The Total Addressable Market slide tells you nothing about India’s deep tech opportunity. What does?
India is full of opportunities, and surprises. My initial years working with Indian companies was fairly conventional: investing in companies in the ecosystem of Infosys and Satyam, the pioneers of outsourcing services to the US, and working with sales channels into Unilever and similar multinationals that were focused on consumer markets. These were established companies with global channels, strong management teams, and clear commercial logic that translated across borders.
My venture stage work in India was different. The commercial strategy for working on, say, telecommunications licenses and related technology bids in India, or more recently, scaling education technology ventures in AI and assessment and exploring medtech distribution options, required a different entry strategy. Why? The buyers were different, procurement timelines and political relationships were not familiar, and the pricing structure was unique. So what looked like a single Indian market from the outside turned out to be many markets operating under their own rules and logic.
The lesson? Founders who treat India like a single market and develop a national go-to-market strategy are in for a rude awakening. And this lesson is not yet learned. Almost every pitch I’ve seen from a US-based founder targeting India talks about the same TAM slide: 1.4 billion people, growing middle class, massive opportunity. But the addressable market for a deep tech spinout in India often relies on specific income bands, procurement channels, state government support, and regulatory nuances. Focusing on demographics for deep tech tells investors almost nothing about the timeline, pricing, or entry viability.
Why should a US-based deep tech founder care about India at all? Isn’t there an easier path?
Perhaps. Singapore is generally more accessible. Korea moves faster. Japan has a deeper and more connected corporate infrastructure. China has the largest deep tech procurement market in the world, but also the highest regulatory and geopolitical complexity for foreign founders. The Gulf has patient capital but not a large market.
India does offer what none of those markets can do at equivalent scale: a wide deployment environment for technology that is outside a premium market context, and therefore representative of potential global scalability. Think about it this way: a diagnostic that works with Ayushman Bharat reimbursement rates can work everywhere; a grid-scale energy storage system deployed through a Maharashtra state electricity board tender is operation proof at a massive scale; and an AI infrastructure platform that is built on India Stack offers credibility that no other government digital infrastructure in the world can match for reach and complexity.
This issue discusses India from three angles: Indian PhD founders and IIT spinouts looking to access the US market; US-based PhD founders accessing India; and the diaspora network connecting both directions. All three require a more precise, honest map of what India actually offers versus what it required to get there.
Landscape: India’s 28+ Markets
India is not a national market in any commercially meaningful way for a deep tech spinout. It has 28 states and 8 union territories, each with its own procurement, political priorities, regulatory ambiguity, and demand for cutting edge technology and solutions. If you have a medtech pilot running in Tamil Nadu, great, but that is not a national footprint. Your climate tech contract with Maharashtra’s state electricity board may give you valuable state access, but nothing beyond that.
One of the first principles to understand is that state governments in India will have a say in public procurement, and often the primary buyer for most deep tech, climate tech, and medtech ventures at early stage. Hence targeting the right state, which procurement channels are most accessible, and what political relationships matter is more important than understanding the national demographic picture.
In short, the serviceable addressable market (SAM not TAM) for a PhD spinout in India is a state-level procurement opportunity in a specific sector.
India market access for US-based PhD founders
The India opportunity for US-based PhD founders is often an institutional procurement opportunity rather than a consumer market. A spin-out’s relevant buyers might be government agencies, state electricity boards, public hospital networks, and research institutions. Policy programs can often drive entry into these markets.
There are four sectors where the opportunity is genuine:
Medtech and diagnostics. Ayushman Bharat covers approximately 500 million people, and its reimbursement rates require significant cost adjustment and differs widely from the US. A venture with US FDA clearance can expect a faster CDSCO (India’s Central Drugs Standard Control Organization, the equivalent of the FDA) approval timeline. The entry point here is likely a state-level public hospital pilot, rather than national procurement.
Climate tech and energy. India’s 500GW renewable energy target by 2030 is massive. Typical buyers are state electricity boards which are politically controlled, state specific, and financially limited. States such as Maharashtra, Gujarat, Rajasthan, and Tamil Nadu are the most commercially vibrant in this sector. One potential non-dilutive entry point is the USTDA India energy program and the US-India Clean Energy Finance Task Force, which will fund feasibility studies and pilots for US technology companies entering the Indian energy market.
Agritech. The Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) and state agricultural universities are the primary research partners. The commercial entry point would likely be state government agricultural extension programs. This is not a consumer market driven by TAM and national demographics; it’s going to be anchored locally.
AI and deep tech infrastructure. The so-called India Stack that includes Aadhaar, UPI, ONDC, and the Account Aggregator framework, is the most sophisticated government-built digital infrastructure in the world. It also offers a real opportunity for US-based AI ventures with the government as the primary buyer. One entry point would be the MeitY startup program and iDEX for dual-use technology.
What risks lie at the state level? Every commercial engagement requiring public procurement is subject to state government political risk, which can be significant and mercurial. Risk mitigation can take various forms, such as anchoring the pilot agreement to a specific program budget line rather than a ministerial priority or personal contact. Building relationships across party lines and making the technology’s value demonstrable to any incoming administration will help over time.
Summary: Replace the TAM slide with a state-level serviceable addressable market analysis. Name the specific program, procurement channel, state, and reimbursement or contract rate.
The diaspora bridge
The Indian-origin PhD founder at a US R1 university is often in a pivotal position with respect to India. They have US TTO relationships, investor access, and research credibility. They may also have IIT alumni network access, Indian government research familiarity, and cultural fluency in India’s commercial environment. That is a rare combination.
