Below is a list of the US metro areas that saw a billion dollars or more in venture capital investment last year (2017). It is taken from a recent CityLab article by Richard Florida where he talks about the “
Below is a list of the US metro areas that saw a billion dollars or more in venture capital investment last year (2017). It is taken from a recent CityLab article by Richard Florida where he talks about the “
Below is a list of the US metro areas that saw a billion dollars or more in venture capital investment last year (2017). It is taken from a recent CityLab article by Richard Florida where he talks about the “
It’s worth noting that San Francisco – not San Jose (Silicon Valley) – is at the top of the list with nearly 1/3 of the US total last year. It’s also interesting to note that when you look at each metro’s share of the total change from 2006-2017 (the chart below), you get Los Angeles now punching above San Jose.
Florida also gets into which economic and demographic variables seem to be associated with higher levels of venture capital investment. For the rest of the article, click here.
I was out for drinks recently with a friend of mine who is a developer in California and she mentioned a few things to me that I thought were really interesting.
First, she talked about how virtually nothing gets built in the Bay Area “as of right.” And so the market is hugely supply constrained. She said, you’re lucky if you can get your entitlements in 2 years. It’s starting to take longer. I immediately said: “That’s Toronto.”
Second, we talked about Proposition 13, which was timely given this recent post. One of the consequences of Prop 13, beyond helping golf clubs survive, is that longtime homeowners seem to be highly incentivized not to move.
Their property taxes are so below market that it can be more cost effective for them to stay put as opposed to downsize – even if they have too much house. This means far less turnover in the housing market.
Third, there really does seem to be a feeling in the Bay Area that it’s at a breaking point in terms of affordability. When a successful software engineer making $200,000 a year can’t afford housing, people naturally start to look to other cities.
We hear this refrain all the time in the media, but because I’m not active in that market, it was far more impactful hearing it from a friend.
It’s worth noting that San Francisco – not San Jose (Silicon Valley) – is at the top of the list with nearly 1/3 of the US total last year. It’s also interesting to note that when you look at each metro’s share of the total change from 2006-2017 (the chart below), you get Los Angeles now punching above San Jose.
Florida also gets into which economic and demographic variables seem to be associated with higher levels of venture capital investment. For the rest of the article, click here.
I was out for drinks recently with a friend of mine who is a developer in California and she mentioned a few things to me that I thought were really interesting.
First, she talked about how virtually nothing gets built in the Bay Area “as of right.” And so the market is hugely supply constrained. She said, you’re lucky if you can get your entitlements in 2 years. It’s starting to take longer. I immediately said: “That’s Toronto.”
Second, we talked about Proposition 13, which was timely given this recent post. One of the consequences of Prop 13, beyond helping golf clubs survive, is that longtime homeowners seem to be highly incentivized not to move.
Their property taxes are so below market that it can be more cost effective for them to stay put as opposed to downsize – even if they have too much house. This means far less turnover in the housing market.
Third, there really does seem to be a feeling in the Bay Area that it’s at a breaking point in terms of affordability. When a successful software engineer making $200,000 a year can’t afford housing, people naturally start to look to other cities.
We hear this refrain all the time in the media, but because I’m not active in that market, it was far more impactful hearing it from a friend.
Emily Badger of the New York Times published an interesting piece yesterday talking about the tech industry’s current obsession with trying to fix cities. And there are certainly many problems to fix.
Staying true to tech and engineering parlance, there’s lots of talk of optimization. How do you technologically optimize a city, for things such as affordable housing?
There’s no doubt that many of you will sympathize with this statement:
“To planners and architects, all of this sounds like the naïveté of newcomers who are mistaking political problems for engineering puzzles.”
But naïveté is not always a bad thing and with all of the money sloshing around in this industry, there’s also no doubt that this is likely a new era of city building.
The article ends by quoting JD Ross, the 27-year old co-founder of Opendoor – a startup that we have discussed many times before on this blog and is now valued at over $1 billion.
It is him saying that he wants to figure out how to put $100 million into this space as soon as he can figure out the right target to optimize for. “It’s better than buying a Bugatti.”
Of course Sidewalk Toronto – which is mentioned a few times throughout the article – is already a perfect example of tech infiltration.
But I think Dan Doctoroff gets it right when he posits that the real naïveté will come from disrespecting urbanist traditions.
Photo by David Alacaraz on Unsplash
Emily Badger of the New York Times published an interesting piece yesterday talking about the tech industry’s current obsession with trying to fix cities. And there are certainly many problems to fix.
Staying true to tech and engineering parlance, there’s lots of talk of optimization. How do you technologically optimize a city, for things such as affordable housing?
There’s no doubt that many of you will sympathize with this statement:
“To planners and architects, all of this sounds like the naïveté of newcomers who are mistaking political problems for engineering puzzles.”
But naïveté is not always a bad thing and with all of the money sloshing around in this industry, there’s also no doubt that this is likely a new era of city building.
The article ends by quoting JD Ross, the 27-year old co-founder of Opendoor – a startup that we have discussed many times before on this blog and is now valued at over $1 billion.
It is him saying that he wants to figure out how to put $100 million into this space as soon as he can figure out the right target to optimize for. “It’s better than buying a Bugatti.”
Of course Sidewalk Toronto – which is mentioned a few times throughout the article – is already a perfect example of tech infiltration.
But I think Dan Doctoroff gets it right when he posits that the real naïveté will come from disrespecting urbanist traditions.
Photo by David Alacaraz on Unsplash
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
