5 ms·

Yeah, I've had some friends leave (to CO and DC), but I'm skeptical of companies and VCs leaving. For a kind of funny example, there was an episode of the all-

Yeah, I've had some friends leave (to CO and DC), but I'm skeptical of companies and VCs leaving. For a kind of funny example, there was an episode of the all-in podcast (mostly a podcast of successful VCs) where they talked about SV politics and leaving. The irony was while they talked about CA politics to an absurd degree ("worst run state in US", etc.) when they asked each other if they were planning on leaving all of them said no. People complain a lot (and there are good reasons to complain!), but people have been complaining since at least 1993 and it's still an economic hub for startups. I'm skeptical of that leaving. I have seen coworkers and friends leave, but it's mostly a housing issue. As people turn 30 and want to have a family if you haven't cashed out $5M in some exit event then it sucks to live here. $500k can get you a nice place in CO, $750k for outside Seattle. I have had older friends leave to have a family. They went to Santa Cruz, Seattle, Denver, DC, and Austin. It's a shame. The ones that stayed either are very rich where a $5M house is not an issue, or they still live with three roommates and rent without kids. Some other reasons to complain about, but that I don't think are usually deciding factors for people to leave: - Bad policy (AB5), Extra founder Tax, Hostility towards tech in general. - Political monoculture (I don't mean not enough trump people, I mean it can be controversial to be an obama era moderate/neoliberal and 'woke' politics is hard to avoid). - High state taxes that harm capital gains and new money. This is related to housing and prop13. Not only do the people that live in housing they bought decades ago pay almost no property tax compared to new buyers, they then push to restrict new supply while also pushing to increase tax on new money. This comes in the form of higher capital gains tax (there's a bill to raise it to 16.3% this year retroactively, by far the highest in the country). They also push legislation to increase tax on the companies excluding homeowners to fund their services (which indirectly affects the employees again). This kind of thing makes it doubly hard to be able to buy in and live here.

