back to article Bone-dry British tech SMBs miss out on UK.gov cash shower

Government technology promotion agency Innovate UK, the former Technology Strategy Board (TSB), surprised many last year when it agreed to spend no less than £800,000 on a piece of software that would “minimise building waste” sent to landfill by construction companies. The happy recipients for this bizarre project included …

  1. TheFinn

    Was this story a first draft? What's wrong with these paragraphs...

    Overall, the North West gets only per cent of total UK grants from Innovate UK, and Yorks/Humber only five per cent, while London gets 25 per cent and the South East 17 per cent. This means that hundreds of hard-pressed engineering firms in the north have been deprived of adequate support.

    Instead, dozens of doubtful digital media firms – which hardly need the cash – have been millions of pounds – but will little tangle result in nearly all cases

    1. Harry Kiri

      Yes but

      IUK isnt about (re)generating geographical areas. Its about generating and exploiting potential ideas, primarily for exports. If you can show that the North is prejudiced against, thats a story. Most likely its due to more (and better) applications from down south on the M4 corridor. Not that there aren't good ideas up north but the stats are against them.

      If you're not doing well in getting money (grants or clients), you might be terminally unlucky. But its more likely other people are better than you. So improve. IUK aren't fools when it comes to technology or business cases.

      1. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

        Re: Yes but

        You are either Steve Bong or on his payroll, and I claim my 6,537 EUR (@ current exchange rate).

      2. Harry Kiri

        Re: Yes but

        9 down and 1 up?

        You lot need to research what Innovate UK is actually about.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Yes but

          Maybe the other down voters have also had some dealings with Innovate UK ?

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Yes but

          > 9 down and 1 up?

          You either replied to a random posting or completely misunderstood what he was saying.

        3. Desk Jockey
          Boffin

          Re: Yes but @ Harry Kiri

          There may be some gems of truth in your original post, but the minute I read the subtle hints dropped in the article about the assessments being done by academics as a paper exercise with not even business cases being asked for I could immediately grasp the problem. I speak from experience in saying you just cannot understand a business or a new concept by asking them to fill in an application form.

          I have had plenty of new concepts pitched to me by small businesses and startups. If at all possible, I will always try to visit their site, meet their engineers not just their sales managers and ask them to explain in plain English what it is they are proposing to do and how. I will also challenge them to show me any evidence on how successful their product could be (eg. field tests are best) and I will carefully read their body language and voice to see how shifty they are being when they reply. If I am meant to be awarding them some money, I damn well want to have some confidence that they will spend it properly. Plus visiting company sites is always a good learning experience and usually quite fun.

          There are loads of Government sponsored ways of helping small companies progress these days, but loads of red tape and too often little understanding of how effective their programmes are or what it is that those companies really need or even that they know what they are doing.

      3. Intractable Potsherd

        Re: Yes but @ Harri Kiri

        There *may* be something to your comment, but, to me, it is the same principle in action as with research grants in academia - the money goes to those who have received it before, usually for basically he same application as succeeded before. This creates a circular process in which anyone with certain connections gets money, whilst newcomers don't. Thus there is a reinforcement of the idea that university X is good because it gets money, so it gets money because it is good. Academics are poor at allocating money outside their perceived ideas of good. That the IUK money is being targeted in the same geographical regions as get the lion's share of research grant money is, unfortunately, no surprise.

        1. Harry Kiri

          Re: Yes but @ Harri Kiri

          Evidence please.

      4. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

        Re: Yes but ..... and, alternatively.

        IUK aren't fools when it comes to technology or business cases. …. Harry Kiri

        That posit is being presently tested of them here too, and here ….. http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/1/2016/01/20/innovate_uk_backing_the_wrong_horse/#c_2753481 ..... in order for their demonstration and accession into Future Virtual Fitnesses with Remote Purposeful Cyber Command and IT Control.

        Now that, methinks, ladies and gents, is AI Heavenly Leverage and impossible to terrorise and counter with failed intelligence, toing and froing between Leading Public Players …… Cracked and Hacked Elite Sources with Old Ploughed Trail Follower Forces.

        1. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

          Re: Yes but ..... and, alternatively.

          @StephenBrowning You have CQI mail to share and tweet ……..

          http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/1/2016/01/20/innovate_uk_backing_the_wrong_horse/#c_2753656

          I wouldn't want anyone to be thinking they are not contacted and connected/forewarned of Future HyperRadioProActive Events. Quite whether they be Forearmed to Resist ITs Sweetest of Temptations, is Quite Something Else Altogether Stupid.

    2. Bob Vistakin
      Big Brother

      Hey steady on now, the London Tories making all these decisions do recognize the true value of the North.

