Tag: new york

Why have cities like New York, London and San Francisco become tech hubs?

What are the ingredients that have driven today’s tech startup centres to prominence?

One of the recurring topics this site keeps returning to is how cities like San Francisco and London have seen an explosion of tech startups in recent years.

Probably the spectacular of all the cities that have shot to prominence is New York;  a decade ago tech startups in the city were a rare thing, today there are thousands.

Today I had the opportunity to visit AlleyNYC, one of New York’s biggest tech accelerators. It’s impressive how a venture two years old can be so successful.

A question I asked was ‘what has driven the change in New York?’ The consensus was the combination of the Great Depression and the success of high profile companies like Facebook.

The success of high profile startups has validated the business model in the eyes of both investors and founders, people who would have been reluctant to leave their jobs and start a business now see the opportunities while investors can see there are returns to be made.

What’s notable about cities like New York, London and San Francisco is the depth of industry expertise, capital, networks, education institutions and diversity. These are key factors in attracting tech startups.

For other cities aspiring to be ‘the next Silicon Valley’, it would be worthwhile considering where their strengths lie compared to these giants.

It’s not a given that any of today’s global leaders will be the future centres of industry, but other cities and regions will need to have a very strong reason for businesses to choose them over the incumbents.

Similar posts:

It’s hard copying Silicon Valley

New York City struggles to create its own Silicon Valley, but should it need to?

This site has looked at cities wanting to become imitations of Silicon Valley in the past.

New York, along with London, has been one of the places most likely to create its own Silicon Valley.

The New York Times though describes how that journey isn’t proving easy, with the city boasting few major tech successes.

The question though is does New York really want to be Silicon Valley – or San Francisco for that matter?

Right now the Bay Area is sexy and the centre of the world’s growth industries; but so too were Detroit and Birmingham, England once upon a time.

Perhaps it’s better to work on being the next big thing rather than trying to imitate today’s successes.

Similar posts:

New York celebrates its entrepreneurs with Made in NY

New York City shows how cities and nations have to promote their economic strengths

Part of a thriving industrial hub is having the business and skills that support the sector. If you’ve got them, you need to tell the world you’re open for business.

Somebody who is doing this well is New York City’s Office of Media and Entertainment which runs the Made In NY program.

While much of the focus of the program is on attracting film production, Made in NY recently branched out into promoting the city’s tech community boasting successful businesses like video sharing site Vimeo, tutor matching service Tutorspree and stock photography supplier Shutterstock.

Towards the end of the Shutterstock clip one of the staff mentions ‘drop bears’ – a little bit of Sydney argot creeps into the story.

It’s the Sydney connection that makes the Made In NY campaign so bittersweet, I was involved in setting up the Digital Sydney project for the New South Wales government.

While Sydney doesn’t have the size of New York’s or London’s tech industries it does share the advantage of being one of the most diverse cities in the world. The work of organisations like ICE in Parramatta is important in realising some of that potential.

That potential is huge – having sizeable communities of East and South Asian language speakers gives Sydney a real opportunity in the Asian Century.

Unfortunately most of those communities live in Sydney’s West and while lip service is given to the needs of that region most economic development work focuses on corporate welfare for established interests and supporting inner city stuff that white folks like.

When I started at what was then the Department of State and Regional Development in 2009 I was told that many in the agency believed NSW stood for “North Sydney to Wooloomoolloo”, something that largely turned out to be true. The west of Sydney, like most of the state, took second place behind the wants of big business.

This is what’s encouraging about the Made In New York campaign, it promotes smaller business – although they all seem based in lower Manhattan staffed largely by a middle class monoculture, which seems to be a problem when you buy into hipster chic.

Hipster chic is one of New York’s strengths and that’s what every city and country needs to be doing in a global connected economy.

If you can’t define and articulate what it is you add to the economy, then you’re locked into the low value, small margin commodity end of the marketplace and that is a tough place to be.

The question for all of us, on a personal and a national basis, is do we want to be price taking commodity producers or do we want to develop the high value, growth business of the 21st Century.

