Sam Altman: Bay Area is no longer the obvious place for startups • Hacker News Board

Re: Sam Altman: Bay Area is no longer the obvious place for startups

#201

Post by baddox » Sat, Feb 23, 2019, 4:33 PM UTC

myspy wrote: post #125

baddox wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would the assumption be that most people would want to move away from their homes because their current employer wants to save money? Sure, many tech employees probably moved to the Bay Area primarily to find employment, but even if they don’t enjoy other aspects of the area, a place you live in for a while will become your home, and abandoning your home is not an easy or obvious decision to make.

Yey, living in SF where junkies shoot on the street and everything is littered with excrements because fuck you good social security system. Let‘s live there! Plus, everything really expensive to live there. And if I work at Google I drive two hours with a bus there. I don‘t know but reading about that place it‘s insanity. And the output is Hit and miss. I know of no startup in the last ten years that‘s any substanti…

I live in SF. Of course all the well-known problems exist and are troubling. I’m sure there are places I would enjoy living more. It still doesn’t mean that I would uproot and move at a moment’s notice because we company decided to move. Nearly all my friends are here. I have hobbies and routines. I have an apartment with furniture. I don’t understand why people seem to think that moving is such a trivial decision. And I don’t even have a family.

Re: Sam Altman: Bay Area is no longer the obvious place for startups

#202

Post by shambolicfroli » Sat, Feb 23, 2019, 4:34 PM UTC

temp1928384 wrote: post #40

eanzenberg wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then why dont they? Or are there 2 people willing to take the place of every person leaving?

People leave all the time...especially anyone who is late 20s/early 30s knows plenty of friends who move out.

Where's that map of outmigration by demographic?

Re: Sam Altman: Bay Area is no longer the obvious place for startups

#203

Post by baddox » Sat, Feb 23, 2019, 4:36 PM UTC

kristianc wrote: post #161

dmode wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only a small portion of SF is matches the dystopian vision you claim. Even those portions are not any worse than other urban areas. There is a reason why housing here is extremely expensive. People want to live here.

> Only a small portion of SF is matches the dystopian vision you claim. My impression of SF having spent time there is that it hits the nail on the head. Sure, I doubt you get junkies asking you for money for heroin in Marin County, but it certainly happens in Union Sq.

Well, yes, but union square is pretty much the center of the public health crisis in San Francisco.

Re: Sam Altman: Bay Area is no longer the obvious place for startups

#204

Post by enra » Sat, Feb 23, 2019, 4:48 PM UTC

baddox wrote: post #124

enra wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think for many people it comes down to go exactly where and do exactly what there. Once lived in Bay Area for while, you have certain expectations on compensation, services, things to do, career growth etc. If you are used to a city like SF and enjoy the level of things in there, in the world and US there only few cities similar. Like nyc, la, London, Tokyo etc. Portland, Seattle, Austin, Berlin are all good but no…

But then the meaning of “want to leave” seems unclear. Of course everyone by definition wants to leave if there is somewhere else to go that is strictly better according to their personal preferences.

I think it’s but like say people “want to be healthy” but don’t want take action or compromise.

I think lot of people in sf feel the pressures of housing and homelessness, that potentially makes them want to leave, but they cannot find enough ways to justify why move to place x.

Re: Sam Altman: Bay Area is no longer the obvious place for startups

#205

Post by randomacct3847 » Sat, Feb 23, 2019, 4:49 PM UTC

Bahamut wrote: post #170

randomacct3847 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not just cost of living but taxes. Living in a state with no income tax is an automatic 10-12% bump in take home pay. Agree though if you’re single your living situation is more flexible and you can find a place for less than market rate here pretty easily. It’s once you get married and want kids that SF makes no sense for most people. Someone making 200k in Austin has a much much better quality of life than som…

In that case, taxes and rent only would account for about a $50k difference at those numbers - not enough to make up the gap between Austin and SF if we're talking $200k and $300k, and I'd imagine $200k isn't as easy to hit in Austin as $300k+ in the Bay Area.

