6 ms·

I would like to hear your thoughts on the cost of living and how it affects business quality? I think 'obscene' is the perfect word when talking about the cost

I would like to hear your thoughts on the cost of living and how it affects business quality? I think 'obscene' is the perfect word when talking about the cost of rent in SF. It's the number one factor in making me consider moving away from the area.

dxbydt 14y ago
I actually did the opposite. Owned a house in Chicago. Sold the house, moved to SF, bought a house in the suburbs, and now take the BART to twitter everyday. Rents are obscene if you want to live in SF proper...as you start moving out to the south Bay or better yet, East Bay, they drop quite dramatically. If you are willing to live in Concord or Pittsburg, you can easily find a 1K/mo rent. Even in Pleasant Hill I was able to land a 1.5K, and Walnut Creek & thereabouts will still be below 2K. Ofcourse you spend 45 minutes on the BART...but hey, there's a reason machine learning textbooks are 800+ pages....:) I have learnt so much in the past 3 months, & all the credit goes to BART.
- peacemaker 14y ago
  Sure I can live an hour away from my workplace and sit on the BART 2 hours every day but it's quite well known that this kind of living is bad for you [1] and I know from experience I would hate doing that again. Why commute all that way when I can move somewhere much more reasonable and get a 3 bed house with a pool for the same price as a small 1 bed apartment in SF, AND only have a 10 minute drive to work? These places exist all over the world and contrary to popular belief around these parts, smart people and businesses do exist in places other than SV. [1] http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2011/05/your_commute_is_killing_you.html http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2011/05/your...
  - caniszczyk 14y ago
    Totally agree, that's the reason I'm in Austin.
    - ahlatimer 14y ago
      +1 for Austin. My base salary is slightly higher in Austin, mostly due to moving to a later-stage company, though the salaries really aren't that different. My take-home pay is noticeably higher because of that and the lack of state income tax. Couple that with a substantially lower cost of living [1], and my dollars go a lot farther. The financials of it isn't the end of it, though. The nightlife is better, the people are nicer, I can have a backyard, I'm not severely limiting my options by having dogs, and the weather is better (for me, but I'm used to hot). I'm significantly happier in Austin. [1]: My 2-bedroom house that I live in by myself costs about what I was paying for my share of a 2-bedroom apartment in SF. Both required about a 10 minute commute, though I drive in Austin where I could walk in SF. It extends beyond rent, though. Everything in SF is more expensive, though nothing is quite as dramatic as the rent.
      - deleted 14y ago
        [deleted]
      - caniszczyk 14y ago
        On top of what you said, I think the culture and nightlife is amazing in Austin. There's more to do than in the bay area IMHO (this includes SF which most shit closes down early and has a sorry ass nightlife). The culture is a lot less vapid, people don't care where you work and I find people just more balanced. Furthermore, if you're fitness, there are so many running clubs, core classes and cycling races that go on. Note: I moved to the bay area for a couple years before heading back to Austin (I lived in Austin for a decade before wanting to try out the bay area, no idea why people like it so much).
  - kyrra 14y ago
    Agreed. I was job hunting a couple years ago and decided to stay in Austin after looking at SF and Seattle areas. The cost of living + commute just wasn't worth it to me. In Austin I can get pay pretty close to Seattle, but live within 30 minutes of my office (fairly easily) and have a nice house to live in.
  - sbov 14y ago
    To each their own. I rather enjoy riding the train. It forces me to do things I should do anyways. For the vast majority of jobs it would be time wasted. But as a software developer it's an automatic 1.5 hours per day I have to spend thinking about what I need to do.
    - hudibras 14y ago
      I used to feel exactly the same way, but eventually the novelty wore off after I started a family. The prospect of spending 2 hours every day commuting for the next 20-30 years got me looking at real estate and job listings real quick. Two hours a day is 500 hours a year on the train. That's a tremendous amount of time to be away from your loved ones for the sake of a Good Job or a Nice House.
      - ihaveajob 14y ago