IIT’s global alumni network is the infrastructure that makes this position valuable. In the US direction it can facilitate warm introductions to investors, accelerators, and corporate innovation groups. For India, it can provide access to Indian corporate venture arms, state government research programs, and BIRAC funding.
Indian conglomerates such as Tata, Reliance, and Mahindra, are also worth prioritizing. They all have active venture arms and are open to deep tech partnerships with US research institutions. Tata, in particular, is a great example of this through its Tata-Cornell and Tata-MIT collaborations. Reliance is active as well, and can provide more scale across telecoms, retail, energy, and financial services than any other Indian corporate partner. And Mahindra is particularly relevant for climate tech and agritech founders. How often are they approached from US-based PhD founders? Generally not top of mind.
One caveat: cultural familiarity can breed complacency, and personal knowledge of India does not automatically translate to commercial knowledge of how state procurement works, corporate partnership negotiations proceed, or how regulatory timelines compare to US expectations. India-born start-up founders can fail just as hard as anyone else. The diaspora advantage is in relationship-building but does not replace the hard preparation that accessing the India market often requires.
Summary: Use the diaspora network deliberately in both directions, into US investors and into Indian corporate venture arms and government programs. Prepare for the Indian market as rigorously as you would for any market where you have no cultural familiarity, and don’t take your Indian-origin for granted.
How might India-based PhD founders and IIT spinouts access the US?
Flipping the lens around, let’s look a cross-border activity into the US.
India’s first technology wave, including Infosys, Wipro, and TCS, succeeded in the US by arbitraging low cost labor services through established global channels and strong management. That model is useless to a IIT deep tech spinout selling cutting edge materials science, AI infrastructure, biotech, or climate technology in the US.
The US entry sequence mirrors what I covered in Issue 19: the Delaware C-corp should be established before investor conversations; access to SBIR and NIH non-dilutive equity is available regardless of founder citizenship and should be strongly considered; and an accelerator program might work well prior to marrying a venture to a VC. Among the many examples, Y Combinator has a particularly strong Indian founder track record, with partners familiar with the IIT commercialization context and where acceptance is itself a credibility milestone.
At a commercialization strategy level, IIT founders need to recalibrate the price point for US consumers and institutional buyers, much as US founders need to do for India. Indian founders may be more accustomed to pricing for Indian institutional buyers where government procurement values are low and price sensitivity is important. In this way, a medtech diagnostic priced for Ayushman Bharat (India’s public health coverage program covering approximately 500 million people) reimbursement rates will be significantly underpriced for a US hospital.
Summary: Map the IIT alumni network in your target US geography. Use it as entry into investor networks, TTO relationships, and pilot partners. Recalibrate price points for the US, depending on buyer.
One Action
Depending on where you sit, tackle a few questions here:
For Indian PhD founders entering the US: Have you mapped the IIT alumni network in your target US geography to gain early traction with investors, TTO relationships, and potential pilot partners? Do your initial pricing assumptions align with US use cases?
For US-based PhD founders entering India: Have you replaced the TAM slide with a state-level serviceable addressable market analysis? Have you focused on a specific program, procurement channel, state, and reimbursement rate that gives your India entry commercially viability?
For diaspora bridge founders: Have you considered leveraging your IIT alumni network in both directions: into US investors and into Indian corporate venture arms and government programs? Are you ready structurally for the Indian market?
A final observation: the O layer of the PROVE sequence (Operation Proof ) is where market entry into India tends to break down. This is because a pilot in Tamil Nadu may mean nothing in Maharashtra, and a BIRAC grant or DST award (DST, India’s Department of Science and Technology is the primary government grant agency for early-stage research commercialization) may not resonate with US investors. Remember that each audience, in India and the US, requires their own proof points.
India, much like other large emerging markets, is not for the faint of heart. But if your entry strategy is well reasoned, the country is more accessible, and more valuable as a proof of concept, than most founders realize.
A note for TTOs
There are at least two questions worth asking at the licensing stage for any spinout founder that has, or may have, India in their commercialization plan: Is the founder using a state-level serviceable addressable market analysis? And has the founder mapped the specific procurement channel (eg. Ayushman Bharat, state electricity board, ICAR, MeitY) through which their technology will reach Indian institutional buyers?
For TTOs with Indian PhD researchers in their spinout pipeline: the IIT alumni network is the most underused commercialization asset available to IIT-origin founders, including in the US. They should leverage that network to ease their entry into an otherwise tough US market.
The PhD Founder Brief is published weekly by Todd Maurer — founder of Edunomix, owner of VersatilePhD. Commercialization intelligence for research-backed ventures and the institutions that support them.
Need advice? Work with Edunomix → | TTO or university innovation office? Bring the PROVE sequence to your cohort → | Browse all issues → edunomix.com/brief
Sources
- Ministry of Health and Family Welfare: Ayushman Bharat PM-JAY Programme Overview 2026
- Ministry of New and Renewable Energy: India’s Renewable Energy Target 2030
- MeitY: India Stack Digital Public Infrastructure Overview
- iDEX: Defence Innovation Organisation Programme Overview
- BIRAC: Biotechnology Industry Research Assistance Council Programme Overview
- US-India Science and Technology Endowment Fund: Programme Overview
- USTDA: India Energy Programme Overview
- ICAR: Indian Council of Agricultural Research Overview
- DST: Department of Science and Technology Startup India Programme
- National Foundation for American Policy: “Immigrant Founders of US Billion-Dollar Startups” (July 2022)
- PhD Founder Brief: Issue 2 (Singapore), Issue 4 (Non-Dilutive Playbook), Issue 13 (PROVE Framework), Issue 17 (East Asia), Issue 18 (Visa and Immigration), Issue 19 (Outside-In: US Market from East Asia)
Photo by Manohar Manu on Unsplash