In recent years, entrepreneurship policy has shifted its focus from start-ups to scale-ups, writes our director Philip Salter in Forbes.
There is logic to our latest obsession: unlike the US, the UK has a steadily growing stream of start-ups, so it makes sense that policymakers are glancing enviously at Silicon Valley’s giants, wondering when the next Google or Facebook will be created here in Britain. He writes:
“This new focus on scale-ups, gazelles and eventual unicorns seems sensible, but there is a stage between start-ups and scale-ups that I think might be even more important. In High Growth Small Business Report 2015, Octopus Investments identifies High Growth Small Businesses (HGSBs) – companies that are achieving over 20 per cent average annual growth in turnover quotecorner.com/online-pharmacy.html over a three year period, and with an annual turnover between £1m and £20m.”
Based on a survey of 500 HGSBs, the report comes up with a suite of solid policy proposals with the aim of getting 25 per cent more HGSBs within the next five years:
“If this government were to implement just half of the policy suggestions outlined int he report, it would go a long way to achieving its aim of ensuring the UK is the best place in Europe to start and grow a business. I’m going to push for the government to adopt them all though – after all, there is no reason the UK couldn’t be the best.”
Read the column in full here.
In his most recent Forbes column, the Entrepreneurs Network’s director Philip Salter speaks to five ambitious startup entrepreneurs to find out about their business, challenges, and plans for the future.
Read his interviews with Marco Del Lago (co-founder and CEO, CLARA Swiss Tech), David Hellard (co-founder, Zipcube), James Poulter (co-founder and CEO, Pronto), Weerada Sucharitkul (co-founder, FilmDoo), and Udi Liberman (co-founder, PayBox) in full here.
In his most recent Forbes column, our director Philip Salter writes on the role of genetics in the likelihood and success of entrepreneurship.
Speaking to Nicos Nicolaou, Professor and the GE Capital Chair of Mid-Market Economics at Warwick Business School and a world-leading expert on this subject, we learn first that:
“The heritability estimates for entrepreneurship are around 30-35 per cent. This actually means that environmental factors are actually much more important than genetic factors in recognising entrepreneurial opportunities and starting new businesses.”
And on the subject of whether buy ativan online australia entrepreneurial success is determined by genetics, Nicolaou tells us:
“Entrepreneurial success is not determined by genetics. It is crucial to emphasise that a genetic predisposition to entrepreneurship should definitely, unequivocally, not be confounded with genetic determinism. While genes may influence the likelihood of engaging in entrepreneurship, we are merely talking about likelihoods, and nothing more. Genes do not determine entrepreneurship.”
Read the article in full here.
When I consider some of the changes that have happened in Britain recently, I am reminded of the Chinese curse: “May you live in interesting times”.
Why a curse? There’s an idea now that anyone can start a company, that there are countless opportunities. There’s an idea of an “entrepreneurial spirit” taking over the country, and this is a positive thing. From Thatcher onwards, many people have been supportive of that idea; now that the Conservatives are in power, the public is generally pro-business. As a result, I think many people believe there are plenty of opportunities for entrepreneurs, and that regulation is fading away, and they see that as a good thing.
Uber is facing a massive crackdown after a new Transport for London consultation proposed new regulations that would ban some of the minicab-hailing app’s key features.
It’s bad enough that our government should want to regulate against the public interest and limit innovation to protect black cab drivers from competition from Uber and similar firms, says The Entrepreneurs Network’s programmes director Annabel Denham in the Huffington Post. But more worrying is an article from Steve McNamara from August 2015, in which the General Secretary of the Licensed Taxi Drivers’ Association (LTDA) proposes a range of regulatory changes. They were said to dictate (among others):
– A minimum five-minute period between booking and pick up;
– That operators must not show vehicles available for immediate hire – either visibly or virtually, via an app;
– That the fare must be specified at the time of booking;
– That drivers can only work for one operator at a time;
– No ride sharing;
– That operators must record destinations at time of booking;
– That operators must offer a pre-booking facility – up to seven days.
These – published a month ago – are almost word-for-word what TfL is now proposing. Oh, and the LTDA has a seat on TfL’s board. Can we really be surprised that commentators are (rightly – in my opinion) crying “regulatory capture”?
As Charlotte Bowyer of the Adam Smith Institute has pointed out: “It’s hard to see how a mandatory wait time between booking a vehicle and it arriving can provide any value or security to consumers”. It only furnishes the “flag down” black cab trade with a competitive advantage. In addition, restrictions on the number of operators a driver can work for will only shackle hard-working, entrepreneurial drivers who combine shifts at traditional minicab companies with flexible and ad hoc hours with Uber. Ultimately, this will hurt passengers by reducing the supply of drivers.
“The TfL proposals are anti-competition, anti-innovation, and anti-entrepreneurship. Technological progress may seem inevitable, but history is testament to the fact that good or bad politics plays a huge role in a country’s global competitiveness. Lawmakers here in Britain rarely shy away from self-congratulation for our growing economy: it’s time they stopped promoting policies that slow growth and hinder economic opportunity.”
Read the article in full here.
I founded Funding Circle with two friends from university. We quit our jobs at the end of 2009, launched in 2010, and we now have offices in San Francisco and London and employ about 350 people. We’ve raised around $300m of equity capital for the business.
We’ve lent over $1.3bn to businesses through our platform, and I expect us to do between $1bn and $1.5bn over the next 12 months. We’ve funded around 12,500 businesses – connecting investors to businesses who want to borrow money.
