In my experience, the only people who weigh in on these debates are those who do not live in Silicon Valley -- like any epicenter for anything, those of us who have made our careers here hardly give a damn how the rest of the world compares themselves to us. (Or to put this another way: New Yorkers do not sit around debating if or that New York is the world's epicenter for finance.) But as someone who has grown slightly sick of the pro-NYC mania, I feel obliged to enter the fray -- if only because Silicon Valley is being misunderstood at an essential level.
While I agree that New York has displaced Boston, it is no threat to Silicon Valley's crown: New York does adequately at some variants of software service startups (e.g., the Foursquares of the world), but it is missing virtually every other element of the ecosystem. There is no microprocessor company in NYC. There is no network equipment provider in NYC. There is no computer company in NYC. There is no handset maker in NYC. There is no cloud company in NYC. Yes, Google may have a large presence in NYC, but Intel has a large presence in Portland; a single company's large presence cannot in and of itself create an ecosystem. And that ecosystem is the difference between having a "vibrant tech scene" and being the world's epicenter for technological innovation; NYC may be the former, but is unlikely to ever displace Silicon Valley as the latter.
I couldn't disagree more. I moved back to NYC because after six years in the Valley, I thought I needed some change. I have two major gripes with the Valley.
The first is that it is a bubble chamber. People there follow their passions. This is a good thing but I believe they are out of touch with the common folk.
The second is what I perceive to be a general, blatant disregard for non-engineering and non-data-driven approaches to startups. I remember when I was figuring out my own project, I had wanted to take a more design-oriented approach to it, and one well-meaning friend suggested I create a "contest" to attract designers (i.e. get them to do some work for free). At least he didn't flick off the idea of making design of central importance, on par with engineering. I mean, what gives, right? Designers are makers too.
Make no mistake, now that I'm here, I don't think it's going to be easy or pretty here. The blatant disregard goes the other way around here. I can't shake the feeling that tech is regarded as second best, that people are cynically passion-impaired, and that good engineering is simply not appreciated outside of a few top shops like Jane St. Most of the startup engineers I meet are strangely risk-averse and used to working for MBAs, practically to the point that they seem defensive when introduced to someone who isn't. Chances are, I will probably end up back in the Valley at some point.
But to think that the Valley is invincible is wrong. The success of Twitter, Tumblr, Etsy and FourSquare are ample cues to the weaknesses of the Valley. These are not edge cases. They are a pattern. And this is fine. I think the two can coexist and learn from each other. If anything, going between the two makes you realize how arrogant each of their cultures are about themselves.
Actually that wasn't the question pg asked. He asked if NYC would ever surpass the valley and concluded that, among many reasons, the fact of NYC as a finance hub could create enough competition for devs that it might actually prevent NYC from ever surpassing the valley, i.e. there might not be enough focus on start-ups for start-ups to win.
What New York/New Jersey does have is an army of operations staff capable of building and maintaining some of the most hardened data centers and networks in the world. In many ways, New York is still stuck in "enterprise" mode. That needs to change before New York is really incubating local startups.
I wholeheartedly agree that NYC is no threat to Silicon Valley. That being said, for my individual startup, why the hell should I care if there is a microprocessor company, network equipment provider, computer company, etc etc etc? I can't think of very many of the hot startups discussed on this forum where it matters to have those things in the vicinity.
Density of expertise, I suspect. If you're working on a software startup, by definition you're dealing with unknowns. Having companies in the area that have staff that are operating on the cutting edge of everything from cloud services to hardware means you're a hell of a lot more likely to trip over someone who can provide you with the expertise you need.
That you don't care highlights the difference between Silicon Valley and everywhere else. Here, even the so-called "hot" startups are no more than two or three hops away from the tech giants -- and that absolutely informs our collective thinking: we know how to build billion dollar tech companies because so many of us have worked for them.
Be wary of confirmation bias. It can be argued that SV alums can build billion-dollar tech companies because they receive the financial backing of those tech companies. That's not an intractable problem for a city with lots of money like NYC.
While not a new startup by any means, consider a company like VMWare. All their sales pitches discuss CPU architectures and how their products are compatible. (The pitches I've heard personally, anyway).
They want to be a big player in cloud, so it makes the most sense for them to be located in Silicon Valley. After that, it's a network effect.
Comments
In my experience, the only people who weigh in on these debates are those who do not live in Silicon Valley -- like any epicenter for anything, those of us who have made our careers here hardly give a damn how the rest of the world compares themselves to us. (Or to put this another way: New Yorkers do not sit around debating if or that New York is the world's epicenter for finance.) But as someone who has grown slightly sick of the pro-NYC mania, I feel obliged to enter the fray -- if only because Silicon Valley is being misunderstood at an essential level.
