Why High-Tech Companies Are Moving to the City(online.wsj.com)
online.wsj.com
Why High-Tech Companies Are Moving to the City
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444914904577619441778073340.html?mod=WSJ_Tech_MIDDLETopNews
8 comments
[deleted]
> I just moved to NYC from California a year ago. In many ways my quality of life has shot way up. You can't beat the transportation, food, culture, and intelligent, diverse population.
I concede that NYC has the best public transportation in the country, but you must have been living in the sticks in California if you think that you can't find "food, culture, and intelligent, diverse population" there.
I concede that NYC has the best public transportation in the country, but you must have been living in the sticks in California if you think that you can't find "food, culture, and intelligent, diverse population" there.
Culture depends on travel distance - everywhere can claim to have culture if you're willing to drive far enough.
The only claim to culture that Mountain View or Cupertino has is being within driving distance of San Francisco.
The only claim to culture that Mountain View or Cupertino has is being within driving distance of San Francisco.
> The only claim to culture that Mountain View or Cupertino has is being within driving distance of San Francisco.
That's true iff you define culture as opera and symphony and certain kinds of museums.
If your definition includes things that one might find in SF's mission district and/or Chinatown, there's culture all over the southbay. For some definitions, Berkeley is the only place in the bay area that "has culture". For others, Oakland is it.
FWIW, there are reasonable definitions of "culture" that can't be satisfied in the US.
That's true iff you define culture as opera and symphony and certain kinds of museums.
If your definition includes things that one might find in SF's mission district and/or Chinatown, there's culture all over the southbay. For some definitions, Berkeley is the only place in the bay area that "has culture". For others, Oakland is it.
FWIW, there are reasonable definitions of "culture" that can't be satisfied in the US.
I think you're mostly right about this. Aside from a few items, the south bay can match SF point for point. The big difference is that in the SB you need to know where those places are (they're not always obvious) and you have to drive many exits to get from one place to another.
For example, if I want hole-in-the-wall Mexican cuisine and I want some Vietnamese dessert, I might be able to walk from one place to the next, in SF. In SJ accomplishing the same would mean going from somewhere in north San Jose, to then somewhere on Senter road. There's no way to walk it (ok, 2 hours). If I want Cambodian it's another trek across the freeways. So, yes, things are there in the SB, but you have to know where to find them and they can be very far from each other. But, if you like "discovery" of hidden places, the SB has some interesting hidden in plain sight places. They're hidden because most have a very targeted (ethnic) audience and few people outside that audience tend to know about those places, unless intro'd by someone who knows.
That is to say, the 'ethnic' aspects of SF actually have a diverse audience in mind, while in SJ, for example, most of the ethnic aspects are directed to a select audience and thus are less approachable by outsiders. At least that's how I felt about these things when I was in SJ.
For example, if I want hole-in-the-wall Mexican cuisine and I want some Vietnamese dessert, I might be able to walk from one place to the next, in SF. In SJ accomplishing the same would mean going from somewhere in north San Jose, to then somewhere on Senter road. There's no way to walk it (ok, 2 hours). If I want Cambodian it's another trek across the freeways. So, yes, things are there in the SB, but you have to know where to find them and they can be very far from each other. But, if you like "discovery" of hidden places, the SB has some interesting hidden in plain sight places. They're hidden because most have a very targeted (ethnic) audience and few people outside that audience tend to know about those places, unless intro'd by someone who knows.
That is to say, the 'ethnic' aspects of SF actually have a diverse audience in mind, while in SJ, for example, most of the ethnic aspects are directed to a select audience and thus are less approachable by outsiders. At least that's how I felt about these things when I was in SJ.
For sure, everywhere has culture if your definition of culture is sufficiently malleable.
To me moving from California to New York for culture makes sense, for a lot of locations in California. Perhaps instead of saying you can't beat New York for culture, I should say I can't beat New York for culture!
To me moving from California to New York for culture makes sense, for a lot of locations in California. Perhaps instead of saying you can't beat New York for culture, I should say I can't beat New York for culture!
> For sure, everywhere has culture if your definition of culture is sufficiently malleable.
That's not what I wrote. I wrote that different folks think that culture means different things, not that those folks have a changing definition of culture.
I get that you like NYC. However, I'll bet that you don't actually take advantage of the culture that you find essential all that often. You're paying for the ability to drop in on a broadway show every day even though you'll likely do it only once every 3-5 years.
I'm glad that you think that you're getting value for your money. How about being respectful of other people's choices wrt their money?