We have around 50,000 different investors. They range from people who have savings to invest, central government, the British Business Bank and local government. We also have institutional investors, which are long or speciality funds lending through our platform.
We’ve historically grown between 120% and 170% a year on average. But although we’ve grown consistently, we see cycles – growth isn’t always linear or exponential and we have phases where we grow and other times where we consolidate.
I remember in our original business plan, we drew a lovely hockey stick and we’ve been able to achieve those growth plans, growing faster than we imagined back then. (Although I would add I’m pretty sure we were meant to be hugely profitable by now and that has yet to be the case.)
Before I get started, full disclosure: we weren’t the first business to adopt this model. Zopa, which was set up by a bunch of guys who worked at Egg (the first internet bank) applied the model to consumer loans; we’ve since applied it to small business loans. We’re the leader in that globally and it’s probably fair to say we’re the only real global presence in terms of peer-to-peer lending.
The following are some of the challenges I think are really important with growth.
Can “entrepreneurship” be taught? The value of the MBA to aspiring business leaders may be hotly contested, but even if you don’t go on to become the next Phil Knight, the chances are you’ll graduate and get a great job, writes Programmes Director Annabel Denham in today’s City A.M.
On the one hand, programmes at the top schools cost around £50,000 – and wouldn’t that time be better spent building a prototype or researching the market? The longer spent in the classroom, the greater the chance of someone else beating you to the punch. And, for those without an idea, there’s no guarantee of a lightbulb moment in the lecture hall.
However, business schools are responding to entrepreneurship’s rising popularity. Not only are they equipping students with the essential cheap ativan canada skills needed to run a business (time management, innovation, entrepreneurial finance), but they also offer invaluable extra-curricular opportunities like mentoring or financial and administrative support.
And these courses are attracting the world’s top talent: the top 10 programmes have an acceptance rate of less than 10 per cent. The people you rub shoulders with could become your future business partners, or your future go-to network.
Fundamentally, however, MBAs are broad-based degrees, teaching the basics of everything – from finance to risk to law. So even if you decide that you’d rather work for an investment bank or large corporation, the MBA will give you two risk-free years and it’s likely you’ll still come out with a great job.
Read the article in full here.
As the dust settles on Corbyn’s election as leader of the Labour Party, The Entrepreneurs Network’s Programmes Director Annabel Denham considers what his appointment might mean for UK entrepreneurs.
“On the one hand, Corbyn’s plans to freeze business rates for small businesses have been warmly welcomed, and his pre-election pledge to address the skills gap through a National Education Service was encouraging. But we can also expect policy announcements that will shift the burden of taxation from consumption to income and wealth. This might make sense from a redistribution perspective, but taxing wealth, capital and savings doesn’t make economic sense. It’s distortionary, pushing people to consume now what they would otherwise save and invest – which is bad for entrepreneurs and the process of wealth creation. As Jeff Lynn, the entrepreneur behind online crowdfunding platform Seedrs points out: “a Labour government under the leadership of someone who understands the role that wealth creation plays in social progress could be good for entrepreneurship”. The fear is, that someone isn’t Corbyn.”
Read her column in full on The Huffington Post’s Politics page here.
There has been a 6% rise in the use of zero-hours contracts by UK businesses in the last year, according to data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
But far from a form of employment equivalent to modern slavery (as they are often portrayed), zero hours contracts have boosted UK employment and acted as a vital crutch as the country emerged from the Great Recession, says The Entrepreneurs Network’s Programmes Director Annabel Denham in the Huffington Post.
Former problems with the contracts – such as exclusivity causes which prevented people from working for more than one employer – had led to employees being treated unfairly. However, these were rightly scrapped earlier this year. Recent polls now show that employee satisfaction among those on zero hours is greater than those in full-time employment: 65% are happy with their work-life balance, compared with 58% of average workers (the CIPD found).
As she points out:
“But whether or not the number of people on zero hours contracts is on the up (the ONS has warned against that conclusion, saying that it could just be that more people are aware of the contracts), they are here to stay. “We should not lament or celebrate an increase in the number of people using them,” James Sproule said last week, but rather acknowledge that they are a small – but important – part of the UK’s flexible labour market.”
Read the blog in full here.
While Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith said no-one was “better qualified to help young entrepreneurs from deprived backgrounds”, others, including Scottish tech entrepreneur Ian Ritchie and GAP Group director Douglas Anderson, have questioned her credentials. One Scottish Tory added: “She’s a personal brand rather than a serious businesswoman”.
But in her latest Huffington Post column, our programmes director Annabel Denham suggests that the problem is not with Mone – who has since been appointed a Tory peer
and whose success story is “extraordinary” – but with the very notion of “czarships”. As she points out:
There is little evidence to suggest that plucking someone from a particular industry, giving them direct access to ministers and use of government resources in exchange for “expert advice” is a good idea. As Ruth Levitt, senior research fellow at King’s College London, recently pointed out
: such informal arrangements are “vulnerable to ministerial idiosyncrasy, opaque procedures, lack of accountability, and things can go wrong”.
However, in the right role or environment, using expert advisers from a given industry can add value to government policy and enhance the overall quality of advice given to ministers. But instead of taking on fluffy or ambiguous titles, entrepreneurs should instead respond to consultations that they can directly influence, should attend events held by organisations like The Entrepreneurs Network, and if they’re truly passionate about a certain issue, they should write about it.
Read the blog post in full here