While I agree that New York has displaced Boston, it is no threat to Silicon Valley's crown: New York does adequately at some variants of software service startups (e.g., the Foursquares of the world), but it is missing virtually every other element of the ecosystem. There is no microprocessor company in NYC. There is no network equipment provider in NYC. There is no computer company in NYC. There is no handset maker in NYC. There is no cloud company in NYC. Yes, Google may have a large presence in NYC, but Intel has a large presence in Portland; a single company's large presence cannot in and of itself create an ecosystem. And that ecosystem is the difference between having a "vibrant tech scene" and being the world's epicenter for technological innovation; NYC may be the former, but is unlikely to ever displace Silicon Valley as the latter.
I couldn't disagree more. I moved back to NYC because after six years in the Valley, I thought I needed some change. I have two major gripes with the Valley.
The first is that it is a bubble chamber. People there follow their passions. This is a good thing but I believe they are out of touch with the common folk.
The second is what I perceive to be a general, blatant disregard for non-engineering and non-data-driven approaches to startups. I remember when I was figuring out my own project, I had wanted to take a more design-oriented approach to it, and one well-meaning friend suggested I create a "contest" to attract designers (i.e. get them to do some work for free). At least he didn't flick off the idea of making design of central importance, on par with engineering. I mean, what gives, right? Designers are makers too.
Make no mistake, now that I'm here, I don't think it's going to be easy or pretty here. The blatant disregard goes the other way around here. I can't shake the feeling that tech is regarded as second best, that people are cynically passion-impaired, and that good engineering is simply not appreciated outside of a few top shops like Jane St. Most of the startup engineers I meet are strangely risk-averse and used to working for MBAs, practically to the point that they seem defensive when introduced to someone who isn't. Chances are, I will probably end up back in the Valley at some point.
But to think that the Valley is invincible is wrong. The success of Twitter, Tumblr, Etsy and FourSquare are ample cues to the weaknesses of the Valley. These are not edge cases. They are a pattern. And this is fine. I think the two can coexist and learn from each other. If anything, going between the two makes you realize how arrogant each of their cultures are about themselves.
The question at hand is not "Does NYC compare to the valley," but instead "is the NYC tech boom sustainable."
NYC tech sustainable? Yes. NYC = SV? No. And that's a good thing.
Also, Appnexus is a cloud company.
Actually that wasn't the question pg asked. He asked if NYC would ever surpass the valley and concluded that, among many reasons, the fact of NYC as a finance hub could create enough competition for devs that it might actually prevent NYC from ever surpassing the valley, i.e. there might not be enough focus on start-ups for start-ups to win.
>New Yorkers do not sit around debating if or that New York is the world's epicenter for finance.
It's actually been a constant debate over the last decade since SOX came in and scared away all the international companies from listing in NY.
NY is now second in the Global Financial Centres index:
http://zyen.com/PDF/GFCI%2010.pdf
(Although NY / London / HK are all practically neck-to-neck)
What New York/New Jersey does have is an army of operations staff capable of building and maintaining some of the most hardened data centers and networks in the world. In many ways, New York is still stuck in "enterprise" mode. That needs to change before New York is really incubating local startups.
I wholeheartedly agree that NYC is no threat to Silicon Valley. That being said, for my individual startup, why the hell should I care if there is a microprocessor company, network equipment provider, computer company, etc etc etc? I can't think of very many of the hot startups discussed on this forum where it matters to have those things in the vicinity.
Density of expertise, I suspect. If you're working on a software startup, by definition you're dealing with unknowns. Having companies in the area that have staff that are operating on the cutting edge of everything from cloud services to hardware means you're a hell of a lot more likely to trip over someone who can provide you with the expertise you need.
That you don't care highlights the difference between Silicon Valley and everywhere else. Here, even the so-called "hot" startups are no more than two or three hops away from the tech giants -- and that absolutely informs our collective thinking: we know how to build billion dollar tech companies because so many of us have worked for them.
Be wary of confirmation bias. It can be argued that SV alums can build billion-dollar tech companies because they receive the financial backing of those tech companies. That's not an intractable problem for a city with lots of money like NYC.
While not a new startup by any means, consider a company like VMWare. All their sales pitches discuss CPU architectures and how their products are compatible. (The pitches I've heard personally, anyway).
They want to be a big player in cloud, so it makes the most sense for them to be located in Silicon Valley. After that, it's a network effect.