Why Is Europe Failing to Create More $1B Startups? • Hacker News Board

Re: Why Is Europe Failing to Create More $1B Startups?

#241

Post by kazinator » Tue, Sep 15, 2015, 9:05 PM UTC

shas3 wrote: post #233

petercooper wrote: post #209

Combine lots of languages with lots of regulatory areas and you end up with numerous smaller communities. Add this to Metcalfe's Law and you have disproportionately smaller opportunities for company size when social effects are important (as they are to most Internet-based unicorns, though not to companies Europe does do well at - like car companies and manufacturing, say). Mathematically, say one network with size 1…

I think you are overstating the importance of languages. As a counter example, one has to only look at large European companies, like Seimens, Airbus, Philips, Volkswagen, etc. Their multinational spread transcends language barriers. Why would this be a problem for start ups? India has several languages and is insanely diverse. In this way it is different from China. But what works for companies trying to scale up in…

Volkswagen doesn't need to speak Chinese in order to have a plant cranking out parts in China for approximatelythe same reason why a computer user doesn't have to know a programming language to read their e-mail.

A small management team at the top of the org chart above the workers just has to be able to communicate with the parent company and "program" the organization below in their native language, to produce the required results.

Re: Why Is Europe Failing to Create More $1B Startups?

#242

Post by aianus » Tue, Sep 15, 2015, 9:07 PM UTC

raverbashing wrote: post #125

On that subject, how many Unicorns Canada has?

Blackberry, until recently.

Canada suffers from dutch disease; it's simply too easy and profitable to dig stuff up (oil, diamonds, gold, potash, etc.) instead of producing value through software or technology.

Re: Why Is Europe Failing to Create More $1B Startups?

#243

Post by radisb » Tue, Sep 15, 2015, 9:08 PM UTC

redblacktree wrote: post #180

andreamazz wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the problem is that with this line of reasoning a startup is destined to fail. If I don't get clients, I can't keep my business open. That's what irks me. How can I prove myself in the market if I don't get a chance?

It sounds like you're trying to sell to late adopters at the early stage. Check out Crossing the Chasm. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossing_the_Chasm

It seems that in Europe that's the only kind of adopters. If early adopters were plenty we wouldn't have this discussion in the first place

Re: Why Is Europe Failing to Create More $1B Startups?

#244

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Sep 15, 2015, 9:11 PM UTC

pluma wrote: post #226

mamon wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The refugee immigration will ultimately boost Europe's tech competitiveness" I don't think so. Most of the immigrants are uneducated people, with no willingnes of finding a job. They want to go to Germany because that's the country with highest benefits for unemployed. How would we benefit from THAT ?

Here's a thought: these people went through hell in order to get out of the misery they lived in. That's not exactly what I have in mind when I think of underachievers with no work ethos.

[deleted]

Re: Why Is Europe Failing to Create More $1B Startups?

#245

Post by ghaff » Tue, Sep 15, 2015, 9:17 PM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #199

exelius wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO the EU is too protective of its economy to allow the kind of innovation Silicon Valley is famous for. The EU has a default assumption of "you have to prove that this will not be harmful before you can do it" where the US has a default assumption of "someone else has to prove that this will be harmful before we will stop you". The important part is that this burden of proof in the US is not placed on a company at…

> In the US, you can do whatever you want as long as it's not explicitly illegal. That feels wrong. Maybe it's just a distorted picture I get from outside the US. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3171665 http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/08/03/the-inexplic...

In all fairness, that's a news story precisely because it is a "man bites dog" situation. It's not the norm for every lemonade stand and bake sale to be shut down by overzealous regulators.

That said "In the US, you can do whatever you want as long as it's not explicitly illegal" is somewhat hyperbolic. Certainly there are things like zoning regulations and other laws that limit what you can do with your property, for example. However, I do think that there is a greater presumption of being able to do and say things in the US so long as they aren't specifically prohibited in some way. (Obviously private parties have the ability to govern a lot of behaviors on their own property.)

Re: Why Is Europe Failing to Create More $1B Startups?

#246

Post by 001sky » Tue, Sep 15, 2015, 9:18 PM UTC

exelius wrote: post #204

chimeracoder wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They're only able to address the EU market because they have a large, profitable base in the US. Uber is only able to address any market because they have a ton of outside venture funding. Don't get me wrong - I agree that the EU is overly protective and that this harms their startup economy, but Uber is not a good example of that point.