TuringNYC 6y ago
>> Yeah, I've had some friends leave (to CO and DC), but I'm skeptical of companies and VCs leaving. >> I have had older friends leave to have a family. They went to Santa Cruz, Seattle, Denver, DC, and Austin. It's a shame. The ones that stayed either are very rich where a $5M house is not an issue, or they still live with three roommates and rent without kids. Just wait until they look for interesting jobs and get 100 linked in messages from CA and like 1 or 2 from DC. (note: I live in VA just outside DC, speaking from experience.)
- Apocryphon 6y ago
  The main idea is that those jobs are now moving to remote, because of the pandemic?
- munaf 6y ago
  Exactly. An anecdote: I got an offer to leave my mid-level FAANG job to return to the Midwest for a VP role at a 200+ person company. The compensation was about 35% of my total comp, and it was maybe one of 3 companies in the area I would consider working for. Not to mention going back to cold winters, McMansions, and chain restaurants. I don't think people fully appreciate the value of unenforceable non-competes + many companies congregated in one area. No where else in the world does the labor have this level of negotiating power and flexibility. Even if it can be replicated (and I hope it is!), it won't be overnight.
  - TuringNYC 6y ago
    Agreed. I think it was all OK when I was single. But the appetite to re-locate a family every 2-3 years with a job change (or employer disappearing) (changing friends, school districts, continuity) is a tall order in my humble opinion. There is an old Russian saying about how every time you move it is like a fire happened (because you lose things.)
- fossuser 6y ago
  Well, this entire premise is that remote work would make that more possible (I personally don't believe this though). That said, the people I know that left aren't planning to find new work (for the most part). CO does have a lot of FAANG options though and Slack was also there. They're not looking for the most interesting work at that point, they're looking to keep their job and raise a family - it's a tradeoff. Isn't that a risk to move to a place without as many employment options? Yes. The reason for that risk is you can raise kids in a nice house for $500k rather than in a tiny, old, 2 bedroom apartment for 1.5M.
  - TuringNYC 6y ago
    >> They're not looking for the most interesting work at that point, they're looking to keep their job and raise a family - it's a tradeoff. >> Isn't that a risk to move to a place without as many employment options? Yes. The reason for that risk is you can raise kids in a nice house for $500k rather than in a tiny, old, 2 bedroom apartment for 1.5M. You exactly summarized my thought process three years ago. To be fair, i'm very happy here. But it is a mixed bag. Housing is great compared to the bay area, but $500k is a stretch for DC/Virginia (check it out on zillow) though not impossible, there is a ton of inventory if you are willing to drive out a bit. Unlike FAANG folks out-buying houses from you, you have lobbyists and government/intelligence contractors outbidding houses from you. Def better than Bay area though. Except i'm in one of like five growth startups in the area and there are rarely any senior positions open, and the senior workforce appears larger than the pool of interesting senior jobs. Its a huge bet on your employer in addition to the already huge bet you're making w/ taking, say, illiquid early stage stock. So your career growth is much slower. OK, so what if you are OK w/o an interesting job? Then you have plenty of options. Also, plenty of options if you're willing to be a consultant and travel, but now you're making a 2nd tradeoff. All in, very happy but not a panacea and certainly multiple tradeoffs.
TomVDB 6y ago
That $5M is hyperbole, right? Nobody will deny that Bay Area housing is expensive, but even today, $1.5M will get you a decent single family house with a garden in Santa Clara. That’s a ridiculous amount of money for most, but it’s not in $5M exit territory, and something that’s relatively easy to manage for a 2 tech income family: $1.25M loan is $5600/m mortgage, $1500/m in real estate taxes.
- fossuser 6y ago
  $5M is a little hyperbolic, but $4M is not. $1.5M will get you a shack - really old maybe a little bigger than 1000sqft in Santa Clara if you can find one at that price at all. $4M gets you a nice, newer 2900sqft house (comparable to what you'd get in the other regions I mentioned). $1.5M would have been enough in 2012, but it's gotten worse since then.
  - whimsicalism 6y ago
    I agree with this comment if by 100 you meant 1000 e: oh whoops, it was edited
  - TomVDB 6y ago
    2900ft houses is a good way to skew the argument in your favor, but it's a bit of a strawman: the vast majority of houses in the Bay Area aren't 2900ft to begin with, yet 2000ft house are plenty, with 4 bedroom, on, say, a 6000ft lot. You can easily find one of those for $2M, and they're not shacks. This is a $2M house, 2600 sqft, 5BD house on an 11000 sqft lot: https://www.redfin.com/CA/Santa-Clara/2602-Birchtree-Ln-95051/home/1789440 https://www.redfin.com/CA/Santa-Clara/2602-Birchtree-Ln-9505.... But going back to my earlier price range. I took me all of 2 minutes, not months of open houses to come up with these: For $1.6M, you get this 2200 sqft house: https://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Jose/1244-Broadleaf-Ln-95128/home/1033684 https://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Jose/1244-Broadleaf-Ln-95128/h.... Or you get this 2500 sqft house: https://www.redfin.com/CA/Santa-Clara/1453-Franklin-St-95050/home/1845968 https://www.redfin.com/CA/Santa-Clara/1453-Franklin-St-95050....
    - 6y ago

TuringNYC 6y ago

>> Yeah, I've had some friends leave (to CO and DC), but I'm skeptical of companies and VCs leaving. >> I have had older friends leave to have a family. They went to Santa Cruz, Seattle, Denver, DC, and Austin. It's a shame. The ones that stayed either are very rich where a $5M house is not an issue, or they still live with three roommates and rent without kids. Just wait until they look for interesting jobs and get 100 linked in messages from CA and like 1 or 2 from DC. (note: I live in VA just outside DC, speaking from experience.)

