Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NYC vs Silicon Valley

metamorphblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 55 posts

Re: NYC vs Silicon Valley

#31

Post by sak84 »

bwh2 wrote: post #26
sak84 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, not true. Have you lived in Astoria (N train to Manhattan in half hour), Fort Greene (so many choices and 15 min to manhattan), Jersey City (path train to manhattan in less than half hour). Brooklyn Heights is a terrible example. It's where the executives who work across the water live. Of course that is going to be super expensive. There are lots of places that you can find, that are comparable to SF & Boston…

Just curious, do you live and/or work in NYC? I find the rent (even in places like Astoria and Fort Greene) to be unreasonable, especially once you consider broker's fees. The best values IMO are in the NJ suburbs, where you can catch a 40 min direct train into Penn Station, but pay half the rent of Manhattan, Hoboken, Astoria, etc. But that's obviously not quite as sexy and appealing. I think a point everyone's miss…

I do live (fort greene) and work (manhattan) in NYC. You should never use broker's though, they're a waste of money. It does take a little work to find a good deal, but you definitely can if you look early enough.

Overall, I would agree. NJ seems to have the most cheap places.

Great point about 45 commute just inside Manhattan.

EDIT: I live in fort greene and I pay 735 a month -- for validation purposes.

Re: NYC vs Silicon Valley

#32

Post by pw0ncakes »

bwh2 wrote: post #26
sak84 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, not true. Have you lived in Astoria (N train to Manhattan in half hour), Fort Greene (so many choices and 15 min to manhattan), Jersey City (path train to manhattan in less than half hour). Brooklyn Heights is a terrible example. It's where the executives who work across the water live. Of course that is going to be super expensive. There are lots of places that you can find, that are comparable to SF & Boston…

Just curious, do you live and/or work in NYC? I find the rent (even in places like Astoria and Fort Greene) to be unreasonable, especially once you consider broker's fees. The best values IMO are in the NJ suburbs, where you can catch a 40 min direct train into Penn Station, but pay half the rent of Manhattan, Hoboken, Astoria, etc. But that's obviously not quite as sexy and appealing. I think a point everyone's miss…

Right. Since urban areas are (in practice) fuzzily-defined, the real economic question is not "What are the rents?" but "What is the best rent/commute/quality-of-life trade-off available?" The fact that a few neighborhoods are expensive isn't relevant, but the fact that every accessible neighborhood is expensive is a problem.

Defining "reasonable rent" as 30% of after-tax income (which is about the point at which governments should limit rent levels, IMO) and noting that an entry-level job in New York pays about $3500/month after tax, reasonable rent would be $1050 for a starter apartment.

It's not impossible to find a decent apartment for under $1000/month in "the greater New York area", but it is impossible to do so with less than a 30-minute commute.

Re: NYC vs Silicon Valley

#33

Post by carterac »

In further defense of NYC, I want to address this whole rent/commuting argument.

We are comparing this to Silicon Valley, where the freeway is packed with traffic both ways every morning and evening. That same commute in NYC means you could live in very affordable places in Brooklyn, Harlem, Queens, and NJ.

Another founder I know, after exiting his company, moved to NYC from SV mainly because he couldn't stand being stuck in traffic all day.

Commuting in via the subway or NJ Transit is no longer than the time a lot of people spend in traffic in SV.

And the best part? You can read a book. I just finished another chapter in Founder's at Work on the subway back from a meeting. Awesome.

And since when was SF and Palo Alto that cheap anyway?

Plus in SV you need to own a car and car insurance. That is expensive. I couldn't afford that so I had to borrow a bike. That bike had to get me EVERYWHERE. Want to go to a meeting in SF? There goes half your day because you're at the mercy of the caltrain.

Anyway, I could go on, but you get the point. I would argue that NYC will save you time and money when it comes to transportation and rent. OK /rant

ps SV and Palo Alto will always have a place in my heart :).

