EUVC

In this episode of Upside, Dan Bowyer, Mads Jensen of SuperSeed and Lomax Ward of Outsized Ventures unpack a week where geopolitics, AI arms races and Europe’s tech momentum took over the headlines.A new oil shock triggered by tensions around the Strait of Hormuz threatens global energy flows and raises the spectre of another inflation cycle with direct consequences for venture capital and startup funding. At the same time, the economics of modern warfare are shifting rapidly, with cheap drones and fast-iteration defence technology reshaping how conflicts are fought and who builds the tools.Against that backdrop, Europe delivered a surprisingly strong week for tech: France produced the continent’s first $1B seed “Instacorn”, Revolut finally secured its UK banking licence, and new proposals could finally push Europe closer to unified capital markets.Meanwhile in AI, the race for chips, coding platforms and infrastructure continues to accelerate, from Nvidia’s looming announcements at GTC to Meta building its own inference silicon and the meteoric rise of AI coding startup Cursor.This isn’t just a tech news cycle.It’s energy markets, AI infrastructure, and European innovation ecosystems moving at the same time.What’s covered• The Strait of Hormuz oil shock and its ripple effects on venture markets• Ukraine’s emergence as a real-time defence innovation ecosystem• The shifting economics of warfare: cheap drones vs expensive missiles• Europe’s first $1B AI seed round and the rise of frontier labs in Paris• Yann LeCun’s new “world models” bet and the next frontier in AI• Capital markets integration and whether Europe can finally unify funding• Cursor’s $50B trajectory and the future of AI coding platforms• The AI chip war: Meta’s inference silicon vs Nvidia’s dominance• AI layoffs and whether productivity narratives are masking pandemic over-hiring

Healthcare startups rarely fail because of bad technology. They fail because the system won’t let them in.In this episode, Andreas speaks with Helen McShane, who leads the Innovation Lab at Young Lives vs Cancer, and Zoe Peden, Partner at impact venture firm Ananda, about a new experiment in healthcare innovation: a charity investing directly in startups.After more than 60 years supporting children and families affected by cancer, Young Lives vs Cancer has deep insight into where the system works — and where it doesn’t. Through its Innovation Lab, the charity is now deploying mission capital to support startups building solutions for young cancer patients.Their first investment: £30,000 into Little Journey, a platform designed to help children prepare for medical procedures.Helen and Zoe explore how charities can combine institutional knowledge with venture discipline to help startups navigate complex healthcare systems and accelerate adoption where it matters most.In this episode:Why healthcare startups struggle with adoptionWhat “mission capital” means in practiceHow charities can support startup innovationWhy credibility and partnerships often matter more than cheque size

Europe’s climate transition is no longer only about emissions.It is increasingly about sovereignty: control over industrial capacity, critical materials, and resilient supply chains.In this episode of Leaders Shaping a Resilient Planet, Carmel Rafaeli⁠, Founding Partner at ⁠The Table⁠ and our very own ⁠Andreas Munk Holm⁠, are joined by ⁠Dr Lilian Schwich⁠, Co-Founder & Co-CEO ⁠cylib⁠, a company building one of Europe’s most advanced lithium-ion battery recycling platforms.Together they unpack one of the least understood gaps in Europe’s battery value chain: refining metallurgy — the step that converts battery scrap into high-purity critical raw materials that gigafactories can actually use.Dr. Schwich explains why Europe still lags Asia in the battery ecosystem, what it takes to scale an industrial climate company, and why recycling is becoming a foundational capability for Europe’s industrial future.In this episode• Why refining metallurgy is Europe’s missing battery capability• How cylib is closing the loop in the battery value chain• Why battery recycling is a sovereignty issue• How to finance industrial climate companies• What makes corporate partnerships actually work

This week on Upside, Dan Bowyer, Mads Jensen (SuperSeed) and Lomax Ward (Outsized Ventures) unpack a moment where energy, AI and geopolitics collide.The ongoing conflict in the Middle East is threatening one of the world’s most important energy routes.AI companies are discovering that governments may ultimately control frontier models. And hyperscalers are committing hundreds of billions to AI infrastructure while venture investors quietly debate whether the cycle is overheating.The conversation explores:• Why energy shocks ripple directly into venture markets• How modern warfare is shifting toward startup-speed innovation• The clash between Anthropic and the Pentagon• Whether AI layoffs reflect real productivity gains or pandemic over-hiring• The massive infrastructure bet powering the AI boom• Germany’s productivity wake-up call for Europe• And why Europe is still capable of deep-tech moonshots like fusionThis isn’t just a news cycle.It’s capital, sovereignty and technology power shifting at the same time.🎧 Listen if you’re building or investing in AI, defence, deep tech or European venture.#euvc #VC #VentureCapital #Investing #TheEuropeanVC #Podcast #Tech #Startup

