4 ms·
Why is that not a good scenario? If the states are competing with each other to make investments better in their state, how does this do anything but help out
by daeken 17y ago
Why is that not a good scenario? If the states are competing with each other to make investments better in their state, how does this do anything but help out investors and startups alike?
The only real downside is that you may end up going to Montana to get the best investment, but lots of people already go to the bay for investments as it is, not to mention things like tax incentives for starting datacenters in a given state.
- pierrefar 17y agoI don't like this scenario as I think it adds too much hassle rather than promote healthy competition, that it becomes a net negative.
- hga 17y agoProblem: as I understand it, the issue is with the state of residence of the investor(s). California today has a critical mass of angels (but how much further can the state decline before enough of them flee???). But let's say I was in Arlington, Virginia (not hard for me to imagine since I was there from 1991 to 2004 :-). My potential investor pool would ideally include residents of D.C. and suburban Maryland. If Dodd passes I've now got to worry about three different sets of state laws, and I'm sure at least one will be insane. As far as moving to Montana to get that great angel investment (hardly out of the question, look at Simplot and Micron in Idaho), well ... how likely are you to be successful there? Recruiting people to come there wouldn't be quite as hard as to Yellowknife in Canada, but, seriously.... There's reasons the SV startup ecosystem is so good, and Boston's is good enough to make it the undisputed #2. Expecting to go just anywhere and replicate the same success strikes me as unrealistic.