The Decline of Investment in San Francisco Startups • Hacker News Board

Re: The Decline of Investment in San Francisco Startups

#31

Post by epicureanideal » Fri, Jul 21, 2017, 6:12 AM UTC

dmode wrote: post #27

ThrustVectoring wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or the costs are driving potential founders out of founding. If you double your monthly costs, you double the amount you need to save in order to have enough runway to "two guys in a basement" your way into enough traction for funding. Plus you need more funding for getting enough roadway for employees and an actual business. Maybe I'm far more mobile than others, but I'm really surprised that there isn't a wave of p…

If that was viable, people would move to Tracy or Stockton or Davis which are nearer to SF than Reno and cheaper. That's not how things work though.

But why isn't it viable? I don't understand.

Re: The Decline of Investment in San Francisco Startups

#32

Post by hossbeast » Fri, Jul 21, 2017, 6:13 AM UTC

vidoc wrote: post #22

aphextron wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's almost comical how overcrowded BART has gotten at rush hour. Embarcadero and Powell stations become standing room only. I live deep in the east bay, and the new apartment building going up across the street has 1 bedroom layouts starting at $2800. Something has to give, or people will simply give up.

> Riding BART into and out of SF as a commute is ridiculous at a new level nowadays. Especially given the shocking number of uneducated people who insist on keeping their backpacks on their shoulders despite the train being packed. Totally pisses me off!

How do you know they're uneducated?

Re: The Decline of Investment in San Francisco Startups

#33

Post by santaclaus » Fri, Jul 21, 2017, 6:21 AM UTC

vidoc wrote: post #22

aphextron wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's almost comical how overcrowded BART has gotten at rush hour. Embarcadero and Powell stations become standing room only. I live deep in the east bay, and the new apartment building going up across the street has 1 bedroom layouts starting at $2800. Something has to give, or people will simply give up.

> Riding BART into and out of SF as a commute is ridiculous at a new level nowadays. Especially given the shocking number of uneducated people who insist on keeping their backpacks on their shoulders despite the train being packed. Totally pisses me off!

Ok, while we are on BART gripes: what is the deal with people trying to squeeze their way upstream and board the cars before everyone has fully detrained? In NYC peeps form little ad-hoc queues to the left and right of the doors, let the exiters exit, then enter in two quick streams. In the Bay, I feel like MFing Moses trying to part the sea when exiting a train.

Don't even get me started on the weird station lines that people form at Embarcadero/Montgomery/Powell...

Re: The Decline of Investment in San Francisco Startups

#34

Post by hkmurakami » Fri, Jul 21, 2017, 6:24 AM UTC

epistasis wrote: post #23

zorpner wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Short-term rentals aren't housing.

Yes, they are, but short-term, and it takes longer-term housing off the market. This is ravaging the housing markets of many mountain villages. Re-reading the comment I was originally replying to, the commenter might have meant that the 2nd home didn't justify a tax deduction, which I would most definitely agree with. A 2nd home is an investment, and there should be no tax incentives on that sort of investment.

Well in the states, a first home is already often a person's biggest investment.

Re: The Decline of Investment in San Francisco Startups

#35

Post by didibus » Fri, Jul 21, 2017, 6:27 AM UTC

ThrustVectoring wrote: post #25

parandeh wrote: post #2

Another explanation could be that real estate costs is driving founders and startups out of the city. If most of the founders don't live in SF, they're more likely to open offices in the valley. Heavy traffic to/from SF doesn't help with the situation.

Or the costs are driving potential founders out of founding. If you double your monthly costs, you double the amount you need to save in order to have enough runway to "two guys in a basement" your way into enough traction for funding. Plus you need more funding for getting enough roadway for employees and an actual business. Maybe I'm far more mobile than others, but I'm really surprised that there isn't a wave of p…

I find normally its the childless engineers who don't want to move out the city, because that's where the fun is at. I think that's why this isn't happening.

Re: The Decline of Investment in San Francisco Startups

#36

Post by noobermin » Fri, Jul 21, 2017, 6:28 AM UTC

hossbeast wrote: post #32

vidoc wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Riding BART into and out of SF as a commute is ridiculous at a new level nowadays. Especially given the shocking number of uneducated people who insist on keeping their backpacks on their shoulders despite the train being packed. Totally pisses me off!

How do you know they're uneducated?

Perhaps they mean "uneducated in riding public transport in a way that doesn't hassle other passengers."

Re: The Decline of Investment in San Francisco Startups

#37

Post by smashingfiasco » Fri, Jul 21, 2017, 6:28 AM UTC

stale2002 wrote: post #30

aphextron wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's almost comical how overcrowded BART has gotten at rush hour. Embarcadero and Powell stations become standing room only. I live deep in the east bay, and the new apartment building going up across the street has 1 bedroom layouts starting at $2800. Something has to give, or people will simply give up.

Correct. And the best way to fix Bart overcrowding is to build apartments near where people work so they don't HAVE to commute.

Just want to point out that Detroit built itself this way through the 1950's and 1960's. At the time, urban planners thought it would be efficient and sensible design.

What ended up happening, though, is that as factories shuttered, the neighborhoods that were built around them started to collapse. The net result was pockets of localized decay, that eventually led to the entire urban area rotting as more people left. It's actually kind of stunning to see in person. (I live about 50 min South of Detroit). And oh, the riots of 1967 didn't help, either.

It's hard to imagine that happening the the metro-Bay area, but I remind myself that people once thought GM, Chrysler and Ford could never go under.

Re: The Decline of Investment in San Francisco Startups

#38

Post by jsudhams » Fri, Jul 21, 2017, 6:28 AM UTC

stale2002 wrote: post #30

aphextron wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's almost comical how overcrowded BART has gotten at rush hour. Embarcadero and Powell stations become standing room only. I live deep in the east bay, and the new apartment building going up across the street has 1 bedroom layouts starting at $2800. Something has to give, or people will simply give up.

Correct. And the best way to fix Bart overcrowding is to build apartments near where people work so they don't HAVE to commute.

The best way is to make work from home / remote default. If US does then devloping countries can follow. If Fortune 100 company makes rule for thier offshoring companies allow work from home then they pretty much can solve traffic issues all Bengaluru, Chennai, Hyderabad in a month. And the country like India can also improve infrastruture other than road .

Re: The Decline of Investment in San Francisco Startups

#39

Post by vedanta » Fri, Jul 21, 2017, 6:29 AM UTC

ThrustVectoring wrote: post #25

parandeh wrote: post #2

Another explanation could be that real estate costs is driving founders and startups out of the city. If most of the founders don't live in SF, they're more likely to open offices in the valley. Heavy traffic to/from SF doesn't help with the situation.

Or the costs are driving potential founders out of founding. If you double your monthly costs, you double the amount you need to save in order to have enough runway to "two guys in a basement" your way into enough traction for funding. Plus you need more funding for getting enough roadway for employees and an actual business. Maybe I'm far more mobile than others, but I'm really surprised that there isn't a wave of p…

Nevada is too different, the combination of non-enforceable non-competes and the nice weather can be duplicated elsewhere in CA easiest, and this is happening. If your state has big corporate HQs forget about getting non-enforceable non-competes.

Re: The Decline of Investment in San Francisco Startups

#40

Post by tshiran » Fri, Jul 21, 2017, 6:29 AM UTC

We considered starting a company in SF a couple years ago. I'm glad that we decided to instead start it in Mountain View (http://www.dremio.com). We're able to attract very talented people from San Jose, Milpitas, Redwood City, etc. where rents are a bit more reasonable.