Seedrs CEO Jeff Kelisky (L) and Crowdcube CEO Darren Westlake. Photo: Seedrs/Crowdcube/Yahoo Finance UK
Seedrs CEO Jeff Kelisky (L) and Crowdcube CEO Darren Westlake. Photo: Seedrs/Crowdcube/Yahoo Finance UK

The chief executives of Britain’s two biggest crowdfunding businesses say their planned combination will allow them to supercharge growth and it’s not about weathering the COVID-19 crisis.

Darren Westlake, the chief executive of Crowdcube, and Jeff Kelisky, his counterpart at Seedrs, told Yahoo Finance UK their planned merger was geared towards expansion, rather than cost cutting.

“The purpose of the merger is growth,” Kelisky told Yahoo Finance UK on Monday. “It’s not harvesting, it’s not consolidation. It’s absolutely about the growth opportunity that we feel is untapped.”

Crowdcube and Seedrs announced plans for an all stock merger on Monday, hoping to create a combined business worth around £140m ($181.8m).

READ MORE: Crowdfunding platforms Crowdcube and Seedrs to merge

The deal brings together the UK’s two biggest equity crowdfunding platforms, which between them have helped hundreds of British startups raise over £2bn.

“We’ve got a lot more in common that we have got differences,” Westlake told Yahoo Finance UK.

‘Stay on the front foot’

The deal was hailed by many in the fintech sector as an obvious combination. But some raised questions about whether it was a shotgun wedding, given financial conditions. Crowdcube and Seedrs lost £7.2m between them last year and activity on Seedrs’ platform dropped 20% in the early stages of the pandemic.

Seedrs’ annual results, published on Tuesday, show auditors flagged the business may need to raise money to keep going, particularly given the impact of COVID-19.

“They have to do something,” said Michael Jackson, an experienced tech entrepreneur and venture capitalist who is now a director of businesses including Axa UK and Volvo.

Both Westlake and Kelisky rejected this picture, insisting they are in fine fettle.

“The question behind the financials relates to:

In 2012 when proponents were negotiating what became the landmark 2013 Massachusetts automotive right to repair legislation, today’s leading producer of electric vehicles, Tesla, sold just over 3,000 cars. This year, estimates suggest that Tesla may deliver over 500,000 vehicles. Potentially accelerating the shift to advanced technology vehicles further, California announced last month an effort to phase out the sale of new gas-powered passenger vehicles by 2035. How does any of this relate to the 2020 Massachusetts Question 1 ballot initiative looking to augment right to repair?

Over the past several decades, vehicles have moved from being primarily mechanical systems, with thousands of moving parts, to systems that draw together fewer mechanical pieces with a broad array of electronic componentry and networks linked by computer software embedded with artificial intelligence. Electric vehicles have dramatically fewer moving parts, potentially accelerating a tipping point towards a largely smart consumer electric device on wheels. The promise of connected, automated electric mobility will further amplify the trends towards higher technology cars in the decades to come. Software, unlike hardware, is increasingly updated through wireless networks and manufacturer provided vehicle service to enhance performance and functionality throughout the vehicle’s lifecycle. As Tesla is demonstrating, cars of all types might actually improve as they age.

In this context, Massachusetts Question 1 is a referendum on how traditional independent automotive repair shops and aftermarket part suppliers are going to function as part of tomorrow’s automotive ecosystem. The ballot initiative aims to enact a law that opens connectivity to any vehicle-specific data “for the purposes of maintaining, diagnosing and repairing the motor vehicle.” The law would require that “access shall include the