3 ms·

Whatever replaces VC-istan and generates the next wave of great businesses is going to be built by guys like this. Also, it'll probably happen in the Midwest.

Whatever replaces VC-istan and generates the next wave of great businesses is going to be built by guys like this. Also, it'll probably happen in the Midwest. Chicago, Austin, Madison, and Minneapolis are among the cities to watch.

scott_karana 13y ago
Why won't it happen everywhere? At least from what I've seen, it's more of a decentralization than a migration from SV. No sense pre-emptively pigeonholing!
- michaelochurch 13y ago
  You're right. I think the Midwest has a few advantages, which are (a) excellent universities and (b) low costs of living.
ImprovedSilence 13y ago
Ya know, I can't explain it, but I've been getting some good vibes from the Midwest lately. (me being a North easterner) Plus the people are pretty awesome. I'd keep Minneapolis on that list too.
- dos1 13y ago
  +1 for Minneapolis. I pay pretty close attention to the start up scene here and things are starting to move. The Minne* Organization (http://minnestar.org/ http://minnestar.org/) does some nice events.
  - egads 13y ago
    Thanks for this link. I've been looking for groups in the TC area to get involved with.
- enjo 13y ago
  Don't forget about Denver! Lots of interesting stuff going on here. Between Tech Stars and Galvanize, things are really amazing around here.
- michaelochurch 13y ago
  I added Minneapolis. I agree. It's a good choice.
bdcravens 13y ago
I always have to root for Texas, but aren't there quite a few VC-funded companies in Austin?
- chiph 13y ago
  Austin has traditionally been home to "lifestyle" firms. But there are increasingly firms which have VC funding (from Austin Ventures, etc)
- michaelochurch 13y ago
  VC-funded != VC-istan. There's a lot of overlap, obviously, but (a) plenty of VCs aren't assholes, and (b) there are good reasons to take VC. VC-istan is a certain social hierarchy and its surrounding ecosystem. It's a certain game that is played where engineering, design, culture, and even human decency take a backseat to marketing and rent-seeking and ridiculous careerism (like technical pivots that make no engineering sense but support some flavor-of-the-month CTO protege's career goals). I don't hate every VC-funded company, obviously. Who knows, in ten years I could be running one. I hate the VC darlings with unethical management and, for that, I only find the VCs to be indirectly responsible by being bad judges of character. (Then again, considering some of the companies I worked for, I don't think I'm a great judge of character either.)
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
205guy 13y ago
I agree that there are other forms of business organizations, and perhaps other forms of companies. For example B-corps that have non-financial goals, or simply like these guys who essentially have a successful on-the-side business, and explicitly do not want to grow it or market it in the traditional way (and hopefully have the legal protection to do so without somebody from the regular business world eating their lunch). A lot of them seem to revolve around the concept of "having enough" as opposed to "trying to expand." However, I don't agree that any of these new models are generalizable and will take over the traditional model. VCs did not replace small business loans or Wall Street capitalization. They are an alternative path or sometimes a different step on the same path. The traditional model will contine to exist where it already does, and the new models will have to carve out new niches.

scott_karana 13y ago

Why won't it happen everywhere? At least from what I've seen, it's more of a decentralization than a migration from SV. No sense pre-emptively pigeonholing!

michaelochurch 13y ago
You're right. I think the Midwest has a few advantages, which are (a) excellent universities and (b) low costs of living.

ImprovedSilence 13y ago

Ya know, I can't explain it, but I've been getting some good vibes from the Midwest lately. (me being a North easterner) Plus the people are pretty awesome. I'd keep Minneapolis on that list too.

dos1 13y ago
+1 for Minneapolis. I pay pretty close attention to the start up scene here and things are starting to move. The Minne* Organization (http://minnestar.org/ http://minnestar.org/) does some nice events.
- egads 13y ago
  Thanks for this link. I've been looking for groups in the TC area to get involved with.
enjo 13y ago
Don't forget about Denver! Lots of interesting stuff going on here. Between Tech Stars and Galvanize, things are really amazing around here.
michaelochurch 13y ago
I added Minneapolis. I agree. It's a good choice.

bdcravens 13y ago

I always have to root for Texas, but aren't there quite a few VC-funded companies in Austin?

chiph 13y ago
Austin has traditionally been home to "lifestyle" firms. But there are increasingly firms which have VC funding (from Austin Ventures, etc)
michaelochurch 13y ago
VC-funded != VC-istan. There's a lot of overlap, obviously, but (a) plenty of VCs aren't assholes, and (b) there are good reasons to take VC. VC-istan is a certain social hierarchy and its surrounding ecosystem. It's a certain game that is played where engineering, design, culture, and even human decency take a backseat to marketing and rent-seeking and ridiculous careerism (like technical pivots that make no engineering sense but support some flavor-of-the-month CTO protege's career goals). I don't hate every VC-funded company, obviously. Who knows, in ten years I could be running one. I hate the VC darlings with unethical management and, for that, I only find the VCs to be indirectly responsible by being bad judges of character. (Then again, considering some of the companies I worked for, I don't think I'm a great judge of character either.)

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

205guy 13y ago

I agree that there are other forms of business organizations, and perhaps other forms of companies. For example B-corps that have non-financial goals, or simply like these guys who essentially have a successful on-the-side business, and explicitly do not want to grow it or market it in the traditional way (and hopefully have the legal protection to do so without somebody from the regular business world eating their lunch). A lot of them seem to revolve around the concept of "having enough" as opposed to "trying to expand." However, I don't agree that any of these new models are generalizable and will take over the traditional model. VCs did not replace small business loans or Wall Street capitalization. They are an alternative path or sometimes a different step on the same path. The traditional model will contine to exist where it already does, and the new models will have to carve out new niches.