Live data from Hacker News

Tech takes over: New York is the sector's second city

crainsnewyork.com

161–170 of 209 posts

Re: Tech takes over: New York is the sector's second city

#161
post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Having lived in both SOMA and the Mission, I wholeheartedly disagree. No need to rely on anecdotes though. According to San Francisco’s Controller’s Office, a little over 6% of the population work in the tech industry[1]. That is an unquestionably small minority of the overall population. If the people you have met predominantly worked in tech, it is likely due to a bubble you created yourself. Perhaps, for example…

"If the people you have met predominantly worked in tech, it is likely due to a bubble you created yourself. Perhaps, for example, the majority of the population outside of tech cannot afford to spend time at those coffee shops and restaurants?" And yet, since moving from SF (after nearly a decade) to NYC, I can confirm the OP's observation that I rarely encounter people who work at tech companies, anywhere in the ci…

> the reality is that the bubble is different in New York.

I think that goes without saying. 6% is a minority, but 6% all working in the same industry remains significant. Where I currently live one of the largest industries makes up about 3% of the workforce. And even at that lower rate it already feels like everyone I meet works in that particular industry. Just imagine what 6% is like. I am not at all surprised that it feels like nobody does anything other than tech. 6% is staggering!

Nobody denies that SF (and the Valley in general) is heavily weighted towards tech professionals. With 6% of the population involved, they are going to be everywhere. However, they still only make up a minority share of the entire population. There should be no shortage of opportunity to find people doing other things.

Re: Tech takes over: New York is the sector's second city

#163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can’t trust any of these comparisions because it’s difficult to compare apartments across cities. Average apartment costs in new york are meaningless. I know of no one paying 3k per month. Usually it’s between 1k-1.5k, which completely changes this graph.

$1,000/month for an entire apartment? Where in NYC?

Prospect Park

Re: Tech takes over: New York is the sector's second city

#164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perfect example. I guess at some point along the way the familiar tech startup narrative got peoples' minds to associate all startups with tech. Makes me wonder where the line is. What qualifies a company as a tech company? Software/computing services/hardware as a primary revenue source?

Then, are Uber, Lyft, on demand services even tech? Aren't they just fancy logistics/transport/delivery companies? Is Amazon only tech when it comes down to AWS and Alexa?

>Then, are Uber, Lyft, on demand services even tech?

I would argue that they are not. They provide services that rely on technology and have been incredibly successful largely due to their embrace of technology, but I would describe Uber as on-demand transportation provider rather than a technology provider.

>Is Amazon only tech when it comes down to AWS and Alexa?

I understand calling Amazon a tech company because they have significant business lines as a technology provider, even if these do not constitute their entire business.

While I have intuitive responses to companies like these, I really don't know where the line is (e.g. how much business one would have to do as a tech provider). I didn't intend to suggest a hard definition but posed the question because I'm genuinely interested in seeing peoples' thoughts on what constitutes a tech company.

Re: Tech takes over: New York is the sector's second city

#165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've also done this math -- price per sqft is wayy better in Seattle and you don't necessarily need a car. In any case, a metro card isnt cheap. The cost of groceries/alcohol is also much much higher in nyc and at a lower quality. I have a postdoc friend who lives in Seattle on slightly less than I do. They have a huge 1br in cap Hill with parking next to the subway with a short committee downtown or to UW. Meanwhile…

While I agree with your opinions here, those things are also somewhat personal. I place a lot of value on large housing, cheap car ownership and easy access to nice outdoor spaces. A lot of other folks place more value on not needing a car ever, lots of easy food delivery options, and access to any kind or show or performance you might ever want to see without having to travel.

As someone who moved from LA to SF to Brooklyn, this exactly. There’s a ton of factors that are very personal. I need a big city; SF is just too small, among all the other reasons I disliked living there. I’m happy to pay for a place that has the things I actually prefer. This sentiment, of course, goes both ways. NYC isn’t for everyone. I don’t want to live in Midtown...

Re: Tech takes over: New York is the sector's second city

#166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perfect example. I guess at some point along the way the familiar tech startup narrative got peoples' minds to associate all startups with tech. Makes me wonder where the line is. What qualifies a company as a tech company? Software/computing services/hardware as a primary revenue source?

pg has some thoughts on what a "startup" is [0]. I used Warby Parker as an example because their business model is disruptive, they're high-growth, and they leverage technology. I think the disruption and innovation are really important aspects. 0: http://www.paulgraham.com/growth.html

Note that PG is addressing startups generally and not limiting his discussion to tech startups. From the third sentence in the post you linked:

>"Nor is it necessary for a startup to work on technology..."

I absolutely agree that Warby Parker has a disruptive business model and see them as a shining example of an innovative startup, I just wouldn't call them a tech startup because tech is not their business.

Re: Tech takes over: New York is the sector's second city

#167
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have heard Brooklyn is gentrifying at a rapid pace, but back when I was there, Brooklyn just wasn't an option.

Do you have any idea how big Brooklyn is?

Since this comment is attempting to be pedantic, I'll give you a pedantic answer: Yes I have access to google maps just like the rest of the world.

Serious answer: Yes, the landmass that constitutes Brooklyn is large. The landscape of the main neighborhoods that have gentrified over the years are not so big. If you actually live there you know which parts I am talking about.

Re: Tech takes over: New York is the sector's second city

#168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can’t trust any of these comparisions because it’s difficult to compare apartments across cities. Average apartment costs in new york are meaningless. I know of no one paying 3k per month. Usually it’s between 1k-1.5k, which completely changes this graph.

Please tell me where anyone is paying 1k-1.5k for an apartment in NYC. I am paying 2700/mo for 650 sqft, 45 minute commute from midtown, and I haven't seen anything better without a longer commute. Studios in my neighborhood are 1.6k+, and I am not in a happenin' place.

Should have specified, but thought it would be implied...roomates or significant other. Yes it’s not an equal comparision to other areas as you can get a whole apartment there by yourself.

If your paying 2700, find some roomates, move to bushwick/east williamsburg astoria, downtown brooklyn. And now your paying 1-1.5

Re: Tech takes over: New York is the sector's second city

#169

"official" FTEs is one way to slice it, but kind of dumb. Seattle is home to two of the five biggest tech companies in the US. Boston has had an IPO every year for the last ten years that exceeds any in NYC history. LA has had the only 11-digit IPO in the last five years, outside of the bay area. It's also capturing the zeitgeist in a way that NYC no longer does (that's subjective, of course, but I'd debate it). Just…

I was just reading pg's "Cities" essay this morning (http://www.paulgraham.com/cities.html). Much of what he said in 2008 is still relevant today. That said, I think NYC has come around a bit.

Re: Tech takes over: New York is the sector's second city

#170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought while Cost of living in Seattle is relatively lesser than NYC, the house prices are exorbitant. NYC has advantage of very close proximity to NJ, Connecticut where you could probably get a better home than in Seattle-Bellvue-Redmond area.

The time, effort, and stress of commuting easily offsets any gains from living outside of NYC. Any city with decent neighborhoods will be at least a 60 minute commute door to door, plus you have to budget another 30 minutes for delays and whatnot because the public transit is terrible. It's very difficult to plan anything on work days if you're commuting into NYC, and you get to pay super high rents and property taxe…

On the other hand, for NYC most of your commute is by train. Resting on the train is a lot less stressful than driving.
Post reply on HN