Slashdot Mirror


Sergey Brin: Don't Come To Silicon Valley To Start a Business (businessinsider.com)

An anonymous reader shares a Business Insider report:If you're itching to start a company out of a garage, then you shouldn't pick up and move to Silicon Valley, according to Google cofounder Sergey Brin. It's easier to start a company outside the Valley than in it, he said onstage at the Global Entrepreneurship Summit. "I know that sort of contradicts what everyone here has been saying," he said with a laugh. "During the boom cycles, the expectations around the costs -- real estate, salaries -- the expectations people and employees have ... it can be hard to make a scrappy initial business that's self-sustaining," he said. "Whereas in other parts of the world you might have an easier time for that."But he adds that Silicon Valley is good for scaling that opportunity.

57 of 103 comments (clear)

  1. It's good if you have money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's a good place to run your business if your business happens to have a lot of money. You can use that money to make even more money, if you're good at that sort of thing. You can also burn through a tremendous amount of cash without anything to show for it.

    1. Re:It's good if you have money by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Most startups here only have a goal of being bought out. Actaully becoming profitable is not in the plans. Their operations consist of continually going to all the countless conferences and trade shows that may be related to their "business". Basically, they're scams. The few honest ones may have a couple people mainly acting as consultants and other work for hire.

  2. Translation by Bovius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Do the riskiest part of starting a business somewhere else. Then, when it reaches maximum future potential, bring it to Silicon Valley so we can buy it out from under you for a song and make a ton of money."

    1. Re:Translation by PPH · · Score: 1

      This.

      Location doesn't matter until it's time to put your startup under Alphabet's management. 'Future potential' is the acquisition price Google and others are willing to pay. Not the earnings potential.

      OTOH, if you want to be bought out by Microsoft, come to Seattle.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Walter White

    3. Re:Translation by swillden · · Score: 1

      As far as I can tell, location doesn't matter for Google acquisitions except that if you aren't located near an appropriate Google office you may have to pack up and move post-acquisition. I suppose it *might* be a little easier to get someone to come look at you if you're in SV, but I doubt it makes much difference.

      What really matters, I think, is being somewhere that you can get the talent and resources you need to build your business. SV is good because there are lots of talented people around, but those people are expensive, as is real estate, etc. The other major resource a startup requires is capital, and I think the perception has been that there is more capital available in SV than elsewhere, but that really doesn't make much sense. Capital is highly mobile.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    4. Re:Translation by halivar · · Score: 2

      That "song" you sell it for is retirement in Tahiti. I envy entrepreneurs who receive the opportunity to have their work stolen thus.

    5. Re:Translation by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 1

      Good call. For many songs the chorus is the best part anyway.

    6. Re:Translation by swillden · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And those people are there because of all the businesses that are there. It's one big feedback loop that's going to keep building until it breaks

      Or until the cities cave in and start allowing high-density housing to be constructed, building decent mass transit (which is easier with high-density housing), etc. The actual population density is quite low compared to truly urban environments. But while they insist on sticking with a suburban lifestyle they're going to be bursting at the seams.

      Luckily, it does appear that Mountain View, at least, is finally starting to recognize this. After years of obstructionism, they have finally approved some high-density housing on the north bayshore. http://www.mv-voice.com/news/2.... With a lot more of that sort of thing, they could fix the problem. Of course, if they do too much of it, all of the people with million-dollar mortgages on $300,000 (at best) houses are going to be in trouble...

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    7. Re: Translation by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Once you've got enough money you really don't need more. If you can retire comfortably then SELL! Don't stay in the rat race if you don't want to be a rat. I see executives hopping from job to job when they clearly have enough money to live extremely well compared to all their underlings, but they still keep grabbing for more and more.

  3. Re:Google by halivar · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "But he adds that Silicon Valley is good for for scaling that opportunity."

  4. Re:Cant speak for SV but I tried the SB thing in N by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

    I move it to Georgia where the dirt is cheap and the labor cheaper.

    That's because we have so much of the damn red clay we can't hardly give it away.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  5. But the Web 2.0 bubble has already burst. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    When we discuss stuff like this we need to consider that the Web 2.0 bubble has already burst. It wasn't a spectacular burst like the initial .com crash, but the burst has still happened.

