Meet the judges who will crown Australia's next breakout startup ⁠79%

By TechCrunch Events⁠0%

7/24/2026, 12:05:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 22 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Appeal to Authority, and Halo Effect, with Attempt to Sell a Product or Service as the most egregious example at 34.1% saturation with 188 hits. Analysis detected 1,044 faulty-reasoning hits from 552 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 70.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠79% (4,512 of 21,175 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 78.70% of the article peer group.

TechCrunch Startup Battlefield is coming to Australia — and we’re partnering with Stripe to find the country’s most exciting early-stage startups. 
On August 19, eight Australian startups will take the stage at Stripe Tour Sydney to pitch live in front of investors, press, and the tech community. 
Three will win prizes. 
One will earn an automatic ticket to TechCrunch Disrupt 2026, taking place in San Francisco from October 13-15. 
The secret to finding the next breakout founder? 
The judges. 
Startup Battlefield has a track record that speaks for itself. 
The competition has launched over 1,700 companies globally, including Dropbox, Cloudflare, Discord, and Trello. 
Alumni have collectively raised $32 billion and produced 250+ exits. 
The last time Startup Battlefield came to Sydney, the winner was HealthMatch — now valued at over $25 million with a million patients globally. 
That success doesn’t happen by accident. 
It comes from having the right people in the room, the ones who can spot potential, ask the hard questions, and open doors for founders. 
This year, we’ve assembled three judges who represent the best of Australia’s startup ecosystem and global fintech innovation. 
Meet your judges 
Jasmine Liew, Head of Startup & Investor Partnerships for APAC, Stripe 
Stripe doesn’t just sponsor Startup Battlefield — the company is also deeply embedded in the startup ecosystem. 
Jasmine Liew brings institutional knowledge of what it takes to scale globally and the payment infrastructure that powers modern commerce. 
When a founder pitches in front of her, they’re pitching to someone who understands not just the vision, but also the mechanics of turning that vision into a revenue-generating machine. 
Brendan Hill, angel investor and venture partner, Ten13 
Brendan Hill represents the investor class that actually writes checks. 
As a venture partner and active angel investor, he’s not just evaluating ideas — he’s also evaluating whether he’d bet his own money on a team. 
That’s the lens that matters when founders are trying to raise their next round. 
Jarron Aizen, founder and CEO, Hapana 
Jarron Aizen is a founder himself, which means he knows what it’s like to stand where these eight pitchers will be standing. 
He’s walked the path from idea to company, and that perspective is invaluable. 
When he asks a question from the judge’s table, it’s informed by the wins and scars of building in the Australian market. 
What’s on the line 
The grand prize winner takes home $15,000 in Stripe fee credits — real money that can fuel growth — plus automatic entry into Startup Battlefield 200 at TechCrunch Disrupt 2026. 
That’s not just a prize. 
That’s a launchpad. 
Second place takes $5,000 in Stripe credits. 
Third place takes $2,000 in Stripe credits. 
But more importantly, all finalists get in the room with these judges, get press attention, and get access to the Stripe Tour Sydney audience of founders, operators, and investors. 
The real spectacle happens on August 19 
If you’re an investor, a founder who’s not ready to pitch, or just someone who wants to see the future of Australian startups unfold, Stripe Tour Sydney on August 19 is the event. 
Register to attend. 
The stage is set. 
The judges are ready. 
The question is: Which startup will be next? 
*Hosted and MC’d by Isabelle Johannessen, director of Startup Battlefield. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.9%TechCrunch: 3.0%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.9%TechCrunch: 1.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 6.5%TechCrunch Events: 3.4%TechCrunch: 3.5%Availability Heuristic6.5%This article: 4.3%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic4.3%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.6%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 2.3%TechCrunch: 2.5%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.4%TechCrunch Events: 6.9%TechCrunch: 4.8%Framing Effect0.4%This article: 9.2%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.6%Loss Aversion9.2%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 13.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.7%TechCrunch: 5.0%Optimism Bias13.0%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 1.2%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 5.0%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 1.8%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 2.1%Self-Serving Bias1.8%This article: 4.5%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.5%Fundamental Attribution Error4.5%This article: 4.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias4.0%This article: 3.3%TechCrunch Events: 3.6%TechCrunch: 0.6%In-Group Bias3.3%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 14.5%TechCrunch Events: 16.9%TechCrunch: 3.3%Halo Effect14.5%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 4.3%TechCrunch Events: 2.2%TechCrunch: 2.3%Recency Bias4.3%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.3%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.6%Straw Man0.0%This article: 21.7%TechCrunch Events: 15.9%TechCrunch: 4.3%Appeal to Authority21.7%This article: 7.8%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 1.7%False Dilemma7.8%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.6%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 2.5%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.2%Circular Reasoning2.5%This article: 8.9%TechCrunch Events: 1.3%TechCrunch: 6.0%Hasty Generalization8.9%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 1.2%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 4.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.6%TechCrunch: 2.2%Appeal to Emotion4.0%This article: 4.5%TechCrunch Events: 1.4%TechCrunch: 0.6%Begging the Question4.5%This article: 6.2%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 2.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)6.2%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 8.3%TechCrunch Events: 4.3%TechCrunch: 2.4%Anecdotal8.3%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.5%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.5%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 2.0%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 24.6%TechCrunch Events: 18.6%TechCrunch: 4.6%Biased Writer Voice24.6%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 1.6%TechCrunch: 0.8%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%TechCrunch Events: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 34.1%TechCrunch Events: 22.0%TechCrunch: 4.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…34.1%

552 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers34%attributed speech367writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageJasmine Liew • 11 words • 0.0% coverageStripe • 17 words • 0.0% coverageJasmine Liew • 20 words • 0.0% coverageJasmine Liew • 30 words • 100.0% coverageBrendan Hill • 8 words • 0.0% coverageBrendan Hill • 10 words • 0.0% coverageBrendan Hill • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageJarron Aizen • 6 words • 0.0% coverageJarron Aizen • 22 words • 0.0% coverageJarron Aizen • 13 words • 0.0% coverageJarron Aizen • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Jarron Aizen

100%flagged-word coverage
63 attributed words34% of attributed speech86% writer coverage
0%27.5%55.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -51.2 ptsWriter: 51.2%Jarron Aizen: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice+19.1 ptsWriter: 15.8%Jarron Aizen: 34.9%34.9%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.