4 ms·

"no to open-plans" And best of luck to small startups looking for affordable and scalable office space without open floor plans, especially in the Bay Area. I'

"no to open-plans" And best of luck to small startups looking for affordable and scalable office space without open floor plans, especially in the Bay Area. I'm as opposed to open plans as anyone. But they're usually a necessary evil for a company trying to keep its burn rate under control. Doubly so for a company trying to keep burn under control while simultaneously growing quickly.

nawitus 13y ago
That's a good point if the startup is located in Bay Area.
- eli 13y ago
  I think that's a good point most places. Acquiring enough office space to get everyone an office is never going to be free.
  - jaggederest 13y ago
    I really don't understand why a company under cash constraints that's doing digital work would have a physical office anyway. Consider it as a perk - how many thousands of dollars a month do people spend on office space? Would the employees be happier taking that money as salary and working remotely? I'd bet so.
    - eli 13y ago
      I thought that too when we started our company, but my co-founders convinced me we needed a space. They were right. The company (and certainly the culture) is better because we mostly all work near each other, and see each other, and can overhear problems other people are having. I suppose the math might be different if I were paying SF rents. YMMV.
      - nawitus 13y ago
        You don't know if it's better, since you can't compare the two alternatives.
nulltype 13y ago
Oculus Rifts for every employee! Virtual private office!
- onedev 13y ago
  In that case better double down on the Vision insurance....
rwallace 13y ago
That's assuming that the choice is between e.g. one office of size X that 5 people have to share, versus 5 offices each of size X; of course that's going to be expensive, especially in the Bay Area, but it's completely unnecessary. Make it 5 offices each of size X/5, and there shouldn't be a substantial cost overhead.
- jonnathanson 13y ago
  In theory, you're absolutely right. There shouldn't be much difference, cost-wise, between renting X space for 5 people and renting X/5 offices. A rational renter/buyer shouldn't have to pay a premium for 5 * X/5 vs X. But the 5 * X/5 configuration is not offered as frequently, or on comparable terms. It's all about the available inventory in the commercial real estate market in any given city. More often than not, if you're in the market for a space with any discrete offices -- regardless of their size -- you're going to have to "buy the cow" and rent a generally bigger space. That's just how office space is developed, rented, and sold these days. The open floor plan has become such a standard that one has to pay a premium to acquire the equivalent amount of non-open work space. Non-open offices have become something of a rarity, especially in the Bay Area. Typically they're rented to law firms, medical practices, and other professional associations: companies with lots of cash flow and a relative indifference to price, creating price-inelastic demand in the market.

nawitus 13y ago

That's a good point if the startup is located in Bay Area.

eli 13y ago
I think that's a good point most places. Acquiring enough office space to get everyone an office is never going to be free.
- jaggederest 13y ago
  I really don't understand why a company under cash constraints that's doing digital work would have a physical office anyway. Consider it as a perk - how many thousands of dollars a month do people spend on office space? Would the employees be happier taking that money as salary and working remotely? I'd bet so.
  - eli 13y ago
    I thought that too when we started our company, but my co-founders convinced me we needed a space. They were right. The company (and certainly the culture) is better because we mostly all work near each other, and see each other, and can overhear problems other people are having. I suppose the math might be different if I were paying SF rents. YMMV.
    - nawitus 13y ago
      You don't know if it's better, since you can't compare the two alternatives.

nulltype 13y ago

Oculus Rifts for every employee! Virtual private office!

onedev 13y ago
In that case better double down on the Vision insurance....

rwallace 13y ago

That's assuming that the choice is between e.g. one office of size X that 5 people have to share, versus 5 offices each of size X; of course that's going to be expensive, especially in the Bay Area, but it's completely unnecessary. Make it 5 offices each of size X/5, and there shouldn't be a substantial cost overhead.

jonnathanson 13y ago
In theory, you're absolutely right. There shouldn't be much difference, cost-wise, between renting X space for 5 people and renting X/5 offices. A rational renter/buyer shouldn't have to pay a premium for 5 * X/5 vs X. But the 5 * X/5 configuration is not offered as frequently, or on comparable terms. It's all about the available inventory in the commercial real estate market in any given city. More often than not, if you're in the market for a space with any discrete offices -- regardless of their size -- you're going to have to "buy the cow" and rent a generally bigger space. That's just how office space is developed, rented, and sold these days. The open floor plan has become such a standard that one has to pay a premium to acquire the equivalent amount of non-open work space. Non-open offices have become something of a rarity, especially in the Bay Area. Typically they're rented to law firms, medical practices, and other professional associations: companies with lots of cash flow and a relative indifference to price, creating price-inelastic demand in the market.