    We've seen IPOs dry up.

    We're seeing little to no growth for the major incumbents, even if they haven't completely flamed out yet.

    People are tiring of Facebook, Twitter, and nonsense "social media" (with is mainly about subjecting users to ads).

    LinkedIn, one of the Web 2.0 darlings, was just bought out by Microsoft.

    The Ruby on Rails fad died off some time ago. The JavaScript fad is dying off now. Now we're seeing the Rust fad start, but compared to its predecessors it's a total joke.

    Average users are getting fed up with the Hipster-oriented design we've been forced to ensure for years now. Software products that were one really usable have become damn near impossible to use (Google Maps, Windows, GNOME, Firefox, among others).

    Slashdot was nearly destroyed by the Slashdot Beta, but luckily it was spared in the end.

    The mobile device market has peaked.

    Beyond Web 2.0, we aren't seeing any traction.

    IoT isn't taking off like it was expected to. Average people have come to realize that these devices can be very obtrusive. Most normal people don't want some device videoing and recording them while they urinate or defecate. They don't want their penis measurements sent to "the cloud".

    VR isn't taking off as expected. The development is going way slower, and people aren't impressed by the results so far. It's a long way off.

    Drones were only ever a niche interest. Average people don't care about them, and business uses are facing many hurdles.

    The Web 2.0 bubble has burst. There is no bubble coming after it. San Francisco is looking to be in a very bad situation, even if the people there don't realize it yet.

    1. Re:But the Web 2.0 bubble has already burst. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 2, Informative

      We've seen IPOs dry up.

      What you seen is venture capitalists and investors no longer throwing money at every potential "unicorn" (a startup with a $1B+ valuation) that comes along. A lot of these unicorns have very little to show for after blowing cash through the wazoo. One notable unicorn had to cut back on employee perks because it was costing $25K per year per employee. VCs and investors want to see profits from business operations. That's not a bubble bursting, it's reality sinking in.

    2. Re:But the Web 2.0 bubble has already burst. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's not a bubble bursting, it's reality sinking in.

      What the hell are you talking about? That's exactly what a bubble bursting is: it's reality sinking in.

      Expectations adjusting downward to match reality is the bubble bursting!

      The expectations that are lowered include the value of companies and their stock, the salaries that employees will receive, the demand for products and services, and the understanding of what's viable.

      You apparently don't realize that you just described the bubble bursting, while at the same time misleading yourself into thinking it hasn't just burst!

    3. Re:But the Web 2.0 bubble has already burst. by DiSKiLLeR · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Erm, no.

      It is reality sinking in but it is not a bubble bursting.

      The dot com bubble of 2000 was a bubble bursting.

      The housing crash of 2007 was a bubble bursting.

      But prices of companies, real estate, and so on regularly go up and down and sometimes go down sharply (eg. LinkedIn) when 'reality kicks in' but that that not automatically mean a bubble has burst.

      They're too different events - one is of a smaller scale the other is of a much LARGER scale that results in a large economy wide event that impacts everyone.

      --
      You can tell how powerful someone is by the magnitude of the crime they can commit and be able to get away with.
    4. Re:But the Web 2.0 bubble has already burst. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 2

      Expectations adjusting downward to match reality is the bubble bursting!

      THE SKY IS FALLING! THE SKY FALLING! THE SKY IS FALLING!
      THE SKY IS FALLING! THE SKY FALLING! THE SKY IS FALLING!
      THE SKY IS FALLING! THE SKY FALLING! THE SKY IS FALLING!
      THE SKY IS FALLING! THE SKY FALLING! THE SKY IS FALLING!
      THE SKY IS FALLING! THE SKY FALLING! THE SKY IS FALLING!
      THE SKY IS FALLING! THE SKY FALLING! THE SKY IS FALLING!

      Does this make you feel better?

      You apparently don't realize that you just described the bubble bursting, while at the same time misleading yourself into thinking it hasn't just burst!

      I lived through the bubbles bursting prior to the Dot Com Bust in 2001 and the Great Recession in 2009. Companies went out of business, employees got laid off, people moved out of the valley, housing and apartment rents dropped, and freeway traffic got better. Guess what? I'm not seeing any that at all. This "bust" is a whimper that has .

