Why no one needs sham advisory boards

In the wake of the BJDW's disastrous position paper, Bitpanda CEO Eric Demuth writes a guest post accusing the board of refusing to work, ripping into the self-promotion of founders via Instagram and TV, and complaining that many have built an autocratic bubble internally.

Supposedly progressive in name, extremely stupid in output: The "Young Digital Economy" has done itself in. Quite rightly, the public is raging about their position paper, the ministry deleted it from their website, the trade press is highly outraged - and we founders are even more so. Yes, I'm really pissed off because this is exactly the kind of amateurism that reflects on an entire industry and was so unspeakably predictable in the process.

The Advisory Board's understanding of democracy and its values with regard to the free press either do not coincide in any way with 99% of the industry, or - if the paper was indeed written by only one member - it is simply a case of refusal to work on the part of the remaining members, and I wonder how they define their role and the responsibility that goes with it.

After all, you don't even have to go into detail to notice that the rhetoric is so not in line with the values of young entrepreneurs, at least not the ones I know. Orbán, on the other hand, would like it just fine.

What we don't need, however, are boards with sign-offs, self-congratulators and those who go loosely by the motto: "The main thing is that the name is underneath."

Eric Demuth, CEO Bitpanda

Let's not forget that appointments to political bodies naturally serve as a clever self-marketing tool; the appointment is applauded accordingly. In my view, this applies not only to the German scene, but also to the Austrian scene. The work of Christian Miele, for example, who has been active in the German startup scene for years and has acted as the head of the local scene, shows that in my view things can be done differently.

What we don't need, however, are committees with sign-offs, self-congratulators and those who go by the motto: "The main thing is that the name is underneath. Either you put in the work and time - or you leave it alone and hand over the reins to others. Instead of just attracting attention with big Instagram and TV appearances, you should be aware of the responsibility you have when advising politicians. Because suddenly you're representing an entire industry with a lot of jobs and you have the opportunity to help shape the future.

Many are no longer reflective enough to realize that they have created an autocratic bubble for themselves internally.

Eric Demuth, Bitpanda CEO

It's also a fact that many a founder has blossomed too much in their self-importance. Many are no longer reflective enough to realize that they have created an autocratic bubble internally. Within one's own empire, as we know, this is particularly easy to do. And so one or the other likes to get the idea that things in the rest of the world should always be the same as in their own company - that is, above all, without backtalk and free of critical reflection. The scepter high, the nose even higher. So it doesn't surprise me anymore that many founders are strangers to that public and have simply forgotten the difference between self-dramatization (PR) and journalism (critical reporting).

But you have to be completely disillusioned if you think you want to exert influence on the freedom of the press. In times of right-wing populists and fascists, who always try to discredit other opinions and thus the free press and portray them as liars, because the content and facts do not fit their own small-minded ideology, such demands of supposed masterminds are an absolute scandal and fire dangerous. On the contrary, we must strengthen the free press and thus support our democracy.

Who can be celebrated, should be able to stand in the wind, first and foremost.

Eric Demuth, Bitpanda CEO

Speaking of critical reporting: Is it really so surprising that there are critical disputes when companies go public for billions without ever having earned a cent? Or when enormous sums of money flow into young companies in a very short time (as is the case with my company)? It makes perfect sense that this is not just applauded. It's all very new, incomprehensible to many. But instead of being transparent, picking up the company, explaining one's own business model and vision in a simple way, instead the critical questions should rather conveniently become less? Sorry, but that's part of our job. If you can be celebrated, you should be able to stand in the wind.

If nothing else, blaming third parties - ergo "the media" - is born of desperation. It is, of course, easier to write than to make concrete proposals for political action. The fact is, we are massively lagging behind, whether in Austria, Germany or Europe. To date, most start-ups are successful not because of politics, but in spite of it. What is completely missing is the awareness of politicians that the young digital industry is the hobbyhorse for the next decades. California has done many things right, while incentives have fallen short in this country. This status quo can only be described as critical.

Anything goes, a lot has to - especially without sham committees, but with a critical public, please.