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

      2. TeeCee Gold badge
        WTF?

        Oddly enough, I read this and as soon as I saw that they'd dropped the business case basis I thought; "Aha! The lefties have been at this........".

        "Business = bad. Equality for all[1] = Good.". Who's usually chanting that mantra then?

        [1] I.E. drag everyone down to the level of the terminally useless.

    3. MyffyW Silver badge
      Paris Hilton

      But I thought the proper role of government these days was to guard the coastlines and let UPS deliver the mail?

      How did Innovate UK survive the great Quango-killing spree?

  2. jzl

    Almost infinite monkeys

    You need a few more monkeys; they're trying, but they're not there yet. This article reads like it was translated by Google from Tagalog.

    1. dotdavid

      Re: Almost infinite monkeys

      I bet it was spat out of an automatic article generator created by one of "dozens of doubtful digital media firms – which hardly need the cash"

    2. Naselus

      Re: Almost infinite monkeys

      Borderline illegible. The comments section, thus far, has produced a more comprehensible narrative.

    3. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

      Re: Almost infinite monkeys

      Not more mokeys. More peanuts for the monkeys.

    4. Rampant Spaniel

      Re: Almost infinite monkeys

      3 monkeys, 30 minutes.

  3. BoldMan

    Where is the editor for this article? Good lord how far have standards fallen at El Reg?

    1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      "Where is the editor for this article?"

      I don't know about the editor for this article but I've just been spammed on my private domain by the ex-editor. Anybody else?

      It looks as if I'm going to have to set up a new alias for reporting typos or use my hotmail spam bin address.

      1. Intractable Potsherd

        That's interesting - I got an email from Lewis yesterday, but I have corresponded with him previously. It would be bad if he has been in touch on an email address that was used for something else (like reporting errors).

        1. YetAnotherLocksmith Silver badge

          Email?

          Shocking. He may have used *email* to contact someone. If only you'd given him your phone number instead.

          Seriously?

  4. A K Stiles
    Facepalm

    More investment in dictation software?

    I was thinking with some of the problems that it seemed to be misinterpretation by voice recognition software followed by a spell-check. I was composing an 'errors' email for the first mistake I spotted when I fell into the 'little tangle result' paragraph and gave up!

    I realise there are tight margins and deadlines to meet, but *some* proofreading might be nice?

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Rate this article: 3 (and probably too generous at that)

    There probably is a story here somewhere, but the already-noted quality of the writing, editing, and proof-reading makes it hard to see what the underlying point really is, except that Westminster is clueless. And who didn't already know that?

    Editing and proof-reading comments apply to the author's profile page here at El Reg too.

    Better luck next time (see you in 2017?).

  6. Stephen Wilkinson

    What % did the South West get?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      That's asking a bit much given that we don't know what % the North West got, which was kind of the point of the article!

  7. m0rt

    See? Even articles with focus on the North get short shrift.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      That's what you get when a Londoner tries to write an article about something outside the M25.

      1. Tom 7

        Outside the M25

        they all suffer from extreme agoraphobia.

  8. frank ly

    They could have saved £400,000

    By giving me £400,000 to do the job.

  9. JonnyBravo

    "Instead, dozens of doubtful digital media firms – which hardly need the cash – have been millions of pounds – but will little tangle result in nearly all cases."

    - your haaaands are typing woooords

  10. dotdavid

    "Oddly enough, the one sector in the UK that has really boomed in the past 15 years – food and drink – has enjoyed relatively little funding or intervention from Innovate UK"

    Why does it need funding or intervention from Innovate UK when it is booming already?

    1. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

      "Why does it need funding or intervention from Innovate UK when it is booming already?"

      Because it's not "digital" enough yet. Remember, in order for Britain to thrive and re-build it's empire everything has to be fully "digital".

  11. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

    "In addition, there is no market for the product as companies already strain to reduce the amounts sent to landfill and avoid excessive charges."

    If they already strain to reduce the amount I'd have thought that that would make them a ready market for a product intended to help them.

    1. graeme leggett Silver badge

      " £800,000 on a piece of software that would “minimise building waste” sent to landfill by construction companies....In the real world, such software might cost £5,000 maximum. "

      I'll take the optimistic view that when the project was evaluated, it was on the basis of the savings projected. I think that - in the words of Bob Newhart* - the conversation went something like this:

      A: "How much do firms lose on average in landfill waste charges?"

      B: "Got that here in this report"

      A: "OK, how many construction firms are there on this sort of work?"

      B: "It's here on page 5 of this report"

      A: "Right. So, landfill cost charge times number of firms equals...Pass me the calculator. Wow, that's a big number"

      B: "That is, isn't it."