    5. Re:But the Web 2.0 bubble has already burst. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Denial of the bubble bursting is another sign of the bubble having already burst.

      This "bubble" is a like a bear taking a shit in the wood. Beside the bear, who else in world cares? (Hint: no one.)

    6. Re:But the Web 2.0 bubble has already burst. by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      During previous "busts" most of the people I knew in companies that were making profits kept their jobs. The job losses in the Silicon Valley are seemed to be from all those companies whose money was only in stock valuations. Of course that caused ripples across the country and world and seriously hurt retirement plans of everyone who kept their jobs. But utlimately it was just another California gold rush revived, with major financial experts getting conned into investing in the new econmy. The housing bubble collapse was the same thing all over again too, experts all giddy about short term profits from slicing and dicing mortgages until that vanished. We really need the "experts" to focus on fundamental basics in the economy instead of irrational exuberance.

    7. Re:But the Web 2.0 bubble has already burst. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      We really need the "experts" to focus on fundamental basics in the economy instead of irrational exuberance.

      That's what the VCs and investors are doing to the unicorns by forcing them to focus on profitable business operations and not offering endless perks for employees.

    8. Re:But the Web 2.0 bubble has already burst. by epine · · Score: 1

      The United States can always be relied upon to do the right thing — having first exhausted all possible alternatives.

      In a similar vein, the valley can be relied upon to solve real problems — after financing all possible alternatives.

      Whatever goes on, there has never been a shortage of real problems out there. Solving a real problem ties your capital up for a longer stretch of time. No VC worth his salt would choose to do that, when the alternative is a quick in-out. After a decade where "scale" became synonymous with "cosmic inflation", oh, the groans will be loud and protracted.

      But it won't matter, because there's plenty of talent, plenty of tools nowhere near fully exploited, and more real world problems waiting to be solved that we can yet imagine.

    9. Re:But the Web 2.0 bubble has already burst. by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Everyone talks about unicorns but they were always extremely rare (thus the name).

    10. Re: But the Web 2.0 bubble has already burst. by avatar+avatar · · Score: 1

      Oh, pish-tosh. There will always be another bubble. The region's real Estate is riding high upon one right now, and there's no shortage of fabulists remaining in the valley.

    11. Re:But the Web 2.0 bubble has already burst. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Everyone talks about unicorns but they were always extremely rare (thus the name).

      The line I picked up from a recent WSJ article that VCs and investors were funding 20 potential unicorns per month, which is a much slower rate than last year. Unicorns that made $1B+ in real money averages to two per year.

    12. Re:But the Web 2.0 bubble has already burst. by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Everything is a "potential" unicorn. No one has any clue what an unfunded company is going to be worth when they have no product, no employees, and only have a business plan that says "we're going to replace Facebook!"

      Turns out sometimes it's the company you overlook that is purchased by Google for over $1B (which greatly increases the statistics).

    13. Re:But the Web 2.0 bubble has already burst. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      [...] a business plan that says "we're going to get bought out by Facebook!"

      FTFY - The dot com version had Microsoft as the fantasy buyer.

      Turns out sometimes it's the company you overlook that is purchased by Google for over $1B (which greatly increases the statistics).

      I worked for a company that went on a buying spree prior to the dot com bust that paid two to four times more than what each acquired company was actually worth. Something that Google found out when they bought Nest for $3.2B in 2014 and recently halted unlimited funding that the division enjoyed for showing little in return.

  6. location, location, location by Thud457 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    payroll's a bitch when your employees have to be millionaires to afford their very own hovel.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  7. Can always just move in with Erlich Bachmann by Kargan · · Score: 1

    I am sure there is space at the incubator.

    --
    Palaces, barricades, threats, meet promises
  8. Re:Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Holy fuck are you dumb? Serge says moving TO the valley is a great place to scale the opportunity. As in, if your business is booming outside of the valley, move into the valley to make it even bigger.

  9. Get out of his way by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2, Funny

    It sounds like Sergey Brin is tired of having to wait in long lines at the In-and-Out Burger.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:Get out of his way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      In-N-Out doesn't franchise. Just saying.

