San Francisco is a nice enough place, but I fail to see the attraction: high taxes, fees for everything you do, a fascist city council, homeless people pretty much do whatever they want and people that love to berate you for not driving a Prius. The geography of San Fran is nice but it's like living in an Al Gore version of Animal Farm. Aside from the weather, Texas is a far more logical place to be. In Austin, $3500 per month would buy a palace compared to San Fran.
> "The Texas cities (Houston, Dallas) have some of the most pollution this side of NJ. They're like LA without the culture."
Much of the pollution in North Texas, (from traffic, cement and power production), is due to the influx of people from the surrounding states, the coasts and overseas by the looser regulations attracting businesses.
Eventually I will probably move elsewhere. The pollution and the allergy environment is wreaking my health. Traffic is a crazy mix of over aggressive yuppies, over careful illegals and commercial trucks. The water system is stressed and the deregulated power system is over priced and in decay to increase profits.
I live in SF and the other option I actively consider is Austin. Fairly accurate statement (but as the other comment said, Dallas and Houston are miserable). Honestly, the income and opportunity in SF is still larger, so I stay.
I also fail to see the attraction of SF. It's foggy, cold, filthy, crowded and expensive. Sure there's perks like great food and awesome beers on tap that are hard to find elsewhere. But is it really worth it?
Food and beer are the least important attractions. Those things are portable. (And SF is hardly a runaway leader in either category, even when the competition is confined to the USA.)
The main non-portable attraction is VCs and their money. People go where the money is.
The fact that SF is crowded is a feature. Your startup's recruitment pool and tech meetups and potential partners are all within a few dozen miles. If you change jobs, your commute doesn't change.
Given all that, I still don't think it's worth it, but obviously a lot of others disagree.
You're right that close proximity to VC and tech scene is important for many people. I wonder if this will change going forward?
If a VC wants to a fund my company is the physical proximity of my office and their office really a deal maker/breaker? One of us can just fly to meet the other if the meeting has to be in person. I've actually never dealt first-hand with VCs so perhaps they require frequent in-person interaction.
Minor note: are there really that many bars in the US with Pliny the Elder and Blind Pig on tap? If so where are they. I'd like to live close-by.
Yes, because when the VC invests in you, they'll also take 1-2 board seats, and will routinely have to meet with your team onsite over the next 18 months.
People have been predicting the all-virtual office for decades. To paraphrase an old joke: It's the organization of the future, and perhaps it always will be.
It is certainly possible to work remotely from your VC. But you are conceding an advantage to competing teams who are working next door to the VC, for whom the cost of an additional in-person demo is a couple of extra blocks of walking during lunch hour.
Comments
San Francisco is a nice enough place, but I fail to see the attraction: high taxes, fees for everything you do, a fascist city council, homeless people pretty much do whatever they want and people that love to berate you for not driving a Prius. The geography of San Fran is nice but it's like living in an Al Gore version of Animal Farm. Aside from the weather, Texas is a far more logical place to be. In Austin, $3500 per month would buy a palace compared to San Fran.
The Texas cities (Houston, Dallas) have some of the most pollution this side of NJ. They're like LA without the culture.
> "The Texas cities (Houston, Dallas) have some of the most pollution this side of NJ. They're like LA without the culture."
Much of the pollution in North Texas, (from traffic, cement and power production), is due to the influx of people from the surrounding states, the coasts and overseas by the looser regulations attracting businesses.
Eventually I will probably move elsewhere. The pollution and the allergy environment is wreaking my health. Traffic is a crazy mix of over aggressive yuppies, over careful illegals and commercial trucks. The water system is stressed and the deregulated power system is over priced and in decay to increase profits.
I live in SF and the other option I actively consider is Austin. Fairly accurate statement (but as the other comment said, Dallas and Houston are miserable). Honestly, the income and opportunity in SF is still larger, so I stay.
I also fail to see the attraction of SF. It's foggy, cold, filthy, crowded and expensive. Sure there's perks like great food and awesome beers on tap that are hard to find elsewhere. But is it really worth it?
Food and beer are the least important attractions. Those things are portable. (And SF is hardly a runaway leader in either category, even when the competition is confined to the USA.)
The main non-portable attraction is VCs and their money. People go where the money is.
The fact that SF is crowded is a feature. Your startup's recruitment pool and tech meetups and potential partners are all within a few dozen miles. If you change jobs, your commute doesn't change.
Given all that, I still don't think it's worth it, but obviously a lot of others disagree.
You're right that close proximity to VC and tech scene is important for many people. I wonder if this will change going forward?
If a VC wants to a fund my company is the physical proximity of my office and their office really a deal maker/breaker? One of us can just fly to meet the other if the meeting has to be in person. I've actually never dealt first-hand with VCs so perhaps they require frequent in-person interaction.
Minor note: are there really that many bars in the US with Pliny the Elder and Blind Pig on tap? If so where are they. I'd like to live close-by.
Yes, because when the VC invests in you, they'll also take 1-2 board seats, and will routinely have to meet with your team onsite over the next 18 months.
People have been predicting the all-virtual office for decades. To paraphrase an old joke: It's the organization of the future, and perhaps it always will be.
It is certainly possible to work remotely from your VC. But you are conceding an advantage to competing teams who are working next door to the VC, for whom the cost of an additional in-person demo is a couple of extra blocks of walking during lunch hour.