5 ms·

The really ironic part of this is that while VCs will claim "America First" is exclusionary(it is), their practice of "Silicon Valley First" is accepted as a no

The really ironic part of this is that while VCs will claim "America First" is exclusionary(it is), their practice of "Silicon Valley First" is accepted as a normal fact of life. Opportunity in America is not equal. Many smart, working class kids would love to be an entrepreneur, and it's not lack of ambition or talent holding them back. It's simple economics and lack of mentorship or investment available. I'm all for bringing more entrepeneurs into the US. But I wish VCs were half as interested in growing talent here, at public universities across the nation and in cities not as hip as SFO.

markh 9y ago
The kind of entrepreneurs most likely to succeed (and therefore gain the attention of VCs) figure out how to relocate to startup hubs where they can get the attention of the VC community and network their way into the ecosystem. It’s way easier to move from Florida to San Francisco that it is from Paris, Sydney or Cape Town, and the extra hoops foreign entrepreneurs have to jump through makes them stand out all the more (relatively speaking). Very few American entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley grew up there either. It becomes a self-selecting sample.
- sudosteph 9y ago
  And for those people who have legitimate reasons to not relocate to the most expensive area in the U.S.? You know, reasons like familial obligations and limited safety net income? They should just accept that they weren't likely to succeed in the first place, because otherwise they would have relocated? That's nonsense. Plenty of very successful companies run succesfully somewhere other than SV. If you run a tech shop, that knows what you're doing, has the talent and resources on-hand, you don't need to be in SV other than for networking (which you only need to do to get those talent and resources in the first place). I would love to see numbers on long-term success vs funding numbers by city. I'd argue that for long-term success and a customer base that is consumer oriented (as opposed to B2B which does benefit from SFO or NYC), a location with lower expenses and less employee turnover due to less competition seems beneficial. Worked for starting Amazon and Microsoft, some of the THE most successful companies right now (even if Seattle is becoming more like SF every day now).
  - markh 9y ago
    The article above is specifically about VC-funded companies by definition. Nobody is arguing that you can’t be a successful entrepreneur outside of a startup hub. But if you’re going to play the “bubble metrics” game, raise VC, grow rapidly and exit for “bubble metrics” valuations, your odds are way higher if you move. Silicon Valley is generally full of young founders. They move before they have families. They couch-surf, eat ramen noodles and don’t let concern for a safety net impede possible success (however unlikely that is).
    - sudosteph 9y ago
      Parents are family. Siblings are family. If you have the ability move across the country without worrying if your family will be able to get by without you helping them either in person or financially, you already have a safety net that many working class Americans don't. Everyone ate ramen in college to get by, but most folks had the option to go back home and stay with their parents if college didn't work out. That's what you're describing here. Please don't conflate choosing to live frugally in exchange for additional opportunity with Americans who actually have grown up watching parents work two jobs only to choose between going to the doctor or paying their car payment (which they need to earn income). That's what working class means, that's what not having a safety net means. The consequences are different.
anindha 9y ago
Could you explain what you mean by the "economics" holding them back? Someone living here starts off in a much better position than any foreign entrepreneur. If they can't figure out how to get the attention of an investor then they probably wouldn't be a great entrepreneur.
- lghh 9y ago
  > Someone living here starts off in a much better position than any foreign entrepreneur. This is an incredibly untrue statement.
  - TheAdamAndChe 9y ago
    To expand upon this statement, social mobility has been on the decline[1] at a time when income inequality in the US is reaching unparalleled levels[2]. Childhood poverty is on the rise[3], and regional inequality is incredible[4]. All this is occurring at a time when the best and brightest young people are ending up with tens of thousands of dollars of debt just to be able to enter the workforce. All this is why small business creation is on the decline here.[5] It takes money to make money, and the lower and middle classes just don't have money to spare. edit: To those downvoting me, can you please explain? I don't understand the flaw(s) in my statement. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socioeconomic_mobility_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socioeconomic_mobility_in_the_... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_Unite... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_States#Child_poverty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_States#C... [4] https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2012/08/07/regional-inequality-and-the-new-geography-of-jobs/ https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2012/08/07/regiona... [5] http://money.cnn.com/2016/09/08/news/economy/us-startups-near-40-year-low/index.html http://money.cnn.com/2016/09/08/news/economy/us-startups-nea...
  - notyourday 9y ago
    This is absolutely correct. If the 'foreign entrepreneur' is rich then he or she does not need VC help to immigrate into the United States. I know a few - it just requires being able to get in via O visa, which is easy for a rich person[1]. So this means that the foreign entrepreneur in question is not rich. A non-rich foreign entrepreneur is unlikely to have the kind of salary that allows one to throw money at the problem to make inconveniences of switching countries go away: 1. Establishing personal credit, bank accounts, dealing with financial institutions, insurance etc 2. Getting state issued drivers license and dealing with Government 3. Getting an apartment 4. Developing a quick understanding of good v. bad areas, social norms (poor person with terrible habits is an asshole. Rich person with the same habits is eccentric ), etc [1] Edit: In a response to the comment below - lets define "rich" as someone with a few million in assets with a million of that being liquid.
QAPereo 9y ago
As far as I can tell, most big VCs are essentially children who care about little more than power, recognition, and maybe being the first trillionaire. If you filter out the incessant talk and focus only on actions, it becomes clear.
paxy 9y ago
VCs aren't in the business of developing talent, they want to set up and mentor startups and make money. They believe (correctly or not) that the best place to do this is in Silicon Valley, so they want entrepreneurs from the US and beyond to relocate there. What is "ironic" about this?

markh 9y ago

The kind of entrepreneurs most likely to succeed (and therefore gain the attention of VCs) figure out how to relocate to startup hubs where they can get the attention of the VC community and network their way into the ecosystem. It’s way easier to move from Florida to San Francisco that it is from Paris, Sydney or Cape Town, and the extra hoops foreign entrepreneurs have to jump through makes them stand out all the more (relatively speaking). Very few American entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley grew up there either. It becomes a self-selecting sample.

sudosteph 9y ago
And for those people who have legitimate reasons to not relocate to the most expensive area in the U.S.? You know, reasons like familial obligations and limited safety net income? They should just accept that they weren't likely to succeed in the first place, because otherwise they would have relocated? That's nonsense. Plenty of very successful companies run succesfully somewhere other than SV. If you run a tech shop, that knows what you're doing, has the talent and resources on-hand, you don't need to be in SV other than for networking (which you only need to do to get those talent and resources in the first place). I would love to see numbers on long-term success vs funding numbers by city. I'd argue that for long-term success and a customer base that is consumer oriented (as opposed to B2B which does benefit from SFO or NYC), a location with lower expenses and less employee turnover due to less competition seems beneficial. Worked for starting Amazon and Microsoft, some of the THE most successful companies right now (even if Seattle is becoming more like SF every day now).
- markh 9y ago
  The article above is specifically about VC-funded companies by definition. Nobody is arguing that you can’t be a successful entrepreneur outside of a startup hub. But if you’re going to play the “bubble metrics” game, raise VC, grow rapidly and exit for “bubble metrics” valuations, your odds are way higher if you move. Silicon Valley is generally full of young founders. They move before they have families. They couch-surf, eat ramen noodles and don’t let concern for a safety net impede possible success (however unlikely that is).
  - sudosteph 9y ago
    Parents are family. Siblings are family. If you have the ability move across the country without worrying if your family will be able to get by without you helping them either in person or financially, you already have a safety net that many working class Americans don't. Everyone ate ramen in college to get by, but most folks had the option to go back home and stay with their parents if college didn't work out. That's what you're describing here. Please don't conflate choosing to live frugally in exchange for additional opportunity with Americans who actually have grown up watching parents work two jobs only to choose between going to the doctor or paying their car payment (which they need to earn income). That's what working class means, that's what not having a safety net means. The consequences are different.

anindha 9y ago

Could you explain what you mean by the "economics" holding them back? Someone living here starts off in a much better position than any foreign entrepreneur. If they can't figure out how to get the attention of an investor then they probably wouldn't be a great entrepreneur.

lghh 9y ago
> Someone living here starts off in a much better position than any foreign entrepreneur. This is an incredibly untrue statement.
- TheAdamAndChe 9y ago
  To expand upon this statement, social mobility has been on the decline[1] at a time when income inequality in the US is reaching unparalleled levels[2]. Childhood poverty is on the rise[3], and regional inequality is incredible[4]. All this is occurring at a time when the best and brightest young people are ending up with tens of thousands of dollars of debt just to be able to enter the workforce. All this is why small business creation is on the decline here.[5] It takes money to make money, and the lower and middle classes just don't have money to spare. edit: To those downvoting me, can you please explain? I don't understand the flaw(s) in my statement. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socioeconomic_mobility_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socioeconomic_mobility_in_the_... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_Unite... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_States#Child_poverty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_States#C... [4] https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2012/08/07/regional-inequality-and-the-new-geography-of-jobs/ https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2012/08/07/regiona... [5] http://money.cnn.com/2016/09/08/news/economy/us-startups-near-40-year-low/index.html http://money.cnn.com/2016/09/08/news/economy/us-startups-nea...
- notyourday 9y ago
  This is absolutely correct. If the 'foreign entrepreneur' is rich then he or she does not need VC help to immigrate into the United States. I know a few - it just requires being able to get in via O visa, which is easy for a rich person[1]. So this means that the foreign entrepreneur in question is not rich. A non-rich foreign entrepreneur is unlikely to have the kind of salary that allows one to throw money at the problem to make inconveniences of switching countries go away: 1. Establishing personal credit, bank accounts, dealing with financial institutions, insurance etc 2. Getting state issued drivers license and dealing with Government 3. Getting an apartment 4. Developing a quick understanding of good v. bad areas, social norms (poor person with terrible habits is an asshole. Rich person with the same habits is eccentric ), etc [1] Edit: In a response to the comment below - lets define "rich" as someone with a few million in assets with a million of that being liquid.

QAPereo 9y ago

As far as I can tell, most big VCs are essentially children who care about little more than power, recognition, and maybe being the first trillionaire. If you filter out the incessant talk and focus only on actions, it becomes clear.

paxy 9y ago

VCs aren't in the business of developing talent, they want to set up and mentor startups and make money. They believe (correctly or not) that the best place to do this is in Silicon Valley, so they want entrepreneurs from the US and beyond to relocate there. What is "ironic" about this?