The Decline of Investment in San Francisco Startups • Hacker News Board

Re: The Decline of Investment in San Francisco Startups

#221

Post by timothycrosley » Fri, Jul 21, 2017, 4:13 PM UTC

mercutio2 wrote: post #218

timothycrosley wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, it doesn't really matter what stats you drive from they all paint the same picture. More and more engineers are moving here from San Francisco for that reason. People never report that there leaving net income on the table, especially once they have enough to be comfortable, and most never even search to look.

If you’re looking at $100-150k total comp, and expect to max out there, you should definitely move to Seattle. If you’re interested in earning $300-400k/year after working for a BigCo for 4-5 years, Seattle isn’t going to work out to a better net savings/year. I think it’s perfectly fine to max out at $100-150k. You’re still extremely rich by any standard. And startups in The Bay Area will pay you vastly less regardl…

The same people who make 300-400k in San Francisco, also do so in Seattle. I don't know where your getting your information from, but all existing stats disagree with you for a reason.

Re: The Decline of Investment in San Francisco Startups

#222

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jul 21, 2017, 4:13 PM UTC

mercutio2 wrote: post #218

timothycrosley wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, it doesn't really matter what stats you drive from they all paint the same picture. More and more engineers are moving here from San Francisco for that reason. People never report that there leaving net income on the table, especially once they have enough to be comfortable, and most never even search to look.

If you’re looking at $100-150k total comp, and expect to max out there, you should definitely move to Seattle. If you’re interested in earning $300-400k/year after working for a BigCo for 4-5 years, Seattle isn’t going to work out to a better net savings/year. I think it’s perfectly fine to max out at $100-150k. You’re still extremely rich by any standard. And startups in The Bay Area will pay you vastly less regardl…

[deleted]

Re: The Decline of Investment in San Francisco Startups

#223

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jul 21, 2017, 4:13 PM UTC

mercutio2 wrote: post #218

timothycrosley wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, it doesn't really matter what stats you drive from they all paint the same picture. More and more engineers are moving here from San Francisco for that reason. People never report that there leaving net income on the table, especially once they have enough to be comfortable, and most never even search to look.

If you’re looking at $100-150k total comp, and expect to max out there, you should definitely move to Seattle. If you’re interested in earning $300-400k/year after working for a BigCo for 4-5 years, Seattle isn’t going to work out to a better net savings/year. I think it’s perfectly fine to max out at $100-150k. You’re still extremely rich by any standard. And startups in The Bay Area will pay you vastly less regardl…

[deleted]

Re: The Decline of Investment in San Francisco Startups

#224

Post by Danihan » Fri, Jul 21, 2017, 4:23 PM UTC

ocb wrote: post #206

nailer wrote: post #115

This is excellent opportunity for anyone who wants investment from west coast VCs but doesn't want to deal with San Francisco, Oakland or the bay area. San Francisco frequently has human feces on the sidewalk in many areas right near the city center, high housing prices and a combination of startup bros and angry hard left outrage culture folk. The bay area is a cultureless void and Oakland is still dangerous. Better…

Portland, LA, and Boulder all have the problems you listed... Also the idea that Boulder has some kind of culture that the Bay Area doesn't is laughable. Disregarding that only 100,000 people live there, I've never seen a place more homogenously populated by "rich boring white people" in my entire life. It's like an entire city of the stuff that pops up when neighborhoods gentrify.

Did it ever occur to you that a nice, "boring," safe culture is what many people want?

Re: The Decline of Investment in San Francisco Startups

#225

Post by timr » Fri, Jul 21, 2017, 4:25 PM UTC

Decade wrote: post #90

timr wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Wishing people would just leave is what the NIMBY organizations have been trying for decades." ...and yet, this crisis is only about 5 years old. Between 2008 and 2012, San Francisco rents were going down , not up. San Francisco's population declined in the 1980s. Say what you will about construction rates, but this is an acute housing crisis, brought on by an asset bubble, instigated by historically low interest ra…

5 years. How cute. Prop 13, a law with horrific long-term consequences, was passed by the voters in response to the housing crisis. 40 years ago. http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-pol-ca-housing-supply/ San Francisco rents have sometimes gone down slightly, but they never returned to sane levels, and affordable housing for the poor hasn’t been abundant in many, many years.

That article has nothing to do with Prop 13 (the only mention of prop 13 is in the comments). And while I think Prop 13 is an abomination for a variety of reasons, there's basically no evidence that it reduces new construction.

