5 ms·

Depressing that the main lesson learned is "Move to the US", the others also pretty standard HN/PG/SV tropes I think. A useful, quite clear-eyed document thoug

Depressing that the main lesson learned is "Move to the US", the others also pretty standard HN/PG/SV tropes I think. A useful, quite clear-eyed document though I think. Aside, one of the co-founders websites is an unusually broad affair for a young founder: https://www.henrydashwood.com/ https://www.henrydashwood.com/

youngtaff 3mo ago
But what problem does move to the US actually solve in this case? House builders don't seem to have a problem acquiring land and rights to develop it Indeed there're permission granted for over 1mn yet to be build residential properties in the UK The problem is UK house builders drip feed houses on to the market to keep their profits up, and slow down building when house prices fall
- pjc50 3mo ago
  > what problem does move to the US actually solve in this case? None of the specific ones, but the general problem of startups that the UK is a poor environment for funding. Source for million unbuilt homes: https://www.terraquest.co.uk/news-and-insights/more-than-a-million-homes-with-planning-permission-left-unbuilt-since-2015 https://www.terraquest.co.uk/news-and-insights/more-than-a-m... It's not sounding like a very simple to resolve problem :(
  - youngtaff 3mo ago
    Lack of tradies is part of the problem but house builders tend to rely on sub-contracting so they don't have to bear the cost of employment, training etc and want someone else to solve the problem for them House builders essentially buy land, get planning, pay a bunch of sub-contractors to slap together a house and then sell it to some poor sap Saying they build houses is a bit of a misnomer in my view
- sjducb 3mo ago
  They get away with drip feeding because there’s no competition, because it’s really hard to get permission. A simpler planning system would allow smaller developers to operate and they would buy, build and sell as fast as they can. The reason big developers drip feed is that they have 100 identical houses in the pipeline so they don’t want the price to drop at all, because it affects the price of the houses in the pipeline. The small developer sells quickly so that the cash is available for their next project.
  - jimnotgym 3mo ago
    Small developers struggle to get hold of land though. You have to be in the know to get hold of building land
    - sjducb 3mo ago
      Agreed, Thats why the planning system needs to change.
  - bcjdjsndon 3mo ago
    > The reason big developers drip feed is that they have 100 identical houses in the pipeline So they'd expedite things to avoid risk surely? Doesn't make sense
    - sjducb 3mo ago
      If you dump 100 new houses onto a small town you will cause a crash. My town has a population of 15000 people, ~250 houses are sold per year and there is a development with permission to build ~400 new homes.
      - bcjdjsndon 3mo ago
        > If you dump 100 new houses onto a small town you will cause a crash. This has never happened once... There are plenty of developments built bigger than that that do t cause a crash
- jimnotgym 3mo ago
  Hence Andy Burnham's threat to build council houses again. It is a good threat, get on with building the houses before we reduce the demand
  - bcjdjsndon 3mo ago
    Except he will come to realise the UK relies massively on house prices continuing upward. Construction is 20% of UK GDP. So many people and businesses in the country rely on it. If house prices fall, or even stagnate, it'll start a chain reaction that leads to recession. Its basically free economic growth, and UK made it's money largely from empire anyway, so now the empire has largely fallen it's no surprise the country has been cutting public services for nearly 20 years and still isn't breaking even
    - jimnotgym 3mo ago
      Not necessarily true though... building houses for the council requires builders too
      - bcjdjsndon 3mo ago
        The entire UK only built like 1500 or so council houses last year
jarym 3mo ago
Enjoyed reading the article and I am sad as well to read about any failed startup but especially British ones. I've tried at various points over the past 2 decades and can confirm: trying to sell startup software into the UK (and European) market is much harder than in the US. Most businesses are not open to buying from an upstart even if the proposition seems attractive. There is a 'safety in numbers' mentality (markedly less so in the UK than in other parts of Western Europe but still much more than in the US). It makes securing the first 10 customers ever more challenging. It is not a trope I'd say, its just a lesson that keeps being relearnt.
blitzar 3mo ago
"Fixing" the UK housing market from the US seems ... suboptimal.
SilverBirch 3mo ago
The "move to the us" thing seems to just be absolute twitter brain. The biggest problem London founders face is raising funding and these guys seemingly raised plenty based on an idea that that didn't seem to understand the market they were targeting.
- automatic6131 3mo ago
  These buffoons started with a bad idea, raised a lot of money to do the impossible, unsurprisingly failed, and learned basically nothing. Or what they did learn was irrelevant to the reason why they failed. It's very depressing, but at least I don't work for them. That would square my depression.
  - MDTHLN 3mo ago
    I don’t think that’s very fair. They seemingly learned a lot. Unfortunately a lot of what they learnt should have been obvious from the start. It shouldn’t take two years to figure out you need to speak to your customers and bring in revenue.

