Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay

sfstandard.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 1001 posts

Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay

#471

Post by fallingknife »

bastardoperator wrote: post #443
seizethecheese wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve had several meetings, either in Twitter office or around it, and the street scene is very bad in that part of SF. If the claim is that this is a motivation for the move, it certainly passes the sniff test for me.

So you've been able to gauge life and the street scene in SF based on several meetings? That's super interesting. I would argue the Embarcadero is fairly nice and I live here, but what do I know.

I don't know what you know, but one thing you apparently don't know is that Twitter HQ is nowhere near the Embarcadero.

Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay

#472

Post by renewiltord »

bastardoperator wrote: post #443
seizethecheese wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve had several meetings, either in Twitter office or around it, and the street scene is very bad in that part of SF. If the claim is that this is a motivation for the move, it certainly passes the sniff test for me.

So you've been able to gauge life and the street scene in SF based on several meetings? That's super interesting. I would argue the Embarcadero is fairly nice and I live here, but what do I know.

My wife and I have lived in SF for over a decade and I go to the Fitness SF next door to this building at least twice a week these days. We can all play this game where we try to pretend that this area is really nice to people not from here.

But what that guy said was "the street scene is very bad in that part of SF." and he's dead right.

I love this city, but misleading people on the Internet is not right. Tell them the truth. I've lived here as long as I have because I think the benefits outweigh the pains. But not because there are no pains.

Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay

#474

Post by [deleted] »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #451
consteval wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because in reality, as in statistically, SF is actually not that dangerous. People say this about any vaguely blue city, which is almost all of them. But they forget Urban areas are very dense. You're actually more likely, per capita, to die to gun violence in rural America. It's just very hard to see that because the coverage isn't there and the actual amount of deaths is lower.

Danger stress is an AOE (area of effect). A single shooting in a city mentally harms/affects 100x more people than in the burbs.

[deleted]

Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay

#475

Post by klooney »

zknill wrote: post #51

I don't know US commutes, or US geography too well. But it seems these two locations are about 45mins-1hr drive from each other. Where do folks actually live in those areas? Is it that a 30min drive north to San Fran becomes a 30min drive south to San Jose?

San Jose is bigger than SF, and tech people tend to age out of the city and move south into the peninsula- so probably a good portion of the employees are getting an improved or neutral commute.

Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay

#476

Post by ZeroGravitas »

vehemenz wrote: post #436
brabel wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was already the case before Musk bought it.

Wrong. I don't understand why people attempt to make corrections like this. Anyone could browse Twitter anonymously, since the beginning.

There was briefly a log-in nag popup that would appear on scroll.

That disappeared and Musk got lots of praise for it, probably entirely unwarrented but it was basically the only thing that improved post-Musk. Then it came back with a vengeance.

Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay

#477

Post by jacobolus »

nimbius wrote: post #426
hintymad wrote: post #412

There is a famous paper about the location of company headquarters: they get as close as possible to the residence of company CEOs. If we don't consider the CEO's influence, I'm actually curious if the location of company headquarters has to do with the average age of the employees in the Bay Area. As the employees start to have families, they most likely move to the south bay for better or for worse, and I have a ha…

i concur. I think a lot of this is just sound business acumen. Twit-er...X, isnt raking in cash like it used to. Musks changes like reinstating hate speech accounts and the blue check fiasco had a direct negative effect on advertising revenue and accelerated already downward subscriber trends. Leaning out the physical side of the already agile digital side was a good idea im not sure twitters old guard would have con…

Musk Twitter stopped paying office rent a long time ago. I can only assume they finally couldn't keep doing that without getting evicted.

Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay

#478

Post by gkoberger »

throw4847285 wrote: post #444
hintymad wrote: post #412

There is a famous paper about the location of company headquarters: they get as close as possible to the residence of company CEOs. If we don't consider the CEO's influence, I'm actually curious if the location of company headquarters has to do with the average age of the employees in the Bay Area. As the employees start to have families, they most likely move to the south bay for better or for worse, and I have a ha…

Just in response to your second point, I do think that's specific to you and your circles. I know multiple retired or semi-retired people who have moved towards the center of a city. Without work to keep them occupied, they want the hustle and bustle, which means something to do. And driving has become more of a hassle and a barrier to the kinds of lives they want to live. These are east coast or midwest cities, so m…

You're talking about different age groups. You mention retired people (who are likely empty nesters), but the age group OP is talking about are middle-aged CEOs with young kids or teenagers.

Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay

#479

Post by groby_b »

nimbius wrote: post #426
hintymad wrote: post #412

There is a famous paper about the location of company headquarters: they get as close as possible to the residence of company CEOs. If we don't consider the CEO's influence, I'm actually curious if the location of company headquarters has to do with the average age of the employees in the Bay Area. As the employees start to have families, they most likely move to the south bay for better or for worse, and I have a ha…

i concur. I think a lot of this is just sound business acumen. Twit-er...X, isnt raking in cash like it used to. Musks changes like reinstating hate speech accounts and the blue check fiasco had a direct negative effect on advertising revenue and accelerated already downward subscriber trends. Leaning out the physical side of the already agile digital side was a good idea im not sure twitters old guard would have con…

fwiw, hiring senior talent in SF works just fine. If you pay at the right pricing tier. SF is a decent city. It could definitely do better, it has issues, but if we all could stop pretending it's a post apocalyptic hellscape, that'd be nice.

Yes, you pay an SF premium. You pay a premium for most major cities, and the worse housing is, the higher the premium. But I'd bet moving to the South Bay isn't happening for that reason. SF pricing has a halo effect on the South Bay, and your savings will be minimal, if any. (I see little differences in South Bay and SF salaries, for larger companies)

What I'd wager precipitated the move is SF rents are stupidly high , and then you combine that with half the twitter offices being empty. If you believe loopt, San Jose office space is ~ half the cost of SF. Half the space, at half again cost - their real estate bill shrinks by 75%. And given that Twitters bill is likely ~$40M-50M/month, that's a good chunk of savings.

Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay

#480

Post by julianeon »

mistrial9 wrote: post #279
dmix wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He said they want to move all the HQs to Texas, which implies they could still have offices in California just maybe smaller. This may be part of the plan. They are also opening a new Palo Alto office for xAI where they could move a lot of engineering talent as well. Which is likely the other big reason.

[flagged]

There is a mile of difference between "person in the Army" and "West Point graduate." Also I want to clarify that the Master's Degree isn't like an online grift, it's really Stanford's graduate program (see link).

https://knight-hennessy.stanford.edu/

Post reply on HN