        That's assuming you waste those 2 hours. I do work while on Caltrain, and count those hours as work, not as missed private time.
    - peacemaker 14y ago
      Does that 1.5 hours per day count as part of your work day, allowing you to leave work earlier? Or are you just doing extra work every day and not being compensated for it? I can understand using that time to better yourself in some way, but working for free I don't agree with.
      - sbov 14y ago
        There aren't any particular number of hours I have to be there. Usually I just leave when I hit a good stopping point for the day.
  - candybar 14y ago
    Have they differentiated between commuters who drive and commuters who have public transit? I wonder how much of this is due to the length of the commute as opposed to specific common experience (driving? traffic?) during the commute.
    - zmj 14y ago
      There's not a ton of data, but one study suggested: stress from long automobile commute > long public transit commute > short public transit commute > short automobile commute.
  - hnriot 14y ago
    You either love SF or you don't, for me cities are not interchangeable based on factors of convenience. I live in SF, and love it.
- zdgman 14y ago
  Coming from NYC and commuting on the subway everyday for around 40 minutes was a pleasure (as you could read a book, listen to music or do something else to amuse your time). Driving is any longer than 30 minutes to work (each way) is going to be more of a pain as you can only do so much in the car without endangering others. Public transportation when it works well in cities leads to people tolerating longer commutes to work. If I had to commute 45 minutes in CA traffic I would be very upset.
- polyfractal 14y ago
  I commuted 45 minutes to work on the MBTA for about two years. I hate commuting...but if I'm going to do it, the train is a pretty swell way to get to work. I would either read or listen to podcasts. As an adult, I never get much time to just sit down and read (either fun fluff, or educational). The train was pretty great for that. That said, since moving from Boston, I'm so much happier. No commute, three times the space and a nicer apartment for half as much rent, better weather, close to the beach. South Carolina isn't exactly the mecca of technology, but telecommuting makes up for it.
- ericabiz 14y ago
  I lived in Pleasant Hill and commuted on BART for 2 years. I ended up really hating it after a while. Later, I moved to Austin, where house prices are reasonable even if you want to live close to downtown, and you don't have to worry about long commutes just to save money. I have no regrets over gaining so much of my time back, and Austin has a thriving tech community.
michaelochurch 14y ago
Expensive real estate ruins the culture, makes personal burn rates high, and creates a sense of transience. You don't feel like you really belong until you have enough money that you don't need to work and (for most) have ceased to be a productive part of society. When people have to beat others down just to afford to live in the city, it's bad, and most people lack the talent or opportunity to make that amount of money (300k+, for a family) through decent means. The transience, I think, is behind a lot of the build-to-flips that are degenerate gambles on social trends. Silicon Valley happened because California land was cheap-- at one time.
- ahlatimer 14y ago
  I recently left SF, and the culture, along with the rent, are two big reasons why I decided to leave. I hadn't put the two together, though, but I think it's a pretty accurate conclusion. The sheer number of startups and engineers in the same place can be pretty fantastic, and there isn't anywhere else that can compete (NYC to some extent, I suppose). In the end, though, it's just an unusually large collection of tech-minded individuals in what amounts to a fairly terrible place to live. YMMV, of course.
- muzz 14y ago
  > Silicon Valley happened because California land was cheap-- at one time. You're being facetious here, hopefully. In any case, San Francisco was never cheap, where OP's startup is.
  - michaelochurch 14y ago
    Silicon Valley started in the 1950s: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shockley_Semiconductor_Laboratory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shockley_Semiconductor_Laborato... . It was affordable until the mid-90s.
- carlio 14y ago
  Which is why Berlin is very much a good place for startups right now. The rent is still very cheap, but there's a huge concentration of creative people wanting to create companies. This will fade over time just like in SV, but for now, it's one of the best places to be for small companies.

