What about the opportunity cost that he potentially lost by starting his company outside of Silicon Valley? I am not saying that he definitely did, but the fact that OP doesn't mention it at all makes his whole post feel a bit disingenuous. In fact, it reminds me a lot of people who talk about how much money they saved by not going to college and how it is the way to go for everyone, despite studies [of US colleges]…
Yup. The headline could have easily been "Not starting a company at all saved me millions of dollars".
Why do you need to start a company in the Valley when two mega-corps (Amazon, Microsoft) have already shown that you can succeed outside of the valley?
The huge companies are already starting to branch out (Amazon in NYC/DC, Apple in Austin, FB/Google in NYC) and ecosystems will be built around these hubs.
Not only that but there are a variety of other hubs in the nation that are in close proximity to elite technology schools (Pittsburgh, Boston). The talent is definitely there, the VC infrastructure may be lacking but you're telling me Marc Andressen won't hop in his private jet to meet with a promising founder?
50% of VC funding lands in CA. 50% of that is on Sand Hill. So ~25% of all VC funding happens in offices in Palo Alto, the sheer efficiency of chasing a funding round can't be beat. For an established serial entrepreneur with a proven track record, it can absolutely make sense to stay in an area you know. But I think that math really changes if you're going to be cold calling VC's, trying to wrangle meetings from 3 t…
But that only matters if you're chasing VC money. That's the norm in silicon valley, but (depending on your goals) it's not necessary in order to start a profitable business.
I've started and sold a handful of successful tech companies, but have never taken a dollar of VC money.
I always assumed the valley focus was because, yeah VC money there, and VCs wanted people close by to help (well if they help), and just generally there are a lot of good people there. By no means are those bad reasons, but not everyone will have those reasons. A calculator seems a bit simplistic but I would generally agree that if there isn't something outright drawing you to that area, you don't have to be there an…
There have been islands of tech outside the valley for longer than the valley has been an island of tech. ENIAC as developed in Pennsylvania (Iowa claims they had one before then).
The valley is much larger, but it was never the only location.
50% of VC funding lands in CA. 50% of that is on Sand Hill. So ~25% of all VC funding happens in offices in Palo Alto, the sheer efficiency of chasing a funding round can't be beat. For an established serial entrepreneur with a proven track record, it can absolutely make sense to stay in an area you know. But I think that math really changes if you're going to be cold calling VC's, trying to wrangle meetings from 3 t…
You only need the VC who funds you though. Chasing after one elsewhere might be better odds because everyone else is looking to CA.
As someone who started a company outside SV, then moved there for 3 years to grow the company, and has now moved away again - I would say it's well worth it to spend at least some time in the Valley to build a network and understand how deals get done in person. The density of investors and other founders/early employees in Silicon Valley can't be beat, and I often found myself learning inadvertently - dinner table c…
I did web design sales from Silicon Valley but used a remote team (US-based) to develop the projects. Everyone was happy. Clients got a great project, I had great margins and the team got paid at or above going rates in their local area.
I would never try to build an in person team in the bay area unless you need the absolute 1% of engineers on your team.
I always assumed the valley focus was because, yeah VC money there, and VCs wanted people close by to help (well if they help), and just generally there are a lot of good people there. By no means are those bad reasons, but not everyone will have those reasons. A calculator seems a bit simplistic but I would generally agree that if there isn't something outright drawing you to that area, you don't have to be there an…
convinced themselves that stuff only happens in the valley and if they hadn't seen it they wouldn't have believed it was possible outside (and some did not, oh the excuses).... Isn't this bigotry? I remember watching all of these shows on PBS as a kid, where one of the major themes was how people would judge other people by class or other surface signals, and how this could obscure the truth or leave good people unap…
Oh, it certainly is bigotry, and it isn't even isolated to the bay area. When I moved to Wyoming, there were a lot of people in Colorado that thought I was literally dropping off the face of the planet, and that I would be unemployable the rest of my life. Sure, the density of tech jobs here is ludicrously low, and I can't job hop like I could in the bay area, but quality of life is important as well, and I don't like living in any size city. There is no way I could afford 40 acres of rural property anywhere within a reasonable commute of the bay area.
Is it just me or is the headline a good reason to start a company _inside_ Silicon Valley? I can't be the only one who thought "all you saved was $1.1 million? I'd rather spend that and be in a location which is drowning in tech talent"