4 ms·

This data isn't of much use for analysis without all the startups that failed or didn't get acquired. This is like trying to analyze average height by nationali

• frossie 18y ago
  Actually, I think it might be a bit better than that. The question is - what biases are there to acquisition with regards to location? Let's say you are more likely to be acquired if your are successful (surely we can all agree on that). If SV is the navel of the world, then you would expect startups in SV to have a higher chance of being acquired, than say a startup in Philadelphia. Now the question is - is being acquired a good trace marker for a not-particularly successful startup? The answer is it doesn't matter - because the original PG essay was talking about being a major economic driver, so in some ways it is irrelevant what the non-successful startups are doing. What it comes down is, is acquisition a fair sampler of successful startups. I don't know the answer to that, but I think a fair number of people would be surprised if it was "Hell, no". Back to the sporting analogy, it is like trying to figure out the fastest nationality by looking at their 100m record. If each country trains and sends to the Olympics its fastest people then yes - but you have no simple way of knowing whether that is true. However you may draw some conclusions about who the fastest race is, on the basis that you would expect any bias to work against them.