Re: NYC vs Silicon Valley

#34

Post by pw0ncakes »

sak84 wrote: post #31
bwh2 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just curious, do you live and/or work in NYC? I find the rent (even in places like Astoria and Fort Greene) to be unreasonable, especially once you consider broker's fees. The best values IMO are in the NJ suburbs, where you can catch a 40 min direct train into Penn Station, but pay half the rent of Manhattan, Hoboken, Astoria, etc. But that's obviously not quite as sexy and appealing. I think a point everyone's miss…

I do live (fort greene) and work (manhattan) in NYC. You should never use broker's though, they're a waste of money. It does take a little work to find a good deal, but you definitely can if you look early enough. Overall, I would agree. NJ seems to have the most cheap places. Great point about 45 commute just inside Manhattan. EDIT: I live in fort greene and I pay 735 a month -- for validation purposes.

Brokers seem like a good deal because they would be if they did their job. If a broker could get you a 10% better place, or 10% cheaper rent (which we'll consider equivalent) then a broker would be paid off in a year and a half (New York brokers typically charge 10-17% of a year's rent, for the uninitated). However, they start you off on miserable apartments, often play bait-and-switch games with nice ones that "just happen" to get taken before your application clears, and stop taking your calls after 5 or 6 showings-- God forbid they do some actual work to earn that commission. This makes them essentially worthless.

Re: NYC vs Silicon Valley

#35

Post by gyardley »

sak84 wrote: post #17

VCs/Angels in NYC(northeast as well) are just not in the same investing environment as the West Coast. And it's solely because this area is just not as mature as there. There are the investors that are smart and are willing to take the risks (Founder's Collective, USV, FRC, Flybridge etc.), but the problem is that they are few and far between relative to earlystage VCs and angels on the west coast. Therefore, because…

From personal experience, I can tell you that's not remotely how Union Square Ventures and First Round Capital invest. (Can't tell you about Founder's Collective or Flybridge because I haven't taken money from them.) They're certainly willing to put money into companies before the risk is gone.

Re: NYC vs Silicon Valley

#36

Post by angstrom »

sak84 wrote: post #24
pw0ncakes wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, but it's a pain in the ass to get into the city from those places. Brooklyn Heights is close to Manhattan and beautiful-- probably one of the nicest neighborhoods in New York-- but it's almost as expensive as living on the island. There are also affordable, beautiful places in the outer boroughs, but an hour's commute away.

Again, not true. Have you lived in Astoria (N train to Manhattan in half hour), Fort Greene (so many choices and 15 min to manhattan), Jersey City (path train to manhattan in less than half hour). Brooklyn Heights is a terrible example. It's where the executives who work across the water live. Of course that is going to be super expensive. There are lots of places that you can find, that are comparable to SF & Boston…

I would add parts of alphabet city to that list. I can get from C ave to work on 8th ave in 30 minutes by bus, 15-20 by train. 1BR rent is $1650. Harlem is also gentrified and will run a little north of $1200. Express A train from 145th takes 30 minutes.

Re: NYC vs Silicon Valley

#37

Post by svx »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #6

a) Wall Street has been a huge talent suck for a long time...the default dream...: Work for Lehman. Actually, there is a bigger talent suck than Lehman. I can easily see the appeal of working for a startup rather than Lehman: don't wear a suit, don't deal with bureaucracy or MBAs, technology rules the day. Less money, but a lot more fun. Now, consider many small hedge funds: don't wear a suit, no bureaucracy, maybe o…

I work at an investment bank in NYC after working for a few startups in the internet and enterprise software space.

Maybe I got lucky with the group I ended up with, but I don't wear a suit to work (and actually like dressing "business casual") and technology certainly rules the day here (large distributed systems executing millions of orders a day with sub-millisecond latencies, etc).

Sure there's more bureaucracy but it's hardly "Office Space" and I'll trade that for 2-3 times the salary any day (with no cap... there are developers here making $500k/year)

Re: NYC vs Silicon Valley

#38

Post by gyardley »

This article is almost completely 100% opposite to my own experience raising money in NYC.