This special episode is an inside look at AI music from three very different vantage points: the builder, the investor, and the industry insider.Andreas is joined by Sundar Arvind, CEO & Co-Founder at Mozart AI, building a collaborative generative audio workstation; Daniel Waterhouse, General Partner at Balderton Capital; and Ash Pournouri, Co-Founder of Belong, entrepreneur, producer, and former manager of Avicii.Together, they unpack how AI is reshaping music creation, how serious investors underwrite risk in a litigious industry, why “one-click songs” miss the point, and whether AI expands creativity or commoditizes it.If you want a grounded view of where the real fault lines are — rights, training data, authorship, collaboration, and the psychology of creativity — this is it.ShareWhat’s covered:00:40 Mozart AI’s vision: a collaborative generative audio workstation05:10 DAWs, EDM, and why tech has always expanded music creation06:35 Why “one-prompt songs” optimise for quantity, not craft09:20 Underwriting AI music: how VCs think about billion-dollar incumbents13:00 Is this a new instrument or a 100x larger market?18:45 Are professional artists already using AI tools?21:00 Copyright, training data, and legal diligence in AI music25:15 Philosophically: what are “rights” when machines learn from music?33:40 Diffusion models explained simply: how AI generates sound36:30 The return of the band? Multiplayer music creation40:00 Ash Pournouri joins: the industry’s instinct is protection44:10 “You can’t stop development”: why demand always wins48:50 Packaging matters: AI as tool vs AI as replacement51:20 Lowering thresholds and democratization across decades56:30 Five-year predictions? We’re on the vertical part of the curve58:10 The “vibe coding” moment for music

Industrial systems are responsible for 75% of global emissions, yet only a quarter of climate-focused VC money flows into them. Not because investors don’t care — but because these systems are hard. They’re interconnected. Capital-intensive. Slow-moving. Technically dense. And deeply under-innovated.Almanac Ventures is built to change that.In this episode of the EUVC Podcast, Andreas Munk Holm sits down with Jo Slota-Newson and Marc Sabas, co-founders of Almanac Ventures — a new European seed and pre-seed deep tech fund laser-focused on unlocking decarbonisation in industrial systems through scientific breakthroughs and commercial discipline.This is a pitch episode — a chance for the EUVC LP & GP community to hear directly what Almanac stands for, how they invest, and why the next decade of industrial innovation will be shaped by specialist deep tech funds with true scientific and financial edge.Here’s what’s covered:00:49 | What Almanac Ventures is — a European seed/pre-seed deep-tech fund backing scientific breakthroughs applied to industrial systems01:31 | The founding team — Jo’s nanoscience PhD + 18 years commercialising deep tech, Marc’s finance → CVC → impact VC journey (and Jo’s 37km Channel swim)03:52 | The complementary edge — technical rigor meets financial/commercial structuring, evidenced through 45 investments and a 2.3× MOIC track record05:22 | The industrial innovation gap — 75% of emissions come from industry, yet only ~25% of climate VC targets it (because the systems are hard, complex, and interconnected)06:11 | Why industry is ripe for deep-tech disruption — 20th-century inefficiencies, high value pools, and the need for performance + cost + decarb together10:17 | “Deep tech works for venture—if you know where to look” — how to identify capex-efficient, scalable industrial technologies vs. science projects that need different capital12:25 | Case study: Hot Green — a new compressor architecture enabling industrial heat pumps for 200–400°C processes (F&B, manufacturing) with electrification upside13:49 | Case study: ReClinker — Cambridge spinout recycling cement inside steel arc furnaces, piggybacking heat, removing the CO₂-heavy chemistry step15:19 | Do you need to be an operator to invest in deep tech? — why complementary experience (science + venture + corporate + some ops) beats any single “must-have”18:35 | Investment strategy — first-check investor at TRL 4–7, pan-Europe, €300k–€1M tickets, aiming for a 25–30 company portfolio with follow-on capacity

