entrepreneur Awards, and following the nomination of her local MP, Callum Anderson, managed to win.

Match Pointing

Rt Hon Chloe Smith has an interesting piece on how the UK might overcome economic inactivity. She posits that AI-driven job-matching could help, as in Estonia where an AI-powered tool has seen 10-15% more people remain employed than those advised by a human without AI assistance. If you’re working in this space, drop Anastasia an email as she has been talking with Chloe on this topic and it has really piqued our interest.

Breakfast Club

One reason for starting The Entrepreneurs Network is simply because I love spending time around entrepreneurs. It’s telling that our survey found most founders are optimistic about their business, even if they aren’t quite as bullish on the British economy.

That’s why we’re working on a plan to start hosting regular small, private breakfasts with the 10,000 or so entrepreneurs in our network (not all at the same time). For this, we’ll need partners, so drop me an email if you would like to chat about this.

We think these breakfasts would allow us to take an even more regular pulse of what’s holding back founders – feeding into the work we do while strengthening the network of entrepreneurs.

Keeping Up With the Joneses

This week the Government gave two encouraging nods to entrepreneurship. On Tuesday, it was announced that Emma Jones CBE, founder of Enterprise Nation, will become the new Small Business Commissioner to help tackle late payments. And yesterday, news broke that Alex Depledge MBE, founder of Resi, will become the Treasury’s first entrepreneurship adviser. Following in the successful footsteps of Matt Clifford CBE, who we just found out is standing down as the Prime Minister’s Adviser on AI Opportunities, it begs the question: what can entrepreneurs bring to government?

One project I think about a lot – and wrote about in our latest Three Big Ideas Substack fortnightly series – is the creation of GOV.UK. Martha Lane Fox laid the groundwork with her influential 2010 report Directgov 2010 and Beyond, which called for a single, user-focused government website and a dedicated digital team to build it. Her recommendations led to the creation of the Government Digital Service (GDS) under the political backing of Lord Maude, with design and delivery led by technologists like Mike Bracken.

In its first few years, the GDS quickly gained a reputation as a global trailblazer in government digital transformation. By 2016, we topped the United Nations E‑Government Development Index. It also saved money. Between 2011–2016, GDS reported £1.3 billion in cost savings through tighter IT spend controls and the use of common digital platforms, such as the G-Cloud procurement and the Digital Services Framework for SMEs. The UK also co-founded the Digital Nations coalition in 2014, hosting the first summit of leading digital governments to reinforce our position as a digital world leader.

You don’t need me to tell you that we no longer lead in this area – otherwise I wouldn’t have to keep writing about why we should emulate Estonia – but this isn’t the fault of any of the entrepreneurs and technologists who built the system. If we had kept innovators at the heart of the system, we could be the envy of the world, competing with the likes of Denmark, Estonia, Singapore and South Korea.

So what do entrepreneurs, investors and innovators need to be successful in government?

First and foremost, they need the skills to deliver. There is a material difference between the likes of Dame Kate Bingham, who was instrumental in the success of the Vaccine Taskforce, and Sir Alan Sugar, who achieved very little as Enterprise Champion under Gordon Brown and David Cameron.

But that’s not enough. Entrepreneurs coming into government also need high-level political backing with real powers – even brilliant innovators will struggle if political leaders are not willing to enact bold recommendations that outsiders might suggest, or if they face constantly changing priorities.

Those coming into government also need clearly defined missions and measurable goals. It’s important to garner some short-term wins to build momentum, and to find a way to both impose a culture of delivery, while not ruffling so many feathers that they can’t achieve their objectives. Diego Piacentini, the orchestrator of Italy’s digital transformation, cautions about complaining too much.

What You Really Want

As many of you know, we tested out your willingness to respond to surveys with Public First. I’m delighted that one email (and a bit of coaxing here) was enough to hit a healthy sample of founder-led businesses. If you want to find out the policies that matter most to entrepreneurs, join us on Wednesday for our launch event. You’ll hear from the Financial Times’ Jonathan Moules and Public First’s Rachel Wolf. And get in touch with me if you want to partner with us on our next survey.

Down for Business

As part of its efforts to understand the startup business and entrepreneur support activity in the UK, the Centre for Entrepreneurs is leading on a survey of their own, which we, alongside a few other organisations, are supporting. It is intended for any startup business organisation in the UK to complete quickly and simply. Find out more here.