  10. Other places are better by DidgetMaster · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There are many places around the country (or the world) that have good talent and moderate to cheap living expenses. Those are the best places to get a tech business off the ground. You will probably have more trouble finding funding for your idea, but startup costs are much lower than in Silicon Valley. I am trying to start up my own business and it is a lot of trouble to find investors. It can be depressing to read about guys with great connections in SV who get $20 million in funding for some idea with a potential of about 10% of what you think your idea will do; yet you can't seem to get even seed funding of much smaller amounts. It drives you insane when someone gets $100 million in funding for a really bad idea that you know will crash and burn in just a year or two.

    1. Re:Other places are better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I am trying to start up my own business and it is a lot of trouble to find investors.

      Is it really that capital intensive? Can you start off small?

      Here's a strategy that I've seen work time and time again: start local and small and build a profitable base (of course CYA on the IP department with patents, trademarks and copyrights - if you want.). Expand with retained earnings. Nothing proves a concept like actually being a profitable business. And it gives you leverage with investors - "I don't NEED you, I just want to get bigger faster." or "I need more capital than I have because [insert big needed capital expenditure here] but, I'll get it eventually."

      The best book I've seen as a guide - believe it or not - the "Portable MBA in Entrepreneurship". They even have links to spreadsheets to to do a lot of the grunt work for you.

      Good luck! I hope you succeed and add wealth to our society.

    2. Re:Other places are better by DidgetMaster · · Score: 1

      No. It doesn't take a lot of capital, but it is a pretty big software project that needs a lot more work to finish. I have already invested a couple hundred thousand of my own money and thousands of hours of time. I just need more resources to finish it. It is going too slow to finish with just a few part-time guys.

    3. Re:Other places are better by DidgetMaster · · Score: 1

      Lucky for us, we are way past that stage. We not only have a prototype working, but the program can already do a bunch of powerful things. There are still features on the drawing board and a lot of testing to do; but we can show it working. It is thousands of times faster than file systems at finding stuff and so far beats MySQL and PostgreSQL at a bunch of database functions. Here are some youtube videos of it in action: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    4. Re:Other places are better by DidgetMaster · · Score: 1

      Exactly. My project is in the same ballpark as a compiler in complexity. It is a kind of file system/database hybrid so it has to do a lot of things that both of those systems do. I have been able to create relational tables for quite a while now, but I just got inner join functionality working the other day and it still has some bugs to work out. It doesn't cost millions to develop, but more than my family budget can handle.

    5. Re:Other places are better by quetwo · · Score: 1

      It depends on the business. Certain businesses can start off small and build up. Some require a lot of capital up front (think, hardware or biotech), where others can rent space from AWS and just pay salary for the first few employees.

    6. Re:Other places are better by DidgetMaster · · Score: 1

      Hardly. It is a general purpose data management system that will replace file systems and databases and even some NoSQL solutions. It does block I/O to the disk so it doesn't even use an existing file system, let alone the Windows File Manager. It is designed to run on any operating system and will scale from simple devices to super-computing clusters. It uses data objects that can do everything a file can do and more. They can be used to manage lists, attach tags, policies, configuration, and a much of other things too numerous to list. I have tested it out to 200 million objects in a single container and it can find any subset (e.g. find all the JPEG photos) in about 2 seconds with that many objects. If you think that is a waste, you must not work with data that much.

    7. Re:Other places are better by houghi · · Score: 1

      The thing is not that you think that others have only 1/10th of the potential. The problem is that you think you have 10* the potential.

      And don't forget they a paying into the whole package and perhaps they don't like you as a person or they like you but you are too nice or are percieved too nice or not nice enough or whatever.

      You also have no idea how hard the others worked to get where they are.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    8. Re:Other places are better by DidgetMaster · · Score: 1

      I was not trying to compare my project with any one other project in particular. My comment was merely pointing out how funding amounts do not always correlate to the value potential of an idea. If you have a great idea that you think has a ton of potential, it can be very easy to see lots of other ideas that seem (to you at least) to have a much lower potential, yet are able to attract lots of money. It's not that you are the wrong person, or that you idea is dumb, or that others worked harder. It is just the nature of business where often luck (also known as being in the right place at the right time) plays a key role.

