20 roundtable: technology in the thames valley ... continued from previous page
Clarke’s start-up accelerator ConnectTVT, enabled by a short-term freespace letting provided by Oxford Properties at Green Park in Reading, has highlighted the Thames Valley’s problem.
incubators and accelerators with semi-free premises for 3-6 months, and I think every area should do that.”
Clarke: “Collaboration is also important and having a community space to do that is key.” Several of those attending ConnectTVT were already talking about combining their talents within innovative business schemes, she added.
Clarke explained that Oxford Properties had provided the workspace at Green Park, and ConnectTVT covers the overheads for the highly successful hub, which has 38 co-working spaces, charged at £10 per day – “but only till the end of November when our lease runs out.”
Working together for the common good
Lisa Forrester
“We have start-ups coming through our door saying ‘Thank God, you are here. They have got themselves going and are now looking for more funding or industry mentoring to kick them on. They just don’t feel catered for.”
Richard Devall of Pitmans agreed. “We have become an established tech region at the expense of home-grown start-ups. Local and even global talent is going to places like London because it is perceived as ‘where it’s at’. People still don’t know what the Thames Valley offers. The pull of London’s east end Tech City is immense for a young techie and the Thames Valley is losing out, certainly on global talent.”
Solari pointed out that the majority of buying decisions in the UK were made within the Greater London environs. “London is the largest single city market in Europe. It’s huge, so tech start-ups naturally want to get near to their customers.”
Clarke: “In terms of a technology cluster we could be really powerful because we already have the corporates here looking to work with tech innovators and a truck-load of mentors that they don’t have in London, but we are not doing enough to bring our start-up communities together. If we did, we could be stronger than other clusters.”
What are start-ups looking for?
Clarke: “It is community. We’ve only been open a few weeks, but already people are coming to us from all over – Newbury, Oxford, High Wycombe, Basingstoke, etc – just to be part of our community. They also need mentoring and finance, and unfortunately they don’t believe there is funding available for them locally, which is not true. There’s plenty of money in this region.”
Duffy: “London has lots of start-up
www.businessmag.co.uk
The Roundtable discussed whether the Thames Valley’s brand as Silicon Valley was being challenged by other regions and whether the competition from tech areas elsewhere was a wake-up call to the sector along the M4 corridor.
Clarke stressed the need to identify and embrace Thames Valley start-ups better, and to supplement this with increased marketing of the region.
Sykes agreed that a rebranding was required. “The Thames Valley has changed from when the large corporate techs came here to set up. Clients who once had five large buildings, in Bracknell say, are now transient businesses with one large building and everyone encouraged to work from home. And the region has broadened, with people moving further out to live in cheaper properties in Hungerford and Newbury, for example, but still effectively work from their EMEA HQ in Reading.”
Clarke: “We also don’t collaborate enough throughout the Thames Valley.” She identified professional services as poor in this respect. “Regions thrive when people and towns work together, look at what’s happened elsewhere,” she stated.
Solari wondered: “Are we asking the impossible for this region?” He noted the more dispersed nature of companies and employees, increasing corporate budget control from the US, lack of regional development organisations (other than the LEP), and the preferred areas of expenditure by central government.
Duffy said effective use of funds would be required but he highlighted the success of accelerator spaces such as financial technology Level 39, Telefonica’s Wayra, and Central Working in London. “All were set up with relatively small amounts of money, but they established the space, the community and the collaboration.” They had generated so much positive interest, he added, that Barclays has set up its own financial technology accelerator in Mile End.
London had the built-in advantage of being first to market with accelerators, Solari pointed out.
Duffy: “No-one here believes the Thames Valley has a lack of talent. We just need a focal point for it.”
How can the tech sector accelerate in the Thames Valley?
“You need the right blend of community collaboration and funding support.” Government-funded clusters are not as successful as those with corporate support, she had heard.
Devall and Clarke both pointed out that London’s Tech City had assistance in the form of “both government funding and a global marketing campaign.
But, noting how private companies had also funded Tech City, Devall added: “Such corporate funding is something we could be doing a lot more of in the Thames Valley. We have the companies, banks, professional services, universities, but where are the accelerators in the Thames Valley?”
Devall wondered if empty properties could be used. “Obviously it’s in the interests of property owners to have their space filled, and if they can charge some form of nominal rent for it, then in future as the start-up grows it will make more financial sense.”
“Work is something you do, not the place you go,” mentioned Sykes.
James Pitt
Devall accepted that, but added: “It’s also about people being together somewhere, having a cup of coffee and chatting about stuff.”
Solari pointed out the twin-edged sword of technology “By nature it can also promote decentralisation rather than grouping because software available today means you can collaborate without even meeting.”
Murray queried if banks in general should be helping to create accelerator hubs, like Barclays had done in London.
THE BUSINESS MAGAZINE – THAMES VALLEY – NOVEMBER 2014
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60