Young Guns

Sticking on the theme of surveys, we have also opened one up specifically to gauge the views of younger founders as part of our Young Entrepreneurs Forum. If you’re a young founder and want to make your voice heard on what it’s like to build a business in Britain today, please consider filling it out. You may be featured in the final report which will be launched in the House of Lords later in the year.

Three Big Ideas #37

Three Big Ideas is our fortnightly roundup of ideas (and our takes on them) in entrepreneurship, innovation, science and technology, handpicked by the team.

This week, Philip Salter celebrates news that Emma Jones has been appointed as Small Business Commissioner, Eamonn Ives wonders whether our ageing society can explain Britain’s dwindling economic dynamism, whileAnastasia Bektimirova writes about challenge prizes and how best to employ them to further innovation.

Under Review

This week, Chancellor Rachel Reeves delivered her much-anticipated Spending Review, setting out the Government’s strategic priorities with a 2.3% real-terms increase in total departmental budgets. From healthcare to national security, the Review touches virtually every corner of public policy, but does it deliver the coherent vision Britain’s businesses need to deliver growth?

No policy announcement – or newsletter for that matter – is complete nowadays without mentioning AI. As Anastasia Bektimirova, our Head of Science and Technology, responded:

“It’s excellent to see £2 billion allocated to deliver the AI Opportunities Action Plan, including up to £500 million for the new UK Sovereign AI Unit – which we’ve already seen in action with [the] announced investment in OpenBind, which will help position the UK as the go-to destination for AI-powered drug design by addressing one of the field’s biggest bottlenecks.

“Coupled with the additional £1 billion for the AI Research Resource announced earlier this week, more of such ambitious endeavours will help the UK gain strategic advantage in critical areas of science and technology.”

Another impediment to growth that we’ve long drawn attention to is the cost of energy. The decision to invest in both advanced modular reactors and fusion technology thus signals serious intent towards making Britain more competitive, particularly in energy-intensive sectors. As Eamonn Ives, our Research Director, notes:

“Economic growth and energy abundance go hand in hand. It’s therefore extremely welcome to see the Government resolutely commit to a nuclear power renaissance in Britain – pledging investment in innovative advanced modular reactors and fusion reactors alike.”

However, investment alone won’t deliver results. As Eamonn emphasises, “funding can only go as far as we allow it. Alongside this investment, the Government must also rationalise the regulatory landscape that nuclear developers face, so that the private sector can be the driving force behind the rollout of new nuclear assets.” As luck would have it, these are all issues that he unpacked in his recent Small Wonders report.

Somewhat less high-tech but just as important was the Review’s focus on transport infrastructure – recognising a fundamental economic truth about connectivity and growth. As Eamonn states, “deep and interconnected labour markets are the lifeblood of dynamic economies.” It’s why agglomeration is a major pillar of our policy priorities. As he goes on to say:

“When workers can better match their skills with employers, or when innovators can exchange ideas more easily, productivity booms. By investing in new transport infrastructure across the North and between Oxford, Milton Keynes and Cambridge, agglomerative forces will be strengthened.”

The success of these investments, however, depends on execution. Eamonn warns that “to ensure public money is spent effectively, the Government should double down on its planning reforms that will prevent blockers from driving up costs and delaying construction.”

Perhaps the most concerning aspect of the Review is the contradiction between stated ambitions and actual policy. While the Government commits to supporting opportunities for top international talent, this sits uncomfortably alongside restrictive immigration policies outlined in the Immigration White Paper.

Eamonn responds, “the Government says it will support new opportunities for top talent to enter the country. Yet this is diametrically opposed to other plans set out in the Immigration White Paper, which will render Britain’s economy less attractive and more difficult for the world’s brightest minds to contribute towards.”

This contradiction undermines Britain’s competitive position. “The Government knows that overseas talent is critical for our entrepreneurial ecosystem to succeed, but its stance is increasingly contradictory – with Britain’s status as an enabling place to build losing its lustre as a result.”

Share

Sober Reading

I don’t want to dampen the optimism following the successes of SXSW London and London Tech Week, but the latest Global Startup Ecosystem Report 2025 report makes for sober reading.

For the first time since 2019, London has slipped to third below New York in its highly respected Global Startup Ecosystem ranking (no prizes for guessing number one). This isn’t just a London thing, nor a UK thing, but a European thing. The report argues that the global startup landscape is undergoing its most dramatic shake-up in years.