Europe does not have a deep tech problem. It has a commercialisation problem.The last European companies to reach €100B+ market caps were SAP and ASML, both founded 40–50 years ago. If Europe wants a new generation of deep tech champions, venture capital alone won’t get us there. Customers have to step in.In this episode, Andreas Munk Holm is joined by Martin Schilling, former operator, investor, and founder of Deep Tech Momentum, to unpack why Europe excels at funding breakthroughs, but consistently fails to industrialise them.This is a conversation about:why enterprise buyers are the missing link in European deep techwhat corporates are doing wrong (and how they can fix it)how founders actually win large customers in complex, regulated marketsand why courage — not grants — is Europe’s real constraintShare🎧 Here’s what’s covered:01:15 Martin’s background: from N26 operator to deep tech ecosystem builder01:52 What is Deep Tech Momentum (DTM)?03:00 Why commercialisation — not capital — is the real bottleneck04:19 The age gap: Europe’s top companies vs the US06:26 Why US corporates acquire twice as many startups as Europe06:54 The uncomfortable truth: Europe funds innovation others industrialise08:54 Why corporates (not just VCs) must change behaviour10:49 Neo-primes: the new system integrators Europe desperately needs12:50 The four things corporates must fix to work with startups15:06 Why startup collaboration must be CEO-owned17:14 Buyers first: why conferences get this wrong19:03 Money + customers: the only two things founders really need21:27Trust, speed, and why procurement kills startups23:25 Why trust starts inside the corporate, not with founders27:03 Selling deep tech to enterprises & governments: what actually works32:03 When CVCs help — and when they hurt33:08 Enterprise sales mistakes founders keep making38:28 Deep tech sales reality: defense, policy, and long cycles44:57 Why DTM is not EU-funded — by design49:07 The state’s real role: customer, not grant machine49:23 Final takeaway: Europe needs courage, not more programs

Welcome back to another episode of Upside where Dan Bowyer, Mads Jensen of SuperSeed, and Lomax Ward of Outsized Ventures go behind the headlines shaping European tech, capital, and power.This week felt less like a market update and more like a structural reset.Nvidia posts another blowout quarter — and the market barely reacts.Ukraine, four years into war, is quietly becoming Europe’s most important defence innovation engine.Anthropic adjusts its safety posture as AI labs collide with geopolitics and procurement reality.And beneath it all, questions around margins, sovereignty, and capital allocation are getting sharper.This isn’t just a tech cycle.It feels like a systems cycle.This is Upside, where optimism is earned, not assumed.What’s covered:03:30 Nvidia earnings: perfection priced in?09:40 Ukraine four years on: from aid recipient to defence capability supplier17:30 Europe’s defence spend: real budgets or slow procurement?23:30 AI safety becomes conditional: competitive pressure meets ethics31:00 Distillation at scale: China, IP leakage, and national security35:00 SaaSpocalypse vs SaaS redemption: systems of record vs systems of action40:30 OpenAI & Anthropic margins: the hidden constraint under the hype46:00 Chips & quantum: Europe’s deep tech wedge — if scale capital shows up54:30 Abundant intelligence: what breaks if intelligence gets cheap?#euvc #VC #VentureCapital #Investing #TheEuropeanVC #Podcast #Tech #Startup

What exactly are LPs buying when they allocate to venture today and do they still believe in it?In this episode, Andreas sits down with Max Bray and Juliet Bailin, both Venture Partners at Kindred Capital VC to unpack what’s really happening beneath the fundraising headlines.Max brings the raw perspective of trying to raise a first-time fund in 2025 with unicorn-founder GPs, strong angel track records, and still struggling to secure second meetings.Juliet brings the sharper counterpoint: LP frustration isn’t always ignorance. Sometimes it’s a rational response to how venture has been practiced, especially around transparency, liquidity discipline, and the unrealistic expectation that a GP should be world-class at everything.This is a conversation about:LP behavior in uncertain cyclesThe myth of the “full-stack investor”Why solo GP economics are brutalWhether software still needs ventureAnd why the fund model is splitting at the extremesNot hot takes. Not doom.Just honest mechanics.ShareWhat’s Covered:01:04 Max’s 2025 fundraising reality: even strong “on-paper” stories struggle to get second calls03:46 LP rotation: capital moving toward liquidity, security, and shorter-duration bets05:08 LP frustration: transparency gaps + liquidity decision-making07:09 LPACs as sparring partners, not governance theatre09:31 Europe’s structural issue: too few LPs and GPs have lived full cycles12:47 The “full-stack investor” myth: investing + fund management + compliance + IR14:46 Solo GP economics: why 2/20 breaks at the small end26:08 The barbell thesis: platforms on one end, specialists on the other27:56 Software defensibility compression in the AI era30:24 Will AI decentralize outcomes — or centralize them further?33:10 The rise of AI roll-ups and alternative capital models35:19 The “middle-market squeeze” — real or overhyped?39:34 What founders actually care about when choosing a fund

