Live data from Hacker News

The start-up bubble

cognitivenerve.com

11–20 of 25 posts

Re: The start-up bubble

#11
I haven't personally been in the Valley recently, but...

"Startup" in the old Silicon Valley used to mean companies with serious technology like Amiga or Apple or Illustra. The staff used to be PhDs and sometimes professors from Stanford & Berkeley EECS. "Startup" did not used to mean "3 marketing dweebs and a website".

Valley interviews used to be "Super Saturday" 6-hour exams with theory questions for junior positions. Startups had more rigorous requirements than big companies; BigCos would at least look at entry-level resumes, Startups not so much.

I have trouble believing London's Shoreditch is any kind of "Silicon Valley".

Re: The start-up bubble

#12
post #6

His LinkedIn states that he graduated last year and worked for a startup for a grand total of 3 months... nothing against the author, but he seems to be too young and inexperienced to fully understand the big picture of something as complex as boom & bust cycles in the startup ecosystem. I certainly don't understand them. Too bad that his startup-experience seems to have been a bad one. For some(most?) people a big c…

What you say is true, and I may generalise more than I should, however I don't think you need a phd in astrophysics to see that this is a bubble. Or that's what I think it is, will see, I hope I'm wrong because many of my friends depend on the start-up ecosystem.

Re: The start-up bubble

#13
post #11

I haven't personally been in the Valley recently , but... "Startup" in the old Silicon Valley used to mean companies with serious technology like Amiga or Apple or Illustra. The staff used to be PhDs and sometimes professors from Stanford & Berkeley EECS. "Startup" did not used to mean "3 marketing dweebs and a website". Valley interviews used to be "Super Saturday" 6-hour exams with theory questions for junior posit…

I can't agree more.

Re: The start-up bubble

#14
post #11

I haven't personally been in the Valley recently , but... "Startup" in the old Silicon Valley used to mean companies with serious technology like Amiga or Apple or Illustra. The staff used to be PhDs and sometimes professors from Stanford & Berkeley EECS. "Startup" did not used to mean "3 marketing dweebs and a website". Valley interviews used to be "Super Saturday" 6-hour exams with theory questions for junior posit…

When technologies move from specialist areas to broad consumer usage, a more diverse (and less specialist) thinking also comes along, so people like zuckerberg, instead of data mining specialists with phd are ruling the techno start-up scenes, or stated otherwise, people who learn php and mysql, and not necessarily people with phd in cs rule this world. Moreover, to traverse all the possible space of innovation possible, more human effort, more dreamers are rushing into the field. finally, most are failing; this is normal in any problem solving when people simply traverse the possibility space with overlapping innovations.

A bubble is better identified in retrospect and a bubble predicator may be, the abundance of prophets such as this blog. Finally a bubble is good, and it simply justifies the fertile ground a certain technology provides. In this case web and mobile technologies have left no area of life untouched, and the bubbles are the golden medals they all carry going forward; showing their success and of course limitations.

Re: The start-up bubble

#15
post #12
post #6

His LinkedIn states that he graduated last year and worked for a startup for a grand total of 3 months... nothing against the author, but he seems to be too young and inexperienced to fully understand the big picture of something as complex as boom & bust cycles in the startup ecosystem. I certainly don't understand them. Too bad that his startup-experience seems to have been a bad one. For some(most?) people a big c…

What you say is true, and I may generalise more than I should, however I don't think you need a phd in astrophysics to see that this is a bubble. Or that's what I think it is, will see, I hope I'm wrong because many of my friends depend on the start-up ecosystem.

Yeah, but you're too young to understand the first one. I only caught whiffs of the tail end of it. Read some of the stories, some of the stuff they were trying to do was nuts.

The massive difference in this one is there really is a load of money to be made. Everyone is now online all the time. Back in 1999 there were bugger all people online and you wouldn't put your credit card details in for love nor money. Business wouldn't buy critical tools online. A lot of the industrial tools are moving cloud based rather than the old server install method. It's expensive to have your own IT team for a couple of massively overpowered servers that still seem to go down every day.

And a lot of consumer faced products are making massive sums just because of the sheer scale of the marketplace now. Google is profitable and there really was a time when it wasn't, Facebook is profitable. Match.com, craigs list. You've got businesses like netflix and spotify. People buy digital goods online. There's a lot more opportunity out there.

