Introduced by Andreas Munk Holm, this EUVC Live at GoWest series spotlights the thought leadership of 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 the sessions, one theme emerges repeatedly:
Europe does not lack talent.
It does not lack innovation.
It does not lack savings.
It lacks coordination.
Over the past decade, Europe has quietly become one of the most productive regions in frontier technology.
In this episode, Olivier Tonneau, Founding Partner at 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, explore that question from different angles:
Quantum.
Corporate capital.
Longevity and health tech.
Sports as industrial infrastructure.
Different sectors. Same scaling challenge.
Quantum: Europe Is Already in the Game
In this talk, Olivier Tonneau reframes the European quantum debate with a simple premise: the question is not whether Europe can become a quantum powerhouse, but how it remains one.
Europe’s position is strong. It supplies a meaningful share of deployed quantum systems, supports competitive startups across hardware, communications, and sensing, and anchors world-class research clusters in the Nordics, France, Germany, and the UK. The constraint is not scientific capability but access to scale capital.
The funding gap is widening. European quantum startups historically raised capital at roughly half the level of their US peers (1:2). Over the past 12 months, that gap has expanded to closer to 1:7. US companies are securing large growth rounds, accessing public markets, and beginning to acquire European counterparts. The window for response is likely 12–24 months. The strategic risk is not technological failure but loss of independence through acquisition.
The weakness is structural, not intellectual. Europe consistently produces breakthrough science and ambitious founders but lacks deep, patient late-stage capital to support global scaling while preserving ownership. Existing tools — the European Innovation Council’s blended finance model, EIF-backed larger vehicles, public procurement as anchor demand, and the proposed €5 billion Scale-Up Fund Europe — reflect progress. However, they do not yet match the depth, liquidity, and integration of US capital markets.
Liquidity is not the same as control. A US listing can be a pragmatic financing choice; operational control and R&D can remain European. But when growth capital, consolidation capacity, and acquisition currency concentrate in one geography, strategic gravity follows. Without competitive domestic scale funding, acquisition becomes the default outcome rather than a deliberate choice.
Quantum is moving from research to commercial deployment, and consolidation is already underway. The issue is time-bound and financial. Europe can invent. The question is whether it can finance independence at scale. If not, its quantum sector may continue to innovate — but it may no longer remain European.
Corporate Venture: Europe’s Underused Lever
Our very own Jeppe Høier shifts the discussion from startups to incumbents.
Corporate venture capital accounts for roughly 25% of global venture volume. Corporates are also the most frequent acquirers of startups. In theory, they should be one of Europe’s most powerful scaling mechanisms. In practice, they are often inconsistent.
The average lifespan of a corporate venture unit is just 3.7 years. Many are launched with enthusiasm and shut down when returns do not hockey-stick quickly enough or when strategic integration fails to show immediate impact.
The misunderstanding is structural. Venture does not operate on quarterly timelines. Nor does strategic optionality compound instantly.
Corporate venture must align across three pillars: build, buy, and partner. It cannot be treated as a peripheral experiment. And it must survive multiple CEOs to matter.
If Europe wants stronger domestic exit pathways and acquirers capable of retaining innovation onshore, corporate balance sheets must function as long-term capital allocators rather than short-term evaluators.
Europe’s corporate capital pools are deep. They are simply under-coordinated.
Health Tech: When Biology Meets Compute
Exceptional Ventures’ Paolo Pio highlights longevity and health as one of the most consequential frontiers of the coming decade.
The pace of change is structural. The Human Genome Project required nearly 20 years and billions in funding. Today, genome sequencing can be completed in hours at a fraction of the cost. mRNA platforms demonstrated the ability to move from viral identification to vaccine deployment in approximately 60 days. Artificial intelligence is now embedded across the biomedical value chain — from drug discovery and molecule design to diagnostics, clinical decision support, and personalised medicine.
This is not incremental improvement but exponential convergence.
As biology becomes programmable and compute becomes scalable, development timelines compress, cost curves decline, and platform-based therapeutic models emerge. Entire categories — including gene therapies, precision oncology, and longevity interventions — are becoming commercially viable at scale.
Europe holds meaningful structural advantages: leading academic research centers, strong regulatory credibility, and large healthcare systems capable of functioning as real-world deployment environments.
However, the constraint is not scientific capability. The constraint is scale capital and execution capacity — specifically, the ability to fund late-stage clinical programs, manufacturing scale-up, and global commercialisation without strategic migration.
As AI-biotech convergence accelerates, capital depth and coordination — not research excellence — will determine where long-term value creation and control ultimately reside.
Athlete Capital and Sports as Infrastructure
The Players Fund’s Fergus Bell highlights a structural evolution in venture capital: the maturation of athlete investors into organised, strategic capital allocators.
Athlete participation has progressed beyond occasional angel investments and brand-aligned endorsements. Increasingly, athletes are forming syndicates, backing dedicated funds, and operating with institutional discipline. Capital deployment is becoming thesis-driven, supported by professional advisory teams, and aligned with long-term value creation rather than short-term visibility.
Their differentiation extends beyond financial contribution. Athletes command global audiences, trusted communities, and cross-border networks. When strategically aligned, they can accelerate distribution, drive adoption, and enhance brand credibility for emerging companies. In effect, they combine capital with market access.
Scandian’s Prashant Agarwal broadens the analysis to the institutional layer of sport itself.
Elite sports organisations are evolving into technologically advanced operating environments. They integrate performance analytics, sports science, biometrics, AI systems, and advanced materials into daily operations. These ecosystems generate high-quality data under real-world stress conditions, creating powerful validation environments for emerging technologies.
As a result, sports platforms increasingly serve as early deployment partners for innovation across health technology, performance monitoring, data analytics, and applied artificial intelligence. Technologies refined in elite competition environments often translate into scalable commercial applications in healthcare, enterprise, and consumer markets.
The broader implication is clear: the capital landscape is expanding beyond traditional venture firms. Athletes, corporates, and sports platforms are entering the ecosystem with both capital and strategic utility.
For Europe, the opportunity lies in coordination. If these actors are integrated into a coherent capital architecture, they can strengthen domestic scaling pathways and reinforce ownership. If not, their participation will remain episodic rather than systemic.
The evolution is underway. The question is whether it becomes infrastructure — or remains influence.
The Core Thesis
Across quantum, corporate venture, health technology, and emerging capital actors, the same structural issue surfaces: Europe’s challenge is not generating innovation, but financing it through global scale while retaining control.
The common denominator is structural. Europe performs well at research and early company formation. The system becomes less competitive when companies require large growth rounds, integrated capital markets, and strategic acquirers capable of holding assets domestically.
This is fundamentally an issue of capital architecture. Institutional savings are significant. Corporate liquidity is substantial. Public instruments are expanding.
What remains underdeveloped is alignment — the ability to mobilise these resources into patient, coordinated, late-stage capital.
Over the next 24 months, innovation output will not be Europe’s constraint. The decisive variable will be whether its financial system can support independence at scale and sustain ownership of the technologies it produces.
