Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy • Hacker News Board

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#181

Post by theptip » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 6:11 PM UTC

coldtea wrote: post #2

> threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy There was no inherent "supremacy", just one created by a bunch of companies being together. Did SV municipalities do anything else to deserve it? There are better places, with more rental space, more resources, better weather, and so on, plus WFH is here to stay...

> There was no inherent "supremacy", just one created by a bunch of companies being together.

I think this somewhat understates the strength of acquired advantages in agglomeration economies. Particularly in an economy of ideas it seems to me that acquired advantages account for most of the benefit; beyond "cheap rent" there's not much "inherent" advantage to be had.

Even in traditional industry many of the advantages are acquired (i.e. not geographic, which is what I think you're getting at with "inherent supremacy"), the textbook example being Lancashire's dominance in textiles in the 19th century (https://voxeu.org/article/agglomeration-explains-lancashire-...).

I think it's a reasonable point to suggest that the exodus from SV could accelerate the development of other startup/tech hubs, and weaken the comparative advantage of SV, but I think you may be understating the current strengths of SV by focusing on "original advantages" like rent and other environmental/geographic attributes.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#182

Post by mdgrech23 » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 6:12 PM UTC

xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #174

munaf wrote: post #40

It's notable that a lot of people are moving, but I'd wait until at least early 2022 to make judgements about lasting impacts on SV. WFH might not stick widely, and some firms will pick a hybrid model (i.e. partial WFH) over going fully remote. Not to mention that few places can match all the benefits of SV, i.e. unenforceable non-competes, fantastic weather and surroundings, an educated and diverse population, cultu…

I lived in SV for a decade and worked in SF for most of that. > WFH might not stick widely If the vast majority of workers demand it, then I don't think employers will have a choice here. Leaving now is a vote with your feet. > unenforceable non-competes Very few of my peers have ever cared about this in practice. I don't think this is remotely a major benefit compared to e.g. state taxes. > fantastic weather and sur…

Employers really don't care what the workers want or think. I can't see employees having the leverage to make much of a dent here.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#183

Post by gowld » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 6:12 PM UTC

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #106

kilbuz wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me (in SF): climate that matches what I want perfectly. The option for snow or beaches on the same day. The food, the diversity, the grittiness, the jobs, the history. And all my family lives here, too. The biggest one of all: walkability, never having to get in my car unless I want to leave the city. Where did you end up moving that you found a better fit for yourself?

Northern Virginia about an Hour from DC. The only two things you miss in VA on your list is "grittiness" which is a negative for me, and walkability, which you could get if you go closer to DC.

Climate is also missing, which is huge. VA has hot humid summers and freezing cold winters. SF spring/fall all year round.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#184

Post by TomVDB » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 6:12 PM UTC

gonehome wrote: post #81

munaf wrote: post #40

It's notable that a lot of people are moving, but I'd wait until at least early 2022 to make judgements about lasting impacts on SV. WFH might not stick widely, and some firms will pick a hybrid model (i.e. partial WFH) over going fully remote. Not to mention that few places can match all the benefits of SV, i.e. unenforceable non-competes, fantastic weather and surroundings, an educated and diverse population, cultu…

Yeah, I've had some friends leave (to CO and DC), but I'm skeptical of companies and VCs leaving. For a kind of funny example, there was an episode of the all-in podcast (mostly a podcast of successful VCs) where they talked about SV politics and leaving. The irony was while they talked about CA politics to an absurd degree ("worst run state in US", etc.) when they asked each other if they were planning on leaving al…

That $5M is hyperbole, right?

Nobody will deny that Bay Area housing is expensive, but even today, $1.5M will get you a decent single family house with a garden in Santa Clara.

That’s a ridiculous amount of money for most, but it’s not in $5M exit territory, and something that’s relatively easy to manage for a 2 tech income family: $1.25M loan is $5600/m mortgage, $1500/m in real estate taxes.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#185

Post by ylhert » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 6:13 PM UTC

dekhn wrote: post #67

ylhert wrote: post #33

Tech in SFBA reminds me of the Resource curse ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse ). SFBA did nothing special to attract the wealth of technology companies, they effectively got lucky with Shockley/Fairchild/Traitorous 8 and the boom in technology that followed. It seems the local gov't have squandered an opportunity to truly capitalize on the gift they were given, and perhaps even done their best to jeopa…

This is ridiculous. The Bay Area, specifically Stanford and Berkeley, contributed to the WWII tech research initiative and then afterwards, Terman made Stanford Research Park which led to Silicon Valley.