Some industries have gone crazy in that they're not charging, the one I look at and shake my head at is the diet industry, what on earth brilliant tools like myfitnesspal and their ilk are doing I do not know, that seems like a sad race to the bottom in an industry traditionally worth hundreds of millions, if not billions. And others, like the newspapers, seem to be regaining their senses and are now charging (personal opinion, let's not derail the point :).

Your field, big data really is meaningful and it really is worth a lot of money to the right people. You'll usually get opportunities in the right startup to advance your learning far beyond what you'll ever achieve at most big companies.

There are exceptions to every rule, but big business often gets bogged down by conservatism and politics.

But in the end, do what makes you happy and find the culture that does. And there are plenty of great jobs out there with a CV like yours.

I partially agree there is a bubble, but only in certain startup sectors.

Re: The start-up bubble

#17
post #4

Lame. Apparently we have been in a bubble since 2007, depending on who you speak to. I recall in a famous YouTube clip circulating at the time that people thought it was ludicrous that Facebook was valued at $16Bn. Of course people are going to overvalue companies. There are cycles in every industry, where people speculate and get burnt. Does anyone remember the Finance industry in 2007? How that is evidence against…

Apparently we have been in a bubble since 2007

Some Google searches show the talk of the bubble going as far back as 2005, if not even late 2004. I wonder what it takes for a bubble to become normal business?

Re: The start-up bubble

#18
post #4

Lame. Apparently we have been in a bubble since 2007, depending on who you speak to. I recall in a famous YouTube clip circulating at the time that people thought it was ludicrous that Facebook was valued at $16Bn. Of course people are going to overvalue companies. There are cycles in every industry, where people speculate and get burnt. Does anyone remember the Finance industry in 2007? How that is evidence against…

Apparently we have been in a bubble since 2007 Some Google searches show the talk of the bubble going as far back as 2005, if not even late 2004. I wonder what it takes for a bubble to become normal business?

A bubble never really becomes "normal business" and it never will without specific tools that can support it, tools only available to governments (eg. the China bubble).

An honest prediction on when this bubble will burst, would be at the end of the current financial crisis. This is because for now, investors treat take as a safe retreat for their capital, along with German and U.S bonds, gold and over-priced art.

When faith is restored and capital starts flowing towards other industries in equal quantities, this tech bubble will deflate (not burst).

Actually, start ups are more of a new sort of monetary inflation within a certain industry rather than a bubble, now that I come to think of it.

Re: The start-up bubble

#19
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you say is true, and I may generalise more than I should, however I don't think you need a phd in astrophysics to see that this is a bubble. Or that's what I think it is, will see, I hope I'm wrong because many of my friends depend on the start-up ecosystem.

Yeah, but you're too young to understand the first one. I only caught whiffs of the tail end of it. Read some of the stories, some of the stuff they were trying to do was nuts. The massive difference in this one is there really is a load of money to be made. Everyone is now online all the time. Back in 1999 there were bugger all people online and you wouldn't put your credit card details in for love nor money. Busine…

I don't think that we disagree. I'm not talking about the valuation of the well established companies like spotify, netflix, match.com or even instagram and evernote which I use as examples in the post. These are not the problem, like Amazon was not in the dot-com bubble. I'm talking about the numerous "1 website - 1 app" paradigms that seem to proliferate based on VC backing with ridiculous amounts of money. And from my (very short) experience I've seen how that works and defines the start-ups objectives.

The companies I admire most now, used to be start-ups, however the term tends (for me at least) to get synonymous with something that's easy, temporary and quick money.

Maybe I should write another post talking about the good parts of working in start-ups. The parts that attracted me in the first place. So I can balance my opinion and not generalise so much.

I'll get some corporate experience soon (hopefully) and then I'll be in position to make a small comparison from a totally subjective point of view. After all, who knows, I may miss the start-up environment :)

Re: The start-up bubble

#20
post #4

Lame. Apparently we have been in a bubble since 2007, depending on who you speak to. I recall in a famous YouTube clip circulating at the time that people thought it was ludicrous that Facebook was valued at $16Bn. Of course people are going to overvalue companies. There are cycles in every industry, where people speculate and get burnt. Does anyone remember the Finance industry in 2007? How that is evidence against…

Here's the video you were referencing, circa late 2007: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6IQ_FOCE6I
Post reply on HN