Live data from Hacker News

Taking Risk

tomblomfield.com

191–200 of 304 posts

Re: Taking Risk

#191

There's many factors that make Europe less competitive than the US: small fractured markets, low salaries, high cost of living relative to wages, Brexit costs, fear of being labeled a failure, working to live, focus on worker's rights, stability, and pensions, general risk aversion etc. A big issue is there's a lack of mega successes high margin software businesses that pump knowledge and money back into the startup…

Low salaries increase competitiveness, while high salaries decrease it. That's one of the things you already learn as a kid when you live in an export-driven economy.

Even if your country is not particularly export-driven but you participate in competitive markets, the same effect may apply. For example, the US lost many manufacturing jobs to China, because American salaries were not competitive (low) enough.

Finland is sometimes said to be a country of engineers, for historical and cultural reasons. That doesn't mean engineers are paid well. On the contrary, engineer salaries are low and Finnish engineers like to complain how much more they would earn in Germany. What it does mean is that engineers have a higher social status than in most Western countries, and a lot of people want to be engineers. Finnish companies can hire good engineers with little money.

Finnish companies have traditionally been good at developing technology and bad at commercializing it. Explanations vary, from the low quality of business leadership to the lack of domestic capital; from the small size of the domestic market to foreign companies buying successful startups; from the cultural dominance of heavy industry to the culture of respecting laws and regulations.

Re: Taking Risk

#192
post #44
post #23

Bankruptcy laws and social mores massively different. In the UK to go bankrupt is to be painted with indelible red shame dye. In America... going bankrupt means you are closing out the book on one failure to try another.

> In the UK to go bankrupt is to be painted with indelible red shame dye Is it? Do people generally know when someone (personally, or in this case, since we're talking startups, their company) goes bankrupt?

perhaps I reflect views of times past. C.P. Snow's "strangers and brothers" series of books starts with Lewis (the hero) as a child, bearing the burdens of his fathers bankruptcy and the implicit expectation he will work life-long to repay the debt, which he rejects. Shock! Horror! -Thats a 1940-1970 series.

It's a common trope in fiction: to be bankrupt, to fail in a business endeavour is to acquire shame and disgrace in society.

If the 40s is too far back, John Le Carré has used it several times as a back plot driver for characters across his books, no doubt reflecting his own experiences as a child of a fraudster and serial bankcrupt. He was writing actively into the modern era.

Obviously I'm not saying there is a literal colourfast red skin dye reserved for failed businessmen: Societal expectation is a stupid social construct, not law.

Re: Taking Risk

#193
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't judge nations in the present based on their historical peak. The UK hasn't been capable of building anything like that for more than a century; the hammering the Germans gave them was really exposing weaknesses that were already starting to set in from the 1910s. The UK is no longer known for being an industrial leader. Or indeed for achieving anything in particular except fading away with a certain graceful…

Industrial leader in what sense? There are a few industries where the UK is world leading

Well the obvious touchpoints to me are that at one point the British Empire controlled about 60% of the world's wealth, was capable of conquering the Indian subcontinent and was a thought leader to the justifiably-named "Age of Enlightenment" that was the approximate foundation of the modern system of global organisation (let me just invoke Newton, Bacon, Locke and Adam Smith because they are good names to remember).

The UK today is world leading in a few industries. Which is underselling it a bit because I suspect even North Korea is world leading in something. The UK have a bit of wealth left over from the empire and some traditions they can be proud of in amongst a sea of fairly average policies and people. Still a nice place to live if you can handle the weather. Not really a leader, more a US follower.

Re: Taking Risk

#194
post #22

I considered a startup after university in the UK. The talent arbitrage is absurd, physics grads with 1sts from top Russell Group unis fighting to be paid £30k/yr. For me it came down to security, life is expensive, rent is expensive. I didn't have a spare parental garage to setup five computers - I barely had room in my flat for one desk . I barely had money for that flat let alone internet, and food. I had zero cap…

I'm in the same boat. I've been chasing my tail for the last 6 years, just trying to keep my head above water financially. I'm a computer hardware engineer so the pickings are slim to none outside of the military-industrial complex, which pays shit outside of sales and executive management. Ended up at one of the big US semiconductor companies where I got paid 1/3rd of what my peers in the US earn, with similar expen…

Is a ‘computer hardware engineer’ different from a ‘hardware engineer’? I think of a ‘hardware engineer’ as someone who works on the development of ICs (or things on FPGAs). I would guess that people in such a role are paid a lot less than software engineers (at comparably sized companies) in the US, and a bit less in the UK (though maybe with more variance). But the numbers you give are lower than I would expect for eg ‘hardware engineer working at Arm/Qualcomm’. There’s also hardware engineering in finance, which can pay well, but not a lot of it.

Re: Taking Risk

#195
I am very well traveled and I spent considerable amounts of time in Europe in various different countries, I am however American, with particularly Midwestern sensibilities. One of the most common threads throughout the culture and society in nearly every European country I went to were three things in particular, that I think impact entrepreneurship:

1. An expectation that someone else will solve their problem, rather than an expectation of self-reliance.

2. A suspicion of anyone who thinks they have a good idea, as if that person is saying they're better than their peers and needs a comeuppance

3. A rejection of any kind of dream that entails class mobility, where the legitimate desires of people are to do something that fits the class they grew up in and "work to live" instead of "live to work" so they can spend as much time futzing about with friends and family rather than growing their family's class.