      A: "So if we could reduce that by 20%, it'd still be worth spending money on."

      B: "Even if we spent 5% on the answer, that'd leave industry 15% better off. Have we got any funds?"

      C: "If it's a IT thing, we could get Innovate UK to do it. Give it to them."

      A: "OK. Next item on the agenda is?"

      And that, my friend, is that.

      *I know, I didn't do it as a one-sided conversation.

      1. Roland6 Silver badge

        " £800,000 on a piece of software that would “minimise building waste” sent to landfill by construction companies....In the real world, such software might cost £5,000 maximum. "

        I'm not sure what "real world" the author was thinking of, but I would expect the recipients of the IUK monies would have submitted a proposal containing a description of the functionality the software would contain and a cost breakdown to justify the envisaged development costs and the level of investment being requested.

        I suspect, inspite of the credentials in his bio, Marcus has little real knowledge of business and the difference between the level of investment needed to deliver a product and the price such a product may be sold at...

        1. Roland6 Silver badge

          As suspected the author hasn't bothered to do even basic research, the funding was primarily for a two-year research project and hence came from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council and Innovate UK (not been able to identify any further details but expect >50% of the funding came from the EPSC).

          http://www.khl.com/magazines/demolition-and-recycling-international/detail/item112733/University-study-to-place-demolition-first

          https://info.uwe.ac.uk/news/uwenews/news.aspx?id=3209

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Yeh, well...

    There's a raft of major problems in this space, which are barely touched on in the article.

    Re. "smart" - the politicos like high profile anouncements, this is under their radar.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Ees right thar kid. I tried t'get fundin fer me whippet tracker wi nay luck.

    Seriously though I would assume that advertising of said funding being concentrated in the south would be a factor?

    Also being cynical I see these things as just ways for the government to siphon off money for whatever reason to whoever they want.

  14. horsham_sparky

    not so Smart

    I'm currently in a tech start-up consisting of myself (electronics hardware/firmware and CTO), and my partner (software and CEO). Do you think we can find a grant that doesn't require more time in applications/interviews/bovine excretion than it actually awards in grants? by the time we had finished the process and gotten a grant, we could have engineered it 3 times over (OK, maybe slight exaggeration, but you know what I mean).

    I even have a friend whose wife works for the local grants group.. she said unless you have someone dedicated (i.e. you're a medium size company that can afford a full time "grants-getter") then don't bother.

    in comparison to the amounts being awarded to companies that don't really need it, a paltry sum (say £30k) would have paid for all our prototypes (we do the engineering ourselves and outsource the manufacture). That would have allowed us to get up and running a lot faster. As it stands we have to contract part time to keep the company going..

    The government needs to sort it out otherwise we'll only have banks and digital media firms left in the UK..

    1. Naselus

      Re: not so Smart

      "The government needs to sort it out otherwise we'll only have banks and digital media firms left in the UK.."

      I think you'll find that's referred to as a 'long-term economic plan' under the present regime.

    2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: not so Smart

      'i.e. you're a medium size company that can afford a full time "grants-getter"'

      Or make being famous a full-time occupation http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/03/25/how_did_millionaire_supermodel_lily_cole_get_200000_of_taxpayers_cash/

    3. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

      Re: not so Smart

      "The government needs to sort it out otherwise we'll only have banks and digital media firms left in the UK..2

      About half way there already...

    4. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

      Re: not so Smart / grant applications

      You can outsource that, there are consultants who specialize in this (national/EU-wide). There are A LOT of progammes and initiatives and what not.

      1. YetAnotherLocksmith Silver badge

        Re: not so Smart / grant applications

        Absolutely.

        No idea why some fool downvoted your comment!

        There are indeed specialists who work with companies and, in my experience, non-profits, to get grants. And they are effectively self-funding, operating on a no-win, no-fee basis. They wrote their costs into the grant.

        Tax payer money hard at work, at least keeping some in a job!

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: not so Smart

      Horsham, stick at it, we've had 80k to develop a new magic. We're no bigger than you. Some grant applications (such as EU stuff) are pretty tortuous. TSB/IUK we found as short as possible. I dont agree with needing a full-time grants-getter, but equally I dont agree with chasing every pound of grant cash, the grant should help your business on the way.

      Truth is, making a widget is a piece of p*ss. Making money from a widget ain't. Do you genuinely have a good business case for your thingy?

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I worked for a company that was roped in to do a website for one of these TSB projects. We got a wodge of cash, then the C*O team moved us onto another project for a year.

    TSB probably came looking for their money eventually, but when I ragequit they were still swallowing the "it's hard to make a website" bull that they were being fed on a regular basis...