That's true of any startup. But I guarantee you in one of those venture funding pitches someone asked them "So most cities have taxi regulations that make what you're trying to do illegal. How are you dealing with that?" Their answer was basically "Fuck 'em, we'll flood the market with cheap product, make consumers love it and the regulators will cave." That would not have worked in Europe if they hadn't already done…

"That's true of any startup"

no, not really. its only true specific contexts. which was the point of the previous comment. but you're right in the second part, that's sort of a confidence game...success begets success.

Re: Why Is Europe Failing to Create More $1B Startups?

#247

Post by wellboy » Tue, Sep 15, 2015, 9:24 PM UTC

Vexs wrote: post #35

ThomPete wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate the word unicorn too, but it's shorter than private market companies with a valuation of more than $1 billion :) With regards to lack of investors I don't think it's as simple as that. If it was only a matter of investments then surely US investors or Asian investors could just come in with the money. There is something that makes European VCs risk averse and keep american investors out of Europe IMO.

Unicorn just pokes my brain the wrong way, like bad kerning. On the other hand, it does describe how rare these things are, which I feel does make it an accurate term- it also explains how companies like this are essentially legends. It's an annoying term, but it works (unfortunately)

It is a disliked term, because it's a buzzword, which get really hyped up in the beginning until everyone can't hear it anymore. If you still use it after the initial hupe, it makes you sound like a tool. That's the thing with buzzwords ^^

Re: Why Is Europe Failing to Create More $1B Startups?

#248

Post by adventured » Tue, Sep 15, 2015, 9:27 PM UTC

hkarthik wrote: post #229

e5india wrote: post #145

There are a couple things missing from this article that really need to be fleshed out: 1. You're comparing the unicorns which is like comparing the top of the pyramid without measuring the base. In other words, where are the figures for seed-round startups? What is the amount of capital available to startups at the different stages in the business life cycle? Without those numbers we can't really tell if this is a m…

Curious which Texas startups are considered unicorns? Last article I read didn't mention any. Google only pulled up this recent article: http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/blog/techflash/2015/09/sor... Are there unicorns coming out of Dallas and Houston, but not Austin? I find that hard to believe.

BigCommerce probably is at this point, or very close to it.

Re: Why Is Europe Failing to Create More $1B Startups?

#249

Post by noelsusman » Tue, Sep 15, 2015, 9:28 PM UTC

KaiserPro wrote: post #160

SneakerXZ wrote: post #148

It is quite easy question actually. In short, US is unified market with one language, laws for business are same across all states, one currency, one culture, low taxes, no social system and a lot of money. In EU you have 28 countries, 24 languages which equals to same amount of cultures. 11 currencies. Every country got own laws so once you make business across many countries, you have taxation and law hell. EU trie…

There is one currency, there are no import taxes, VAT is per country. (assuming EEC) This ofcourse assume that you are operating in one country and providing goods to another. Employment is another issue. Thats almost the same as in the US(excluding employment). The issue of low taxes is frankly utter bollocks, yes the US's taxes might be lower but so is your life expectancy, and productivity. The main issue with sta…

There's still a much larger difference in both laws and culture between European countires than between American states. Also, much of what you said doesn't make much sense. Lower life expectancy and productivity? Are you arguing that investing in startups is irrational and Europeans realize this while Americans don't?

Re: Why Is Europe Failing to Create More $1B Startups?

#250

Post by adventured » Tue, Sep 15, 2015, 9:32 PM UTC

exelius wrote: post #178

happyscrappy wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The major two exceptions are New York and Texas in that order. Umm. Boston(MA)?

Boston is a second-tier startup city along with Pittsburgh, Chicago, Seattle, etc. It's too expensive, it's hard to recruit good talent (too cold, too far from everywhere, etc), and there's not a ton of VC. You can do it, but you'll have an easier time of it in NYC or Texas. Texas has a warm climate, cheap housing and low taxes, which draws a lot of startups there. Raising money can be a problem, but you also don't n…

Boston is a first tier startup city, clearly.

It ranked above New York for total VC dollars raised in 2014, to go with its 371 deals, versus New York's 395.

It's basically third in deal activity nationally. It's four times larger than Seattle, and perhaps ten times larger than Pittsburgh when you account for deals + money.

http://nvca.org/pressreleases/u-s-venture-capital-investment...