Compared to where? The days where you get funding based on an idea is over. I don't think the funding situation is particularly bad "per capita" [0]. There are other problems with Stockholm of course, but that's another story.
I don't see how that, without any data, isn't just "the grass is greener". No one is surprised that Stockholm isn't London, that doesn't really speak to the different ecosystems nor that you can raise money across borders. There can be issues with "per capita" measurements, but that pretty hard to discuss when you didn't bother to include your reasoning.
Tell that to any number of seed-stage, bootstrapped companies in Stockholm. A fund-raising "roadshow" from Stockholm to London can be very costly -- especially if it is unsuccessful.
Linking a 91 page presentation without specifying your point isn't very helpful.
As I said, you don't get funding for an idea anymore so being bootstrapped is becoming the norm. The presentation even says that "all in all, Q3 was a quarter for big, big deals. Less so for seed-stage and Angel financing, both of which were down for the fifth consecutive quarter on a global basis". Fundraising is never easy, but having more and more eyes on Stockholm helps.
As other commenters has said, fundraising is never easy no matter where you are.
There's plenty of super early stage money you can get (i.e. up to $100k) from government grants etc. so that part isn't that hard.
What's lacking in Stockholm is a strong angel scene, and what's especially lacking are larger angel investors that does investments of $100k-$500k. I.e. investments that are too small for a fund, but a bit too large for someone that just does investments as a hobby.
However, one of the things I'm doing right now is helping some of the local venture funds and some UK based ones to scout for investments, and the perspective from the other side of the table is that there's currently a shortage of fundable projects that are raising $500k-$2m.
Also there's a new monster fund being announced soon. Rumours on the street (i.e. drunk people at startup events who let their mouths slip) is that it's going to be the largest first time fund globally so the competition among VCs for investments in that size will increase.
If you are doing something interesting but lack connections to VCs or angels, ping me (email in bio) and I'd be more than happy to make introductions.
You really just have to try and raise money there to realize how bad. Most of Scandinavia are still in many ways caught in the idea of loans rather than risky investments.
And most investors in Europe are very risk averse.
Maybe it is, but on the other hand I've never heard anyone which couldn't easily get funding, i.e. the majority of people, not complain about it. I would even expect that the factors of ones specific situation quickly overtake the importance of the general funding situation anyway.
What I do know is that if you play your cards right you can make your own seed funding in a year, even if the housing market is making this slightly harder these days.
Compared to where? The days where you get funding based on an idea is over. I don't think the funding situation is particularly bad "per capita" [0]. There are other problems with Stockholm of course, but that's another story.
[0] http://blogs.wsj.com/tech-europe/2013/11/11/how-entrepreneur...