Many commentators in this thread have mentioned other aspects, but I think these three things are huge cultural drivers against entrepreneurship. In the US, when you found a startup, you are taking a financial risk, possibly a career risk, but you aren't taking a personal relationship risk or societal risk in the same way you are in Europe. In most countries in Europe, the people around you will think you are becoming too big for your britches the moment you entertain starting your own company, especially to do anything new, and will either cease their relationships with you or actively seek to tear you down socially. Not only is the financial risk larger, both in relative terms and in the legal structure, but the social and relationship risk that's non-existent in the US looms large in Europe. People will legitimately think you're a bad person who thinks you're too good to be around your peers for trying to do something more than the same job your father and uncle do.

#1 above is especially insidious as well, because most of the ways successful startups get founded is by finding a problem to solve and figuring out what you'd want to do to solve it for yourself. If you don't go and do this, it's really difficult to find any sort of product-market fit that resonates on anything but a tiny fractional basis. If you want to found a global company, you need to be able to devise /the/ solution to a problem, at scale, and if you are operating under the expectation that any meaningful problem has either already been solved or is the responsibility of some other entity, you won't do this, you won't have the right mentality.

Re: Taking Risk

#196
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It comes with an inability to do lots of things for 6 (I think?) years, including things like not having an overdraft and more importantly to this conversation, prevents being a director of a company.

Isn't this only for personal bankruptcy? If you have a limited company and it goes bankrupt, it's it that's bankrupt, not the owners. Or is the UK very weird in that regard and I'm reading gov.uk wrong?

At least in other places in Europe, and I assume also in UK, it's somewhat common for any sources of financing to new companies (i.e. without a proven steady cash flow), both banks and other investors, to explicitly require personal guarantees from the owner - so while technically you have a limited liability company, the lender will lend you money only if you accept full liability and put your house, car and other assets on the line. As the original post states, "investors spend too much time trying to mitigate downside risk with all sorts of protective provisions". So a company bankruptcy may result in a personal bankruptcy as well.

Re: Taking Risk

#197

There's many factors that make Europe less competitive than the US: small fractured markets, low salaries, high cost of living relative to wages, Brexit costs, fear of being labeled a failure, working to live, focus on worker's rights, stability, and pensions, general risk aversion etc. A big issue is there's a lack of mega successes high margin software businesses that pump knowledge and money back into the startup…

Low salaries increase competitiveness, while high salaries decrease it. That's one of the things you already learn as a kid when you live in an export-driven economy. Even if your country is not particularly export-driven but you participate in competitive markets, the same effect may apply. For example, the US lost many manufacturing jobs to China, because American salaries were not competitive (low) enough. Finland…

This is an interesting post. Thank you to share your thoughts.

    > Finnish companies have traditionally been good at developing technology and bad at commercializing it.
Can anyone provide some concrete examples?

Re: Taking Risk

#198
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumably because an ambitious young person in southern Europe would rather move somewhere like Zurich for higher pay rather than getting paid less in southern Europe? Who are those R&D centres going to end up hiring?

People don't move if their lives are decent enough. If FAANG sets up shop in Milan and pays 80k compared to the local average of 40k, few people would rather move to Zurich for 150k and have to learn Swiss German and have worse weather and few local friends. For comparison, Eastern Europe has FAANG offices and people working there generally don't move as much, and the few that do leave, generally go to Switzerland (o…

    > If FAANG sets up shop in Milan and pays 80k compared to the local average of 40k
I see this types of claims on HN frequently. This looks "too easy". Why isn't Big Tech setting up offices in large southern European cities to do exactly this?

Re: Taking Risk

#199
post #22

I considered a startup after university in the UK. The talent arbitrage is absurd, physics grads with 1sts from top Russell Group unis fighting to be paid £30k/yr. For me it came down to security, life is expensive, rent is expensive. I didn't have a spare parental garage to setup five computers - I barely had room in my flat for one desk . I barely had money for that flat let alone internet, and food. I had zero cap…

As an immigrant to the UK I'm continually surprised on how poor life here actually is. The main culprit in my mind is the atrocious cost of real estate. Not so much in how much money it takes to buy a house - those costs can be comparable to other countries, but on the ratio of post-tax salary pound per square meter. Most of the real estate in the UK is very small, both in outdoor space as well as in indoor proportio…

    > As an immigrant to the UK I'm continually surprised on how poor life here actually is.
Why do you stay?

Re: Taking Risk

#200
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not saying they are more scammy, I'm saying that the reputation score is computed differently in US and in Europe, and having a scammy aspect is penalizing the startups more in Europe than in US. You can start from exactly the same facts: - X% are scammy - Y% are bringing something great - Z% are bringing yet another useless junk in shiny paper that pollute and had bad side effect - W% are making new discoveries…

I think you're probably just categorizing something as "scammy" when it's more about being unrealistically ambitious.

But that's kind of the point - in your culture apparently there is a difference between making unrealistically ambitious claims and being scammy, and in my culture there is not. If someone tries to get investor's money by making unrealistic claims, they may be above the line legally, but in my culture they're clearly behaving morally unacceptably, demonstrating that they are a fraudster, someone who can't be trusted or respected by others in the community, "not one of us", and deserve to be shunned even if they were my friend or relative.

In my mind there is a strong ethical duty to ensure that your claims are realistic, and it's a severe breach of ethics to be irresponsible with unrealistic claims, triply so when others' money is on the line. As far as I understand, in USA being a bullshitter is treated as somewhat acceptable, to me being a bullshitter means you're scum that I'd need to warn others in the community so that they wouldn't work for you or with you. So while in every country there definitely are some "hustler-type" people who do try to initiate startups, they also have issues hiring and local B2B sales if word gets around that they are the type of person who routinely make unrealistically ambitious claims; the world is small, most industries even smaller and people do try to check references of potential partners through friend-of-a-friend-of-a-friend channels - so while a failed startup won't necessarily be held against you, the factors of why and how it failed (and how it affected others) definitely can be.

Post reply on HN