European science firms are finally attracting venture capital as investors chase moonshots, yet many founders still begin with public or research grants. The article argues that early grant dependence skews business models toward eligibility criteria rather than market demand, turning scientists into grant writers and delaying product launch. Proxima Fusion illustrates the alternative: private money first, public support later.

Grant‑heavy ecosystems create structural drag. Universities can retain up to half of grant overhead, leaving innovators with a fraction of the intended capital. Cases like the Scottish aerospace firm Orbex show taxpayers absorbing risk when public money props up stalled projects, ultimately leading to administration. The piece warns that premature state backing concentrates risk on the public purse rather than on market validation.

The author does not call for the abolition of public research funding, noting bodies such as Innovate UK and Horizon have seeded companies like Oxford Quantum Circuits. However, the decisive factor for scaling should be private validation—customers or investors—before any public cash flows. Shifting the funding sequence would sharpen founder ownership, accelerate market entry, and produce more globally competitive science companies.