Contract Helper

The Office of the Small Business Commissioner (OSBC) has asked us to share a Guide to Creating a Contract which aims to help small businesses write and negotiate clear, simple contracts between them and their suppliers.

The guide is designed to be as comprehensible as possible. The OSBC can’t provide a template contract to accompany it for legal reasons, but the World Commerce and Contracting Association and its charitable Foundation, who collaborated on this resource, have examples on their website.

Bull Market

I’m delighted to announce that Partners Wealth Management is the latest company to join us as a Corporate Partner. David Bull, who is a Partner in the firm, will become an Adviser.

Our Corporate Partners, like David, speak with entrepreneurs on a daily basis, so are vital for keeping us updated on their challenges. But that learning goes both ways. As David says:

“I need to understand the challenges my clients are facing in order to better support them in building their long-term personal financial and lifestyle goals. The Entrepreneurs Network creates a forum for the wealth creators of the UK to address their challenges to success.”

If you’re keen to join our growing band of brothers and sisters, driven to make the UK the best place to start and grow a business, let me know.

Spending Review 2025 – Our snap reaction

Today, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rachel Reeves, delivered the Spending Review – setting out the Government’s long-term spending plans. From the NHS to national security, energy to education and infrastructure to innovation, little was left ignored – and, overall, the Spending Review increases total departmental budgets by 2.3% in real terms.

Below, we’ve picked out a handful of areas where the Spending Review will matter most for Britain’s entrepreneurs. We’ll delve into what the Chancellor announced in more detail on Friday in Perennial Gale – so be sure to subscribe if you’re not already.

🚀 What does today’s Spending Review mean for Britain’s startups?

Our team weighs in on some of the key announcements for entrepreneurs.

Thread below! 🧶 pic.twitter.com/uV29YAWTXB

— The Entrepreneurs Network (@TenThinkTank) June 11, 2025

Commenting on the decision to invest in new nuclear energy, Eamonn Ives, Research Director at The Entrepreneurs Network, said:

“Economic growth and energy abundance go hand in hand. It’s therefore extremely welcome to see the Government resolutely commit to a nuclear power renaissance in Britain – pledging investment in innovative advanced modular reactors and fusion reactors alike. 

“As we have repeatedly outlined, however, funding can only go as far as we allow it. Alongside this investment, the Government must also rationalise the regulatory landscape that nuclear developers face, so that the private sector can be the driving force behind the rollout of new nuclear assets.” 

Commenting on AI-related announcements, Anastasia Bektimirova, Head of Science and Technology at The Entrepreneurs Network, said:

“It’s excellent to see £2 billion allocated to deliver the AI Opportunities Action Plan, including up to £500 million for the new UK Sovereign AI Unit – which we’ve already seen in action with yesterday’s announced investment in OpenBind, which will help position the UK as the go-to destination for AI-powered drug design by addressing one of the field’s biggest bottlenecks. 

“Coupled with the additional £1 billion for the AI Research Resource announced earlier this week, more of such ambitious endeavours will help the UK gain strategic advantage in critical areas of science and technology.”

Commenting on plans to invest in transport infrastructure, Eamonn Ives said:

“Deep and interconnected labour markets are the lifeblood of dynamic economies. When workers can better match their skills with employers, or when innovators can exchange ideas more easily, productivity booms. By investing in new transport infrastructure across the North and between Oxford, Milton Keynes and Cambridge, agglomerative forces will be strengthened. 

“To ensure public money is spent effectively, the Government should double down on its planning reforms that will prevent blockers from driving up costs and delaying construction.”

Commenting on the mention of the National Data Library, Anastasia Bektimirova said:

“While the Chancellor did not specify a funding figure for the National Data Library (NDL), it is encouraging to see it receive dedicated attention as a Government priority. 

“With the present level of political will behind reimagining public data infrastructure, we have a rare opportunity to be very ambitious, which we must seize.”

Commenting on the objective to attract more of the world’s top international talent, Eamonn Ives said:

“As part of the uplift to funding for R&D, the Government says it will support new opportunities for top talent to enter the country. Yet this is diametrically opposed to other plans set out in the Immigration White Paper, which will render Britain’s economy less attractive and more difficult for the world’s brightest minds to contribute towards. 

“The Government knows that overseas talent is critical for our entrepreneurial ecosystem to succeed, but its stance is increasingly contradictory – with Britain’s status as an enabling place to build losing its lustre as a result.”  

