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

A Startup That Wants to Build Cities

buildcampus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 84 posts

Re: A Startup That Wants to Build Cities

#71

Post by slm_HN »

makeitsuckless wrote: post #32

Ah, the arrogance of completely ignoring history and human nature. The problem with building a community of like-minded people is that after a few generations it won't be a community of like-minded people that have chosen to be there anymore. And I'm not even talking about any other form of social and economic reality. All else remaining the same (it won't), just bringing in new generations will change the entire dyn…

>What they are basically describing is trying to start a cult.

Cult is exactly what I thought when viewing the website. All the talk of like minded people, the photograph of people sitting around in a circle... hugely creepy.

Re: A Startup That Wants to Build Cities

#72

Post by logfromblammo »

mbesto wrote: post #17

Here's my idea to solve the same problem (aimed at tech people): - Buy a decent expensive plot of land in SV - Buy several tiny homes (let's say 10)[0] and put them on said plot - Buy a large cheap plot of land way out in the middle of California (or potentially Nevada for tax reasons) that can accommodate 100 tiny homes - Move the tiny homes (they're portable), effectively swapping them, from the SV plot to the chea…

Your idea, as well-considered as it may have been, is a complicated workaround to the problem that Silicon Valley money does not want to leave Silicon Valley, and is thereby causing an explosion of inflation, driven by too much money chasing after too little common sense.

In the rest of the country, this is called a "trailer park" or "RV campground". There is no second, remote property in Nevada, because all the homes adhere to a common standard for utility hookups and foundation pads. Even so, despite the theoretical possibility, most mobile homes do not actually move more than once. This is because it is several orders of magnitude easier to move people and their personal possessions than the buildings they live in, even when such buildings are designed to be moved.

I don't want to be mean about this, because you did put your idea out there and stand behind it, but it is not an ideal business plan. There is already a solution to the problem wherein a businessperson needs to be in a certain city for 10% of the year, while still enjoying most of the amenities of home--several, actually: hotels, time-share condominiums, furnished apartments rented weekly, couch-surfing, pieds-a-terre. There are also existing solutions for portable homes: touring buses, RVs, camper trailers.

Re: A Startup That Wants to Build Cities

#73

Post by pantalaimon »

aetherson wrote: post #70
mattmanser wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or 3. Your argument is wrong because markets aren't efficient and jobs + housing aren't as tightly linked as you'd have us believe?

This has nothing to do with any strong form of the efficient markets hypothesis. If there aren't jobs for the people in Berlin, then obviously they can't pay these great housing prices that the OP claims they can. I guess barring a case where Berlin is a vacation spot for the idle rich, but I don't think that anyone is arguing that. If there are plenty of jobs, but housing is super-abundant, then I suppose you could…

I think I made too many assumption, so the point I wanted to make got lost.

Basically, Campus wants to build what normally is the end result of gentrification, I'm not critical of that at all, I just wanted to point out that there has to be more to a city than the availability of jobs - there have been previous modelled cities specifically for that purpose (e.g. Eisenhüttenstadt) which turned out rather boring.

As for Berlin, it's isolated position during the cold war/much abandoned property after reunification led to rents being quite low, which attracted creative types - who probably couldn't afford to live at Campus. The vast availability unclaimed spaces after the wall came down enabled them to try all different kind of things, there was a niche for everyone. To pull that of you need a certain density - Leipzig just barely does that, but many other East German cities are rotting away and experiencing an exodus because there is not the critical mass of people. But I also think the Hobrecht-Plan plays into it by providing dense and flexible city spaces - areas where those structures are preserved are the most popular today.

To get back to the original point, the target audience of Campus will rather move to a place they find desirable and find/create jobs there than to move to a place that has no other appeal than a job.

Re: A Startup That Wants to Build Cities

#74

Post by mbesto »

logfromblammo wrote: post #72
mbesto wrote: post #17

Here's my idea to solve the same problem (aimed at tech people): - Buy a decent expensive plot of land in SV - Buy several tiny homes (let's say 10)[0] and put them on said plot - Buy a large cheap plot of land way out in the middle of California (or potentially Nevada for tax reasons) that can accommodate 100 tiny homes - Move the tiny homes (they're portable), effectively swapping them, from the SV plot to the chea…

Your idea, as well-considered as it may have been, is a complicated workaround to the problem that Silicon Valley money does not want to leave Silicon Valley, and is thereby causing an explosion of inflation, driven by too much money chasing after too little common sense. In the rest of the country, this is called a "trailer park" or "RV campground". There is no second, remote property in Nevada, because all the home…

This is a fair consideration. However, having seen "tiny homes" in person, I'm convinced they are very different than a traditional RV or trailer.

> There is no second, remote property in Nevada, because all the homes adhere to a common standard for utility hookups and foundation pads.

Solution: Solar (electricity) and gas propane (for heat).

> hotels, time-share condominiums, furnished apartments rented weekly, couch-surfing, pieds-a-terre.

None of these are economical because their high price is driven by regularly unused capacity. Also, there are benefits to being "swappable" in that entrepreneurs are always close to other entrepreneurs. YCombinator alone could benefit from such a system where they have 100+ entrepreneurs temporarily relocated to the Mountain View area every 3 months.

Re: A Startup That Wants to Build Cities

#75

Post by s73v3r »

epicureanideal wrote: post #23
Animats wrote: post #20

It's not that building a new city is hard. Real estate developers do it routinely. The problem is jobs. There are, at present, quite a few places in the US with more houses than jobs. Only in a few places, such as SF and some areas of Oklahoma where there's heavy drilling activity, is the reverse the case. If you want to buy an empty town of new houses, there are plenty in San Bernardino. Vacant lots run about $7500.…

I know a way of solving this, but "ideas are worth nothing, execution is everything". If anyone's willing to value the idea as significantly more than nothing, I'd be happy to discuss. See my reply to commenter below. I for one don't believe ideas are worth nothing, and am willing to pay for ideas/information useful to me.

If you're not going to contribute to the discussion, then don't post. Nobody is going to steal your idea.

Re: A Startup That Wants to Build Cities

#77

Post by logfromblammo »

mbesto wrote: post #74
logfromblammo wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your idea, as well-considered as it may have been, is a complicated workaround to the problem that Silicon Valley money does not want to leave Silicon Valley, and is thereby causing an explosion of inflation, driven by too much money chasing after too little common sense. In the rest of the country, this is called a "trailer park" or "RV campground". There is no second, remote property in Nevada, because all the home…

This is a fair consideration. However, having seen "tiny homes" in person, I'm convinced they are very different than a traditional RV or trailer. > There is no second, remote property in Nevada, because all the homes adhere to a common standard for utility hookups and foundation pads. Solution: Solar (electricity) and gas propane (for heat). > hotels, time-share condominiums, furnished apartments rented weekly, couc…

I strongly encourage you to live in another city--possibly even one entirely outside of California--for a year.

To mix two entirely appropriate metaphors, you are attempting to summon the molehill to Muhammad.

Different cities have different problems. As far as I know, "not able to live in close physical proximity to potential investors" is one that is unique to Silicon Valley.

Re: A Startup That Wants to Build Cities

#78

Post by epicureanideal »

pforpineapple wrote: post #45
epicureanideal wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the record, I'm very much open to buying ideas (or other information) that help me make more money. If you're selling ideas that would help me make more money, and willing to make payment conditional upon me being able to utilize your ideas (and I'll certainly try, given that it's in my interest) post your contact info and I'll get in touch. I realize there isn't a very efficient market for ideas, and I have diff…

What you are talking about is not an "idea", but a "plan".

And yet a "plan" is still not execution.

Re: A Startup That Wants to Build Cities

#79

Post by epicureanideal »

kristiandupont wrote: post #44
epicureanideal wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the record, I'm very much open to buying ideas (or other information) that help me make more money. If you're selling ideas that would help me make more money, and willing to make payment conditional upon me being able to utilize your ideas (and I'll certainly try, given that it's in my interest) post your contact info and I'll get in touch. I realize there isn't a very efficient market for ideas, and I have diff…

Well for one thing, the term "idea" isn't very well defined. If you are talking about something like Elon Musks Hyperloop, I can see that it might be worth money. But someone else might consider "Uber for dog walkers" an idea. And it is to some extent, but how would you know before you buy? No worries, you say, you'll just make a clause that says that you only pay for an idea if you execute it? Right, but then you ar…

I think it's possible to sufficiently reduce this problem. For example, "needs to be an idea I can execute on with skill set X (or hire for)", "needs to be something I can execute on with $Y or includes a plan to acquire $Y that I can execute on", "needs to have a potential ROI of Z%".

Also, enough information can be given in advance that I'd be able to filter out ideas that I'm not interested in pursuing. General industry it's in, whether or not it's legal, etc.

I have plenty of information/ideas that would be valuable to software engineers, so I know that there exist scenarios in which information/ideas are valuable. I would've benefitted from the same information/ideas a few years back, and I suspect there's more ideas I don't have yet that would provide more gains. However, as I mentioned in another post, not many people willing to pay for information/ideas so I've had difficulty finding buyers.

Re: A Startup That Wants to Build Cities

#80

Post by twelvechairs »

netcan wrote: post #49
twelvechairs wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only real reason is cost of living. If you build it yourself you could omit half a dozen middle men who make money from real estate as well as potentially local taxes, planning regulations you dont agree with, etc. You could then pass this on in part as higher wages.

Nonsense. The middle men are part of the economy of real estate. Building, selling, reselling, tenanting… These are all economic activities with associated costs. These costs are higher where you are working within an existing cities where there are already people, property owners, residents, communities, local governments. So, yes building in the middle of nowhere reduces your costs. Mostly because land is cheap, bu…

So you disagree with me where? The vibrancy of big cities is great - all im saying is that theres a segment of the population who would rather live in a less vibrant neighbourhood with a better home and more pay. Which is entirely achievable.
Post reply on HN