The U.S. Census Bureau recently released it’s 2016 city and town population estimates. The press release can be found here.

The headline isn’t a new one. Southern cities continue to grow quickly. This is not a new trend. Humans seem to like warm weather and the housing supply in southern cities tends to be more elastic. This keeps home prices relatively in check and allows the cities to more easily accommodate growth.

From July 2015 to July 2016, 10 of the 15 fastest growing large U.S. cities were in the south (based on % growth). 4 of the top 5 were in Texas. 

From 2010 to 2016, the population in large southern cities grew an average of 9.4%. Cities in the west clocked in at 7.3%. And cities in the northeast and midwest were at 1.8% and 3.0%, respectively.

Two outliers near the top are Seattle and Denver. Since 2010, the population of these two cities grew 15.39% and 14.87%, respectively. I’m going to say it’s because of the skiing and snowboarding. Half-joking. For the top 25 large cities ranked by 2010-2016 growth rate, click here.

Today is my birthday. 

I am one year older, at least at face value. This got me thinking about something I read a number of years ago on Fred Wilson’s blog called The N+1 theory. The basic premise is as follows: whatever it is, there could be one more. It is an optimistic viewpoint that emphasizes continuous improvement and change.

For example, let’s say you’re designing a building and you’re trying to make it as energy efficient as possible. You might think that you’ve arrived at the most efficient outcome, but in fact you’re probably just sitting at N. Stretch yourself. Go for N+1.

Let’s say you’re working out at the gym and you feel you’ve done as many reps as you could possibly do. Well, if you stretched yourself, you could probably do N+1. People who lift weights will also tell you it’s that one additional rep that counts the most. 

The mantra: Do as many or as much as you can possibly do (N), and then do one more (+1). The N+1 theory is a growth mindset. And if you apply this thinking throughout your life, I am sure you would see many benefits.

At the same time, one could imagine this theory being applied in a destructive way. In a relationship, for instance, is it healthy to think of your significant other as N, meaning that you should be looking for someone better? That N+1. This strikes me as an unhappy way to live. I would prefer to apply this theory in a productive way. 

Whatever the case may be, today I am firmly N+1. And I feel good about that.

“There is no higher God in Silicon Valley than growth. No sacrifice too big for its craving altar. As long as you keep your curve exponential, all your sins will be forgotten at the exit.” -David Heinemeier Hansson

Snap Inc. went public last week. Offering price was $17. Closing price on the first day was $24.48. Given that the company is not profitable and may never be profitable (their caveat, not mine), many people have been asking: Is a valuation somewhere around $34 billion justifiable?

This is a common question when it comes to tech companies. And the answer usually comes down to something along the lines of this:

The Snapchat story “is all about growth,” Mr. Nathanson said. “It’s not about economics.”

It’s about the future.

I love Snapchat and I think the company is run by a very creative founder. But now that Snapchat Stories was stolen by Instagram, they need, in my humble opinion, something new and killer to stick.

The U.S. Census Bureau recently released it’s 2016 city and town population estimates. The press release can be found here.

The headline isn’t a new one. Southern cities continue to grow quickly. This is not a new trend. Humans seem to like warm weather and the housing supply in southern cities tends to be more elastic. This keeps home prices relatively in check and allows the cities to more easily accommodate growth.

From July 2015 to July 2016, 10 of the 15 fastest growing large U.S. cities were in the south (based on % growth). 4 of the top 5 were in Texas. 

From 2010 to 2016, the population in large southern cities grew an average of 9.4%. Cities in the west clocked in at 7.3%. And cities in the northeast and midwest were at 1.8% and 3.0%, respectively.

Two outliers near the top are Seattle and Denver. Since 2010, the population of these two cities grew 15.39% and 14.87%, respectively. I’m going to say it’s because of the skiing and snowboarding. Half-joking. For the top 25 large cities ranked by 2010-2016 growth rate, click here.

Today is my birthday. 

I am one year older, at least at face value. This got me thinking about something I read a number of years ago on Fred Wilson’s blog called The N+1 theory. The basic premise is as follows: whatever it is, there could be one more. It is an optimistic viewpoint that emphasizes continuous improvement and change.

For example, let’s say you’re designing a building and you’re trying to make it as energy efficient as possible. You might think that you’ve arrived at the most efficient outcome, but in fact you’re probably just sitting at N. Stretch yourself. Go for N+1.

Let’s say you’re working out at the gym and you feel you’ve done as many reps as you could possibly do. Well, if you stretched yourself, you could probably do N+1. People who lift weights will also tell you it’s that one additional rep that counts the most. 

The mantra: Do as many or as much as you can possibly do (N), and then do one more (+1). The N+1 theory is a growth mindset. And if you apply this thinking throughout your life, I am sure you would see many benefits.

At the same time, one could imagine this theory being applied in a destructive way. In a relationship, for instance, is it healthy to think of your significant other as N, meaning that you should be looking for someone better? That N+1. This strikes me as an unhappy way to live. I would prefer to apply this theory in a productive way. 

Whatever the case may be, today I am firmly N+1. And I feel good about that.

“There is no higher God in Silicon Valley than growth. No sacrifice too big for its craving altar. As long as you keep your curve exponential, all your sins will be forgotten at the exit.” -David Heinemeier Hansson

Snap Inc. went public last week. Offering price was $17. Closing price on the first day was $24.48. Given that the company is not profitable and may never be profitable (their caveat, not mine), many people have been asking: Is a valuation somewhere around $34 billion justifiable?

This is a common question when it comes to tech companies. And the answer usually comes down to something along the lines of this:

The Snapchat story “is all about growth,” Mr. Nathanson said. “It’s not about economics.”

It’s about the future.

I love Snapchat and I think the company is run by a very creative founder. But now that Snapchat Stories was stolen by Instagram, they need, in my humble opinion, something new and killer to stick.