Spending Preview

All entrepreneurs know the danger of living beyond their means. Do it for too long and the businesses they’ve struggled tirelessly to build can easily come crashing down. In today’s volatile economy, knowing how to balance prudence with ambition is a growing challenge – so spare a thought for Rachel Reeves as she prepares to deliver next week’s Spending Review.

For those with better things to do than follow the ins and outs of Westminster proceduralism, spending reviews are when the government of the day sets out its spending plans – largely for any items that can reasonably be decided in advance (as opposed to expenditure like benefits, which fluctuate with the economy).

We’ve known for some months now that this particular Spending Review will be ‘zero-based’ – meaning that allocations for departments will be reset to zero and all spending decisions will be taken from there, as opposed to making increases or decreases to existing budgets. That probably sounds more radical than it actually is, but nonetheless, in theory, everything is therefore up for grabs.

Where, then, might Britain’s startups hope to see the cash being splashed? Some ankle has been shown, with £15 billion of investment earmarked for transport projects across the Midlands, the North and the West Country. Knowing what we know about how underdeveloped labour markets are outside of London – primarily owing to weak transport connectivity, as opposed to so-called skills shortages – this investment should be applauded, and all the more so if proposed changes to the planning system really do make infrastructure delivery quicker and cheaper.

Meanwhile, Darren Jones, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury – or the Minister responsible for public expenditure in plain English – has repeatedly emphasised the importance of modernising the state and using new technologies to boost public sector productivity. While that could well pay dividends, it won’t come without upfront investment – and many tech founders will spy an opportunity to supply innovative solutions that cost-effectively improve public services.

Of course, given that all government outlays are ultimately financed by the hard work and toil of the private sector, plenty of entrepreneurs may sooner prefer that Reeves tightens the purse strings instead. With the tax burden at its highest rate in decades, if now is not the time to question whether more largesse is affordable, when is? Anecdotally at least, following hikes to Corporation Tax, Capital Gains Tax and Employer National Insurance Contributions, it seems that more of Britain’s wealth creators than ever are questioning the UK as a viable place to start and grow a business.

For reasons I set out in my latest contribution to our Three Big Ideas series (do subscribe if you haven’t already), I don’t think a mass exodus of entrepreneurs is just around the corner. But, if we become complacent, and keep funding spending increases through tax rises rather than broad-based economic growth, our finely balanced fiscal situation will become downright precarious.

Last Call

Entrepreneurs have enough on their plates to deal with without also thinking about influencing policymakers. That’s where we come in. If you’re a founder, please consider filling out our Entrepreneurs Survey so we can tell politicians what Britain’s entrepreneurs really think – with the cold, hard data to prove it. The survey only takes ten minutes to complete and will be open for another few days for final responses. If you’ve already completed it, don’t forget to RSVP to attend the launch reception of the first set of results.

We’re All Ears

On the science and technology side, we have some exciting opportunities coming up for these three groups in particular:

🤖 Those working with AI to solve economic inactivity (e.g. AI-powered solutions for recruitment, job matching or other ways to improve employability, training, and support for people not yet in work);

📚 Those with strong views on what data the government could help unlock to benefit your work and how to make the National Data Library useful for you (see our latest work on this, by the way);

💡 Those who have a positive or negative, successful or unsuccessful experience with Innovate UK.

If one of the above sounds like you, please drop Anastasia a line.

Three Big Ideas #36

Three Big Ideas is our weekly roundup of ideas (and our takes on them) in entrepreneurship, innovation, science and technology, handpicked by the team.

In this week, Eamonn Ives on why a panel left him bullish on Britain, and what a new paper teaches us about the challenges of decarbonising energy use, while Anastasia Bektimirova discusses the ‘pivot penalty’ facing researchers.

Trappings of Power

Back in January, The Economist ran a piece outlining the “credibility trap” which the Labour Party found itself in once it went from being His Majesty’s Most Loyal Opposition to having its hands firmly on the levers of power. Prior to moving into Number 11, Rachel Reeves repeatedly sought to assure businesses by promising not to raise any of the main taxes and to abide by strict fiscal rules. Now faced with actually managing the country’s finances, there’s a strong argument that these guarantees are forcing the Chancellor into making sub-obtimal choices that make little economic sense in the long run.

