London SXSW in review: Where was the vibe?
A lot to love, but a lot to improve. Was the first year of London SXSW a success? Paul Armstrong gives his verdict
Last week South-By-South-West (SXSW) came to London. A win in itself. It’s not easy launching a global franchise event in one of the busiest cities in the world, during the busiest week of the tech conference calendar. And while I didn’t see every panel, I had eyes and ears across the venues, from Whatsapp groups to fringe pop-ups to those quietly abandoning the main stage for side alley drinks. The feedback was consistent: ‘We’re glad it happened, we just wish it had hit harder.’
Attending SXSW Austin years ago, when living in the US and working with Yahoo! Music (yes, I’m that old) was, frankly, nuts. I haven’t been back recently, but I’ve followed its evolution, spoken to those who still go, and have seen how the festival has transitioned. Not without criticism, still widely respected, and still notorious for not paying its speakers anything. Multiple speakers I spoke to weren’t compensated for their time or travel, a standard SXSW move, but whalit stood out was how many said they weren’t even briefed properly. Direction was “minimal”. That lack of intentionality seems to have bled through into the main stage content.
Safe speakers and Linkedin soundbites
Let’s start with the ticket price. In Austin, access costs anywhere from $895 to $2,295. London SXSW was £1,300 unless, apparently, you were among the crowd of Tiktok influencers getting comped left and right. The music programme felt inclusive, £25 and up, so the intent was there. But if you’re trying to recreate the “collision of ideas” that SXSW is famous for, it helps to let more people in and keep them in one place. A more inclusive ticketing structure, and live streaming, would have been a powerful statement.
The main issue for most was the content. The conference stage lacked sharpness, didn’t push buttons, boundaries or reflect where the UK is really going in tech, culture and creativity. Did it confront and delight? At times it felt like a conference programmed for safe Linkedin soundbites, not ideas worth sweating over at a time when everyone seems to be sweating about something. The lack of editorial challenge on stage was hard to ignore. Some moderators simply didn’t do the work. Others got 30 minutes for a five person panel, which is madness in anyone’s book. There were also several stages stacked with white, male-only panels. In 2025 that’s just sad – and frustrating – to see.
Another issue was an egregious amount of weight given to marketing and advertising despite, it seems, not having that much new to say. The UK is a leading force in AI regulation, defence innovation, synthetic biology and financial services. Barely any of that was meaningfully explored. Where was our institutional credibility on display? SXSW should be where the UK flexes its future. Instead, we got 30-minute panels crammed with five participants and no Q&A. A chance to get real wasn’t just lost, it was not even aimed for.
Did Tony Blair need to be there?
Mid-week, the political stunt casting hit. David Cameron and Tony Blair were quietly added to the bill last minute, a move that reportedly led several musical acts to pull out. Were their contributions insightful or agenda-setting? No. The sessions were non-committal at best, and generally felt uncomfortable and obvious viewing. High-profile guests can work at SXSW, but their presence should add value, and right now, there are multiple better experts to discuss, among other things, AI’s role in the future of the UK. Picking two ex-Prime Ministers with, frankly, chequered pasts to say the least, did not need to happen, or add much but controversy.
One of the other defining traits of SXSW Austin is its startup energy. The presence of early-stage companies creating unexpected value. At London SXSW, that spirit felt muted. The UK has plenty of high-quality startups, especially in unsexy or complex spaces like privacy tech, industrial systems and compliance software. Why not highlight those doing the difficult work? Instead, too many panels felt like gloss over grit.
Operationally, the event struggled. People complained about long walks between venues, long lines and missed sessions. Several told me they gave up trying to run between them. Worse still, the sessions weren’t recorded, and there’s still no clear reason as to why, a decision that undermines the longevity of the content and the experience for those who paid the £1,300 to attend.
London SXSW compared to Austin
Austin alumni were probably always going to be the harshest critics. Generally, the feedback was ‘where was the vibe?’ We’re all clear that London can do parties, randomness and serendipity. But for many, the atmosphere felt “transactional”. I heard the phrase “glorified trade show” more than once. A few people said they did decent business. Most said it felt like the first time people had gathered en masse, so it was bound to be useful. Is that good enough for a brand that trades on magic and momentum? London’s job is to carve out new relevance.
Even the details felt off. The London SXSW-branded speaker handed out as swag? A cheap, Chinese-made throwaway. A small thing, sure, but it says a lot about the brand, the missed opportunities to differentiate the London edition.
Why not tap a local design firm to make something useful, beautiful and British? The whole brand identity lacked teeth. If London was meant to signal a new chapter for SXSW, it should have looked and felt like one.
Was Shoreditch the right choice?
Now, to be fair, this is a franchise. It’s the first year (of 10 apparently), and the festival brought economic benefit to the local area. I spoke to shop owners, restaurant managers, co-working execs, all obviously thrilled with the foot traffic. If anything, SXSW shone another light on how much help the nightlife and cultural economy in London still needs post-Covid. Did it change the industry’s fortunes? No. But for one week, it reminded the city that Shoreditch still has a pulse.
Feelings are mixed whether it’s a heartbeat or a sugar rush for the area. Max Alexander, CEO of London SXSW is aware of the issues per a Bloomberg segment: “We need to think harder about being focused on the amount of content to have real domain weight in some segments and every conference producer will go away and think how can we make this queue go away or more fun.” There’s also a question of location in general. Should it stay in Shoreditch? Probably not. The sprawl killed the vibe according to many I spoke with.
Stratford’s new cultural district, King’s Cross or North Greenwich, maybe even Battersea could have offered more scale, cohesion and a little less urine. SXSW is meant to feel like an ecosystem, not a gritty scavenger hunt. London’s got options.
And finally, timing. London SXSW landed just before London Tech Week, and the AI Summit in London, and just before Viva Tech in France (June 11-4), Cannes Lions in France (June 16-20) and Amsterdam’s The Next Web (June 19-20). A lot of senior execs had to pick their battles, and it feels like SXSW didn’t make the budgets of many. Even Meta felt scaled back despite a truck with the specs in.
A bolder editorial strategy might have helped offset that. Instead, it all felt slightly out of sync with the moment, and fringe events like Women in Immersive Tech and Igloo Vision’s youth talent showcase became the must-attend events.
The verdict: Was London SXSW a success?
So was London SXSW a success? Organisers say just over 20,000 people attended over the six days and Sadiq Khan maintains the event “brought creativity, innovation and excitement to venues across Shoreditch” – which makes it sound a touch parochial.
Still, there’s something to build from. The franchise has a ten-year runway.
London SXSW should aim to be the place that shows the world what British innovation actually looks like, not just in media and culture, but in biotech, space, regulation, defence, crypto and science. We’ve got the goods, they just didn’t make the stage.
So, a moderately successful year one, a generally happy crowd, with hopefully some issues that can be ironed out so London SXSW year two pushes higher and further.
There’s a lot to love; but there’s a lot to improve, and there were too many own goals that didn’t need to happen. The operational friction, the weak editorial agenda, the missing energy from the startup community were surprising lapses, but all are fixable.
Undoubtedly a superb logistical achievement and gargantuan effort to launch. But now that the bar has been set, it’s time to raise it.
Paul Armstrong is founder of TBD Group and author of Disruptive Technologies