Re: The Decline of Investment in San Francisco Startups

#226

Post by isotropy » Fri, Jul 21, 2017, 4:27 PM UTC

Sleeep wrote: post #167

chrissnell wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone living in the Midwest and telecommuting to SFBA, that's almost unbelievable to me. I pay less than that for my brand new and quite nice 5/4 house on almost half an acre of land. With all of the remote work available, why would you stay here? I manage a team with two remote-friendly job openings currently. You could work for me and go live in Telluride, CO for less than that East Bay 1br and still have mone…

What's a 5/4 house? The Midwest is stereotypical for "affordable living" but I live in New England and it's fairly affordable here too in comparison. I own a three bedroom in town, with 20% down my P+I is $750 a month and PITI is $1275 a month. If I financed the whole thing the PITI would be $1462 a month. I think my housing cost is about average for the US.

> What's a 5/4 house?

5 bedrooms/4 bathrooms

Re: The Decline of Investment in San Francisco Startups

#227

Post by vedanta » Fri, Jul 21, 2017, 4:30 PM UTC

ghaff wrote: post #134

vedanta wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nevada is too different, the combination of non-enforceable non-competes and the nice weather can be duplicated elsewhere in CA easiest, and this is happening. If your state has big corporate HQs forget about getting non-enforceable non-competes.

No one is forcing you as a company to make employees sign a non-compete, enforceable or otherwise. I've generally lived in states where non-competes are enforceable and I've signed exactly one.

It's not about you or a company, once the market tolerates non-competes, employers will use them for any sort of a knowledge-based position. People will shift jobs less, wages will lower, followed by other economic effects of slightly lower wages.

Re: The Decline of Investment in San Francisco Startups

#228

Post by timr » Fri, Jul 21, 2017, 4:31 PM UTC

briandear wrote: post #123

mattm wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AirBnB is a huge factor. Take a look at http://insideairbnb.com/san-francisco/ and the chart under Activity and see it go up after 2012.

AirBnB doesn’t cause 3 bedroom tract houses in Cupertino to cost $2 million. There is AirBnB in Houston and it has almost an unmeasurable effect of prices. I don’t know if the Bay Area has rent control, but those types of policies (along with planning commissions and other bureaucracies have more deleterious impacts than a thousand AirBnBs. The simple fact is that if you own a Bay Area home, you will oppose increased…

"The simple fact is that if you own a Bay Area home, you will oppose increased supplies because it makes your home less valuable."

Yeah, this is a bit of "yimby" rhetoric that's pretty simple-minded. People don't oppose new construction because of abstract fears like "property value"...they oppose them because of concrete fears, like changing the character of the neighborhood, or increasing traffic.

I'm not saying I agree with those fears, but it's helpful not to make cartoon characterizations of the other side's arguments, when many of those arguments have merit. If you spent most of your life savings on a house in a cute suburban neighborhood, you'd (rightly) be pretty pissed if people suddenly wanted to surround it with high-rises.

Again, I don't agree with these arguments, but it's helpful to actually understand them.

Re: The Decline of Investment in San Francisco Startups

#229

Post by edoceo » Fri, Jul 21, 2017, 4:31 PM UTC

posguy wrote: post #84

timothycrosley wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure that's true. I take Vitamin D, and have a light that I use during the winter. However, it's really both the Spring and Summer that are beautiful IMO, which is half the year. I make sure to take my vacations during the other half. I also tend to get more work done during that half, since staying indoors is conducive toward it. But, per the article I posted: it's not a couple bucks, on average - you end up after p…

IMO we still need to dezone Seattle, parking minimums and height caps are strangling new development and eliminating the possibility of affordable, unsubsidized housing for the average working person. I hate seeing my old classmates and friends move from Fremont to Marysville or further, no good reason why we have to keep every single building in Seattle super short and build parking that will sit empty.

Fremont here means a neighborhood in Seattle, not an East Bay town.

Re: The Decline of Investment in San Francisco Startups

#230

Post by scarmig » Fri, Jul 21, 2017, 4:32 PM UTC

xr4ti wrote: post #148

narrator wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does everyone have to squeeze into San Francisco and the peninsula? Can't you tech workers gentrify West Oakland at least? Guess a few street thugs are a force more powerful than million dollar home prices. I bet those guys are really proud of the chaos they create that forces all of you to avoid their neighborhoods.

Yes. Thugs. Drugs. Drive by shootings. The east bay is a burning trash heap with no redeeming value. Please do not move here.

Yes. On the way to work I got mugged three times, before having acid thrown in my face. Oakland is a burning hellhole, stay the fuck away if you value your life and property.