Having gone through SUS/winning a grant with a biotech, I'll say the style of thinking and the community/accountability was universally applicable. Getting to the killer experiment as quickly as possible to have a solid foundation to build on/raise money off of is a very similar and useful style of thinking to get an MVP launched asap. The more tactical content was sorely lacking for biotechs/hartechs/moonshots though. For bio and hardware, it would have been nice to have some co tent specifically around challenges with capital raising/capital efficiency, how to think about designing experiments. Maybe for hardware, a how to do kickstarter lecture (since there were some very granular tactical software lectures), and maybe a lecture on how to manage a supply chain/inventory. For moonshots, I dont know if theres a playbook that applies since by definition they're very different, but perhaps similar themes to biotech of how do you derisk as quickly as possible. Hopefully theres an opportunity to add content along those lines as they build out the next gen of SUS
Thanks for the experience, your post is encouraging, might apply!
The lack of "more tactical content" is what I noticed and that is what caused me to have that kind of a perspective at this being aimed at quicker-moving startups.
It's not an application anymore I dont think, it's more of a just sign up to participate, but you have to actually participate to get the benefits sort of thing