Climate isn’t “over.” But building in climate has entered a new chapter, defined by shifting regulation, politicized narratives, buyer confusion, and a market that funded dozens of overlapping platforms.In this episode, Andreas and co-host Carmel Rafaeli, Founding Partner at The Table, sit down with Lubomila Jordanova, Co-founder & CEO of Plan A, just weeks after Plan Ajoined forces with Diginex, the NASDAQ-listed sustainability technology company, at the end of 2025.The conversation is part of Leaders Shaping a Resilient Planet, a series spotlighting exceptional founders in climate tech who happen to be women. The focus is not identity as a theme, but execution as a discipline. These are operators building in some of the most complex and capital-intensive parts of the real economy.This is not an acquisition recap. It is a clear-eyed discussion about what it takes to build and responsibly exit a climate tech company in a market that is maturing quickly.What’s covered:00:52 The Table: co-investing community + the Foundation’s recoverable grants model02:05 Introducing Lubomila Jordanova and Plan A02:45 The acquisition: why Plan A chose to lead consolidation04:35 Fundraising logic → acquisition logic: what changed06:40 Founder outcome vs VC outcome: how alignment works in an exit11:30 “The truth is where the real economy sits”: what carbon software actually sells13:30 The uncomfortable line: “glorified consulting with a digital angle”15:05 What VC portfolios get wrong in climate: return distribution, capital stack, secondaries16:55 Why “climate” can’t be one bucket: hardware vs SaaS vs reporting20:00 Managing investor perception: visibility, bias, and boardroom baggage23:15 The broader financial pyramid: VC vs public markets vs real-economy signals27:35 Post-exit reality: why a public-company KPI lens changes the conversation31:10 Three founder learnings (humility, ecosystem, real-world problems)33:55 A rare founder truth: pregnancy during the exit + building with “more hats than one”

In a market where “AI fund” can mean almost anything, Lumo Labs is unusually specific: digital deep tech, deployed early, and anchored in one of Europe’s densest innovation clusters—Eindhoven, home of Philips’ legacy and the High Tech Campus (“smartest square kilometer” energy).In this EUVC pitch episode, Andreas sits down with Andy Lurling, founder & GP of Lumo Labs, to unpack how an entrepreneur-turned-investor built a fund that’s deliberately more than money: a structured support program, deep technical selection, and a thesis shaped by real-world constraints, health systems under pressure, and cities as the source of most emissions and pollution.ShareWhat’s covered: 00:59 Why “Labs” and why Eindhoven: origin story + Philips legacy02:31 Andy’s founder journey: EyeOpener, ESA as first investor, and the exit06:15 From angel tickets to a fund: two cornerstone LPs pull them into fund building08:26 Fund I recap: €20m, 23 pre-seed/seed investments08:58 Fund II status: just over €40m raised, targeting €100m final size10:34 The actual thesis: AI + digital deep tech (security, IoT, AR)13:12 SDG focus: health, education, sustainable cities + climate action (urban)15:31 Why these sectors: prevention over curing, and cities as the “source problem”19:22 Where they invest: Netherlands/Belgium/Germany core; Spain/Portugal + Nordics via scouts20:30 “Smart capital” in practice: leadership, market fit, storytelling, follow-on readiness23:30 Track record snapshot: 30 companies; 3 dead; 9 (soon 11) moving into scale-up territory

Welcome back to another episode of Upside where Dan Bowyer and Mads Jensen of SuperSeed go behind the headlines shaping European tech, capital, and power.This week we’re joined by Eyal Malinger, co-founder of Resurge Growth Partners, to unpack a genuinely strange week in global tech.China unveils humanoid robots that look disturbingly battlefield-ready. Anthropic tries to draw moral lines in defence AI. Peter Steinberger leaves Europe almost as fast as he went viral. Munich becomes less “security conference” and more “Europe, wake up.” And in the background, billion-dollar AI seed rounds and quantum mega-funds quietly signal that the frontier is accelerating again.This isn’t just a tech cycle.It feels like a systems cycle.This is Upside, where optimism is earned, not assumed.What’s covered:02:10 China’s humanoid robot moment: hardware dominance meets AI brains06:20 Battlefield AI and the ethics problem Anthropic can’t avoid14:00 Raspberry Pi, edge AI, and Europe’s accidental meme stock20:30 Anthropic vs Palantir: moral lines vs deterrence logic25:10 Peter Steinberger leaves Europe — ecosystem gravity in action31:00 AI inside venture: workflow automation vs real alpha43:00 Munich Security Conference: defence budgets, sovereignty, and Stark vs Thiel52:10 Psychedelics and glucose monitors: Europe’s quiet biotech strength55:30 Quantum funds and Europe’s billion-dollar AI seed round