News from the IMF this week that Britain’s future growth figures are expected to be higher than previously thought will therefore be well received on Downing Street. A bigger economy means bigger receipts for the Treasury, and thus fewer spending trade-offs. The credibility trap becomes that little bit less suffocating.

Perhaps more significantly, however, was that the revision came with what the Financial Times described as “political cover” for Reeves to amend her fiscal rules, opening up the possibility for her to extricate herself from the credibility trap. To promote stability, it recommended switching to annual, rather than twice-yearly, assessments of the public finances by the Office for Budget Responsibility, and “implementing additional revenue or expenditure measures as needed if shocks arise.” This wasn’t exactly a green light for radically changing course on tax, but it could grant the Chancellor grounds to have a more grown-up conversation about the nation’s fiscal situation.

Virtually all taxes drag on the economy, but not all do so in the same way. Economists generally see the wisdom in low but broad-based levies – such as income or consumption taxes – and warn against systems which impose high marginal rates and those which artificially distort individual decision making. It is these latter features which really destroy growth by discouraging economic activity. An historical example might be William III’s 1696 ‘Window Tax’; a more contemporary one would be Stamp Duty Land Tax, which stifles labour mobility by making it harder for people to move to where their skills are best deployed.

Whether or not Reeves takes advantage of the IMF’s helpful pronouncement is anyone’s guess. As much as it might make economic sense to rationalise the tax system, electoral sense may come up trumps. The pledge not to increase any of Income Tax, National Insurance and VAT was a signature manifesto commitment. Reform, now the main threat to many Labour MPs, are running on a platform to slash personal taxes considerably. The Government is still feeling the heat from its Autumn Budget which cut Agricultural and Business Property Relief.

That being said, Labour is still less than a year into governing. Four more will elapse before voters go to the polls again, and it’s not unthinkable that they will be more inclined to reward growth than they will be to punish backpedaling. Moreover, as evidenced by the recent howls from the farming community, it’s not necessarily true that the political consequences of hiking taxes on supposedly narrow groups are easily brushed aside – as may have to happen under the current rules if spending goes up.

With global economic volatility spiralling, this is not the time to abandon caution. But caution that prevents sensible adaptation is anything but. So far the Chancellor has frequently found herself boxed in, but this week’s IMF verdict was more than a minor upgrade in growth expectations – it was a route out of the credibility trap.

As You Wish
Building on a recent paper with the Tony Blair Institute (TBI) on how to build the National Data Library (NDL), our Head of Science and Technology Anastasia Bektimirova released follow-up work jointly with TBI this week, focused on what data researchers and innovators in academia and industry wish they had, and what’s getting in their way when trying to access and work with data.

It’s not a paper, but a website, mapping both barriers and opportunities. The findings are worth a read. Respondents from academia and industry have already revealed that it can take 50-150 weeks to access health data, HMRC Datalab has insufficient computers, some datasets haven’t seen updates for several years, compute power is “woefully poor,” and people are spending months just finding out what data exists. But the findings also give clarity about what’s possible. For example, detailed emissions data by industrial sites could accelerate decarbonisation, traffic and mobility data could provide “unprecedented understanding of accessibility, transport and inequalities,” and NHS records linked across care settings could transform treatment development.

The website is built as a living platform, designed to grow and become more useful over time, and inform NDL development as it takes shape. Anyone can share their insights, ideas, and frustrations related to data access. Ultimately, the NDL’s practical usefulness will depend on how well it meets actual user needs rather than assumptions about them.

Three Big Ideas #35

Three Big Ideas is our weekly roundup of ideas (and our takes on them) in entrepreneurship, innovation, science and technology, handpicked by the team.

In this week, Eamonn Ives discusses a new paper emphasing the importance of reducing barriers to exit, Philip Salter implores politicians to consider the second-order impacts AI could have, and Jessie May Green writes about the unexpected opportunities emerging from the energy transition.

Nightmare on Parliament Street

First up, if you’re not one of the hundreds of founders who’ve already completed our Entrepreneurs Survey, now is the time to do so. It will take less than ten minutes, and the anonymised results will help us tell politicians and civil servants – as well as the rest of the country through the media – what entrepreneurs are currently thinking about the state of the economy. This is the most efficient way to have an impact (you’ll also be invited to the launch event). Most of the questions can be answered with a single click, but for those who really want to get into things, there is also the opportunity to write in your own words what entrepreneurs need from politicians.