  11. Of course he'd say that... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1

    He doesn't want to have to compete with new startups for employees.

    1. Re:Of course he'd say that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This.

      While I don't think that he's particularly wrong, it seems a bit self-serving to push people out of the area. The advice should be to setup the business where it's affordable, but be open to hiring from anywhere, including Silicon Valley.

      My company has employees in that area and our headquarters has moved to be near Google's (just in respect to location, not as a reason), but the majority of our employees are not in the Silicon Valley area, including myself.

  12. Re:Google by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

    Why not lead by example by moving Google away from the bay area

    I'm sure many of the employees will move, but the majority probably wouldn't. Forcing them to either retain a significant and expensive presence there, or lose the people who know how to keep the company going.

    Similarly, opening up sites elsewhere makes a lot of sense if you can divide up the work and minimize communication. No one likes having half their team split geographically (particularly across many time zones).

  13. Re:Expenses by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

    Silicon Valley hasn't been cheap any time in the past 30 years. It has always been an overpriced zoo, it just has money and momentum.

  14. start your business in Canada by cats-paw · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The healthcare situation in this country is so fucked up.

    At least when you are paying everybody as little as possible to get off the ground, they will have good healthcare.

    --
    Absolute statements are never true
    1. Re:start your business in Canada by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This is not flamebait - we, as a Canadian business, have the majority of our customers in the US but every attempt to onshore employees has been blocked by this medical cost wall.

      We haven't tried since Obamacare - would that drop our out of pocket by 50% to provide coverage similar to Canada?

  15. Great advice by sootman · · Score: 3, Informative

    Start your company anywhere... but if you want VC money, get your ass to Sand Hill Road because VCs can't see past the end of their own driveway.

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  16. Re:Cant speak for SV but I tried the SB thing in N by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

    WTF? I guess you haven't read about the BitLicense and the amount of companies that don't operate in NY as a result of it.

    --
    If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
    Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
  17. Silicon Valley is a great place to be from by alispguru · · Score: 3, Informative

    Worked and lived in Mountain View in the late 1980's; visited the peninsula many times since then.

    Got out when I realized that I would not be able to afford a house unless I hit the startup lottery.

    Also, realized I did not want to rear children in either side of Palo Alto (east or west).

    Still, having some direct experience of Silicon Valley has been useful ever since; it helped me get every job I've had since that time.

    --

    To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
  18. web 3.0 is upon us by peter303 · · Score: 1

    Web 3.0 is about the merger of browsers and apps with advantages of both and no longer see the distintion between the two. Apps were a temporary aberration to wall of pieces of the internet often for financial gain. No longer will there be the tyranny of of app store censors.

  19. Re: Expenses by peter303 · · Score: 1

    An incubator fellowship, like from ycombinator, hides the expenses until you get version 1.0 out. If its any decent, then a vc will throw money at you.

  20. "Self-sustaining"? by DogDude · · Score: 1

    That's very odd to hear him talk about "self-sustaining" in Silicon Valley. I didn't think that *any* businesses started in that neck of the woods were "self-sustaining". I got the impression that everybody starts a company with somebody else's money and then sells it before they burn through all of the cash. Are there are Silicon Valley startups that have been self-sustaining in the past few decades (other than traditional businesses, of course, that actually have to ear a profit to stay alive).

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
  21. Oh right by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    Like I'd take advice from some nobody named "Sergey".

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  22. India? by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

    So like India for example.

  23. Come to NC by SkyLeach · · Score: 1

    High-Tech rednecks are a lot less expensive to hire than Hipsters and Yuppies.

    Heck I can get a website cobbled together for a case of beer and one visit to a strip club.

    --
    My $0.02 will always be worth more than your â0.02, so :-p
  24. Getting VC by TheSync · · Score: 1

    You are far less likely to get VC funding if you are not physically in the Bay Area.

    Yes, it is cheaper and easier to start a business outside of the Bay Area. But if you want the VC funding, you better be there. Then you can move your operations out...

  25. Re:Google by wyHunter · · Score: 1

    Unless you want to go to another US city that isn't as insanely expensive, but has a strong infrastructure for software, like Boston, Denver, Omaha, Atlanta...