Apocryphon 6y ago
The main idea is that those jobs are now moving to remote, because of the pandemic?
munaf 6y ago
Exactly. An anecdote: I got an offer to leave my mid-level FAANG job to return to the Midwest for a VP role at a 200+ person company. The compensation was about 35% of my total comp, and it was maybe one of 3 companies in the area I would consider working for. Not to mention going back to cold winters, McMansions, and chain restaurants. I don't think people fully appreciate the value of unenforceable non-competes + many companies congregated in one area. No where else in the world does the labor have this level of negotiating power and flexibility. Even if it can be replicated (and I hope it is!), it won't be overnight.
- TuringNYC 6y ago
  Agreed. I think it was all OK when I was single. But the appetite to re-locate a family every 2-3 years with a job change (or employer disappearing) (changing friends, school districts, continuity) is a tall order in my humble opinion. There is an old Russian saying about how every time you move it is like a fire happened (because you lose things.)
fossuser 6y ago
Well, this entire premise is that remote work would make that more possible (I personally don't believe this though). That said, the people I know that left aren't planning to find new work (for the most part). CO does have a lot of FAANG options though and Slack was also there. They're not looking for the most interesting work at that point, they're looking to keep their job and raise a family - it's a tradeoff. Isn't that a risk to move to a place without as many employment options? Yes. The reason for that risk is you can raise kids in a nice house for $500k rather than in a tiny, old, 2 bedroom apartment for 1.5M.
- TuringNYC 6y ago
  >> They're not looking for the most interesting work at that point, they're looking to keep their job and raise a family - it's a tradeoff. >> Isn't that a risk to move to a place without as many employment options? Yes. The reason for that risk is you can raise kids in a nice house for $500k rather than in a tiny, old, 2 bedroom apartment for 1.5M. You exactly summarized my thought process three years ago. To be fair, i'm very happy here. But it is a mixed bag. Housing is great compared to the bay area, but $500k is a stretch for DC/Virginia (check it out on zillow) though not impossible, there is a ton of inventory if you are willing to drive out a bit. Unlike FAANG folks out-buying houses from you, you have lobbyists and government/intelligence contractors outbidding houses from you. Def better than Bay area though. Except i'm in one of like five growth startups in the area and there are rarely any senior positions open, and the senior workforce appears larger than the pool of interesting senior jobs. Its a huge bet on your employer in addition to the already huge bet you're making w/ taking, say, illiquid early stage stock. So your career growth is much slower. OK, so what if you are OK w/o an interesting job? Then you have plenty of options. Also, plenty of options if you're willing to be a consultant and travel, but now you're making a 2nd tradeoff. All in, very happy but not a panacea and certainly multiple tradeoffs.

TomVDB 6y ago

That $5M is hyperbole, right? Nobody will deny that Bay Area housing is expensive, but even today, $1.5M will get you a decent single family house with a garden in Santa Clara. That’s a ridiculous amount of money for most, but it’s not in $5M exit territory, and something that’s relatively easy to manage for a 2 tech income family: $1.25M loan is $5600/m mortgage, $1500/m in real estate taxes.

fossuser 6y ago
$5M is a little hyperbolic, but $4M is not. $1.5M will get you a shack - really old maybe a little bigger than 1000sqft in Santa Clara if you can find one at that price at all. $4M gets you a nice, newer 2900sqft house (comparable to what you'd get in the other regions I mentioned). $1.5M would have been enough in 2012, but it's gotten worse since then.
- whimsicalism 6y ago
  I agree with this comment if by 100 you meant 1000 e: oh whoops, it was edited
- TomVDB 6y ago
  2900ft houses is a good way to skew the argument in your favor, but it's a bit of a strawman: the vast majority of houses in the Bay Area aren't 2900ft to begin with, yet 2000ft house are plenty, with 4 bedroom, on, say, a 6000ft lot. You can easily find one of those for $2M, and they're not shacks. This is a $2M house, 2600 sqft, 5BD house on an 11000 sqft lot: https://www.redfin.com/CA/Santa-Clara/2602-Birchtree-Ln-95051/home/1789440 https://www.redfin.com/CA/Santa-Clara/2602-Birchtree-Ln-9505.... But going back to my earlier price range. I took me all of 2 minutes, not months of open houses to come up with these: For $1.6M, you get this 2200 sqft house: https://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Jose/1244-Broadleaf-Ln-95128/home/1033684 https://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Jose/1244-Broadleaf-Ln-95128/h.... Or you get this 2500 sqft house: https://www.redfin.com/CA/Santa-Clara/1453-Franklin-St-95050/home/1845968 https://www.redfin.com/CA/Santa-Clara/1453-Franklin-St-95050....
  - 6y ago