Slashdot Mirror


High-Tech Start-Ups Put Down Roots In New Soil

ThousandStars writes "The Wall Street Journal says that 'High-tech start-ups are increasingly setting up shop in places previously not known for attracting high-tech firms. A number of cities, such as Kalamazoo, Mich., and Toledo, Ohio, are offering grant money and tax breaks to high-tech start-ups, just as the usual venture-capital hot spots, such as Silicon Valley and Boston, continue to see a pullback in venture lending.""

18 of 141 comments (clear)

  1. better places to work by KingFeanor · · Score: 5, Informative

    I work for a big tech company from a small city in Wisconsin. It is great. For the company, office space is cheap, internet access is cheap, energy is cheap, salaries are less than in big cities and employees are still happy. As an employee, I'm happy since I don't have traffic nightmares getting to work and home (I have a whole 5 minute commute), the cost of living is low (I live in a remodeled 3 bedroom home that is worth $120K) and in a small office (200 people) you can know everyone by name. It is a win-win deal for a tech company to locate outside the major tech areas.

    1. Re:better places to work by ushering05401 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hiring is the problem. If you require highly specific skill sets you end up paying relocation... and who knows how well the relocation itself goes for the candidate.

    2. Re:better places to work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      I grew up in WI, lived in Seattle for seven years, and am now in San Francisco. I'm fairly familiar with the laws regarding businesses in all three states; I started an LLC in Seattle that I never really did anything with due to my day job, while now I've been completely dedicated to a personal project for eight months and am looking into starting a real business out of it. While there are trade-offs between WA and WI -- WA has better business and tax laws, while WI has lower cost-of-living in many cases -- CA is quite clearly dead last in starting a business where physical proximity to other particular businesses or people isn't a key factor to success. I now thoroughly understand why my former employer moved their entire business, including providing handsome travel and housing packages for then-current employees, from the Bay Area up to the suburbs of Seattle.

      The first big warning sign was when I saw that along with other fees and taxes, a CA LLC with absolutely no income is charged an $800 fee by the state every single year. This is four times or more of the initial fee in other states, and most other state only charge a legitimate filing fee for subsequent years -- along the lines of $50. The business taxes, plus the sales taxes, plus the income taxes, plus ridiculously high cost of living all add up to a massive inequity in ROI compared with other locations, and in return you get to live in a state on the verge of bankruptcy and your non-local business gets essentially no boost in sales due to its location. The single reason why I'm considering incorporating here is because if my business doesn't work out, this location has more jobs for my somewhat unique specialty compared with other locations. I can only see that lasting for so long, though.

  2. I saw it happen in the early 90's by localroger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A manufacturer we represent whose business center and plant was in rural Minnesota bought a competitor whose business was located in San Francisco. They decided who they wanted from the eated company and offered them jobs. Most of the SFicans were appalled at the idea of moving to the great frozen flyover wasteland, but the eater company paid for all of them to come visit for a couple of weeks. In that time they learned that they could own acres of land with three thousand square foot homes for what they had been paying for a walk-up condo, that they could commute in minutes and leave their doors unlocked without worry, and nearly all of them ended up moving to Minnesota. And most of them are still there today, even though their company eventually got eated by a European company and you now hear a lot of British accents around the place.

    --
    Brackets contain world's first nanosig, highly magnified:[.]
    1. Re:I saw it happen in the early 90's by Tiro · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Reminiscent of Wells Fargo, the bold SF bank that got eated by the very cautious Minnesota-based Norwest Corporation in 1998. Regarding your story, this is a fundamental aspect of capitalism: the dislocation of production from established areas to lower cost areas. That can mean Ohio to China, or San Francisco to Ohio. It is rather interesting to me that places like Gary, IN* don't rejuvenate on their own. There is definitely some cultural preference to other places, which is why there is more to the story than pure economic cost/infrastructure advantage. * Interesting that much new growth in the US Midwest comes from Mexican immigrants, for whom there is less bias against these 'boring' towns.

    2. Re:I saw it happen in the early 90's by Technician · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What we see on a state by state basis to attract jobs while at the same time we try to make the evil multinational corporations pay (Obama and taxes) we may start to see many start ups simply avoid the US.