The difference is buying. A 300k house in Austin would be 1.5m in SF. Again, if you’re single and renting and ok with roommates SF makes sense, but if you’re buying 300k/year will not be enough to afford a 1.5m place (which probably won’t be renovated and in a bad location)

Re: Sam Altman: Bay Area is no longer the obvious place for startups

#206

Post by consz » Sat, Feb 23, 2019, 4:49 PM UTC

zavi wrote: post #51

pm90 wrote: post #45

I think it’s important for anyone getting to this page to read his whole thread, which is more nuanced than suggested by the sensational title. The point he seems to be making is that it’s better for startups that aren’t looking at being unicorns to look at other locations where they might have a better chance of success.

What's the point of being a startup not looking at being a unicorn? I genuinely do not understand how somebody can cap off their ambitions like so.

I think it's sometimes hard to understand how quickly marginal utility of money decreases. As someone who makes high seven figures, I have genuinely no idea how more money could possibly affect my happiness -- there's just no appreciable difference between making 5m and 500m to me.

Re: Sam Altman: Bay Area is no longer the obvious place for startups

#207

Post by rb808 » Sat, Feb 23, 2019, 5:11 PM UTC

Its interesting that he mentions short job tenures. I always thought it was weird how common job hopping is in the Bay Area, I thought job-hopping employees was perhaps a good thing rather than a problem. It does mean its easier to build a team.

Re: Sam Altman: Bay Area is no longer the obvious place for startups

#208

Post by dmode » Sat, Feb 23, 2019, 5:13 PM UTC

inferiorhuman wrote: post #175

dmode wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only a small portion of SF is matches the dystopian vision you claim. Even those portions are not any worse than other urban areas. There is a reason why housing here is extremely expensive. People want to live here.

> Only a small portion of SF is matches the dystopian vision you claim. Even those portions are not any worse than other urban areas. If you believe that you either live an extremely sheltered existence in SF or you've not visited recently. San Francisco is pretty bad no matter where you go (except, perhaps, for the affluent areas like Sea Cliff and St Francis Woods). Out in the Outer Sunset I saw what looked like so…

I work near Civic center and go there everyday. You know, like, Chicago has 500 murders a year. Nothing in SF and Oakland even comes close to that. Oakland used to be the crime capital in the US. People can actually live in West Oakland now. Oakland hill homes now run at $2mn. Drug use in SF has been prevalent since, what like 60s. I have been living in SF since well before the boom. Mid market and Tenderloin used to be way more troubling. I am continually amazed that they actually managed to our Uber, Twitter, and Dolby HQ there. Did you ever go to 9th and market prior to the tech boom ?

Re: Sam Altman: Bay Area is no longer the obvious place for startups

#209

Post by mv4 » Sat, Feb 23, 2019, 5:15 PM UTC

freddie_mercury wrote: post #150

zavi wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the point of being a startup not looking at being a unicorn? I genuinely do not understand how somebody can cap off their ambitions like so.

Some friends created a startup a few years ago. It is now profitable and never took VC. The two founders pull down $1,000,000 a year and they give staff $50,000+ annual bonuses from profit sharing. They also work four day weeks and spent every night and weekend with their kids. What's the upside of trying to make it into a unicorn?

what type of business/service, if you don't mind sharing?

I've always found "no VC" stories incredibly inspiring.

Re: Sam Altman: Bay Area is no longer the obvious place for startups

#210

Post by temp1928384 » Sat, Feb 23, 2019, 5:34 PM UTC

sytelus wrote: post #119

enra wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think for many people it comes down to go exactly where and do exactly what there. Once lived in Bay Area for while, you have certain expectations on compensation, services, things to do, career growth etc. If you are used to a city like SF and enjoy the level of things in there, in the world and US there only few cities similar. Like nyc, la, London, Tokyo etc. Portland, Seattle, Austin, Berlin are all good but no…

Let’s not discount weather. As pg had said, places with bad weather can cut opportunities in half (paraphrased). Think about all the time you didn’t go out because of bad weather. Those are the times you didn’t bump across some founder or partner or VC or new job. Also, there is huge cultural aspect that is much harder to articulate. If you are young, you can find lots of peers arriving in office on roller blades or…

Weather in NYC is pretty bad.