Felix Haas
Chairman & Co-Host; Moderator
Sessions (9)
Sessions featuring Felix Haas at Bits & Pretzels 2026 | Founders Festival in Munich
Bits & Pretzels Opening 2026 - After AI video
The opening message after the AI video was that Bits & Pretzels 2026 wanted attendees to carry one shared question through the next three days: what future are they helping make more likely? The hosts emphasized that the point was not to force people to choose between the video’s positive, negative, or neutral voices on AI, but to use the tension as a conversation starter. They specifically named security, the labor market, and financial markets as areas attendees should think about, and urged people at the coffee bar not to begin with the usual “what are you building?” Instead, they asked the community to first ask one another where they stand on the AI-related questions raised by the video, and only then connect those views to what they are building and in which direction their work may push the future.
Defense for European Sovereignty
The core message of the session was that European defense innovation must connect military needs with startup speed, because modern security depends on technology that can protect soldiers, critical infrastructure, and society. The moderator opened by noting that defense has become a core topic at Bits and Pretzels and that its relevance now extends beyond direct military application. Sven described his first encounters with the Bundeswehr as surprising, including discovering that military acronyms meant different things than in the startup world and observing how precisely soldiers pitch ideas. Admiral Bock then explained that, after nearly forty years in the armed forces, he had watched the Cyber Innovation Hub become a front runner in connecting civilian innovation with military needs, especially through reservists who embody both ecosystems in one person. The discussion then moved to why defense innovation matters for society as a whole. Admiral Bock argued that Europe cannot afford to duplicate technologies, budgets, or knowledge across separate civilian and military systems. Instead, he called for a whole-of-government approach that combines information, expertise, and capabilities. He emphasized that defense is not only about “destroying things,” but also about securing and stabilizing hospitals, traffic infrastructure, and other critical systems. Sven added that unlike the 1960s and 1970s, when military programs drove much modern technology, today many important software advances come from civilian startups. He challenged the term “dual use,” saying soldiers care less about labels than about technology that helps them protect people, especially in the context of Russian aggression in Ukraine and toward Europe. The most operational part of the session focused on speed. Admiral Bock said his main task is to create systems that can move faster under peacetime conditions while learning from nations in crisis or war. Asked what had been learned from Ukraine, he pointed to separating hardware and software, treating systems as modular, and connecting cyber, AI, intelligence, procurement, technology, science, and military users into a shared ecosystem. Sven described this as moving toward an API-driven military world and “software defined defense,” contrasting it with older procurement models where updating software could effectively require buying a new tank. Both speakers emphasized asking soldiers what they actually need and iterating with them every seven to fourteen days rather than designing solutions from PowerPoint. For founders, the advice was direct: approach the Cyber Innovation Hub or the Innovation Centre of the Armed Forces, but do so with a clear unfair advantage and a working prototype. Sven warned that some areas, especially counter-UAS and counter-drone startups, are already crowded, so merely proving that drones can fly is not enough. Software differentiation, a technology readiness level closer to six or seven, and the ability to test with soldiers matter. Admiral Bock said the Innovation Centre is building more open access routes and can invite startups into challenges or competitions, while Sven highlighted demo days where 10 to 15 startups receive direct soldier feedback. The session closed by urging founders to engage, test, and avoid spending years building products without military product-market fit.
Welcome
The welcome session positioned the investor stage as a deliberately focused program designed to create maximum value for investors, institutional LPs, and, ultimately, founders attending Bits and Pretzels in Munich. The hosts opened by greeting the audience and explaining that this is the third edition of the investor program, hosted by Andre and Felix. They framed the third year as the point at which the format has become something of a tradition, while emphasizing that the original idea three years ago was not to introduce investors to Bits and Pretzels for the first time, but to create a dedicated program specifically for investors and LPs. Felix described the program’s development as an iterative process. In the first year, the goal was to bring top investors and LPs to Munich. In the second year, the team improved the format, and in the third year they again made “a lot of little adoptions” and changes. The stated purpose of these adjustments was precise: to provide maximum value to investors and LPs, while also supporting founders. Andre then expanded the current scale of the event, saying that more than 2,000 investors are present at Bits and Pretzels in Munich, with several hundred additional participants joining online because they cannot attend physically. He highlighted that this is the first time the audience has been extended in that way. A central point of pride was the presence of more than 330 institutional LPs. Andre described the effort to bring international LPs from all over the world to Munich as significant, and said the hosts were looking forward to the conversations ahead. He then set expectations for the two-day agenda: more than 60 speakers across more than 20 sessions, designed around deep and honest conversations. He contrasted this approach with conferences that rely on ten- or fifteen-minute panels, explaining that the investor stage is intended to go deeper into specific topics already known to matter to the audience. The welcome concluded by outlining additional networking opportunities and announcing a new report. Beyond the stage program, attendees were pointed to GP-LP matchmaking, the investor lounge, exclusive formats such as LP Fifty connected to Oktoberfest, and more open formats across the days. Andre then announced that the team had collected convictions from several speakers about the next five years and compiled them into a report published that day. Attendees can access the convictions report through a QR code in front of the investor lounge and later online. He closed by thanking the contributing speakers, the Bits and Pretzels team, and cohost Felix for making the program possible.
OneMunich.AI: Building Europe’s AI Powerhouse
The core message of the available session transcript is that Munich’s AI opportunity rests on a rare combination: global technology companies are arriving, major industrial customers are nearby, and the city’s two leading universities are choosing collaboration over rivalry. The introduction frames Munich as already attractive to Google, Salesforce, OpenAI, Anthropic, Mistral, and Legora, while also being surrounded by companies such as Siemens, Allianz, Linde, BMW, and Audi. But the moderator argues that the deeper engine is academic: TU Munich has produced more than twenty unicorns and more startup founders than any other university in the German-speaking world, while LMU is associated with more than fifty Nobel Prize-winning scholars who studied or researched there. The session then positions OneMunich.AI as a new joint initiative built on that academic foundation. Before the panel begins, the speakers introduce Thomas Hofmann, president of TUM since 2019, and Matthias Tschöp, who became LMU president the previous October. Their biographies are used to show the breadth of Munich’s research base: Hofmann’s background is in food chemistry and taste molecules, while Tschöp is a physician and metabolic researcher whose work helped lay groundwork for cutting-edge drugs fighting diabetes and overweight. Tschöp is also introduced as a founder whose biotech company was sold to Novo Nordisk, reinforcing the panel’s link between research excellence and entrepreneurship. In the discussion, the moderator emphasizes that TUM and LMU are not approaching AI as isolated competitors but as partners trying to attract talent and resources to Munich. Tschöp describes LMU as one of Europe’s broadest universities, spanning philosophy, theology, physics, and informatics, and argues that Munich benefits when the universities combine strengths and use complementary areas effectively. Hofmann echoes this, saying that in fields such as natural science and medicine both universities are leading, so it would be “stupid” not to bundle competencies for global competition. He distinguishes TUM by highlighting its early integration of student education, research deep dives, and entrepreneurship from the first semester. The available transcript closes with a discussion of what still holds Munich back from being number one globally. Money is acknowledged as important, especially compared with the resources of US private universities, but both presidents stress that funding is not everything. Tschöp begins with talent and ideas, saying Europe’s former brain drain toward the United States has started to reverse, with Munich now attracting talent from Stanford, MIT, Oxford, and elsewhere. Hofmann adds that Munich’s universities are building a growing supporter community, including donations from people who believe Germany, Europe, and Munich can shape the future.
Brain-Computer Interfaces: Our Only Defense Against AI Extinction?
The available transcript’s core value proposition is a founder-investor lesson drawn from Christian’s psychedelic-biotech experience: conviction in unfashionable categories can pay off, but only if a company survives the down cycle long enough for fundamentals and strategic buyers to matter again. Although the session title points to brain-computer interfaces and AI extinction, the supplied transcript covers psychedelics, Atai, biotech investing, and the early impact of AI on drug discovery; it ends during a discussion of biotech recovery. Christian begins by arguing that psychedelics should be used only in controlled settings, specifically therapeutic and medical contexts. He says he believes they can make someone a better entrepreneur, investor, and human being, then grounds that claim in his own experience discovering psychedelics in 2014. He describes his first psychedelic trip as “the single most meaningful and important thing” he had ever done, and says that realization pushed him to build Atai. He frames the company’s recent sale for almost $12 billion to Eli Lilly as validation after years in which friends and the pharmaceutical industry considered schedule-one psychedelic drugs career-ending or impossible to commercialize. The discussion then turns to why Christian believed the opportunity was visible. He says Sandoz had approved LSD and psilocybin as medical treatments in the 1960s, and that studies from that period already indicated low downside in medical settings. He also criticizes the Nixon-era campaign that he says stigmatized LSD, psilocybin, and cannabis as part of a political effort against the anti-Vietnam movement. In the present, he claims clinical studies show relatively mild adverse effects such as headache or nausea, while psychedelics may significantly improve conditions including depression, anxiety, addiction, PTSD, and body dysmorphia. For depression, he cites roughly 70% success rates after one or two sessions. The strongest practical advice arrives through the biotech market discussion. Christian says biotech is highly interest-rate-sensitive because of long-dated cash flows, and explains that Atai’s stock fell from its $15 IPO price in 2021 to around $1.50 as the sector collapsed from 2022 to 2024. His rule for founders is blunt: “don’t die in a down cycle.” He advises firing quickly when needed to extend runway, preserving optionality, continuing the work even when no one listens, and waiting for the cycle to turn. Looking ahead, he says returns in both tech and biotech may become harder because volatility is rising and AI is accelerating innovation cycles, though biotech has some protection because drug approval timelines still matter.
Opening
The opening framed the second day of the Bits and Pretzels investor program as a dedicated space for deeper, investor-specific content at a moment when capital deployment has become both promising and harder to judge. The speaker welcomed the audience early in the morning, noting that the CIO stage was already packed with around 500 CIOs while investors “tend to start a bit slower into the day.” He positioned the investor stage as a place built specifically for investors who want more substantial discussion than a general event opening can provide. He then connected the day’s agenda to his own perspective as an investor: someone putting “hard earned money into startups” with the dual aim of supporting founders and potentially generating strong returns. The core tension he named was that investors and entrepreneurs currently face an “abundance of opportunity” but also a “scarcity of clarity.” In particular, he highlighted AI as an unresolved question for capital allocators: it could become the biggest money destruction of the century, the biggest opportunity of the century, or both at once, depending on how investors pick companies and recalibrate their judgment. The speaker also emphasized that venture capital and startup financing are no longer simple categories of early stage and late stage. He pointed to a more complex landscape involving blend-over funds, crossover funds, different fund blends, private equity moving down into earlier-stage activity, early-stage funds doing SPVs, and other shifts. These changes, he said, create many questions for the industry, and especially for GPs and investors. He thanked Mats and the team for months of work curating the program and putting “love into the detail” so that the time spent in the room would be worthwhile. The handoff encouraged active participation rather than passive listening. The audience was explicitly invited to challenge panels if they became boring or overly agreeable, because contrarian questions are where the best discussions often start. Mats then previewed the morning structure: more than 13 sessions and over 30 speakers, organized into three blocks on winning deals, investment theses across AI, quantum, biotechnology, and energy, the current boundaries of defense investing, and finally the LP view, including where institutions place capital and whether real value accrues in Europe or only in the US.
Fireside Chat Isar Aerospace x Felix Haas
The core message of the available session transcript is that Isar Aerospace’s orbital launch success was not presented as a single spectacular moment, but as the result of eight years of persistence, disciplined engineering, and repeated decisions not to take avoidable risks. The opening framed the achievement as a European milestone: the host contrasted the footage with NASA and SpaceX, emphasized that Isar Aerospace is based near Munich, and said the company’s Spectrum rocket had, on its second flight, reached orbit and deployed five satellites. The host connected this to Daniel Metzler’s LinkedIn reflection that people had thought the company was “crazy” for eight years, and positioned the launch as a step toward European “serenity and independency.” Felix Haas then brought Daniel Metzler into the conversation by asking what it felt like inside the operations room during the successful launch. Metzler deliberately began with the prior year’s first flight, which outside observers described as a failure because the German rocket “blows up in the sea” after about thirty seconds. Internally, however, he said the team considered it a major success because they did not blow up the launch pad and they gathered substantial data. That data then fed into a rigorous engineering process between the first flight and the second launch campaign, including overhauling the vehicle and incorporating lessons from both flight and ground attempts. Metzler described the successful launch as the fifth attempt in the campaign. One attempt was stopped because a valve got stuck; although launch was theoretically possible, it would have removed redundancy on that valve. Another was blocked by a fishing boat entering the range, causing the team to miss the cleared sea and airspace window by seconds. Two further attempts were stopped because of fluid-system issues while the rocket was fully fueled on the pad. He explained that different authorities made different abort calls: himself on the first attempt, range authorities on the second, and mission control and the team on the third and fourth. The leadership lesson Metzler emphasized was resilience: staying focused while outsiders, investors, and critics apply pressure or offer advice from outside the situation. The discussion then moved into the economics of launch risk. When asked about the cost of replacing a launch pad, Metzler said it was roughly a nine-digit sum, making it far more important to protect the pad than to push a rocket launch prematurely. The available transcript ends shortly after he explains that a launch pad is essentially like a chemical plant.
Fireside Chat: Quantum Systems x Felix Haas
The core message of the fireside chat is that Quantum Systems’ growth came from pairing technically demanding autonomous systems with a disciplined, resilient company culture built before the geopolitical demand spike. After a light opening with networking questions and a T-shirt cannon, the host introduced Quantum Systems as a Munich-born company building AI-powered autonomous systems across air, ground, and sea, connected by software, sensors, and intelligence. The session framed the company as part of a broader push toward German and European sovereignty, noting a recent $1.2 billion raise at an approximately $8 billion valuation before welcoming co-founder and co-CEO Florian Seibel alongside Felix Haas.
One more thing...
The core message of this closing segment was that the most useful measure of success is personal and subjective: Stephen Bartlett’s final takeaway was not to accept anyone else’s formula for how to live, including his own. Asked what he wanted to leave the audience with, he first answered, “Don’t take advice from anybody, including me.” He then explained that this was not a throwaway line, but the point he had intended to make. The value proposition for the audience was direct: instead of adopting success metrics from speakers, social posts, or public examples, attendees should ask themselves how they actually feel about the life they are building. Bartlett illustrated the point with a behind-the-scenes exchange involving Jack, the person who films his show and has observed him for eight years across his previous company, his current company, and his day-to-day work. Bartlett said he asked Jack, on air, whether Jack would like his life. Jack answered “no” immediately, so quickly that Bartlett joked it was almost offensive and might need to be cut from the episode. Bartlett then asked a follow-up question: whether Jack thought he was happy. Jack answered “yes” just as quickly. Bartlett used this contrast to show that two people can reject each other’s lives while both being happy in their own. From that story, Bartlett connected happiness to the proxy word “success.” His conclusion was that no LinkedIn post, no person, and no speaker on the stage should be treated as qualified to define the right life or the right happiness metric for everyone. The only metric he explicitly highlighted was “how do you feel?” The host thanked him and closed his appearance, after which the room was asked not to leave because “one more thing” was still coming. The final portion shifted from Bartlett’s reflection to an unscripted conference announcement. The hosts said that the best things happen unscripted and that Bartlett had just written down a question for someone next year. They added that they had not only prepared Bits 26 over the previous 365 days, but also the opening of Bits 27. After a short video, they announced that everyone had received an email with an exclusive link to a limited best-price ticket offer for next year, framed as a special edition for people in the room, before welcoming the moderators back on stage.