The journey from a breakthrough idea to a market-ready reality is paved with obstacles, but for many founders—particularly those from minoritised backgrounds—the highest hurdles aren't technical; they are structural. The venture capital and public funding landscapes continue to struggle with a glaring disparity: while talent is distributed equally, opportunity and capital are not.
To address the stinginess of investors, one must look at the data. In the UK, research has consistently shown that entrepreneurs from Black and multi-ethnic backgrounds face higher rejection rates and receive lower levels of investment.
This isn't just a pipeline problem. It is often the result of affinity bias—the tendency for investors to fund people who look, speak, and went to the same universities as they did. When an investor says "no" to a viable project, it is often a failure of imagination or a reliance on outdated pattern matching that excludes diverse perspectives.
One of the most frustrating arguments used by funding bodies like Innovate UK or traditional VCs is the concept of additionality. They claim their role is to fund projects that would not happen without their help. However, if a founder manages to scrape together friends and family money, takes on personal debt, or finds a smaller, more agile investor to prove the concept, the original funder often uses that success as a retrospective justification for their rejection.
They argue: "Since you succeeded without us, you clearly didn't need the money."
This logic is fundamentally flawed. It ignores the opportunity cost of the struggle. A project that took three years to launch due to lack of capital might have taken six months with proper funding. The struggle isn't a badge of honor; it is a delay that allows competitors to catch up and drains the founder's mental and financial resources. Succeeding despite a lack of support is not proof that the support wasn't necessary; it is proof of the founder's exceptional resilience against an inefficient system.
To win in this environment, founders must pivot from seeking permission to building leverage.
Evidence as an Armor: Systemic bias thrives on subjective risk. By over-delivering on data, traction, and early-stage validation, you make a "no" look like a professional lapse in judgment by the investor.
Alternative Ecosystems: Look toward Angel Syndicates and Venture Studios specifically focused on underrepresented founders.
These groups don't just provide cash; they provide the warm introductions that bias usually blocks. The Power of the "Second Bite": When you succeed independently, do not just walk away. Use your new valuation to approach the same institutions for much larger Series B or Scale-Up rounds. At this stage, the data is undeniable. You are no longer asking for a favor; you are offering them a seat on a moving train.