      Intel has been accused many times of avoiding paying taxes for the massive tax breaks they get to have a location in the Portland Oregon area, but most people don't realize they not only pay salaries taxed by the state, they also are taxed for their property. Nike also in the area has a much lower inventory tax because they don't have a fab full of multi million dollar manufacturing tools. To attract Intel, the city of Hillsboro had to adjust for this.

      Failure to do this would let them have a larger piece of nothing, With no concessions for the value of the factory equipment Intel would have built elsewhere. The clean water and moderate electricity rates are what attracted them. High local tax areas could soon erase the advantages.

      I am afraid that Obama's economic plan will drive the rest of large manufacturing overseas. The Union obligations are already having a severe toll on the auto industry without the help of taxes driving them out of business.

      Tax the rich simply is to send them elsewhere in a global market where conditions are better.

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
    3. Re:I saw it happen in the early 90's by superdana · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think Gary is a special case. It has an appalling crime rate, for one: they've only recently managed to get themselves off the list of top ten crime-ridden places in the United States. I also suspect that an element of racism (not necessarily overt, but racism nonetheless) prevents companies from even considering places like Gary, which is overwhelmingly populated by African Americans. Kalamazoo and Toledo are, by comparison, lily white.

  3. Its definitely the exception, and a rare one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    My wife & I left silicon valley about 5 years ago at the tail-end of the dot-com bust. I had a GREAT time there, aside from the worthless options and 80-hour work weeks. We thought it was time to start a family, and wanted a bigger, less-expensive house, no traffic, slower quality of life. We were willing to trade a premium salary for it.

    WHAT A HUGE MISTAKE.

    Turns out that when you're in a smaller town, you have NO OTHER employment options. What happens if you don't like your little tech company? uh, you're screwed. In Silicon Valley you always had a network three deep that could get you a fun, interesting job in a little bit. You had options. A backup plan. In smaller towns you're running without a safety net. If you leave the relocated tech-company, you've got the small-town mindset and businesses. I see plenty of craigslist ads that read, "must have 5 years networking experience, cisco preferred. Be able to build and administer our 50-person network. References required. $10/hr, contract only." I'm seriously NOT kidding.

    I wish I could completely rewind my experience and still be in silicon valley. Higher rents, more traffic, silly housing prices and all.

    1. Re:Its definitely the exception, and a rare one by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Sounds like you've just identified a major perk for companies that move out into the sticks...

      Sooner or later, they'll just start paying in scrip, redeemable at the company store, and it'll be the good old days all over again.

  4. Online Economy by alain94040 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The economy is moving online. Soon, it won't matter anymore where you live and who you work with.

    And I'm not talking about the scams such as "make $100K working from home". I mean real, legitimate, value-added work (like programming), that you do wherever you want, whenever you want, as long as you deliver a good product.

    1. Re:Online Economy by xant · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Uh, that's been possible for, like, 10 years now. When's that going to happen?

      --
      It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
    2. Re:Online Economy by Eil · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Uh, that's been possible for, like, 10 years now. When's that going to happen?

      It already did. In India.

  5. What about marriages? by aafiske · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Problem is, and all jokes about single engineers aside, that means the spouse has to find something viable in that location as well. Some professions are pretty portable, others aren't. But it's not just about where you can lure a single person.

    Plus, if you lose your job, suddenly you're in Toledo where there's not that many other companies. At least in the Bay Area, you know you have multiple options to switch to should you want to. Without having to sell your house which no one wants or needs to buy. (Admittedly this is a chicken-and-egg problem; if enough companies move to Toledo or wherever, this goes away.)

  6. I'm with Paul Graham on this: it won't work. by bADlOGIN · · Score: 4, Informative

    Check out How to Be Silicon valley (http://www.paulgraham.com/siliconvalley.html).

    Based on the description of the right environment, we're not talking Kalamazoo or Toledo by
    a long shot. Besides, didn't people try this crap en-mass before the dot.com bust?

