How Underrepresented Founders Face Retaliation in Techstars Program

In 2024, my cofounder — a queer woman of color — and I were accepted into Techstars Miami. We signed the paperwork. The offer was real. And then, suddenly, it was revoked.

The Revocation

The reason? My cofounder had an unresolved back pay dispute with a previous Techstars portfolio company where she'd worked. Instead of helping resolve the issue or showing support for a founder who had been wronged, Techstars chose to protect the company. She was punished for speaking up.

That's the pattern.

Techstars' Claim vs. Reality

Techstars claims to support diversity. But when underrepresented founders raise valid concerns — about payment, ethics, or conduct — the organization retaliates, revokes offers, smears reputations, and then scrubs its hands.

Our Experience

In our case, my cofounder had worked full-time as a contractor for a Techstars-backed startup. She was even offered a "cofounder" role and asked to relocate to Malta. Despite doing the work, she was never paid. After months of ghosting, she retained legal counsel. Only then did the company make a token payment — not even covering the full amount owed.

We disclosed this situation during our Techstars interviews. We were still accepted by both Techstars Miami and LA. We signed the participation agreements. Then Techstars reversed course.

The Pressure to "Be Pragmatic"

Andres Barreto, the managing director, told us to "be pragmatic." The subtext was clear: drop it, or you're out.

Matt Kozlov, the MD of LA, told my cofounder that the dispute would follow her. He was right — not because it should, but because they made sure it would.

The Aftermath

In the months after, MDs and staff from Techstars began privately accusing her of having "a serious character flaw." They actively damaged her reputation across the founder and investor ecosystem. The company that failed to pay her was never held accountable.

Techstars' Response

Meanwhile, Techstars rebranded programs, quietly reshuffled leadership, and continued to use the language of inclusion to shield itself from scrutiny. They launched a $25K "mental health fund" — a token gesture that amounts to less than one founder's pre-seed runway. It came only after public pressure.

A Broader Pattern

This isn't a one-off story. It's part of a broader pattern:

• Founders of color and women are accepted into programs, then excluded or sidelined when they speak up.
• Leadership turnover is rebranded as "innovation" while the same bad behaviors persist.
• Techstars uses "community partnerships" to distance HQ from responsibility — if a local MD retaliates, they say: "That wasn't us."

The Reality of "Give First"

For an organization built on the idea of "Give First," this is what extraction and silence look like in practice.