Why do well funded science innovation ecosystems keep reproducing the same failures? This article explains why failure in deep tech, life sciences, energy, and hardware is structural, not accidental. It shows how standardization, misaligned incentives, proxy metrics, premature capital, accelerator design, and software-style assumptions systematically collapse optionality and stall ventures between TRL 4 and TRL 7, despite strong science and funding.

Science-based ventures fail when evaluated with startup logic that ignores structural constraints. This article explains why research timelines, regulation, technical dependencies, and resource intensity cannot be optimized away, and how constraint-aware strategy, capital structuring, and governance increase the odds that scientifically viable ventures survive long enough to create real impact.

Science ventures operate under structural uncertainty and irreversible decision paths that traditional startup logic fails to capture. This article explains why early signals are misleading, why scientific choices cannot be undone, and how capital, governance, and evaluation frameworks must change when value creation depends on resolving unknowns rather than optimizing known risks.