What about other municipalities/areas who have great universities and contributed to WW2? There are many examples of areas with similar initiatives and prestigious universities but have not reaped the same outsized rewards over the past 60-80 years as SFBA. So I would posit that it is more luck than execution, and thus qualifies as a resource curse

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#186

Post by TuringNYC » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 6:13 PM UTC

gonehome wrote: post #133

TuringNYC wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Yeah, I've had some friends leave (to CO and DC), but I'm skeptical of companies and VCs leaving. >> I have had older friends leave to have a family. They went to Santa Cruz, Seattle, Denver, DC, and Austin. It's a shame. The ones that stayed either are very rich where a $5M house is not an issue, or they still live with three roommates and rent without kids. Just wait until they look for interesting jobs and get…

Well, this entire premise is that remote work would make that more possible (I personally don't believe this though). That said, the people I know that left aren't planning to find new work (for the most part). CO does have a lot of FAANG options though and Slack was also there. They're not looking for the most interesting work at that point, they're looking to keep their job and raise a family - it's a tradeoff. Isn…

>> They're not looking for the most interesting work at that point, they're looking to keep their job and raise a family - it's a tradeoff.

>> Isn't that a risk to move to a place without as many employment options? Yes. The reason for that risk is you can raise kids in a nice house for $500k rather than in a tiny, old, 2 bedroom apartment for 1.5M.

You exactly summarized my thought process three years ago. To be fair, i'm very happy here. But it is a mixed bag.

Housing is great compared to the bay area, but $500k is a stretch for DC/Virginia (check it out on zillow) though not impossible, there is a ton of inventory if you are willing to drive out a bit. Unlike FAANG folks out-buying houses from you, you have lobbyists and government/intelligence contractors outbidding houses from you. Def better than Bay area though.

Except i'm in one of like five growth startups in the area and there are rarely any senior positions open, and the senior workforce appears larger than the pool of interesting senior jobs. Its a huge bet on your employer in addition to the already huge bet you're making w/ taking, say, illiquid early stage stock. So your career growth is much slower.

OK, so what if you are OK w/o an interesting job? Then you have plenty of options. Also, plenty of options if you're willing to be a consultant and travel, but now you're making a 2nd tradeoff.

All in, very happy but not a panacea and certainly multiple tradeoffs.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#187

Post by Apocryphon » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 6:13 PM UTC

mdgrech23 wrote: post #182

xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I lived in SV for a decade and worked in SF for most of that. > WFH might not stick widely If the vast majority of workers demand it, then I don't think employers will have a choice here. Leaving now is a vote with your feet. > unenforceable non-competes Very few of my peers have ever cared about this in practice. I don't think this is remotely a major benefit compared to e.g. state taxes. > fantastic weather and sur…

Employers really don't care what the workers want or think. I can't see employees having the leverage to make much of a dent here.

Employers aren't a monolithic block. Some companies will switch back to in-person, others will continue WFH policies. If more workers depart for the latter, the former will take notice.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#188

Post by badconvincer » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 6:13 PM UTC

ylhert wrote: post #33

Tech in SFBA reminds me of the Resource curse ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse ). SFBA did nothing special to attract the wealth of technology companies, they effectively got lucky with Shockley/Fairchild/Traitorous 8 and the boom in technology that followed. It seems the local gov't have squandered an opportunity to truly capitalize on the gift they were given, and perhaps even done their best to jeopa…

This is reactionary revisionism and based on your post history you know it.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#189

Post by codemac » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 6:14 PM UTC

xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #174

munaf wrote: post #40

It's notable that a lot of people are moving, but I'd wait until at least early 2022 to make judgements about lasting impacts on SV. WFH might not stick widely, and some firms will pick a hybrid model (i.e. partial WFH) over going fully remote. Not to mention that few places can match all the benefits of SV, i.e. unenforceable non-competes, fantastic weather and surroundings, an educated and diverse population, cultu…

I lived in SV for a decade and worked in SF for most of that. > WFH might not stick widely If the vast majority of workers demand it, then I don't think employers will have a choice here. Leaving now is a vote with your feet. > unenforceable non-competes Very few of my peers have ever cared about this in practice. I don't think this is remotely a major benefit compared to e.g. state taxes. > fantastic weather and sur…

> Very few of my peers have ever cared about this in practice. I don't think this is remotely a major benefit compared to e.g. state taxes.

Well, while working in RTP I saw many suits filed for my coworkers for non-compete clauses.

If you're ~director or above, this matters a lot and the bigco's basically auto file the lawsuit in any jurisdiction where enforceable. At least one exec I reported to had to take a year off as a result of these lawsuits.

IMO it's a huge deal for the HQ execs of many companies, similar to how tax benefits are a huge deal to the rank-and-file.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#190

Post by elefanten » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 6:14 PM UTC

akhilcacharya wrote: post #148

rmk wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know exactly, but my experience is that most parents say private schools do a better job (teachers are better engaged and aren't checked out, apathetic pencil pushers). In the areas with good school districts (and there are a handful of those), things swing to another extreme: too much pressure, like Singapore-style schools, which causes children to buckle under the pressure later in their lives.

> but my experience is that most parents say private schools do a better job This sounds more like classism to me.

This reads like a knee-jerk reaction to me.

There are data and experiences available for making these judgments. There might be a class divide underlying it, but to walk away with the assessment that one type of school on average does better than another is not a classist sentiment.