I don’t want to sway you, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see a fair few mentions of the ongoing R&D Tax Credits debacle. For background, you may be interested in my thoughts on this matter from last year. Without wanting to sound overly dramatic, the fact is that the vagaries of HMRC are destroying the livelihoods and lives of entrepreneurs up and down the country, and denting innovation in the process.

As our Research Director, Eamonn Ives, wrote in his latest Big Idea, “it isn’t enough for a firm to suddenly decide that it can flip a magic R&D switch and have innovation follow as a result. Rather, […] innovation requires time, trial and error, and consistency to yield results.” He cites fresh academic research that finds that “persistent investment in R&D is critical for small firms to fully realise the innovation gains derived from the ‘learning effects’ and ‘success breeds success’ mechanisms.”

In short, HMRC is constraining the compounding effect of investment.

We’ve already heard enough horror stories to fill a Stephen King novel, but the more you let us know about your challenges, the stronger our case becomes when we’re advocating for you. We’ve already connected some of you to journalists to share your experiences in the media, and we will continue to do so. And we’ll soon be hosting a roundtable on this issue, so whether you’re able to add to the weight of evidence – or would like to be part of technical discussions about how to fix things – let me know.

Good News Travels

It’s the nature of our trade that we talk about problems, and how to fix them. But from time to time we need to celebrate what’s working, which is why I’m happy to share an opportunity to do exactly that from the Department for Business and Trade.

On the back of our input into the forthcoming SME Strategy, the Department for Business and Trade is looking to feature some success stories and case studies from entrepreneurs to reflect different themes of the strategy alongside innovative and impactful support programmes.

In the first instance they’re looking for a 100-150 word teaser which should include:

• Brief description (business or programme name, sector, location, type of government support you’ve already received);

• Impact highlight (across growth, productivity or community benefits);

• Innovation or unique approach that sets it apart (i.e., new product/service);

• Contact details of business for follow-up.

• If you send them to us, we’ll forward them straight on to the Department.

Loud Voices

Many entrepreneurs are – or will become – parents, yet the intricacies of managing a business while raising children are seldom talked about in depth. We would like to change that, and to create a space where parents feel safe to explore the challenges of running a business while also running a household. It is all being led by our brilliant Adviser, Kajal Sanghrajka – herself an entrepreneur and new parent.

First off, on 4 June we’ll be hosting the first in an online series on Parenting and Entrepreneurship. Kajal will be joined by Anna Sofat of One Loud Voice for Women and Zoë Dagless of Meliora Financial Planning. As you might expect, there are a lot of thorny policy issues to be discussed here. Find out more here.

WhatsUpdate

The ball is now rolling on WhatsApp. Anyone can join here for occasional announcements. Patrons and Advisers can join here for a closed group to coordinate on strategy, while Patrons, Advisers and Supporters can join here for a closed group for early event invites and ad hoc media requests. Our other groups are slowly getting off the ground, but we’ll develop these further following meetings and in-person events.

The TL;DR is this: if you’re keen to get early invites to our events and the chance to talk to the media, now’s the time to join us as a Supporter.

Policy Updates

Our Policy Updates newsletter is back. The first was in partnership with Kingsley Napley and focused on the Immigration White Paper. Read it here, and drop me an email if you want to partner with us on future updates.

Three Big Ideas #34

Three Big Ideas is our weekly roundup of ideas (and our takes on them) in entrepreneurship, innovation, science and technology, handpicked by the team.

In this week, Eamonn Ives looks at what a new research paper tells us about maximising the effectiveness of R&D, Philip Salter discusses how non-tariff barriers are now the real impediments to trade, and Anastasia Bektimirova reflects on ARIA’s Summit.

Policy Update: The Immigration White Paper

During the Covid-19 pandemic, government business policy was constantly and rapidly changing. From not knowing what support was on offer, to uncertainty about what various rules actually meant, even the most clued-in entrepreneurs told us they were struggling to keep up. For that reason, we launched our Policy Updates newsletter – which aimed to provide information to entrepreneurs about what the latest developments coming out of Whitehall meant for them.

While the pandemic is now thankfully a distant memory, we think there’s still value in formally communicating to our network about what’s going on in the policy world – and to that end, we’re firing up our Policy Updates once again. We’ll only send these when we think there is a timely, relevant update that impacts a majority of entrepreneurs in our network. Alongside the team at The Entrepreneurs Network, we will work with trusted experts – lawyers, accountants, academics, economists, consultants – on these updates. If you’re an expert and would like to be considered for inclusion, please drop us an email.

