4 ms·
> Which values exactly are being expressed by being incorporated in, say, California? Depends on when. The whole point is that the incentives, and signal gener
by RickS 2y ago
> Which values exactly are being expressed by being incorporated in, say, California?
Depends on when. The whole point is that the incentives, and signal generated by responding to them, are changing a bunch.
Just my opinion, but between ~2008 and ~2016, incorporating in CA could at least potentially be read as "We're really serious about hiring the best talent and doing an unusually good job, to the point that we're willing to pay a premium."
Implied in the above is the idea that paying said premium would result in success that strongly outweighed the costs, and that you could more or less keep that success, without putting a huge target on ones back for additional taxation, regulation, social stigma, etc. California was highly regulated and expensive, but not quite punitively regulated and expensive.
Over time, that signal has weakened. The relationship between SV and CA feels more actively hostile. people do what everyone's doing, or really want to be near VCs and other network effects. These things have always been true, they've just lost the cover provided by that other more grand and inspiring explanation. despite the drawbacks I do think it's still the best place to start a very small tech startup. The pool of both talent and peer companies is completely unmatched, even in other large tech cities.
One thing that's hard to decouple: to what degree is this shift because of the regulatory and social environments becoming authentically hostile to tech (on many fronts: taxation, gentrification, looseness-for-speed, etc), and to what degree does it just seem that way to people that get some combination of cash and dopamine from shifting to see the world through that lens? IMO both things have certainly occurred, but I'm less sure of the proportions.
Edit — another thing that's very interesting to me: massive ideological decoupling in the C-suite vs IC classes. My experience during that time period felt much more "flat", both hierarchically and ideologically. I started out as a random intern and not only was it very easy to get in the room with some staggeringly rich and brilliant people, I genuinely felt a very strong and natural vibe-compatibility with them. They mostly seemed regular. Thiel was an exception, but only mildly. Intense vibes, but decent ones. I'd have guessed that as I aged out of my 20s and became more successful that I would, if anything, be better able to relate to some of those big dogs. Not the case at all. I think back then both classes were less aware that one was or was becoming an inhumane robber barron. Both sides know that now.
- lolinder 2y ago> between ~2008 and ~2016, incorporating in CA could at least potentially be read as "We're really serious about hiring the best talent and doing an unusually good job, to the point that we're willing to pay a premium." This makes sense for putting a headquarters in California but doesn't explain incorporating there. For example, from TFA: Meta is thinking of moving their corporation from DE to somewhere else, but their headquarters was and will likely remain in CA. I'm trying to figure out what values would be signaled by incorporating anywhere other than DE.
- RickS 2y ago> This makes sense for putting a headquarters in California but doesn't explain incorporating there. Good point. Agree that DE C corp has been the norm and expectation since forever. Doesn't look like CA is a mentioned contender, and my guess is that it is very much not in consideration, for all the above reasons. In "TX and other states" I read "TX and other states that will lean towards relative deregulation in coming years". It's less about sticking it to DE, more about bribing TX or whoever into even more favorable terms than you're getting in DE, in a way that wins some 10+ year metagame. Bezos did a classic version of this with HQ2 and DC
- ok_dad 2y ago> I'm trying to figure out what values would be signaled by incorporating anywhere other than DE. "I don't like that corporations can shop around for the best deal in governments, while an individual is stuck with using their physical location and must follow those laws and pay those taxes no matter where they work. Therefore, my company will be incorporated in the locality that it's main office is in, and we'll pay local taxes and follow local laws for our locations elsewhere, so as to support the people who make our products/services great."