The Entrepreneurs Network

Last month, we brought together robotics founders and the Regulatory Innovation Office so that founders could share their experience of scaling in Britain and inform the government's approach to robotics regulation. You can read our write-up here 🤖 tenpolicyupdates.substack.com/p/batteries-no…

📬 That’s all for this week! If you aren’t signed up already, you can subscribe to our newsletters for all the latest news, research and events from @TenThinkTank here: @entrepreneursnetwork" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">substack.com/@entrepreneurs…

💻 Why backing scale-ups is key to getting the tech sector booming x.com/williamnhutton…

🚨🥳 It’s time for our Friday Thread! 🚨🥳 Here’s a rundown of the key stories and interesting articles relating to entrepreneurs, economics, technology, and innovation this week…

Link: survey.alchemer.eu/s3/91113520/En… This wave is themed around how the UK presents itself globally as a place to build a business — what works, what doesn’t, and how we stack up against rival hubs. London gets its own section too, given how much of the ecosystem still runs through it

Politicians love talking about founders. They’re less good at listening to them. Our Entrepreneurs Survey is one attempt to fix that, and the next wave is open now. It takes around 10 minutes and it’s anonymous. Link below ⬇️

What does the Government’s legislative agenda means for Britain’s entrepreneurs? Read more in this edition of Policy Updates: tenpolicyupdates.substack.com/p/the-kings-sp…

Last week, and not for the first time, I heard from the founder of a genuinely innovative British technology company that has been blocked from the next iteration of G-Cloud. The reason was not poor delivery, a weak product or lack of relevance to public-sector buyers. It was negative EBITDA and a lightly capitalised balance sheet, both of which are completely normal for growth-stage tech companies. It goes without saying that the government should not be cavalier about supplier risk. But there is a difference between a company that is structurally insolvent and one that is investing in product, people and expansion. There is a difference between a supplier whose failure would bring down a critical public service and one offering a substitutable software or data product. This is precisely the kind of domestic scaleup ministers claim to want in the public-sector supply chain. This ‘computer says no’ approach needs to be replaced with something smarter. If procurement rules cannot distinguish between those cases, they will select for the wrong things: incumbency, corporate backing and the ability to satisfy a bureaucratic risk model. They will not select for innovation, and competition will suffer. This matters because public procurement is one of the largest levers government has. If the state wants more British scaleups, it needs to be a better customer to them. If it wants more competition in public services, it cannot design frameworks that only large incumbents can comfortably navigate. If it wants domestic technology companies to grow, it should not tolerate blunt financial tests that keep them out of public-sector markets. Get in touch if you have experienced similar issues with procurement frameworks, financial viability assessments or public-sector buying processes. tenentrepreneurs.org/blog/cloud-nein

📬 That’s all for this week! If you aren’t signed up already, you can subscribe to our newsletters for all the latest news, research and events from @TenThinkTank here: @entrepreneursnetwork" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">substack.com/@entrepreneurs…

🪫 Without cheap, reliable power, European economies will not reindustrialise; countries will not retain strategic industries; and governments will neither meet climate goals nor maintain public consent. x.com/MarinSanna/sta…

🚨🥳 It’s time for our Friday Thread! 🚨🥳 Here’s a rundown of the key stories and interesting articles relating to entrepreneurs, economics, technology, and innovation this week…