  16. clanger9
    Thumb Up

    Good to see this on El reg

    Terrible proofreading aside, it's good to see this kind of thing getting some media coverage.

    In fairness to Innovate UK, if you are lucky enough to get an award from them, they are pretty supportive and easy to deal with - a far cry from the bureaucratic nightmare that was the Technology Strategy Board (TSB).

    The funding criteria and awards process are truly bizarre, though. They have funded all sorts of ¡Bong! 'digital' nonsense, but seem really wary of anything vaguely industrial. The placing of the Energy Systems Catapult in the Midlands was another huge missed opportunity, especially when most of the industry and backers for it are located in the North West.

    Definitely lots to complain about, but also a potential force for good. We all need to keep the pressure on...

  17. 100113.1537

    As someone who has sat on review panels for "industry-directed" research grants (in the the US), I can vouch for the almost completely academic make-up of these panels. There is rarely any consideration of what the route to market would be - and this was not (at the time) addressed as one of the selection criteria. I myself was an 'academic" at the time, although since I was working in IP I at least understood one aspect of getting to market.

    I have since then worked far more on the delivery side of my field and have somewhat irregularly been involved in government efforts to promote innovation and I have to say that they are universally a waste of money. The one thing you can't do in this field is pick winners from a research perspective - funding solutions to going looking for problems is completely bass-akwards.

    The most telling part of this article is where it notes that the food industry is now the most successful sector in the the UK - and has had no support from the industry promotion quango. Government support/subsidies do more to harm innovation than promote it because they gloss over the one critical aspect of innovation - if it doesn't result in something better and/or cheaper then it won't fly and if you need government support to make it, then it is almost by definition not cheaper and probably not better.

    I appreciate that funds to build a prototype can often be hard to come by in the private sector, but funds from someone who is looking for a return are worth a lot more than funds from someone who just wants to tick all the boxes about how they have spent the money. As any recipient of government funds will confirm, the overriding concern of the funding body is that the funds are properly accounted for - not that they have been used to actually achieve a goal.

  18. Darryl

    I'm still trying to figure out why the government should be giving money to Kim Kardashian's brat...

    1. Chris 193

      Pardon my ignorance (I'm from the North West), but, Kim who?

  19. happy but not clappy

    It's academic, innit

    Innovate and all those others desperately seek to glue academia to industry (universities try really hard to justifdy their own existence, and they have copious free time to stuff the boards of these organisations).

    Thus partnerships with Universities give you a huge uplift. Add some spurious IP, some eco "woo woo" digital fairy-dust, pick a number that hits the average (about £1M by the looks of things) and you are good to go. So you can see why the mentioned project got loads of cash, it is perfectly adapted.

    The London catapult is empty of serious applications for this reason, academia are largely irrelevant in the software space, and the amounts of money offered are paltry. £5K gets you nothing really. £800K gets you a little more, but not much. Consider instead what it costs to develop a new car and you are getting closer.

  20. TwoWolves
    WTF?

    All shall win Prizes

    Bet they all want an Oscar for living in the North West as well!

  21. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Why should innovate fund food and drink if it is booming on it's own?

  22. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

    Global Scoop for El Reg re Guiding Lights from the Dark Side to Life

    For Homegrown Foreign and Alien IntelAIgently Designed IDEntity, Innovate UK might like to levitate towards its and IT Cloud Crowd Funding of

    AIDirect Secure Quantum Communications Link for BroadBandCasting of Future New WWWorlds

    I Kid U Not. Amigos;-)

    And that be Main Stream SMARTR Street News too, for Onward BroadBandCasting.

    I suppose and propose that is worth great chats about chatter and chaff/good and bad exchanges/future working designs.

  23. John Styles

    Whilst I'm sure this is all tiresome quank (Quango wank), I am dubious about

    "[...] it agreed to spend no less than £800,000 on a piece of software that would “minimise building waste” sent to landfill by construction companies.

    [...] In the real world, such software might cost £5,000 maximum.[...]"

    Why might this software cost 5000 pounds? How do you know this based on this one line description of the software? If you are actually paying a company to do something in a vaguely organised way you don't get much software for 5000 pounds, surely.

  24. maffski

    Declaration of interests?

    Don't get me wrong - it's a interesting area and something I'd like to read more about, however shouldn't you declare that you have a vested interest - running The Gibson Index ("...profiles on some 50,000 early stage start-ups, University spinouts, SME veterans, technology-led consultancies and business partnerships"). After all you did in last years article.

  25. gnufrontier

    Reducing construction landfill waste.

    Are we sure a piece of software is the solution to this problem?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon