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

791–800 of 1001 posts

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

#791

Post by averageRoyalty »

acedTrex wrote: post #501
janalsncm wrote: post #371

Had a recruiter call with Twitter a few months ago. Mandatory in office 5 days per week. Among other things, an hour commute both ways to work was not acceptable. Maybe they will have better luck in Santa Clara. I don’t buy any of the flamebait reasons for leaving SF. Reason 1 is money and reason 2 is talent pool.

[flagged]

Maybe, but it's all relative. Isn't it not self respecting to be working for anyone making over say $2m a year? You're just contributing further to inequality to "get yours".

There are plenty of horrible people who are CEOs out there (and plenty of companies that do actual evil), I think you're grandising Musk a bit due to him being a public figure.

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

#792

Post by bushbaba »

thatfrenchguy wrote: post #610
curiousllama wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cities' attractiveness feels u-shaped Young adults love it bc they have the time to go to bars/restaurants/clubs Middle aged folks hate it because they're so busy - they can't take advantage, and other people get in their way (some) Older folks like it again bc they have the time to go to restaurants/theater

I don't know, the residential neighborhoods of SF are the perfect place to raise a family if you make tech money: dense enough that there is a ton of stuff to do and your kid knows other kid nearby, low density enough that you get 1500-2500sqft to yourself.

Except schools, crime, and kids able to get into trouble.

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

#793

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

Animats wrote: post #784
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…

> There is a famous paper about the location of company headquarters: they get as close as possible to the residence of company CEOs. Boeing. That's what killed Boeing - moving HQ from the factory in Renton, WA to Chicago. Boeing has no plants anywhere near Chicago. But Dave Calhoun, the previous CEO lived in Chicago. He previously was the head of Nielsen, the TV ratings and marketing company, which has been in Chica…

The move to Chicago was made by Condit. Ostensibly it was just a cover to stay far away from the wife while he kept his mistress shacked up at the HQ.

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

#794

Post by qingcharles »

CalChris wrote: post #675
gumby wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Back in the early 90s my wife and I moved to SF because it had a thriving art and music scene and more interesting culture than the 'burbs of palo alto. But as you say, the long commute to SV was a killer and we moved back down. Back then SF was a bedroom community for SV with no tech sector. Businesses up there were banking (Wells Fargo, BofA, Crocker etc), retail, the local stock exchange, and a bunch of manufactur…

I lived in San Francisco in the very late 70s through to the 00s. My first apartment share was $50/mo. The late 70s had the dying embers of the Beat Generation and San Francisco was a sleepy town. San Francisco was great in the 80s with a ton of theater, music, dance, art, everything. It was good in the 90s although the late 90s dotcom boom pushed/priced artists out. The 00s became pretty boring and compressed. I mov…

What are your thoughts on Oakland now?

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

#795

Post by averageRoyalty »

thih9 wrote: post #600

Is the constant stream of flamebait (this action and other recent changes) helpful for twitter, or part of some larger strategy? To me the service seems increasingly unreliable and unprofessional. Then again, I no longer feel like I'm the target audience. The numbers seem bad too; revenue was 22% down in 2023[1]. Also, "global active daily users of X via mobile apps had steadily declined during the year after Musk ac…

Are these numbers that important when you're privately owned and slashing costs? I guess the motivators are different to a VC backed or publicly traded company.

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

#796

Post by seanmcdirmid »

dunham wrote: post #745
thatfrenchguy wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, the residential neighborhoods of SF are the perfect place to raise a family if you make tech money: dense enough that there is a ton of stuff to do and your kid knows other kid nearby, low density enough that you get 1500-2500sqft to yourself.

We bailed for seattle because we could get a bigger house and have a better school situation. We did enjoy living on the border between the mission and noe valley before that though.

I’m reading this from Ballard and I think we do alright on school quality and house size, although my east side colleagues think the deal is better in more suburban Kirkland or Bellevue.

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

#797

Post by qingcharles »

drawnwren wrote: post #788
darby_nine wrote: post #780

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You know an area is fucked when people start trying to blame the victims for the crime.

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/getting-mugged-just-say-no

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

#798

Post by mlindner »

I mean it makes lots of sense. I'm in South Bay and the amount of vacant corporate buildings around here is ridiculous. The property prices have to be falling through the floor. Lots of companies substantially downsized their footprint during covid as they're now either partially or completely work from home places now, meaning they need a lot fewer seats in the office.

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

#799

Post by matrix87 »

darby_nine wrote: post #772

I don't think Twitter realizes how much the quality of employees will crater when they trash the brand and the workplace

the brand is already trashed, at this point the workplace doesn't really matter. only thing that will save it now is if elon sells it

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

#800

Post by fabrikam »

Animats wrote: post #784
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…

> There is a famous paper about the location of company headquarters: they get as close as possible to the residence of company CEOs. Boeing. That's what killed Boeing - moving HQ from the factory in Renton, WA to Chicago. Boeing has no plants anywhere near Chicago. But Dave Calhoun, the previous CEO lived in Chicago. He previously was the head of Nielsen, the TV ratings and marketing company, which has been in Chica…

According to Wikipedia, Boeing moved its headquarters in 2001, a mere two decades before he became CEO, and the nearly half dozen that preceded him.
Post reply on HN