In this EUVC Live at GoWest episode, Olivier Tonneau, Founding Partner Quantonation, Jeppe Høier, Co-Host at EUVC Corporate, Paolo Pio, Co-founder and General Partner at Exceptional Ventures, Fergus Bell, Founder and Managing Partner at The Players Fund, and Prashant Agarwal, Chairman and Managing Director at Scandian xplore one defining question:How does Europe turn frontier innovation into global scale?Across quantum, corporate capital, longevity, and sport, the same pattern emerges: Europe doesn’t lack talent or research. It lacks the capital and market architecture required to scale strategic industries fast enough to stay independent.Olivier opens with Europe’s quantum paradox. Europe supplies a meaningful share of deployed quantum computers globally, with strong startup and research clusters across the Nordics, France, Germany, and the UK. The science is world-class — but the financing is breaking. Over the last 12 months, the funding ratio between Europe and the US has shifted from roughly 1:2 to nearly 1:7, accelerating US scale-up, public listings, and acquisition pressure. Europe has 12–24 months to respond — not to avoid failure, but to avoid becoming the lab while others become the market.Jeppe shifts the lens to corporates. Corporate venture capital represents roughly 25% of global VC volume, yet the average lifespan of a CVC unit is only 3.7 years. His argument is blunt: most corporates launch venture arms believing they are “doing VC,” when they are actually building a strategic instrument without the operating system required to sustain it. Without durable governance — and a clear Build, Buy, Partner model — corporate venture becomes fragile instead of strategic.Paolo reframes health and longevity as deep tech moving at software speed. Genome sequencing has collapsed from decades to hours. mRNA proved that biology timelines can compress dramatically. With AI now embedded in diagnostics and discovery, health is entering an exponential era — and venture is being pulled with it.The session closes with a thesis most investors still underestimate. Fergus and Prashant argue sport is no longer entertainment — it is venture infrastructure. Athletes and rights holders are becoming capital allocators and distribution rails. Elite sport has evolved into a real-world deployment environment for deep tech, health tech, AI, and performance systems — where validation happens under pressure and at global scale.The takeaway across all five perspectives is clear:Europe invents early.But scale requires architecture.Late-stage capital depth.Liquidity.Corporate integration.Coordination.What’s covered:00:30 Europe’s scale question — five lenses on one problem02:00 Quantum’s paradox — Europe leads in science, not in financing05:00 The 1:7 funding gap — why the next 12–24 months matter07:00 What Europe can do — capital architecture, procurement, scale funds11:30 Corporate venture — 25% of global VC, but structurally fragile13:30 Why CVCs fail — the 3-year vs 6-year test and governance gaps16:30 Longevity as deep tech — health moving at software speed21:30 AI in health — diagnostics, discovery, and exponential biology27:30 Sport as venture infrastructure — athletes and rights holders as rails34:30 Deep tech in sport — validation, performance systems, adoption under pressure40:00 Final takeaway — Europe has innovation; it needs scale architecture

Is Europe’s defense investment wave real, or is it simply venture capital wrapped in a Ukrainian flag?The debate featured Nicholas Nelson, General Partner at Archangel Ventures, and Sebastian von Ribbentrop, Founding Partner at Join Capital.At stake is more than narrative. It is about capability, returns, sovereignty — and the structural future of European capital markets.Until recently, defense investing in Europe was controversial. Many institutional LPs avoided the sector. ESG mandates were interpreted narrowly. Defense was often softened under the label “dual-use.” Russia’s invasion of Ukraine changed the landscape. Defense budgets rose. Political rhetoric shifted. Venture capital began flowing into the sector at unprecedented levels.But the central question remains:Is this a structural capital reallocation — or a short-term momentum trade?The debate crystallizes around one fault line: defense-first vs dual-use.Nicholas argues Europe’s hesitation to embrace defense-first investing is both strategically and financially misguided. Defense-only startups, he contends, have historically outperformed. Dual-use often dilutes focus by forcing two distinct go-to-market motions. Real capability requires designing directly for the warfighter — not adapting commercial products later. In his view, dual-use in Europe often functions as a reputational hedge rather than a strategy.Sebastian counters that dual-use is not compromise — it is risk management. Advanced technologies can serve both industrial and defense customers without duplicating entire teams. Diversified revenue reduces concentration risk. Non-dilutive defense contracts can substitute late-stage equity rounds in a region where growth capital remains thin. And Europe’s comparative advantage may lie less in building vertically integrated primes — and more in dominating high-precision subsystems.As the conversation escalates, it moves beyond product strategy into a deeper structural issue: scale capital. Even where early-stage defense investment has improved, later-stage funding remains limited. Several leading European defense startups have relied heavily on US or Middle Eastern growth capital.Which raises uncomfortable questions:Can Europe build independent defense champions without foreign growth capital?Will its strongest companies inevitably “pick a flag” as they scale?Is fragmentation across 30+ procurement regimes Europe’s structural disadvantage?Without coordination at scale, even strong early-stage ecosystems struggle to produce global champions.What’s covered:00:30 Framing the question — structural shift or narrative trade?02:00 From taboo to trend — ESG optics and the Ukraine inflection point04:15 Defense-first vs dual-use — the core strategic divide07:30 The defense-first case — focus, procurement alignment, and capability building11:00 The dual-use counterargument — diversification and risk management14:30 Subsystems vs primes — where Europe’s advantage may lie18:00 The growth capital gap — reliance on US and Middle Eastern funding21:00 “Picking a flag” — sovereignty vs scale23:30 Procurement fragmentation — 30+ regimes and scaling friction26:00 Final takeaway — Europe’s defense future depends on capital conviction and coordination