Today’s Policy Update is about the changes proposed by the Immigration White Paper, which was unveiled last week. We know that many startups critically rely on international talent – from the staff they employ, to the people who found them, and the investors who back them. We’ve partnered with the law firm Kingsley Napley on this one – find out more about them at the bottom of the Policy Update.

Questions Time

First the good news. Right now, you can materially contribute to making the UK a better place to start and grow a business. The bad news is that it involves filling out this survey.

We get it. Nobody likes filling out surveys – least of all me. But this one really matters.

We want the insights of actual entrepreneurs – not simply sole traders or senior decision-makers in large firms, who already have their own ways of getting their views across. We pride ourselves on being the voice of entrepreneurs, so we’ve created a real opportunity for your voice to be heard by those in Westminster.

This isn’t something we wanted to do by halves – that’s why we’ve crafted it in partnership with the experts at Public First. We’ve tested it with real entrepreneurs and I promise it will only take you between six and ten minutes.

If enough of you respond, we’ll run it on a regular basis. Some of the questions in it will remain the same each time, allowing us to track trends on various issues, while others will focus on topical issues that might be dominating the conversation. Everyone on this newsletter will be able to feed into what we should ask.

As a bit of an inducement – not that you need it, of course – we’ll be inviting those who respond to a launch party for the results in the City of London next month at Wedlake Bell. Places for that will be on a first-come basis, so don’t delay – fill out the survey here.

Island of Stragglers

As you’ll know, one of the survey questions concerns visas and immigration. This was a last-minute decision in response to the Government’s Immigration White Paper, which was released on Monday.

It’s bad news for British businesses. Under the plans set out in the White Paper, fewer jobs will qualify for sponsorship as the skill threshold for Skilled Worker visas rises to degree level, with only some mid-level roles temporarily allowed under a new Shortage Occupation List.

At the same time, minimum salary requirements will increase, Graduate visas will be shortened to 18 months, and the Immigration Skills Charge will rise by 32% to £1,320 per year. English language requirements will be tougher, including for dependants. The path to Indefinite Leave to Remain will be extended to ten years for Skilled Worker visa holders, with some accelerated routes, and reportedly these changes could apply to current visa holders, subject to consultation.

As Nick Rollason, Head of Immigration at the law firm Kingsley Napley, explained in the Financial Times, the combination of higher fees, higher salary thresholds and a potential ten-year wait for settlement could push the total cost of sponsoring a skilled worker with a partner and two children as high as £67,000, if the employer bore the full cost.

If the ten-year wait is imposed widely, it would be disastrous for attracting and retaining talent here. If it applies to those who are already here, it would be immoral – and likely illegal, as was the case in 2009 when the government tried to do something like this with the Highly Skilled Migrant Programme (HSMP) visa.

A nod was given to the needs of entrepreneurs, with things like the Government looking into potentially doubling of the High Potential Individual (HPI) visa, which is exactly what we called for in Job Creators 2024. But as Bella Rhodes argues in City A.M., exceptional and entrepreneurial talent is just the tip of the iceberg. The risk isn’t so much becoming a nation of strangers, but becoming a nation of stragglers.

As you might expect, there are a lot of conversations happening about how to have an impact before some of this becomes law. If you’re keen to have your say – besides filling in the survey, which, of course, you’ve already done or shared – drop me a message so I can know to keep you updated.

Peer Review

As you may have spotted, on Monday we released a letter on the Data (Use and Access) Bill. Our request was a rather modest one. As I wrote for Forbes:

“The proposed amendments reveal a fundamental misunderstanding of AI development. They would impose crushing transparency obligations – like monthly reporting of comprehensive training data – that bear no relation to how modern AI systems are actually built.”

It was signed by the great and the good: Professor Lord Tarassenko (Oxehealth), Professor Alison Noble CBE (Intelligent Ultrasound), Sir John Michael Brady (Perspectum, Optellum, Naitive Technologies, ScreenPoint Medical, and Oxford Community Diagnostics Centre), Professor Niki Trigoni (Navenio), Professor Paul Newman (Oxa Autonomy), and many more besides. Lord Tarassenko went on to mention the letter in the House of Lords.

Drop me a message if you have views on this thorny but critical policy issue.