That's not what I wrote. I wrote that different folks think that culture means different things, not that those folks have a changing definition of culture.
I get that you like NYC. However, I'll bet that you don't actually take advantage of the culture that you find essential all that often. You're paying for the ability to drop in on a broadway show every day even though you'll likely do it only once every 3-5 years.
I'm glad that you think that you're getting value for your money. How about being respectful of other people's choices wrt their money?
Sorry, I guess I misunderstood what you wrote.
I'm absolutely in favor of other people doing what they like with their money - diversity of entertainment choice is a great thing.
For me that meant the city, where the higher density of customers makes it viable for IRL entertainment suppliers to operate further down the long tail of demand. The things I'm interested in are right down that long tail, so I can understand when rm999 found moving to a city has improved his/her quality of life.
I'm absolutely in favor of other people doing what they like with their money - diversity of entertainment choice is a great thing.
For me that meant the city, where the higher density of customers makes it viable for IRL entertainment suppliers to operate further down the long tail of demand. The things I'm interested in are right down that long tail, so I can understand when rm999 found moving to a city has improved his/her quality of life.
>You're paying for the ability to drop in on a broadway show every day even though you'll likely do it only once every 3-5 years.
That's true for some people, and for them it's probably not a great idea to pay extra for a theoretical access to things they barely use. On the other hand, when I lived in London I went to see a play 2-3 times a month for the four years I lived there. If I moved back there, the theatre would be major reason why.
That's true for some people, and for them it's probably not a great idea to pay extra for a theoretical access to things they barely use. On the other hand, when I lived in London I went to see a play 2-3 times a month for the four years I lived there. If I moved back there, the theatre would be major reason why.
I can't think of any.
PS: Assuming native american cultures are included as part of the US.
PS: Assuming native american cultures are included as part of the US.
Then live in SF. It's really not that complicated. If you want the suburban life, you can get that in NY as well as in CA. If you want the urban life, that's available in both states as well.
Culture is more than the petri dish of your city's sidewalks.
There is life outside of the 415.
There is life outside of the 415.
Some things are also just a matter of taste. If you're really into theatre for instance, it's hard to beat NYC. If you don't care about that but you really hate cold weather then obviously you're going to choose differently!
I never said you can't find those things in California, nor did I even ever directly compare any city in California with NYC.
"Can't beat" is an idiom, it means I think those things are pretty awesome in NYC :)
"Can't beat" is an idiom, it means I think those things are pretty awesome in NYC :)
[deleted]
http://mlink.20x200.com/view/503d2c2fdc87ac0b4f19128alyyl.v2...
Can't beat means it sets the standard.
Can't beat means it sets the standard.
He didn't say he couldn't find "food, culture, and intelligent, diverse population" there.
Not needing a Car is the the distinction here though.
Then he should've said only that, and not the other things. I already conceded that public transportation was better in NYC.
The transportation issue permeates everything though. Culture is only available if it is accessible. My parents live in Northern VA, and they've got tons of culture around, in theory: museums in DC, great ethnic food in Arlington, etc. But in practice it's a such a huge pain in the ass to get anywhere that the actual culture available to them is total whitewashed suburban dreck.
exactly! Also a secondary upside for the younger set is that 24/7 good public transit is a lot safer for those folks to travel late at night.
[deleted]
I am actually thinking on doing the opposite move. NYC is great If you earn a lot of money and don't mind spending it.
Also everything that is a commodity elsewhere, in NYC is a luxury. (A car, washers and dryer, etc.). It's also unbelievably overcrowded.
In the end it can be tons of fun, but if you like good weather, less crowded, cheaper places and more laid back relaxed environments then NYC is not the right place.
I would much rather prefer san Francisco or Santa Monica
Which part of CA were you living in? Thinking of making a similar move
Fact, thats why I'm working in NYC as I get WellPosed off the ground :)
That plus I'm a native.
I have to say one fun upside to NYC is that theres lots of interesting smart folks (both young and old) doing cool stuff that isn't just "website as a business". The wee coworking space I use is especially fun because I'm surrounded by smart young pros doing high end work in design , architecture, fashion, etc.
Variety is good for the brain, especially when designing numerical algorithms all day :)
I have to say one fun upside to NYC is that theres lots of interesting smart folks (both young and old) doing cool stuff that isn't just "website as a business". The wee coworking space I use is especially fun because I'm surrounded by smart young pros doing high end work in design , architecture, fashion, etc.
