
Top 10 States for Entrepreneurs -- The list may be surprising - danielha
http://images.businessweek.com/ss/07/02/0228_states_entrep/index_01.htm
======
pg
This reminds me of those college rankings where they calculate each college's
score by dividing the number of books in the library by the percent of faculty
with beards. GI, GO.

------
omarish
I think the algorithm needs some work. It could make sense mathematically, but
it doesn't model things correctly.

Take Virginia, for example:

"Ranked No. 1 in the "Fastest-Growing Firms" indicator" and "Ranked No. 2 in
the "High-Tech Jobs" indicator,"

and then

"Ranked No. 47 in the "Entrepreneurial Activity" indicator"

We have a lot of fast-growing firms, a lot of high tech jobs, but very few
people are running startups here.

But if you think about it, what is it that makes a startup hub? A university
campus? A high tech sector? PG says a lot about this, I think the conclusion
is that they exist where you make them exist.

------
danielha
Does anyone have any thoughts of the list?

I'd have thought that California would be placed higher than spot 5.

From the article:

"The rankings are not a guide to the best states to start a new business, nor
are they the best states to move a business toat least not in the traditional
sense of weighing where to find cheap labor and low taxes, says Rob Atkinson,
president of the ITIF and lead author of the study. "But if you're an
entrepreneur trying to do something new, something that's based on new kinds
of products or services, and you want to be globally linked and need highly
skilled workers and IT infrastructure, this is a much more accurate tool for
that," says Atkinson."

\---

So I'm interested to see exactly what parameters went into determining the
best places for "an entrepreneur trying to do something new."

~~~
jwecker
Well, did you notice most of the top ten list had things like- Ranked No. 50
in the "Entrepreneurial Activity" indicator. Obviously they weighed that
indicator very lightly or else ignored it altogether. As for me, I think that
in a free (enough) market the entrepreneurial activity indicator would be the
most accurate of all. I think this article was to help state and civic
governments feel good about themselves. Even the indicators like Venture
Funding available and IT force don't mean much in the context of startups, in
my opinion. Not if the IT force are all government workers (like in Virginia)
or the VC firm has a small portfolio of enormous brick-and-mortar businesses
(dunno if that's true in one of those).

Possibly insightful initial data. Bad algorithm IMO for the conclusion.

~~~
jwecker
Ah, see- Elfan just posted this: http://news.ycombinator.com/comments?id=1568
Exactly.

------
davidw
Oregon's got a lot going in the open source arena (besides having Linus
Torvalds living there). Almost enough to make me pack up and go home...

~~~
Harj
There's only one metric worth paying attention to when deciding how good a
place is for entrepreneurs - the number of successful companies started there.

Silicon Valley is the best place for tech startups because there are more tech
success stories here than anywhere else. Success stories bring with them: \-
Capital injection into the economy \- Happy investors prepared to take more
risk in their portfolio \- Inspiration to young entrepreneurs \- More networks
and experience

Anything else is irrelevant in my opinion.

~~~
jimream
This top 10 list is worthless your right. especially to this community. Heres
why:

The entrepreneurs on this "newsgroup" are ALL web entrepreneurs. This means
that half of the criteria do not even pertain our needs/interests as founders
of entrepreneurial ventures. (tech populations / graduation rates may apply
but those should be looked at separately.

Let me pose this question. If VC/angel fudning / programmers needs / location
was not an issue, where would you start your company?

There are a lot of places in this country that in my opinion would gather much
more interest on a local level that starting a company in NY or SF. I think by
starting a web company in an already "hot" web area is like opening a
starbucks across the street from a starbucks? Sure you know it will get
business, but it would be better if it was the 1st starbucks on a major
University Campus.

By launching in a less saturated market, you have the benefit of traditional
sources of media attention so that you receive high adoption rates locally,
which as we know is vital to high adoption rates globally. Does company
location have anything to do with adoption rates?

Thoughts?

------
jimream
.