Lilacs Are New

This week also saw the release of the final report from The Lilac Review. I’ve been on its Steering Committee, so it’s wonderful to see this come to fruition. The Review sees the launch of the LILAC Centre for Disabled Entrepreneurship, the UK’s first flagship business incubator and research centre dedicated to advancing the success of disabled entrepreneurs.

Three Big Ideas #33

Three Big Ideas is our weekly roundup of ideas (and our takes on them) in entrepreneurship, innovation, science and technology, handpicked by the team.

In this week, Eamonn Ives brings news worth cheering about for pigs around the world, Jessie May Green looks at potential growing opportunities in using wild plants for medical purposes, and a guest contribution comes from Bright Blue’s Will Prescott on a smarter way approach to the minimal salary threshold immigrant workers need to clear.

Open letter: Data (Use and Access) Bill

Today, we published an open letter to the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, Peter Kyle, asking him to urge Members of Parliament and Peers to reject amendments to the Data (Use and Access) Bill that threaten to undermine the Government’s careful and consultative approach to legislating on copyright and AI development. Below is the text of the letter and the full list of its signatories, who consist of leading AI founders, investors and academics. Anyone wanting to also sign the letter can do so here.

The letter and signatories in full

Dear Secretary of State,

Artificial Intelligence (AI) presents a generational opportunity to grow the economy,  cement the UK’s strategic advantage in science and technology and reshape the delivery of public services for the better. British-based companies, researchers and institutions are already creating and using AI tools to make scientific breakthroughs, build businesses, improve health outcomes, enhance creativity and make people’s lives easier. 

Since coming to power, this Government has taken decisive actions to ensure Britain can lead the world in the development of new AI technologies. The publication of the AI Opportunities Action Plan sets out the laudable ambition for the UK to be an “AI maker, not an AI taker,” and provides a solid blueprint for a thriving ecosystem of AI developers and users.

We welcome the Government’s intention to follow the consultation process and to consider the impact of any proposals before developing legislative solutions. Unfortunately, amendments to the Data (Use and Access) Bill proposed in the Lords threaten to undermine that process. 

Tabled before the Government had an opportunity to review submissions to the consultation intended to help develop viable proposals for copyright reform, these amendments pose a serious threat to the UK’s potential to lead in AI. We appreciate that some Parliamentarians feel strongly about these issues, but hurried decision making of this kind will not deliver a sustainable outcome for British businesses seeking to develop and deploy innovative new AI services.  

The debate around AI and copyright is complex. Navigating that complexity is not helped by legislation that sidelines the considered perspectives of those who are directly driving innovation in Britain’s AI ecosystem.

As founders of and investors in British companies that are leading the charge to keep Britain at the forefront of the global AI industry, we ask that you urge Members of Parliament and Peers to reject these amendments and instead explore workable proposals that stand up to scrutiny.

Yours sincerely,

Professor Lord Tarassenko – Founder and Director, Oxehealth 

Professor Alison Noble CBE – Founder, Intelligent Ultrasound

Sir John Michael Brady – Founder, Perspectum; Founder, Optellum; Director, Naitive Technologies; Founder, ScreenPoint Medical; CEO, Oxford Community Diagnostics Centre

Professor Niki Trigoni – Founder and Chief Science Officer, Navenio

Professor Paul Newman – Founder, CTO and President, Oxa Autonomy 

Mark Girolami – Sir Kirby Laing Professor of Civil Engineering, University of Cambridge

Rodolfo Rosini – Co-Founder, Vaire Computing

Stephen Roberts – Co-Founder, Mind Foundry

Michael A. Osborne – Co-Founder, Mind Foundry

Professor Philip Torr – Co-Founder, Director and Chief Technologist, Aistetic

William Briggs – Founder and CEO, Naitive Technologies

Sarah Drinkwater – Solo GP, Common Magic

Jonathan Gilmore – Founder and CEO, DeepFlow

Irina Pafomova – Co-Founder, Zestic AI

Andres Guadamuz – Reader in Intellectual Property Law, University of Sussex

John Spindler – Founder, Twin Path Ventures 

Michael Slade –Founder, Retainit

Sam Bose – Founder and CEO, IntelliSense.io 

Oliver Cameron – Co-Founder and CEO, Odyssey

Jeff Hawke – Co-Founder and CTO, Odyssey

Alasdair Thong – Head of Sovereign Innovation, Alloy Therapeutics