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

The outlook for Bay Area startup space in 2017

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 42 posts

Re: The outlook for Bay Area startup space in 2017

#11

Post by jtbed »

alarge wrote: post #5
api wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've said for a long time that if investors insist on only funding Bay Area companies they should just skip the middleman and cut checks directly to real estate owners and speculators.

To be a little pedantic here, the numbers quoted here are San Francisco numbers, not "Bay Area" numbers. With just a quick check, I found considerably cheaper commercial lease rates in Mountain View.

You are totally right. It was heavily focused on SF. there are great options outside of SF, but all along the Caltrain stops there is really expensive space because they are more accessible. Castro Street in MV can be very expensive. It matters a lot where the founding team lives and also where you want to recruit from and at what scale. there is a ton of talent in SV as well as East Bay to pull from. Good luck on your startup! thanks so much for your comment.

Re: The outlook for Bay Area startup space in 2017

#12

Post by jtbed »

api wrote: post #3
overcast wrote: post #2

Spending that much on rent for a starting company, is just completely ludicrous.

I've said for a long time that if investors insist on only funding Bay Area companies they should just skip the middleman and cut checks directly to real estate owners and speculators.

I agree, it often seems like money flows from the investor right to the landlord, bypassing the startup. we talked about this in the article. aside from the value of office space and its cost, to your point about the role of the broker, there are very good reasons for brokers to be involved, as it is such a big expense and there are a lot of factors to think about when finding and negotiating a deal that we help with. In my last company, 42Floors, we made (and they continue to make) listings available on a website, and even when founders find a great space themselves, it turned out they still wanted to have a broker on their side to help with the process. In any case, I totally respect your opinion and appreciate you joining the conversation.

Re: The outlook for Bay Area startup space in 2017

#14

Post by jedberg »

overcast wrote: post #4
api wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've said for a long time that if investors insist on only funding Bay Area companies they should just skip the middleman and cut checks directly to real estate owners and speculators.

Seriously, they should just become real estate investors. They get paid in all the funds funneled into startups, and the circle of life is complete.

A lot of them are also real estate investors.

Re: The outlook for Bay Area startup space in 2017

#15

Post by jedberg »

I still don't understand why software startups get offices today. I don't see any value in pissing away half my capital enriching a landlord when there are perfectly good tools out there to collaborate without making everyone come to the same place every day.

And it's even better for the environment if we don't make everyone commute.

Can you imagine a world where all the software startups go fully remote and all that prime office space becomes residential? You'd still need the restaurants and bars and whatnot, but instead of a bunch of office workers coming in at noon, you'd have a bunch of neighbors who are all taking a break from their jobs. It would be glorious.

Re: The outlook for Bay Area startup space in 2017

#16

Post by jessalyst »

jedberg wrote: post #15

I still don't understand why software startups get offices today. I don't see any value in pissing away half my capital enriching a landlord when there are perfectly good tools out there to collaborate without making everyone come to the same place every day. And it's even better for the environment if we don't make everyone commute. Can you imagine a world where all the software startups go fully remote and all that…

100% agree. This hits an even bigger discussion around the "norm" of working. The whole 9-5 going to work 5 days a week was developed during an industrial revolution. Now a days 9-5 applies less and less to certain industries in which it's more about getting the work done by a certain time vs. completing it within a certain time.

The amount of resources saved by those who are able to work from home would not only have a positive impact on environment but also travel times, this would reduce the amount of both foot and vehicle traffic overall having a positive impact on everyone else's well being. It's unfortunate the solutions to these problems are so slow to move or often times missed by the top. All in good time!

Re: The outlook for Bay Area startup space in 2017

#17

Post by foobar241431 »

jedberg wrote: post #15

I still don't understand why software startups get offices today. I don't see any value in pissing away half my capital enriching a landlord when there are perfectly good tools out there to collaborate without making everyone come to the same place every day. And it's even better for the environment if we don't make everyone commute. Can you imagine a world where all the software startups go fully remote and all that…

Collaborating IRL is more effective IMHO (and my experience working with remote offices). Plus, having an office can be a great perk: with a small commute (~20 min) and 3 meals a day, I save a lot of time/energy just on the food.

Re: The outlook for Bay Area startup space in 2017

#19

Post by jedberg »

foobar241431 wrote: post #17
jedberg wrote: post #15

I still don't understand why software startups get offices today. I don't see any value in pissing away half my capital enriching a landlord when there are perfectly good tools out there to collaborate without making everyone come to the same place every day. And it's even better for the environment if we don't make everyone commute. Can you imagine a world where all the software startups go fully remote and all that…

Collaborating IRL is more effective IMHO (and my experience working with remote offices). Plus, having an office can be a great perk: with a small commute (~20 min) and 3 meals a day, I save a lot of time/energy just on the food.

> Collaborating IRL is more effective IMHO

I've done a lot of both, and what I've found is that in person works better if the company isn't "remote first". Being one or a few remote people sucks, lots of stuff happens in the office without you. But having the right tools for remote work makes it in some cases better.

But even in the case of an office, when everyone goes remote, suddenly it's not so bad.

At reddit, since when I was there everyone else was just out of college, we always worked the last two weeks of the year from home because we had "winter break". So for those few weeks, we were a 100% remote company, and it worked out ok. BUT, we didn't make any big decisions or do any deep collaboration because even though everyone was remote we waited till we got back to the office, not because it was better but because we weren't set up to do it remotely.

It's really all about having good processes for remote work -- ie. as much async as possible. And once you do that, even if you go to an office later, you've get better systems set up for tracking what happened and seeing history for new employees.

The worst thing for a new employee is having to get up to speed when all the meetings were in person and not recorded.

Re: The outlook for Bay Area startup space in 2017

#20

Post by ENGNR »

jedberg wrote: post #15

I still don't understand why software startups get offices today. I don't see any value in pissing away half my capital enriching a landlord when there are perfectly good tools out there to collaborate without making everyone come to the same place every day. And it's even better for the environment if we don't make everyone commute. Can you imagine a world where all the software startups go fully remote and all that…

I know it's buzzwordy but after using it a bit I'm starting to think VR might really change this.

Instead of losing all of the signals from in person communication, the accidental bump into's or a glance causing you to notice someone doing something relevant to you (or vice versa), you can just walk over to someone else's space and collaborate with them. If they need a period of focus, they can disconnect from the group space and have a doorbell, but it would also be easy to rejoin.

And unlike skype you're not always 'on the call', everyone just happens to be in the same room and if nobody says anything all day it's ok. More to the point you could even mute people if it's not relevant.

Post reply on HN