dxbydt 14y ago

I actually did the opposite. Owned a house in Chicago. Sold the house, moved to SF, bought a house in the suburbs, and now take the BART to twitter everyday. Rents are obscene if you want to live in SF proper...as you start moving out to the south Bay or better yet, East Bay, they drop quite dramatically. If you are willing to live in Concord or Pittsburg, you can easily find a 1K/mo rent. Even in Pleasant Hill I was able to land a 1.5K, and Walnut Creek & thereabouts will still be below 2K. Ofcourse you spend 45 minutes on the BART...but hey, there's a reason machine learning textbooks are 800+ pages....:) I have learnt so much in the past 3 months, & all the credit goes to BART.

peacemaker 14y ago
Sure I can live an hour away from my workplace and sit on the BART 2 hours every day but it's quite well known that this kind of living is bad for you [1] and I know from experience I would hate doing that again. Why commute all that way when I can move somewhere much more reasonable and get a 3 bed house with a pool for the same price as a small 1 bed apartment in SF, AND only have a 10 minute drive to work? These places exist all over the world and contrary to popular belief around these parts, smart people and businesses do exist in places other than SV. [1] http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2011/05/your_commute_is_killing_you.html http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2011/05/your...
- caniszczyk 14y ago
  Totally agree, that's the reason I'm in Austin.
  - ahlatimer 14y ago
    +1 for Austin. My base salary is slightly higher in Austin, mostly due to moving to a later-stage company, though the salaries really aren't that different. My take-home pay is noticeably higher because of that and the lack of state income tax. Couple that with a substantially lower cost of living [1], and my dollars go a lot farther. The financials of it isn't the end of it, though. The nightlife is better, the people are nicer, I can have a backyard, I'm not severely limiting my options by having dogs, and the weather is better (for me, but I'm used to hot). I'm significantly happier in Austin. [1]: My 2-bedroom house that I live in by myself costs about what I was paying for my share of a 2-bedroom apartment in SF. Both required about a 10 minute commute, though I drive in Austin where I could walk in SF. It extends beyond rent, though. Everything in SF is more expensive, though nothing is quite as dramatic as the rent.
    - deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
    - caniszczyk 14y ago
      On top of what you said, I think the culture and nightlife is amazing in Austin. There's more to do than in the bay area IMHO (this includes SF which most shit closes down early and has a sorry ass nightlife). The culture is a lot less vapid, people don't care where you work and I find people just more balanced. Furthermore, if you're fitness, there are so many running clubs, core classes and cycling races that go on. Note: I moved to the bay area for a couple years before heading back to Austin (I lived in Austin for a decade before wanting to try out the bay area, no idea why people like it so much).
- kyrra 14y ago
  Agreed. I was job hunting a couple years ago and decided to stay in Austin after looking at SF and Seattle areas. The cost of living + commute just wasn't worth it to me. In Austin I can get pay pretty close to Seattle, but live within 30 minutes of my office (fairly easily) and have a nice house to live in.
- sbov 14y ago
  To each their own. I rather enjoy riding the train. It forces me to do things I should do anyways. For the vast majority of jobs it would be time wasted. But as a software developer it's an automatic 1.5 hours per day I have to spend thinking about what I need to do.
  - hudibras 14y ago
    I used to feel exactly the same way, but eventually the novelty wore off after I started a family. The prospect of spending 2 hours every day commuting for the next 20-30 years got me looking at real estate and job listings real quick. Two hours a day is 500 hours a year on the train. That's a tremendous amount of time to be away from your loved ones for the sake of a Good Job or a Nice House.
    - ihaveajob 14y ago
      That's assuming you waste those 2 hours. I do work while on Caltrain, and count those hours as work, not as missed private time.
  - peacemaker 14y ago
    Does that 1.5 hours per day count as part of your work day, allowing you to leave work earlier? Or are you just doing extra work every day and not being compensated for it? I can understand using that time to better yourself in some way, but working for free I don't agree with.
    - sbov 14y ago
      There aren't any particular number of hours I have to be there. Usually I just leave when I hit a good stopping point for the day.
- candybar 14y ago
  Have they differentiated between commuters who drive and commuters who have public transit? I wonder how much of this is due to the length of the commute as opposed to specific common experience (driving? traffic?) during the commute.
  - zmj 14y ago
    There's not a ton of data, but one study suggested: stress from long automobile commute > long public transit commute > short public transit commute > short automobile commute.
- hnriot 14y ago
  You either love SF or you don't, for me cities are not interchangeable based on factors of convenience. I live in SF, and love it.
zdgman 14y ago
Coming from NYC and commuting on the subway everyday for around 40 minutes was a pleasure (as you could read a book, listen to music or do something else to amuse your time). Driving is any longer than 30 minutes to work (each way) is going to be more of a pain as you can only do so much in the car without endangering others. Public transportation when it works well in cities leads to people tolerating longer commutes to work. If I had to commute 45 minutes in CA traffic I would be very upset.
polyfractal 14y ago
I commuted 45 minutes to work on the MBTA for about two years. I hate commuting...but if I'm going to do it, the train is a pretty swell way to get to work. I would either read or listen to podcasts. As an adult, I never get much time to just sit down and read (either fun fluff, or educational). The train was pretty great for that. That said, since moving from Boston, I'm so much happier. No commute, three times the space and a nicer apartment for half as much rent, better weather, close to the beach. South Carolina isn't exactly the mecca of technology, but telecommuting makes up for it.
ericabiz 14y ago
I lived in Pleasant Hill and commuted on BART for 2 years. I ended up really hating it after a while. Later, I moved to Austin, where house prices are reasonable even if you want to live close to downtown, and you don't have to worry about long commutes just to save money. I have no regrets over gaining so much of my time back, and Austin has a thriving tech community.

michaelochurch 14y ago

Expensive real estate ruins the culture, makes personal burn rates high, and creates a sense of transience. You don't feel like you really belong until you have enough money that you don't need to work and (for most) have ceased to be a productive part of society. When people have to beat others down just to afford to live in the city, it's bad, and most people lack the talent or opportunity to make that amount of money (300k+, for a family) through decent means. The transience, I think, is behind a lot of the build-to-flips that are degenerate gambles on social trends. Silicon Valley happened because California land was cheap-- at one time.

ahlatimer 14y ago
I recently left SF, and the culture, along with the rent, are two big reasons why I decided to leave. I hadn't put the two together, though, but I think it's a pretty accurate conclusion. The sheer number of startups and engineers in the same place can be pretty fantastic, and there isn't anywhere else that can compete (NYC to some extent, I suppose). In the end, though, it's just an unusually large collection of tech-minded individuals in what amounts to a fairly terrible place to live. YMMV, of course.
muzz 14y ago
> Silicon Valley happened because California land was cheap-- at one time. You're being facetious here, hopefully. In any case, San Francisco was never cheap, where OP's startup is.
- michaelochurch 14y ago
  Silicon Valley started in the 1950s: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shockley_Semiconductor_Laboratory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shockley_Semiconductor_Laborato... . It was affordable until the mid-90s.
carlio 14y ago
Which is why Berlin is very much a good place for startups right now. The rent is still very cheap, but there's a huge concentration of creative people wanting to create companies. This will fade over time just like in SV, but for now, it's one of the best places to be for small companies.