San Francisco is back
-
When companies leave town, the people that donât go with the new company band together and try a small startup. This happens all over the city⌠You get many more tiny companies and overall less actual employment and $$$, but you can say âWe had an explosion of tech companies open in San Fran, baby! We are back!â
Now, one thing that is their saving grace is they do have several of the largest AI labs in the world with too much infrastructure and investment to move. With the exodus of so many tech workers, those labs have had to import a large number of new workers. Wanna guess where from?
-
Austin is growing but still tiny compared to the SF bay area, which gets about half of all VC funds in the US. It is small compared to NY, Boston, and LA which are 2, 3, and 4. Having said that, how they justify putting Atlanta and Seattle on the list but not Austin I donât know.
LD - SF area is number 1 in VC funding and has been for decades and remains so specifically in AI. Austin is far more a case of small-base-gooses-growth-percentage than the top cities on the list.
-
Austin is growing but still tiny compared to the SF bay area, which gets about half of all VC funds in the US. It is small compared to NY, Boston, and LA which are 2, 3, and 4. Having said that, how they justify putting Atlanta and Seattle on the list but not Austin I donât know.
LD - SF area is number 1 in VC funding and has been for decades and remains so specifically in AI. Austin is far more a case of small-base-gooses-growth-percentage than the top cities on the list.
@jon-nyc said in San Francisco is back:
Austin is growing but still tiny compared to the SF bay area, which gets about half of all VC funds in the US. It is small compared to NY, Boston, and LA which are 2, 3, and 4. Having said that, how they justify putting Atlanta and Seattle on the list but not Austin I donât know.
LD - SF area is number 1 in VC funding and has been for decades and remains so specifically in AI. Austin is far more a case of small-base-gooses-growth-percentage than the top cities on the list.
I donât think VC funding is the accurate measure for these things. The largest and most influential companies and employers arenât taking VC at this point. They donât need it.
Which is more powerful and transformative for a region? A large number of small tech companies getting funding from gamblers in SF, or Amazon Web Services investing $35B into Northern VA? Speaking of which, I would like to see their geographical boundaries. Are they are counting Silicon Valley as San Francisco, but not using Northern VA for DC? Since 2022, 15000 startups have formed in Northern VA, with $7B in VC. That is most definitely serious growthâŚ
The Brad
-
@jon-nyc said in San Francisco is back:
Austin is growing but still tiny compared to the SF bay area, which gets about half of all VC funds in the US. It is small compared to NY, Boston, and LA which are 2, 3, and 4. Having said that, how they justify putting Atlanta and Seattle on the list but not Austin I donât know.
LD - SF area is number 1 in VC funding and has been for decades and remains so specifically in AI. Austin is far more a case of small-base-gooses-growth-percentage than the top cities on the list.
I donât think VC funding is the accurate measure for these things. The largest and most influential companies and employers arenât taking VC at this point. They donât need it.
Which is more powerful and transformative for a region? A large number of small tech companies getting funding from gamblers in SF, or Amazon Web Services investing $35B into Northern VA? Speaking of which, I would like to see their geographical boundaries. Are they are counting Silicon Valley as San Francisco, but not using Northern VA for DC? Since 2022, 15000 startups have formed in Northern VA, with $7B in VC. That is most definitely serious growthâŚ
@LuFins-Dad said in San Francisco is back:
I donât think VC funding is the accurate measure for these things. The largest and most influential companies and employers arenât taking VC at this point.
You want to argue Austin has more and/or larger "largest and most influential companies" than San Francisco?
-
As for the metric this is about company formation for which VC money is a damn good proxy at least in the tech space.
@jon-nyc said in San Francisco is back:
As for the metric this is about company formation for which VC money is a damn good proxy at least in the tech space.
HP moves its HQ to Austin, dropping 2500 positions, and losing another 500 employees that donât want to move. Thatâs 3K people. Of that 3K, 10 different groups form small startups of 100 people each. Those 10 new companies donât represent growth for the area, itâs still a net loss but through the magic of marketing we say âlook at all of the new businesses!, weâre booming!â New business formation sounds great, but when itâs accompanied or even caused by larger and established businesses migrating, then itâs a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing. Half of these startups will be shuttered in 18 months, with new startups coming from those ashes. Thatâs not growth.
Again, the real growth that is happening in San Francisco are the AI labs that have been there and established for over a decade that are logistically impossible to move. And those jobs have been going to primarily foreign born workers that these companies are specifically bringing in from overseas. Thatâs fine, but itâs not the image of opportunity that the San Francisco council is trying to promoteâŚ
-
@jon-nyc said in San Francisco is back:
As for the metric this is about company formation for which VC money is a damn good proxy at least in the tech space.
HP moves its HQ to Austin, dropping 2500 positions, and losing another 500 employees that donât want to move. Thatâs 3K people. Of that 3K, 10 different groups form small startups of 100 people each. Those 10 new companies donât represent growth for the area, itâs still a net loss but through the magic of marketing we say âlook at all of the new businesses!, weâre booming!â New business formation sounds great, but when itâs accompanied or even caused by larger and established businesses migrating, then itâs a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing. Half of these startups will be shuttered in 18 months, with new startups coming from those ashes. Thatâs not growth.
Again, the real growth that is happening in San Francisco are the AI labs that have been there and established for over a decade that are logistically impossible to move. And those jobs have been going to primarily foreign born workers that these companies are specifically bringing in from overseas. Thatâs fine, but itâs not the image of opportunity that the San Francisco council is trying to promoteâŚ
@LuFins-Dad said in San Francisco is back:
HP moves its HQ to Austin, ...
Long after it stopped being "influential," of course.
-
The first and only time I was in Austin was when Apple Computer was my client in the early 90s. It was after Jobs had been fired and the Newton was launched. But they already had a sizeable presence there.
One thing that came of it (Appleâs presence, not my trip) was Apple crushed an initiative that was going to outlaw the provision of âpartnerâ benefits (ie spousal-type benefits for same sex couples back when gay marriage was illegal). It was about to pass and Apple told the governor and legislative leaders that it would shut down its Texas facilities if it became law. âAnd the rain came downâ, as they say.