There's plenty of good angels here - largely entrepreneurs who have been successful with their own businesses. I talked to a number of them one-on-one and never paid to pitch.

There's plenty of good early-stage venture capital firms here - yes, fewer than Silicon Valley, but there's fewer startups to compete with.

Raising money from early-stage firms here was a relatively straightforward process. The deal terms were clean, and the valuation was adequate. (Trust me, you want clean terms and an adequate valuation over a high valuation under a ton of preferences anyway. Keeps your options open.)

Recruiting was also easy - I largely hired people I'd worked with before at other startups, or who came recommended to me by people I'd worked with before at other startups.

The differentiating factor, I suspect - because personally, I'm nothing particularly special - is that I worked at a few startups in NYC and got to know people over a few years before founding my company. (Like Chris Dixon wrote a while back, there's a time to learn and a time to earn.) I suspect this is largely true for Silicon Valley as well.

Re: NYC vs Silicon Valley

#39

Post by look_lookatme »

mtalantikite wrote: post #25
sak84 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not true, you can find cheap places to live, if you're willing to live outside Manhattan. Jersey City, Queens, BK, are all viable options for the scrappy founder.

Brownstone Brooklyn isn't exactly cheap -- my place is considered a steal here in Park Slope, but it's still an eyebrow raising amount of money. Places like Prospect Heights, Crown Heights, and Clinton Hill are gentrifying quickly, and rents are getting up near the $2k month for a 1 bedroom mark. It's just not sustainable.

You'd have to be crazy to live in Crown Heights for 2K a month.

I think on of the biggest problems is looking for a reasonable place to live in NYC is a total beat down. It takes time, and diligence and you can become disillusioned very, very quickly. You can also get screwed if you are new and don't know the various neighborhood profiles. And brokers... I don't even want to get started on brokers.

I live in a 1BR in Brooklyn (Carroll Gardens), but I work remotely for a startup. I still live here because it's easily on the short list for best city in the world. If I had to take a hit in salary to work at a local startup, I'd probably look at Sunset Park or Bay Ridge. Living in the boonies (by Manhattan standards, they are perfectly nice neighborhoods) is a trade off you have to make to interact with such a great city on a budget.

Re: NYC vs Silicon Valley

#40

Post by mtalantikite »

dgallagher wrote: post #28

I hate Boston. Would never live there. So ignoring that city, where are you going to find, ohh, let's say Speech Engineers? Why hate Boston? I would disagree. Boston's a great city to live in. It's much smaller than NYC so you can walk from one end to the other, is a lot more scenic, and my favorite part of all is that it isn't gritty/dirty like NYC is (unless you head out to Boston's outskirts like Ashland/Brighton/…

Boston occupies a strange place in my heart. I grew up in and around Boston, but am now a New Yorker, and I don't think I could ever move back. There are definitely worse places to live, but Boston has always felt more like a really big small town than a city to me, and the amount of close-mindedness and racism I've found in Boston has always been surprising to me. I just often don't feel comfortable in Boston.

While Manhattan might feel crammed, it's part of the appeal for us. Everything is always open, everything you need is within a couple blocks, you can get anywhere anytime in the city via 24 hour public transit. You walk down the street and hear tons of different languages constantly. The diversity in ethnicity, cultural backgrounds, and experiences is mind-blowing. It's one of the world's cultural centers. Art and music is everywhere all the time. We have enormous, beautiful parks all over the place, Central Park only being one of them. Gorgeous brownstone neighborhoods with tree lined blocks. Old factory neighborhoods repurposed into everything imaginable.

Is there trash on the ground? Yes, everywhere. That fades from your perception into the landscape within weeks of living here.

Maybe Brooklyn would be more your thing (it is for me) -- it's more laid back here and less crowded, but gives you easy access to all the amazing parts of being in NYC.

'No beauty' really is hard for me to swallow -- I look around me here all the time and am always amazed at how beautiful and diverse this city is.

Post reply on HN