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

Finally, a Startup Visa That Works

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 121 posts

Re: Finally, a Startup Visa That Works

#61

Post by recoiledsnake »

ck2 wrote: post #27

Help me understand this? Is there a shortage of startups in the USA? Can startups (that in reality have an online-only product) not occur outside the USA? These are honest questions, I'm trying not to be biased, why come here?

I really fail to understand this line of thinking.

>Is there a shortage of startups in the USA?

What harm will an additional 1000 startups do, even if they fail? Fill the Whitepages and Yellowpages and make it heavy when you have to carry it inside your home? Look at the upside. Even a few successful ones(esp. big ones) can more than make up for the failures.

>Can startups (that in reality have an online-only product) not occur outside the USA?

Things are more conducive in the USA. So the same people may not be able to start and succeed elsewhere.

Online only etc. doesn't matter. There will be too many obstacles like tax laws, payment methods and what not.

Re: Finally, a Startup Visa That Works

#63

Post by crux_ »

blizkreeg wrote: post #59
crux_ wrote: post #44

Doesn't this give investors a rather disproportionate amount of negotiating power, particularly for the 2nd round? "Agree to our terms ... or lose your visa!"

Not really. Except for the first category, it's 100K in financing. Not penny change, but not a big amount either. Of course, you can also generate 100K in revenue (two years is plenty enough time to get there) and then financing isn't a requirement.

100K in financing that must come from a US-based VC/angel, no friends-and-family fundraising or personal savings allowed.

That 100K is going to be rather more costly to acquire than you think.

Re: Finally, a Startup Visa That Works

#64

Post by noelsequeira »

gridspy wrote: post #53
noelsequeira wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer depends largely on intent (is the bill meant to be exclusively for startups or are the terms more inclusive) and consequently, on how you define a 'startup'. Let's assume a hypothetical company in operation for 15 years outside the US with > 100000$ in revenue from the US market. 3 American hires now effectively represent an immediate ticket to a Visa for the founders. If I might hazard a guess, there'll b…

If the founders are working in their own company, contributing to the local economy, is this really a problem for the U.S?

Agreed. But this then essentially translates into a "jobs for founder visas" scheme for relatively larger companies that can afford to immediately hire 3 American candidates.

This will, therefore, probably mean a deluge of applications from across the globe and the consequent generation of several more US jobs (which works out great for everyone).

Only I'm not too sure we should then call it a 'Startup' Visa.

Re: Finally, a Startup Visa That Works

#65

Post by [deleted] »

noelsequeira wrote: post #47
HistoryInAction wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are some ways that this clause could be misused? I'll pass these examples along.

The answer depends largely on intent (is the bill meant to be exclusively for startups or are the terms more inclusive) and consequently, on how you define a 'startup'. Let's assume a hypothetical company in operation for 15 years outside the US with > 100000$ in revenue from the US market. 3 American hires now effectively represent an immediate ticket to a Visa for the founders. If I might hazard a guess, there'll b…

[deleted]

Re: Finally, a Startup Visa That Works

#66

Post by huherto »

tghnjtghn wrote: post #38
tomjen3 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't it makes sense to get those who sell outside the US even more? that could potentially get the trade deficient back to zero, which this measure won't.

Most of the monetary requirements are to stop scams - ie where millionaire's kid bills family company abroad for $100K and gets to stay in the US running his company. It's also the reason for requiring qualified investors - to stop this just being family money recycled. Although it is a bit silly that if you invented say a malaria vaccine and had a $Bn in foreign sales you would be deported!

IMHO, it is in the best interest of the US to let rich people in. They have a big potential to invest or consume.

Re: Finally, a Startup Visa That Works

#67

Post by jmspring »

I think the proposal is an interesting one. This really is one good step in cleaning up the issues with visas in this country. People that want to come here, start companies, and build the economy should be encouraged. Those that come for school, get an advanced degree and want to start something should be allowed to as well.

What isn't clear to me would be a scenario, say, where two foreign nationals want to work together to start something under this proposed program, would they need 2x the numbers? Also, "three new American jobs", are those visa eligible or not?

The second area I would like to see addressed is the whole of the H1-B process, specifically for "filling jobs where there is a shortage of talent". The economy is in the shitter and there are people qualified that are having a hard time finding things -- maybe due to age, location, or possibly needing to brush up on skill sets. I don't know what the right approach here is, but it really needs to be cleaned up to encourage training and hiring of those not needing a visa. I've worked with many of the job-shops (Wipro, GlobalLogic, etc) where the amount being paid for "talent" often was much higher than what hiring locally would cost with similar or worse quality.

Balance is needed. This proposal is a great start and maybe adopting something like the Canadian point system would be an interesting follow up for the non-entrepeneurial crowd.

Re: Finally, a Startup Visa That Works

#68

Post by ssp »

crux_ wrote: post #44

Doesn't this give investors a rather disproportionate amount of negotiating power, particularly for the 2nd round? "Agree to our terms ... or lose your visa!"

They already have almost the same leverage: "Agree to our terms ... or lose your business". Competition among investors would probably prevent this from becoming a big issue.

Re: Finally, a Startup Visa That Works

#70

Post by crux_ »

ssp wrote: post #68
crux_ wrote: post #44

Doesn't this give investors a rather disproportionate amount of negotiating power, particularly for the 2nd round? "Agree to our terms ... or lose your visa!"

They already have almost the same leverage: "Agree to our terms ... or lose your business". Competition among investors would probably prevent this from becoming a big issue.

Why is that anything close to "the same"?

Example: a 3-person $400k-revenue business a year and a half old would normally be able negotiate with investors from a position of great strength, because they can painlessly walk away from a deal -- if they're talking to investors at all!

Same situation, only with founder(s) on a startup visa? They'll be going hat-in-hand for 6mo from VC to VC with no choice but to close a deal. The only competition will be between the VCs to find the one who screws them over the least.

Further: There's a great deal less "competition among investors" written into the bill. Foreign capital does not count, nor does friend/family money, nor do strategic partnerships that include capital investments -- the only investment that will keep you in the country is US VC investment.

Post reply on HN