Rendered at 22:46:23 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
nottorp 16 hours ago [-]
Being Germany, that means it only takes six months to properly register a startup? :)
CodesInChaos 14 hours ago [-]
I really hope "EU Inc." will reduce the pain in that area.
superze 5 hours ago [-]
EU inc is what made me start believing, my idea is possible.
egorfine 14 hours ago [-]
It may, but only for the incorporation step. All other pain points in Germany are yours to enjoy.
CodesInChaos 14 hours ago [-]
Yes, accounting/tax related stuff is still annoying. But there are a few more advantages:
* Employee share options are taxed when they sell the shares, not when issuing the option (regardless of strike price) nor when exercising it.
* Changes to the shareholder structure (e.g. raising capital) don't require visiting a notary
And I'm not sure if incorporating in a different EU country (while still looking just like a German EU Inc) would avoid some of the German pain points.
jstrebel 10 hours ago [-]
What do you think all those IT engineers who were made redundant in the last months are doing? Some of them might prefer founding a start-up to joblessness. It's not the first time that a job market crisis increases the rate of start-up registrations.
jasonvorhe 1 days ago [-]
That's not even 1,5% of all companies founded annually.
ant6n 1 days ago [-]
Maybe more related to the possibility of boot strapping with random AI startups. German investors are pretty conservative.
Beijinger 23 hours ago [-]
No shit man. Their government high tech (!) VC fund rejected a high tech proposal from me (Medical devices), instead financed things like: https://www.mymuesli.com/
superze 5 hours ago [-]
Austria is the same. Vienna is seriously a horrible in that regard.
ant6n 23 hours ago [-]
Pretty much.
In Germany, innovation is defined and funded by grant agencies. The only projects that are deemed innovative are those that look like existing projects that are known to be innovative.
throw1234567891 22 hours ago [-]
HTGF?
Beijinger 18 hours ago [-]
Yes. I actually also interviewed once for a job there.
Not the sharpest minds. More bureaucratic than entrepreneurial. At the time, none of the C-suite had ever run their own company. Zero international experience. Complete mediocrity.
cromka 5 hours ago [-]
This deserves an article of its own, to be honest, I don't think people are aware of the incompetencies at this level. I am betting it's the same across EU.
CodesInChaos 14 hours ago [-]
They can't be as bad as KfW, right?
Beijinger 7 hours ago [-]
Probably the same level, but I have no experience with KfW. But I could ask a buddy.
kbelder 1 days ago [-]
They had one?
alexbelyanin 18 hours ago [-]
The bootstrapping-without-VC point tracks with what I keep hearing from people building small AI-adjacent tools on their own. A few have told me directly they never considered raising – not because they couldn't, but because the traction they needed was small enough that a few months of paying customers did the job faster than a pitch deck would have.
That might also explain part of the discrepancy in this thread: a count like this only captures what registers as a "startup" in the first place. If AI is mostly lowering the cost of getting to a working, revenue-generating product solo, a meaningful chunk of that activity may never show up in a founder database – it just looks like someone quietly running a small profitable thing.
Curious whether anyone here started something in Germany this year without going near a grant or VC process – and if so, whether that was deliberate or just never came up.
* Employee share options are taxed when they sell the shares, not when issuing the option (regardless of strike price) nor when exercising it.
* Changes to the shareholder structure (e.g. raising capital) don't require visiting a notary
And I'm not sure if incorporating in a different EU country (while still looking just like a German EU Inc) would avoid some of the German pain points.
In Germany, innovation is defined and funded by grant agencies. The only projects that are deemed innovative are those that look like existing projects that are known to be innovative.
Not the sharpest minds. More bureaucratic than entrepreneurial. At the time, none of the C-suite had ever run their own company. Zero international experience. Complete mediocrity.
That might also explain part of the discrepancy in this thread: a count like this only captures what registers as a "startup" in the first place. If AI is mostly lowering the cost of getting to a working, revenue-generating product solo, a meaningful chunk of that activity may never show up in a founder database – it just looks like someone quietly running a small profitable thing.
Curious whether anyone here started something in Germany this year without going near a grant or VC process – and if so, whether that was deliberate or just never came up.