Three brands and retailers state a packaging problem they have not solved, with the dataset attached. Six teams spend 30 hours answering them. You fund the track that matches what you sell, your material goes into every toolkit on that track, and the results are published under your name six weeks later.
Sponsorship of most industry events buys visibility to people walking past. This buys two days inside the problem your customers are trying to solve, and a document with your name on it that people read afterwards.
A packaging lead from a brand or a retailer spends the first morning explaining an unsolved problem to a room, then two hours being interrogated about the data behind it. You are in that room. No stand, no badge scanning, no pitch. If you have ever wanted to hear a customer describe the constraint before a tender is written, this is that.
Partner toolkits go to every team: substrates, coatings, barrier papers, inks, software, equipment access. Whatever gets prototyped with your material on the Friday goes into the December report with the method written down. An engineering trial you did not have to schedule.
Every packaging supplier in Europe has a sustainability page. Very few can point at a published benchmark, dated 2026, with their name on the track that produced it. The document outlives the event, and it is the thing your sales team can send.
From TU Delft, Wageningen and the UvA, across materials, industrial design, data science and food technology. You watch them solve something under pressure rather than reading a CV. Cheaper than a careers fair and a great deal more informative.
Every tier includes at least one seat inside a team for one of your specialists. They compete, they build, and they spend 30 hours working shoulder to shoulder with a brand owner and a converter. The relationship is the point.
From 14:00 the demo floor opens to roughly 150 guests, partners and trade press, ten days before the industry week. Guest passes come with every tier, and you decide who to bring.
24 seats sit inside the competing teams. Partner packages take seats among the designers and track specialists. Problem-owner seats belong to the challenge owners, and student seats are free. All prices exclude 21% Dutch VAT.
Not a smaller sponsorship. A different thing entirely: you pay for young people to be in the room, and you get named for it rather than for your logo size. Two slots.
For an event or media organisation whose audience this already belongs to. You promote it and carry it in your programme. We handle venue, teams, briefs, toolkits, judging, legal, insurance, catering and the report. Your name sits on the front and no money moves in either direction. In return you publish all six solutions and the three comparisons first, in the days before the industry week opens, and the winning team is available to your stage at no cost.
Knowledge Partner and University Host places are in-kind. Students pay nothing, ever, including travel and accommodation.
The format only works if nobody in the room suspects the result was bought. So partner access is deliberately narrow, and the same for everyone.
During the build there is no commercial contact between competing companies anywhere in the venue. No two direct competitors sit on the same team. Mentors on the floor are neutral parties only.
No partner employee competes in the track their employer funds, because that partner helped write the brief and saw the data first. The AmPhi Labs builder embedded in each team is studio staff, one per team, identical support everywhere, and takes no share of a prize.
Competition-law fit, GDPR compliant, insured, and reviewed by Dutch counsel before anyone signs.
Because you helped write that brief and you saw the dataset before anyone else did. If your own employee then won it, the other twenty competitors would read the result as bought rather than earned, and the benchmark we publish afterwards would be worth nothing to you. Fund a track and enter a different one, or take a seat in a track you did not fund. Either way the win is defensible and so is the report.
No, and the rules are built for exactly that. Direct competitors never sit on the same team, partner representatives are absent during the build, mentors are neutral parties only, and every partner gets the same toolkit slot and the same access. We flag competitor overlap to both sides before either signs rather than quietly excluding anyone.
Two teams, two routes, and a published comparison. A brief that turns out to be harder than anyone thought is a result worth having in writing, and it is the kind of result nobody publishes. The December report carries what worked and what did not, with the rubric, so the reader can judge for themselves.
Five judges with an independent chair, and no more than one judge from any partner organisation. Regulatory impact 25%, feasibility at scale 25%, commercial viability 20%, circularity evidence 20%, team 10%. The rubric is published before applications open, and no partner judges the track it funds.
The format, the economics, the legal framework and the three tracks are designed and costed. The dates are fixed. Venue, knowledge partner, challenge owners and funding partners are in conversation now, and the go decision is 15 September. We would rather show you the whole design in August than a signed poster in October.
No. It is an Amsterdam event on 29 and 30 October, scheduled in the run-up to the industry week so the results are finished and publishable before anyone travels. Partnership conversations with the Summit organisers are open, and nothing about the format depends on them.
Forty-five minutes. We walk through the brief for the track you are considering, who you would put in the seats, and the waiver. Bring legal and someone from HR to the second call.
