Mind the gap: Notes from our founder-investor event

After rapid-fire pitches from our portfolio, moderator Ilana Taub (biotope by VIB) brought four sharp voices to the stage: Barbara Freitag (Inbiose), Giacomo Bastianelli (Rainbow Crops), Mariana Gonzales (Collateral Good), and Mirasbek Kuterkebov (Thia Ventures). 

The first myth they dismantled: traction as a vibe. “Build it and they will come” doesn’t pay salaries. Investors aren’t looking for press clippings. They want proof points that add up: paid pilots with scope and success criteria, repeat orders with better terms, a first sliver of margin that shows unit economics aren’t a fairy tale. If you’ve only got scientific milestones, translate them: what does that titer, yield, or assay result unlock commercially?

Then came the capital plan reality check. Too many decks, the panel agreed, treat the round size like the destination. They urged founders to map to the end of the journey: how much capital in total, from which sources (equity, grants, project finance, venture debt), tied to which inflection points, on what timeline. 

Tied to that: biotech is a long game—ten years can be short—and the fastest way through it is to choose a first beachhead. Pick the sub-segment you will win first, and be explicit about the impact you can deliver there. Don’t hand-wave across five markets; draw a straight line through one.

Minding the gap also means: be collaborative, not combative. Someone on your cap table is part of your family, so ask for help. Regulatory sparring, IP sanity checks, customer intros, a shortlist for that critical hire… 

Transparency came up again and again, and not the performative kind. There is (quoting the panel) “no error in over-communicating.” If a pilot slipped or a batch failed, say it early and ask for input. Investors can’t help with blind spots they don’t know about. The pressure to “oversucceed” (only good news, always) looks impressive on LinkedIn, but slows everything down in real life.

And yes, the accountability runs both ways. Founders asked for more transparent investor processes and straighter answers. A vague “too early” often hides a tougher truth: concerns about team, defensibility, or market. Clear reasons help teams adjust. Keeping the door “kind of open” helps no one.