New York City has made its choice, we have to make ours.

Similar posts:

How the film industry cons governments

Do government incentives really build a sustainable movie industry?

“I would never make a movie where I didn’t get an incentive and I don’t ever intend to” states Michael Benaroya, producer of the movie Margin Call, in a New York Times story on movie studio subsidies.

While we focus on the cost of subsidies to motor manufacturing, one sector that beats all others for playing governments for suckers is the global film industry.

“Incentives” are a huge factor in determining where studios will film their latest blockbuster, Australia’s learning this the hard way as rent seekers looking for fat subsidies parade Hollywood stars in an effort to convince publicity hungry ministers that giving fat payments to the major production houses is good for jobs.

The problem with this is that these susbidies aren’t that great for employment – Accompanying the New York Times’ video is a story on how Michigan’s dream of building a film industry has foundered.

“Film is one of the few industries that’s really well subsidised and that’s a really attractive thing” Michael Benaroya says in the video.

Before Michael even made the movie, he sold the rights to the New York production subsidies to investors. Who says financial engineering is the purview of Wall Street?

The question for governments, taxpayers and those who want to build a sustainable movie industry in their city, state or country is do you want to attract “entrepreneurs” like Michael Benaroya who are shopping around the world for the best deal.

New York might be the flavour today, but tomorrow it might be Sydney, Toronto or Prague. If the incentives aren’t fat enough then the movie productions may not come back for decades.

In the meantime the crews, production assistants and catering companies who make up most of the employment on a major production move onto other jobs so the skills and industry infrastructure is lost.

The biggest challenge is for governments, it’s estimated that New York state gives away over $400 million in subsidies and it’s difficult to see how that sort of expenditure can be justified as politicians face cuts to basic spending in today’s austere times.

For the taxpayers, we need to be demanding fair value and real long term plans behind the subsidies doled out to the film, motor manufacturing and other industries.

During the good times it was easy for opportunist politicians to dole out money to rent seekers for a media opportunity or to boost votes in a key electorate, but today that spending has to be strategic with real value and outcomes.

As Michael Benroya shows, when an entire industry is based around government subsidies and incentives the leaders are those who know how to manage the bureaucracy and fill in the forms properly. Is that what we want our industries to become?

If the answer is ‘yes’, then the next question is ‘can we afford it?’

Similar posts:

When disruption meets regulation

Innovation wasn’t meant to be easy, particularly when you’re against vested interests.

Taxi booking applications have been one of the big areas for smartphone developers. Around the world apps for hailing cabs have popped up following the lead of San Francisco’s Uber.

One of the opportunities for copycat developers is that in most places taxis are regulated by the local city or state government, so an app for New York will struggle in Los Angeles, Paris or Tokyo and savvy entrepreneurs can create their own Uber knock off suited to their own location.

The problem is in most places taxis are regulated as a cartel, not a public service. Sometimes that cartel is to protect drivers, sometimes the companies that run the networks and often taxi license holders.

Sydney, Australia, is a good example of the latter two. The New South Wales state government’s rules are designed to protect the interests of the greedy ‘investors’ who’ve bought taxi license plates and the networks who run the booking systems and management of the cabs.

The result is Sydney cab drivers are treated like serf in what can only described as a feudal system while customers have to put up with lost bookings, poorly kept vehicles and high taxi fares.

It’s a lousy deal all round and is a great example of where disruption can change things for the better.

The problem is the incumbents will fight innovation that threatens their cosy and profitable arrangements and the regulators are part of that comfortable alliance.

In New York it looks like the Taxi and Limousine Commissioner does have some of the consumer interests at heart, pointing out that the metered fare is what passengers have to be charged by law. In most cities though, particularly Sydney, protecting the passenger is just another smokescreen for protecting vested interests.

Something that many innovators don’t realise is the power of those vested interests.

In the case of the taxi app developers many of them are about to get a nasty taste of just how vicious incumbent and their tame regulators can be when confronted with a threat to their cosy business arrangements.

Similar posts: