5 ms·

Why does it matter where the HQ is? I dont need to work in the city with 1000 tech employers, i only need one, the company i work for.

speedster217 8y ago
Have you lived in Silicon Valley? The amount that people from other companies talk to each other is incredible. You're using a technology? Oh just hop in the car and talk to the developers about your use case and help guide the development. You _can_ do that remotely, but having it happen in person is way more reliable
- olcor 8y ago
  That doesn’t mean that people in NYC don’t talk to each other as much. Sure it might be easier to hop in the car and talk to developers in the valley. But I don’t just want to talk to developers (and even if I do, not necessarily developers of a tech company). Technology is primarily an enabler for the rest of the world, not just something significant in and of itself. I can still talk to developers in NYC. But developers are not the only ingredient of a project, company or ecosystem. I can also talk to the best domain experts in finance (different types, not just VC), media, law, health, government, advertising, academia, architecture, etc. all at one place with more ease than in SF. This gives me, a developer, more perspective than I can glean elsewhere. I agree with the GP that you’ll find a lot of pure tech in the valley. But the applications of that tech all have significant presence in New York in comparison to the valley.
rsj_hn 8y ago
Think about what that means -- in the entire history of New York, not a single start up began in NYC and grew to be successful and market dominant there. Not a single one. Seattle has been much more successful -- it created MSFT and Amazon. What did NYC create? Best example would probably be fog bugz. Given that NYC has been so successful at creating other kinds of companies and has a lot of talented people, this is a conspicuous gap, no? Austin, TX, has been far more successful at creating tech companies than NYC. Both are tiny specs of dust compared SV. So clearly there is some kind of difference between these places, no? Some reason why one place offers more opportunity than another in tech? SV has an incredibly high density of headquarters of the biggest tech firms. This is where the leadership is, where the most experienced engineers are, and where the institutional knowledge resides. Because attention is scarce and communication is costly, firms tend to keep the most strategic efforts closest and push less critical efforts farther out. As Dan Kaminsky used to say, "If you're not at HQ, you're not part of the conversation". Individual contributors can be remote and support/sales/backoffice staff can be in satellite offices all over, but the key roles will be concentrated around HQ. Now go back to finance. There are lots of bank teller jobs in Phoenix. Wells Fargo has a lot of staff there, so does Bank of America. But if you want to have a career in finance, you are going to have more opportunities in NYC where the HQ of so many FIRE firms is concentrated, and not in Phoenix, even though there are lots of bank tellers and back office managers that work in Phoenix. The types of jobs you can have are just different. The opportunities, institutional knowledge, mentoring opportunities, social networks, level of responsibility -- it's different. It may seem unfair, but that's how it goes. NYC is basically Phoenix when it comes to tech -- a lot of backoffice and sales positions, and a bunch of engineering satellite positions, but not a single major tech company is headquartered there.
- gamblor956 8y ago
  In the entire history of New York, not a single start up began in NYC and grew to be successful and market dominant there. Outside of SV, "startup" is a pejorative term for a business that doesn't know how to make money. So you're right, New York doesn't have any startups that grew to be successful. They do, however, have thousands of success businesses, including some extremely large businesses that were once as market dominant as the tech companies are today.
  - rsj_hn 8y ago
    Not tech business. Not a single one. Banks, sure. Publishing houses -- absolutely. But zero for tech. Perhaps your cultural animus might be reflective of why that is. And I would do some soul searching and look even outside tech to see what the last market leading or top 3 corporation of any industry that was founded in NY? The publishing houses and financial firms are often more than 100 years old at this point. What new company has NYC produced that grew to dominate its market in the last 30 years? SV has about 100 of them. Los Angeles has more than NYC -- across all industries. Think about why NYC is more suited for established corporations to hire staff rather than entrepreneurs starting new corporations that can take over a market or create a market.
    - ohyes 8y ago
      Etsy? Blue Apron? SV is the giant sucking sound of the tech industry. More often than not a startup will be founded in a place like New York, Chicago or Boston and then move to SV to try to get VC funding. I think it has very little to do with the ‘culture of innovation’ and more to do with rich white guys willing to splash around money in seemingly longshot businesses. I guess maybe that is what innovation is all about.
      - rsj_hn 8y ago
        Your racist comments notwithstanding, the idea of founders moving to a place where they can access funding networks is one of the reasons why there is a strong productive ecosystem in SV for starting firms. If they could have tapped the same funding networks and skillsets in other places, they would go there, too. I'm not saying it's something in the water, it's the whole ecosystem of investors, employees, infrastructure, social networks, etc. I wouldn't call Etsy market dominant, but perhaps Blue Apron would qualify -- I think it's the largest in its space. They have what, ~900 million in revenue? There are about 70 SV founded companies that earn that much or more in revenue, starting from AAPL on down to Splunk/Infinera/EFI, which are all hovering around that revenue range.
ThrustVectoring 8y ago
In short: BATNA. Your salary is highly dependent on what the next-best thing you could be doing if your employer didn't hire you. If you live in a city where only your employer hires developers, your next best option sucks, so you can be forced to either move out or accept an uncompetitive offer. If you live in the SF Bay Area, you can walk out the door of Facebook on a Friday and into Google on a Monday, which means that both companies must compensate you handsomely in order to keep you around.
- lm28469 8y ago
  When I see the cost of living / quality of life in SV I'm glad I'm back in Europe. You do you, but for me salary isn't everything: social security, work hours, amount of vacation days, parental leaves, job security, commute time, &c.
  - s3r3nity 8y ago
    This. The marginal increase in salary that you might get moving to SF is almost guaranteed to be dwarfed by the net increase in cost of living from moving from virtually anywhere in the country to SF. Therefore net income actually goes down. I understand the numbers seem like they look good ("omg $150k is higher than the $100k i'm making in smaller city X!), but the BATNA isn't really a BATNA, as the market dynamics are different...it's almost like propaganda with no factual basis at this point. I'd take my fewer work hours (due to easier commute,) nice take-home, a house, etc. over an SF offer any day.* *Everyone has their price, and sometimes the argument doesn't hold if the offer is _crazy_ high to make the argument above false...but that's the rare exception, not a rule.

speedster217 8y ago

Have you lived in Silicon Valley? The amount that people from other companies talk to each other is incredible. You're using a technology? Oh just hop in the car and talk to the developers about your use case and help guide the development. You _can_ do that remotely, but having it happen in person is way more reliable

olcor 8y ago
That doesn’t mean that people in NYC don’t talk to each other as much. Sure it might be easier to hop in the car and talk to developers in the valley. But I don’t just want to talk to developers (and even if I do, not necessarily developers of a tech company). Technology is primarily an enabler for the rest of the world, not just something significant in and of itself. I can still talk to developers in NYC. But developers are not the only ingredient of a project, company or ecosystem. I can also talk to the best domain experts in finance (different types, not just VC), media, law, health, government, advertising, academia, architecture, etc. all at one place with more ease than in SF. This gives me, a developer, more perspective than I can glean elsewhere. I agree with the GP that you’ll find a lot of pure tech in the valley. But the applications of that tech all have significant presence in New York in comparison to the valley.

rsj_hn 8y ago

Think about what that means -- in the entire history of New York, not a single start up began in NYC and grew to be successful and market dominant there. Not a single one. Seattle has been much more successful -- it created MSFT and Amazon. What did NYC create? Best example would probably be fog bugz. Given that NYC has been so successful at creating other kinds of companies and has a lot of talented people, this is a conspicuous gap, no? Austin, TX, has been far more successful at creating tech companies than NYC. Both are tiny specs of dust compared SV. So clearly there is some kind of difference between these places, no? Some reason why one place offers more opportunity than another in tech? SV has an incredibly high density of headquarters of the biggest tech firms. This is where the leadership is, where the most experienced engineers are, and where the institutional knowledge resides. Because attention is scarce and communication is costly, firms tend to keep the most strategic efforts closest and push less critical efforts farther out. As Dan Kaminsky used to say, "If you're not at HQ, you're not part of the conversation". Individual contributors can be remote and support/sales/backoffice staff can be in satellite offices all over, but the key roles will be concentrated around HQ. Now go back to finance. There are lots of bank teller jobs in Phoenix. Wells Fargo has a lot of staff there, so does Bank of America. But if you want to have a career in finance, you are going to have more opportunities in NYC where the HQ of so many FIRE firms is concentrated, and not in Phoenix, even though there are lots of bank tellers and back office managers that work in Phoenix. The types of jobs you can have are just different. The opportunities, institutional knowledge, mentoring opportunities, social networks, level of responsibility -- it's different. It may seem unfair, but that's how it goes. NYC is basically Phoenix when it comes to tech -- a lot of backoffice and sales positions, and a bunch of engineering satellite positions, but not a single major tech company is headquartered there.

gamblor956 8y ago
In the entire history of New York, not a single start up began in NYC and grew to be successful and market dominant there. Outside of SV, "startup" is a pejorative term for a business that doesn't know how to make money. So you're right, New York doesn't have any startups that grew to be successful. They do, however, have thousands of success businesses, including some extremely large businesses that were once as market dominant as the tech companies are today.
- rsj_hn 8y ago
  Not tech business. Not a single one. Banks, sure. Publishing houses -- absolutely. But zero for tech. Perhaps your cultural animus might be reflective of why that is. And I would do some soul searching and look even outside tech to see what the last market leading or top 3 corporation of any industry that was founded in NY? The publishing houses and financial firms are often more than 100 years old at this point. What new company has NYC produced that grew to dominate its market in the last 30 years? SV has about 100 of them. Los Angeles has more than NYC -- across all industries. Think about why NYC is more suited for established corporations to hire staff rather than entrepreneurs starting new corporations that can take over a market or create a market.
  - ohyes 8y ago
    Etsy? Blue Apron? SV is the giant sucking sound of the tech industry. More often than not a startup will be founded in a place like New York, Chicago or Boston and then move to SV to try to get VC funding. I think it has very little to do with the ‘culture of innovation’ and more to do with rich white guys willing to splash around money in seemingly longshot businesses. I guess maybe that is what innovation is all about.
    - rsj_hn 8y ago
      Your racist comments notwithstanding, the idea of founders moving to a place where they can access funding networks is one of the reasons why there is a strong productive ecosystem in SV for starting firms. If they could have tapped the same funding networks and skillsets in other places, they would go there, too. I'm not saying it's something in the water, it's the whole ecosystem of investors, employees, infrastructure, social networks, etc. I wouldn't call Etsy market dominant, but perhaps Blue Apron would qualify -- I think it's the largest in its space. They have what, ~900 million in revenue? There are about 70 SV founded companies that earn that much or more in revenue, starting from AAPL on down to Splunk/Infinera/EFI, which are all hovering around that revenue range.

ThrustVectoring 8y ago

In short: BATNA. Your salary is highly dependent on what the next-best thing you could be doing if your employer didn't hire you. If you live in a city where only your employer hires developers, your next best option sucks, so you can be forced to either move out or accept an uncompetitive offer. If you live in the SF Bay Area, you can walk out the door of Facebook on a Friday and into Google on a Monday, which means that both companies must compensate you handsomely in order to keep you around.

lm28469 8y ago
When I see the cost of living / quality of life in SV I'm glad I'm back in Europe. You do you, but for me salary isn't everything: social security, work hours, amount of vacation days, parental leaves, job security, commute time, &c.
- s3r3nity 8y ago
  This. The marginal increase in salary that you might get moving to SF is almost guaranteed to be dwarfed by the net increase in cost of living from moving from virtually anywhere in the country to SF. Therefore net income actually goes down. I understand the numbers seem like they look good ("omg $150k is higher than the $100k i'm making in smaller city X!), but the BATNA isn't really a BATNA, as the market dynamics are different...it's almost like propaganda with no factual basis at this point. I'd take my fewer work hours (due to easier commute,) nice take-home, a house, etc. over an SF offer any day.* *Everyone has their price, and sometimes the argument doesn't hold if the offer is _crazy_ high to make the argument above false...but that's the rare exception, not a rule.