Europe is not facing a crisis of ideas — it is facing a crisis of industrial depth.In this EUVC episode, Danijel Višević (Co-Founder & General Partner, World Fund), Heidi Lindvall (Founder & General Partner, Pale Blue Dot), Narina Mnatsakanian (Partner & Chief Impact Officer at Regeneration VC), Dr. Isabella Fandrych (Co-Founder and General Partner at Nucleus Capital), and Moritz Jungmann (GP at Future Energy Ventures) confront one of the defining questions of 2025:What does sovereignty actually mean?Danijel opens with history. In 1951, coal and steel powered conflict — so Europe integrated them. That integration was not symbolic. It was structural coordination under pressure. Europe repeated this reflex after the Berlin Wall, during COVID, and following the Russian gas shock. Europe does not collapse under pressure. It coordinates. But today, coordination must extend beyond policy — into capital markets and industrial systems.The structural gaps are stark. Europe produces less than 10% of the semiconductors it consumes. It imports the vast majority of rare earth materials. It raises significantly less venture capital than the United States. Only a fraction of European climate tech startups reach Series B. Europe can invent. It struggles to industrialize.Heidi reframes venture capital itself. Performance is necessary, but insufficient. Her equation is clear: Success = Performance × Trust. Trust — expressed through brand, values, and measurable impact — acts as a multiplier. Venture does not simply fund companies. It allocates the future. Narina reinforces the LP perspective: pension funds seek returns, but pensioners also seek stability, sustainability, and systemic resilience. Capital allocation is no longer purely financial. It is strategic.Dr. Isabella Fandrych shifts the conversation to materials. The energy transition is not just about electrons — it is about minerals: copper, lithium, nickel, manganese. Extraction today is geopolitically concentrated and environmentally destructive. Biology offers alternatives: microbes separating metals from rock, engineered proteins extracting minerals from waste streams, plants accumulating metals for harvest. Industrial decarbonisation is chemistry as much as energy policy.Jordan makes the case for baseload energy. Europe has reduced emissions partly through deindustrialization and outsourcing production. If Europe wants manufacturing, AI data centres, electrified transport, and economic resilience, it needs dense, dispatchable power. Renewables are essential — but intermittent. Nuclear remains one of the few proven zero-carbon baseload sources operating at scale. The debate, he argues, should be practical — not ideological.Moritz closes on infrastructure. Europe has built renewable capacity quickly. The constraint is no longer generation. It is grid orchestration. As energy systems decentralize, operators must manage volatile, distributed flows. The opportunity lies in software: orchestration, optimization, dynamic throughput management. Energy sovereignty is not just about producing electrons. It is about system design.Sovereignty in 2025 is not a slogan.It is an investment strategy.What’s covered:00:30 Sovereignty redefined — from symbols to supply chains03:00 Europe under pressure — integration as a structural reflex06:00 The industrial gap — semiconductors, rare earths, and scale-up capital10:30 Venture as allocator — Success = Performance × Trust15:00 The LP lens — systemic capital and long-term responsibility19:00 The materials bottleneck — why decarbonisation is mineral-intensive23:00 Biology as infrastructure — new extraction paradigms27:00 Baseload power — nuclear as industrial policy32:00 The grid constraint — orchestration, optimization, software-defined systems38:00 Sovereignty as coordinated capital and industrial depth

