I am soo much looking forward to read it.

🥰

The two are not mutually exclusive. - true that!
Generally I do not completely disagree with your take (and MANY see it like you). But I do also see the political impetus and its potential political value. Am a bit 50/50 here, surprisingly...

So I think the low % is not byproduct but purpose. If high % funding rates, it looses its prestige. And having a prominent EU prestige grant (known even by US researchers) was one of the ideas. Germany has a bunch of super grants (e.g. Emmy Noeter), but outside of D, noone gives a f about them.

That's what I said: the grant has a different purpose. Intended to get prominent US stars to move to EU.
But overall, I think the ERC fills a different gap in EU national funding mechanisms (high risk/reward projects). It was never intended to carry the broad burden of funding standard projects.

I think AH is not a fair descriptor here.
Also this grant scheme has a different purpose of norm ERCs and national funding agencies.
I think what you should ask for is not grants money but more stable uni funding for stable positions from research scientists, lecturers, techs, and profs.

1) By using a D-amino acid oxidase (DAAO), iAPEX omits the requirement of external H2O2 addition and therefore reduces toxicity and allows in vivo applications, which our fantastic collaborators @kerstinfeistel.bsky.social and @walenteklab.bsky.social could show in developing #Xenopus embryos.