Variety is good for the brain, especially when designing numerical algorithms all day :)
At the same time, high-tech products and industries are more multidisciplinary than they used to be. Success often requires excellence in more than one field of technology and in other lines of business. East London's tech scene is led not by tech firms per se but by "digital creative" companies that combine computer technology with music, art and narrative—and musicians, artists and writers cluster in cities.
Everyone is moving back to the city. In Vancouver there was a long gap where there was no commercial building development in the downtown core, and there was even a short period where they were converting commercial buildings to residential, but there is a significant amount of commercial construction now.
The western Canadian telecom Telus is building[1] a new HQ downtown and is moving there from their current building in the Vancouver suburb of Burnaby. The Telus Garden complex will have a residential component as well, and their employees were offered priority and a bit of a deal on units in it. It sold out pretty much instantly.[2]
[1]http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-n... [2]http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/teluss-...
The western Canadian telecom Telus is building[1] a new HQ downtown and is moving there from their current building in the Vancouver suburb of Burnaby. The Telus Garden complex will have a residential component as well, and their employees were offered priority and a bit of a deal on units in it. It sold out pretty much instantly.[2]
[1]http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-n... [2]http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/teluss-...
Here's another data point from Austin:
“Recruiting and retaining great workers is a big part of it, and downtown is where the development and design community wants to work,” said co-founder and CEO Sam Decker. “Startups don’t want the typical Class A, everything carpeted environment. They love character in their office and a place that feels unique. This is an opportunity to have a place where people look forward to coming to work every day just because of that vibe.”
http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/aust...
“Recruiting and retaining great workers is a big part of it, and downtown is where the development and design community wants to work,” said co-founder and CEO Sam Decker. “Startups don’t want the typical Class A, everything carpeted environment. They love character in their office and a place that feels unique. This is an opportunity to have a place where people look forward to coming to work every day just because of that vibe.”
http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/aust...
These are not high-tech companies.
These are interactive media companies.
These are interactive media companies.
I agree. These are companies that just duct-tap together high tech, made by others. High tech companies are IBM, Intel, Sun, Oracle, etc, and those are firmly planted outside cities. A good rule of thumb is if the company consists mostly of 20 something hipsters, its not a high-tech company :)
What's the key distinction between a high-tech company and an interactive media company?
Many of the latter have emerged as quite innovative in their use and/or creation of emerging software technologies and tools.
Many of the latter have emerged as quite innovative in their use and/or creation of emerging software technologies and tools.
Here's an under rated reason - a night owl's schedule! Tech startup founders and early teams get most of their shit done at night when there are fewer or no distractions. When you're on this schedule, the city life is much more accommodating in terms of food, socialization, etc. Then suddenly, dinner time is suddenly like lunch time.
Living in a city does not lend itself well to getting stuff done at night "when there are no distractions" precisely because those environments provide those nighttime distractions.
Early founder schedules tend to be necessarily isolating. Once you're to the point of having employees and semi-sane work hours, then the rest tends to be personal preference because you can once again coexist with the rest of the world.
Early founder schedules tend to be necessarily isolating. Once you're to the point of having employees and semi-sane work hours, then the rest tends to be personal preference because you can once again coexist with the rest of the world.
What happens when residential prices rise so high that you price out many of the same employees who created the critical mass and desire for this urban environment in the first place? How do you recruit a software dev @ $100k/yr when the 1 bedroom SoMa apartment they want costs $3k/month (~ $40k/yr fully loaded, or 50%+ of their take home pay)?
In most cities people can find much cheaper places to live within commuting distance. Cities can't support themselves when people are totally priced out.
For example, I know someone who lives in Bushwick, Brooklyn and pays <600/month (with roommates), and another in a studio for 1200/month. Bushwick is about 30 minutes from Soho by subway.
For example, I know someone who lives in Bushwick, Brooklyn and pays <600/month (with roommates), and another in a studio for 1200/month. Bushwick is about 30 minutes from Soho by subway.
I second this. I was in Bushwick when I lived in NYC. I saw 1-bedrooms going for 1200. I moved to the UES after that, and found that the Manhattan tax really isn't worth it.
Bushwick rocks. Stinks, but it is the best hood in the city. However it is not very techie. Great art scene.
Cities are perfect for attracting the kind of young, interesting, and smart people tech companies want to attract. Also, tech companies are often capable of generating relatively high profit per employee; for these companies, the biggest downside of a city (cost) is not as big of an issue.