youngtaff 3mo ago

But what problem does move to the US actually solve in this case? House builders don't seem to have a problem acquiring land and rights to develop it Indeed there're permission granted for over 1mn yet to be build residential properties in the UK The problem is UK house builders drip feed houses on to the market to keep their profits up, and slow down building when house prices fall

pjc50 3mo ago
> what problem does move to the US actually solve in this case? None of the specific ones, but the general problem of startups that the UK is a poor environment for funding. Source for million unbuilt homes: https://www.terraquest.co.uk/news-and-insights/more-than-a-million-homes-with-planning-permission-left-unbuilt-since-2015 https://www.terraquest.co.uk/news-and-insights/more-than-a-m... It's not sounding like a very simple to resolve problem :(
- youngtaff 3mo ago
  Lack of tradies is part of the problem but house builders tend to rely on sub-contracting so they don't have to bear the cost of employment, training etc and want someone else to solve the problem for them House builders essentially buy land, get planning, pay a bunch of sub-contractors to slap together a house and then sell it to some poor sap Saying they build houses is a bit of a misnomer in my view
sjducb 3mo ago
They get away with drip feeding because there’s no competition, because it’s really hard to get permission. A simpler planning system would allow smaller developers to operate and they would buy, build and sell as fast as they can. The reason big developers drip feed is that they have 100 identical houses in the pipeline so they don’t want the price to drop at all, because it affects the price of the houses in the pipeline. The small developer sells quickly so that the cash is available for their next project.
- jimnotgym 3mo ago
  Small developers struggle to get hold of land though. You have to be in the know to get hold of building land
  - sjducb 3mo ago
    Agreed, Thats why the planning system needs to change.
- bcjdjsndon 3mo ago
  > The reason big developers drip feed is that they have 100 identical houses in the pipeline So they'd expedite things to avoid risk surely? Doesn't make sense
  - sjducb 3mo ago
    If you dump 100 new houses onto a small town you will cause a crash. My town has a population of 15000 people, ~250 houses are sold per year and there is a development with permission to build ~400 new homes.
    - bcjdjsndon 3mo ago
      > If you dump 100 new houses onto a small town you will cause a crash. This has never happened once... There are plenty of developments built bigger than that that do t cause a crash
jimnotgym 3mo ago
Hence Andy Burnham's threat to build council houses again. It is a good threat, get on with building the houses before we reduce the demand
- bcjdjsndon 3mo ago
  Except he will come to realise the UK relies massively on house prices continuing upward. Construction is 20% of UK GDP. So many people and businesses in the country rely on it. If house prices fall, or even stagnate, it'll start a chain reaction that leads to recession. Its basically free economic growth, and UK made it's money largely from empire anyway, so now the empire has largely fallen it's no surprise the country has been cutting public services for nearly 20 years and still isn't breaking even
  - jimnotgym 3mo ago
    Not necessarily true though... building houses for the council requires builders too
    - bcjdjsndon 3mo ago
      The entire UK only built like 1500 or so council houses last year

jarym 3mo ago

Enjoyed reading the article and I am sad as well to read about any failed startup but especially British ones. I've tried at various points over the past 2 decades and can confirm: trying to sell startup software into the UK (and European) market is much harder than in the US. Most businesses are not open to buying from an upstart even if the proposition seems attractive. There is a 'safety in numbers' mentality (markedly less so in the UK than in other parts of Western Europe but still much more than in the US). It makes securing the first 10 customers ever more challenging. It is not a trope I'd say, its just a lesson that keeps being relearnt.

blitzar 3mo ago

"Fixing" the UK housing market from the US seems ... suboptimal.

SilverBirch 3mo ago

The "move to the us" thing seems to just be absolute twitter brain. The biggest problem London founders face is raising funding and these guys seemingly raised plenty based on an idea that that didn't seem to understand the market they were targeting.

automatic6131 3mo ago
These buffoons started with a bad idea, raised a lot of money to do the impossible, unsurprisingly failed, and learned basically nothing. Or what they did learn was irrelevant to the reason why they failed. It's very depressing, but at least I don't work for them. That would square my depression.
- MDTHLN 3mo ago
  I don’t think that’s very fair. They seemingly learned a lot. Unfortunately a lot of what they learnt should have been obvious from the start. It shouldn’t take two years to figure out you need to speak to your customers and bring in revenue.