Introduced by our very own Andreas Munk Holm, this EUVC Live at GoWest session brings together policymakers, institutional investors, GPs, corporates, and public capital leaders around one defining question:How does Europe mobilise its own capital to secure its technological future?Across every session, one theme emerges repeatedly: Europe does not lack talent. It does not lack innovation. It does not lack savings. It lacks coordination.In The Case for a United European LP Strategy, Philippe Tibi (The Tibi Initiative; French Ministry for the Economy, Finance and Recovery; Professor at École Polytechnique Paris) lays out the macro argument. Europe holds more than €35 trillion in household assets, yet its top companies often scale under foreign ownership. The problem is not capital scarcity — it is capital allocation. Pension funds and insurers must treat venture and technology as core asset classes — for returns and sovereignty.In The Path to a United European LP Strategy, Chris Elphick (BVCA) and Philippe Tibi explore why mobilisation is slow: regulatory conservatism, fragmented mandates, cultural risk aversion, and weak cross-border coordination. Institutional allocations to venture remain near zero in many countries. Reform is structural, not optional.Succeeding in Venture as a Long-Term Capital Investor shifts from policy to portfolio construction. Christina Brinck (Volvo Group VC), Daniel Keiper-Knorr (Speedinvest), and Joe Schorge (Isomer) examine how to underwrite European venture in a fragmented but maturing ecosystem. Themes include diversification across cycles, power-law return dynamics, patience as structural advantage, and strategic alignment with industrial direction. Venture is positioned not as optional exposure — but as infrastructure for technological transformation.Public capital enters the equation in The Role of Public Capital in European Venture Outcomes, where Michiel Scheffer (European Innovation Council) explains how the EIC funds deep tech, underserved geographies, and growth-stage gaps. Public capital, he argues, is not distortion — it is market completion.In Catalyst or Competitor? Adem Yakisirer (European Investment Fund) outlines how EIF has backed more than 1,600 fund managers, building a financing continuum from pre-seed to pre-IPO. In a candid exchange with Mia Grosen (Venture Partner, SuperSeed) moderated by Andreas, the tension surfaces: Is Europe becoming too dependent on public anchors? Does institutional backing signal quality or complacency?From LP mobilisation to cross-border collaboration, one message is clear:If Europe wants technological sovereignty and long-term competitiveness, capital must move with intent, alignment, and scale.What’s covered:02:30 Europe’s savings paradox — why the issue is allocation, not scarcity05:00 Philippe Tibi — €35T in household assets and the case for a united European LP strategy10:30 Venture as sovereignty infrastructure — why pensions and insurers must move15:30 Chris Elphick + Tibi — the real blockers: regulation, mandates, culture, coordination22:30 Why allocations stay near zero — institutional inertia across Europe27:30 Christina Brinck — underwriting venture across cycles33:00 Daniel Keiper-Knorr — power-law returns, patience, and portfolio construction38:00 Joe Schorge — long-term capital behaviour and strategic alignment43:00 Michiel Scheffer — the EIC as market completion in deep tech and underserved geographies49:00 Growth-stage gaps — why public capital anchors where private markets hesitate53:30 Adem Yakışırer — EIF’s role: 1,600+ managers backed from pre-seed to pre-IPO58:30 Mia Grosen — dependency vs signal: when public anchoring becomes a crutch1:02:30 Final takeaway — Europe’s challenge is coordination: capital must move with scale and intent

Welcome back to another episode of Upside where Dan Bowyer, Mads Jensen of SuperSeed and Lomax Ward of Outsized Ventures go behind the headlines shaping European tech, capital, and power.This week is an AI-heavy sprint with a guest who’s right in the Gulf capital flow: Sam Marchant. Anthropic’s monster round is the headline, but the more interesting story is underneath: enterprise AI is becoming workflow-sticky, while OpenAI feels like it’s drifting toward consumer monetization experiments.Then we get into the “AI productivity” paradox: why generative tools aren’t giving us leisure, they’re giving us more output… and more work. From there: Alphabet’s 100-year bond and what it says about tech becoming a utility, plus the uncomfortable European angle — our savings funding US hyperscalers while we debate sovereignty.Finally, Europe sovereignty vibes: Mistral’s enterprise ramp, the 28th regime rhetoric, and whether political systems can actually execute. We close with space: Orbex collapsing, “data centers in orbit,” and why maybe civilization needs billionaires burning capital on high-variance cathedral projects.This is Upside, where optimism is earned, not assumed.ShareWhat’s covered:00:21 Anthropic’s $30B: why the market can’t stop throwing money at enterprise AI03:42 The real shift: OpenAI → consumer/ads vibes, Anthropic → coding + enterprise execution04:50 Gulf capital dynamics: OpenAI relationships vs QIA showing up in Anthropic07:21 Claude vs ChatGPT: switching costs are collapsing… until workflows become the moat10:54 HBR’s “AI intensifies work”: why productivity becomes pressure, not leisure12:19 Autonomy + mastery + dopamine: AI as the ultimate short feedback-loop machine13:25 Practical use cases: research across languages, idea stress-testing, “AI as a first hire”22:05 Alphabet’s 100-year bond: tech is now priced like infrastructure24:51 The pension problem: Europe’s savings financing US scale while Europe underfunds Europe32:44 Europe’s GDP gap is a tech gap: productivity isn’t the issue, tech scale is39:51 Mistral’s enterprise ramp: sovereign AI or local services + transformation advantage?45:37 The 28th regime: big words, hard execution — can Europe actually push reform through?50:32 Space data centres: PR-on-steroids or physics-defying inevitability?53:07 Orbex collapses: why “mid-sized countries” can’t win launch alone55:20 Fusion/quantum: Europe’s deep R&D edge, blocked by capital markets structure56:25 Deal of the week: Olex’s $1B+ moment and Europe’s chip-shaped ambition