    --
    *** Sigs are a stupid waste of bandwidth.
    1. Re:I'm with Paul Graham on this: it won't work. by OrangeTide · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I've heard so many of these stories about how XXX will be the new place for tech. I don't see any reason to start believing it now. If you want to relocate away from Silicon Valley or one of the other tech areas of the US, you might as well relocate to India or east Asia or somewhere that is even cheaper than Kalamazoo.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  7. Plus... by maz2331 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I wouldn't move from Pittsburgh to anywhere in California for any amount of money.

  8. Technology and internet access by phorm · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually, it's quite interesting to see how - in terms of infrastructure - smaller cities compare to the big ones. Two years ago, I lived in a city (my hometown) of about 85,000 in BC, Canada. Internet access was generally quite fast, especially with cable providers, etc for residential. Around when I was leaving, the city in conjunction with various local businesses had been in the process of laying fiber in all areas.

    After that I moved to Toronto, Ontario (population over 2,500,000). Internet and telecommunications infrastructure sucked there. Bell seems to have little motivation to upgrade lines, meaning DSL outside of certain major downtown areas could not reliably offer high speeds, either for businesses or residences. Not only that, but Bell's throttling of third-party connections was a nightmare, not just for home-user torrents, but for SSL-tunnelled connections to/from my workplace when telecommuting.

    Rogers was the local cableco provided and I'd heard of similar issues with them: poor service, bad cabling, and weird issues due to throttling. I know of at least one business that bounced between Bell, Rogers, and a third-party (DSL, so unbeknownst to them still going through Bell) provider trying to get reliable connectivity.

    Local tech shops had more deals and cool small items. Things like monitors or PC's/laptops weren't much of a deal though, and customer service STANK. Got a new LCD with dead pixels out of the box, and a fairly major local retailer (yes, I'm looking at you Canada Computers) refused to exchanged it. I know for a fact my local shop in the previous city would have done so.

    Now I'm in back in a smaller city/town of around populatimainon 30,000. No long commutes to work. Internet via cable is fast. There's a local wifi provider who gets rather impressive speeds to all sorts of weird areas around town, and they're continuously improving service. Rent and property costs are a lot lower.

    I was just musing whether it would be possible to setup a datacentre downtown. There are quite a number of buildings with space that might fit a small DC as long as the power requirements were met, though I've yet to investigate what the local providers offer for large commercial trunks.

    Big cities are overrated. When I moved to Toronto I expected to find myself able to do all sorts of things, but the reality was with the longer commutes, extra work hours, and almost universally crappy service. Here, people tend to be more honest (in a smaller city you can't get away with as much without it becoming known eventually), and the quality of life is better. There may not be a huge glass-covered shopping multiplex within 10 minutes drive, but for that sort of thing a bigger city is still within driving range, and really the local stores aren't that bad except when it comes to stuff like furniture etc, and my iPhone only gets 2G service (until next year).

    Screw big cities.Businesses should invest in local communities at smaller locations. Power and rent are cheaper here. Connectivity seems in many cases better. There will be likely be less location-related expenses, and I've found that there are still plenty of tech-savvy citizens available to work there, and even a good share of front-line grunts for phone support etc.

  9. I'd go to Detroit. Seriously. by Qbertino · · Score: 3, Interesting

    People seem to forget that Shockley went to death valley because there was absolutely nothing there and you could get all the basics dirt cheap. The nutcases that started the silicon revolution did that in barns and garages and of those in the cheapest they could find. The shockley five went to start Intel in the neighbourhood and thus Silicon Valley was born.

    If I where building a startup in the US today, I'd seriously consider Detroit. You can buy houses for 500$ right now in Detroit and infrastructure is just good enough to live. You could spent years there on the most minimal VC and since Detroit is so super-boring now the team actually would have a personal interest in concentrating on the thing their building.

    Revolutions very often start in extremely unspectacular places, where the artists and crazies move in because they have other things to worry about than finding the best way to rake in cash. It's only a few decades later that these places become the hippest areas on the planet. Notting Hill in London, Schanzenviertel and Hafenstraße in Hamburg, etc. etc. - all the same story.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca