Tech Startups Don’t Need the Valley Unless They Need VC
1–10 of 53 posts
Re: Tech Startups Don’t Need the Valley Unless They Need VC
#2It's one reason to go to the valley, but not the only one. When I moved to the valley last year, everyone asked me why? I said "People". Those people could be new friends at other startups, future talent for my company, future informal advisors, potential investors, or an awesome bartender at the Olde Pro in Palo Alto. The Valley exposed me to people that I couldn't have met anywhere else.
If you love technology and startups, you should probably give it a shot out there. Just because you move doesn't mean you'll have magic VC genies grant you three rounds of funding. You will definitely meet some awesome people along the way.
Re: Tech Startups Don’t Need the Valley Unless They Need VC
#3Is it surprising in any way that a bunch of people not from the valley say that being in the valley isn't important?
Re: Tech Startups Don’t Need the Valley Unless They Need VC
#4It's one reason to go to the valley, but not the only one. When I moved to the valley last year, everyone asked me why? I said "People". Those people could be new friends at other startups, future talent for my company, future informal advisors, potential investors, or an awesome bartender at the Olde Pro in Palo Alto. The Valley exposed me to people that I couldn't have met anywhere else. If you love technology and…
Agreed.
I live over in Australia -- My cofounder and I are in Bay Area (visiting) and the access to having access to the people/minds here is astounding... And as you allude to - it's not just hackers, it's a whole ecosystem of people that can contribute to your idea.
Re: Tech Startups Don’t Need the Valley Unless They Need VC
#5Your probability of success is higher in the Valley. Doesn't mean you can't be successful elsewhere. I don't understand why people can't reconcile these two statements.
If you like your lifestyle where you are, by all means, stay. If you can find investors, lawyers, and accountants (assuming you want them) that you trust, stay where you are.
But if you're just a couple of crazy kids with a work ethic and an idea to change the world, and if you are willing to do everything possible to give your startup the highest probability of success, go to the Valley.
Re: Tech Startups Don’t Need the Valley Unless They Need VC
#6It's one reason to go to the valley, but not the only one. When I moved to the valley last year, everyone asked me why? I said "People". Those people could be new friends at other startups, future talent for my company, future informal advisors, potential investors, or an awesome bartender at the Olde Pro in Palo Alto. The Valley exposed me to people that I couldn't have met anywhere else. If you love technology and…
Agree about the other benefits in addition to access to VCs, but it's still arguable if they're worth the higher cost of living. If you're a bootstrapped startup, you'll hit ramen profitability much sooner elsewhere. When you have an infinite runway, you'll have infinite time to find people as well :).
Re: Tech Startups Don’t Need the Valley Unless They Need VC
#7The guy in the video makes a point about external funding: a lot of well-known, large tech companies accepted money only after they were already profitable and did so in order to expand. That seems really sane to me - capital seems like a magnifier for a process that either produces money or consumes money. I suspect a lot of companies that succeed with external money would have succeeded without it and that a lot of companies that fail without external money would have failed with it.
Re: Tech Startups Don’t Need the Valley Unless They Need VC
#8It's one reason to go to the valley, but not the only one. When I moved to the valley last year, everyone asked me why? I said "People". Those people could be new friends at other startups, future talent for my company, future informal advisors, potential investors, or an awesome bartender at the Olde Pro in Palo Alto. The Valley exposed me to people that I couldn't have met anywhere else. If you love technology and…
Agree about the other benefits in addition to access to VCs, but it's still arguable if they're worth the higher cost of living. If you're a bootstrapped startup, you'll hit ramen profitability much sooner elsewhere. When you have an infinite runway, you'll have infinite time to find people as well :).
To me the valley seems like a good place to grow if you're already profitable and can't find enough talent in whatever location you started. For a business with a few guys doing product development in an apartment and counting every penny, I just don't see the justification for the cost of living.
Re: Tech Startups Don’t Need the Valley Unless They Need VC
#9Some people like Silicon Valley, some people don't. To each his own.
Silicon Valley has a huge population of smart tech workers. There are certainly advantages to running a tech startup there. Other aspects of the area detract from the quality of life, however.
I live in the bay area, but can't stand Silicon Valley's feeling of endless suburbia. I don't think strip malls and sprawling apartment complexes make a good living environment for me. Some people prefer it, however. Silicon Valley is for them. It is not for me.
Re: Tech Startups Don’t Need the Valley Unless They Need VC
#10Your probability of success is higher in the Valley. Doesn't mean you can't be successful elsewhere. I don't understand why people can't reconcile these two statements. If you like your lifestyle where you are, by all means, stay. If you can find investors, lawyers, and accountants (assuming you want them) that you trust, stay where you are. But if you're just a couple of crazy kids with a work ethic and an idea to c…
Your probability of success is higher in the Valley
Your probability of flipping heads is higher than your probability of rolling 1 on a six-sided die: X = .5, Y =~ .167. I have yet to even hear of a good setup for measuring X or Y, to say nothing of actual numbers for them, for measuring "probability of success in a startup". Heck, I have never even heard a defensible universalizable definition of success for a startup.
Incidentally, and this has always bothered me about statements like "give your X the highest probability of Y": do people routinely get the opportunity to run a simple random sample of startups, marry a simple random sample of women, raise a simple random sample of children, etc? No? Then why do we bastardize statistics in this manner.