Welcome back to the EUVC Podcast, where we bring you the people and perspectives shaping European venture.In this pitch episode, Andreas Munk Holm sits down with Pedro Ribeiro Santos, Partner at Armilar, to walk LPs through the story, strategy, and succession plan behind Armilar Fund IV — the firm’s new pan-European early-stage fund.Armilar is one of Europe’s longest-standing independent tech VCs and Portugal's original venture firm. Born inside a bank 25 years ago, spun out almost a decade ago, and now a multi-generational partnership, the firm has backed some of Portugal’s most important tech companies and quietly built a track record of dragons (fund-returners), not just unicorns.Fund IV doubles down on what the team knows best: early-stage, tech-intensive companies across data, digitalization, and connectivity, with a strong focus on Portugal & Spain and selective investments across the rest of Europe.ShareHere’s what’s covered:01:17 | What is “Armilar”?02:30 | Origins & Spinout 03:40 | Why being based in Portugal with almost no local ecosystem 04:50 | From US to Europe, Then Back Home 07:22 | Fund IV in a Nutshell 09:44 | Geography & LP Backbone11:41 | Track Record, DPI & Dragons 13:51 | Selected Portfolio & Staying Power 16:19 | Team & Generational Design 21:38 | Iberia’s State of Play (Portugal & Spain) 27:45 | Golden Visa & LP Angle 29:29 | Closing & What LPs Should Care About

Welcome to another episode of the EUVC Podcast! Today, we’re diving into How Corporates Might just be able Beat VCs in the AI Race. Or maybe more importantly, how we can collaborate.Our guest is Alex Dang, co-author of the bestselling book The Venture Mindset: How to Make Smarter Bets and Achieve Extraordinary Growth. Alex is a seasoned technology executive and innovation advisor with over two decades of experience. He was a product leader at Amazon, where he launched new businesses across e-commerce, supply chain, and AI; a partner at McKinsey, helping Fortune 500 companies build digital ventures; and today advises corporate leaders and investors on AI strategies, venture building, and applying VC principles to large organizations.In this conversation, Alex shares provocative insights on why the venture mindset is now non-negotiable for corporates in the AI era, where incumbents hold hidden advantages over VCs, and how to avoid “innovation theater” while turning data, distribution, and scale into real venture wins.Let’s jump in!Here’s what’s covered:01:56 | The Venture Mindset in one frame with nine principles from 20 years of Stanford VC research: uncertainty → portfolios → outliers03:44 | The post-book update Alex wishes he had added time compression: “days, not weeks,” and the rise of the “one slice team”05:53 | Venture mindset applied to AI 07:34 | Why “adding AI” is the wrong framing; start customer-backward, not tech-backward08:43 | “AI theater”, innovation theater and press release strategies vs real product value11:19 | The European corporate trap: regulation, consensus, and downside protection as the enemy of transformation11:56 | The right AI rollout sequence with start in back office to learn and protect trust, then go customer-facing at scale15:21 | Why CVCs die after 3.7 years: incentives, leadership fear, and why corporate venturing fails structurally17:24 | AI is now the world’s most democratized intelligence: everyone has the same tools; the gap is execution18:47 | Where corporates fit in venture + startup ecosystems: strengths: data, distribution, enterprise scale20:38 | When corporates should build in-house, when to partner, and why AI must become an internal muscle25:24 | Incentives drive behavior: why executives won’t take venture-style risks unless failure is structurally safe28:18 | AI-native teams and corporate reskilling among smaller, senior teams + digital workers replacing junior tasks35:24 | What happens to the average corporate employee: tasks disappear, workflows evolve, but people still matter38:50 | If Alex were CEO: how to move a workforce into an AI-safe future and target 25% profit uplift through AI44:01 | Most counterintuitive venture principle — “drop bad ideas fast” and why persistence is sometimes the wrong discipline46:05 | What top CEOs are doing right now: coding with Claude, learning by building, and staying close to users49:00 | The compounding effect: “what was impossible 6 months ago is normal today” and why constant feedback loops win

Europe’s debate about gender equity in venture has moved beyond awareness and intention. The real question now is much sharper: how does capital actually move, where does it get stuck, and what genuinely changes outcomes for women building companies today?In this episode, Andreas sits down with Debbie Wosskow, a serial founder, investor, and Chair of the UK’s Invest in Women Task Force, to discuss what she has learned from 25 years inside the system. This is a conversation about incentives, power, institutional capital, and why gender equity in venture is not a “nice to have” but a performance strategy.We move from founder mindset to investor behavior to ecosystem and government-level levers and end with a clear-eyed reflection on DEI, ESG, and feminism. At a moment when many are retreating, but the case for backing women has never been stronger.Context: the data doesn’t lie, and it isn’t improving fast enough