Fast-growing firms working on “gamechanging” technology, including in areas such as life sciences and clean energy, are being invited to apply for a slice of a £375m fund aimed at fostering innovation in the UK.

The future fund: breakthrough scheme will involve the government committing to co-invest alongside private enterprise to give extra impetus to businesses looking for cash to take nascent technologies to the next step.

In an effort to make the UK a “science superpower”, the Treasury will favour industries such as quantum computing, life sciences and clean technology, in an effort to spur breakthroughs that can “solve some of society’s greatest challenges”.

Just what the tech sector is currently suffering from. An absence of speculative capital.

Idiot tossers.

To qualify, firms will have to be UK-based and seeking at least £30m to fund further development.

Private companies will have to make up the bulk of the investment, with applicants required to show that they have already secured commitments for 70% of their funding round.

Applicants must show that they have previously been able to raise £5m without state help, indicating that they are already growing significantly.

Seriously, what shortage of Series B – or even Series C – capital is there?

9 thoughts on “Idiot tossers”

  1. The Meissen Bison

    So we set up Scamtech and rake together £5m of real money, take an option on some brownfield site in a depressed area in the north, mock up a letterhead with impressive names and create fictitious pledges of investment from other (probably foreign) sources to the tune of £16m.

    We then ask Sunak to stump up £9m as soon as he likes so that the project can take off and build the UK’s white heat of technology (© H Wilson) while also creating skilled jobs, contributing to levelling-up objectives and demonstrating that inward investment into Britain has not been harmed by Brexit.

  2. Invention = developing new technology.
    Innovation = finding new use for existing technology/combination of existing technologies.

    The two are not the same but seemingly always conflated.

    Technology is of no benefit unless/until it has a use attractive to consumers. (Steam technology was invented in 73AD, but nobody had a use for it for about 1700 years.)

    Innovation is the bright idea that imagines a use which might be attractive. How do you fund people to have ideas? Here’s £1 million go and have a good idea? They are serendipitous, often prompted or building on the ideas of others.

    “In an effort to make the UK a “science superpower”, the Treasury will favour industries such as quantum computing, life sciences and clean technology, in an effort to spur breakthroughs that can “solve some of society’s greatest challenges”.”

    So funding will be directed for political/ideological purposes to solve ‘challenges’ that politicians and ideologues have concocted rather than what people want, thereby diverting effort away from new tech and development of the ideas that might best benefit us all.

    And of course, new tech is not being funded to replace current, but to replace current tech that serves consumers, with a rehash old tech… like wind and Sundays… to replace current tech which works just fine., to meet political aims.

    Fascism: the means of production remains in private ownership, but is directed by the State for the interests of the State.

  3. ‘ And of course, new tech is not being funded to replace current, but to replace current tech that serves consumers, with a rehash old tech… like wind and Sundays… to replace current tech which works just fine., to meet political aims.’

    Should read…

    And of course, new tech is not being funded to replace current, but to replace current tech that serves consumers, with a rehash old tech… like wind and solar… to replace current tech which works just fine., to meet political aims.

  4. Yeah. I’d argue that the Romans could have manufactured a Newcomen engine. But, at least at Rio Tinto, they used slaves on treadmills.

  5. Until the horse collar, slaves were cheaper than horses, and until the Black Death, peasants were cheaper than meliflous enginenes, and were immobile and could be prevented from wandering off. Mr Newcoumbe’s Steam Artifice won’t go on strike or go down the road to the next village for better employment.

  6. As Ronnie put it “I’m from the Government and I’m here to help”. The none most dangerous words in the English language.

  7. jgh
    July 20, 2021 at 10:07 am

    ‘humanist.de/rome/rts/index.html’ gives an argument that the Romans had a form of horse collar. But I’d agree that the Norman barons were more than happy to round up the peasants for a little work on their castle or whatever when the agricultural work slacked off. So were the pharaohs.

  8. On a point of fact, very little taxpayer money will be spent. The Future Breakthrough Czar will go to the racecourse with a tenner and pick winners.

  9. If government bureaucrats could be trusted to compete with private venture capitalists, then Sir Richard Branson or Martin Sorrell would’ve been on the committee, no?

    Clearly this is just a program to help the rejects from Lion’s Den. Give them false hope for their terrible ideas.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *