4 ms·
You did mis-interpret the gist of the bill. The VC funders have less significantly less control than a employer of a H-1B visa. Basically they are saying you
by neurotech1 17y ago
You did mis-interpret the gist of the bill.
The VC funders have less significantly less control than a employer of a H-1B visa.
Basically they are saying you have a 2 years (max 3 years) to meet the requirements (investment and jobs)of the visa, or go home. A EB-5 visa has a 2 year "conditional status" along similar lines.
A H-1B visa, the employer can terminate your job, and you have 30 days to leave the country. A VC can't do that unless the founders have given up their controlling interest.
- tptacek 17y agoH1-Bs are also bad. And, H1-B's aside, I'm not sure you actually refuted my interpretation of the bill. I cited its plain text. My question is, is there some other law or propose legislation that mitigates the impact of this bill? If there is, I'll stand corrected.
- neurotech1 17y agoThe part that I'm refuting is that they HAVE to raise $1m from VCs. From the legislation you quoted; "‘‘(II) raise not less than $1,000,000 in capital investment in furtherance of a commercial entity based in the United States; or ‘‘(III) generate not less than $1,000,000 in revenue." Note that it says OR
- tptacek 17y agoI think we're clear that they don't have to raise $1MM from VCs. They can also raise it from customers.
- Confusion 17y agoYou did mis-interpret the gist of the bill. The gist is irrelevant. The only thing that is relevant is what it actually says.
- andreyf 17y agoYou're saying the same thing. To put it plainly, what I think tptacek is saying, is that after 3 years, investors have a strong upper hand in negotiating a round, knowing that "Homeland Security" has set an artificial bar for how much a company must raise if the founders are to stay in the country. Edit: he said it explicitly here - http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1148789 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1148789
- neurotech1 17y agoMy whole point is they don't "have the upper hand" if you've already made $1m in revenue.
- tptacek 17y agoYes. It just puts people with viable $900k/yr companies in a ludicrously bad negotiating position.
- alex_c 17y agoWhich could be argued (by entrepreneurs looking for a startup visa) is still better than nothing. No, it's not perfect, but what alternative do you propose?
- tptacek 17y agoDrastically relaxing green card restrictions.
- davemc500hats 17y agoperhaps a laudable goal, however: 1) not mutually exclusive to proposed Startup Visa Act 2) politically MUCH more challenging to pull off feel free to contribute to other efforts to promote your ideas. however, hope you don't feel the need to tear down our (complementary) ones that may be achieved practically & expediently. light a candle, don't piss on ours.