
What’s the Matter with Boston Tech? - boynamedsue
http://recode.net/2014/12/10/whats-the-matter-with-boston-tech/
======
jhallenworld
What's the difference between MA and CA? How about that CA has banned non-
compete agreements, but MA has not. There was a proposal to ban them earlier
this year, but it fizzled.

AIM (entrenched industry lobbying firm) seems happy about it, anyway:
[http://blog.aimnet.org/aim-issueconnect/topic/non-compete-
ag...](http://blog.aimnet.org/aim-issueconnect/topic/non-compete-agreements)

[http://www.aimnet.org/employer-issues-
center/Non_Compete_Agr...](http://www.aimnet.org/employer-issues-
center/Non_Compete_Agreements.cfm)

"Proponents often cite California as a warmer, magical place because it bans
non-compete agreements. We note however that;  California allows non-competes
in certain business circumstances and many California-based companies use non-
competes in those circumstances.  Many California based companies use non-
compete agreements in other states where they operate, including
Massachusetts." Nice...

Let's see who's represented on their board: Intel, IBM, EMC, GE, Raytheon,
Microsoft, Harpoon Brewery? [http://www.aimnet.org/about-
aim/board.cfm](http://www.aimnet.org/about-aim/board.cfm)

------
baydinalex
It's seed funding. The seed funding ecosystem is a vortex of death in Boston.

We (Boomerang) moved to San Francisco after going 0/34 with Boston investors.
It took less than 30 days to have our full round complete after we got here,
and that was in 2010, before the seed market even started to feel frothy.

All the Boston talk about how "a good company can get funded here just as well
as it can in San Francisco; they just fund a lot of crappy companies out
there" is nonsense. Over half of those 34 Boston investors have paid us for
Boomerang.

The ideal company for a Boston tech investor is one gunning to be the #6
company in an already-established market, run by a 45-year-old dude who
graduated from HBS then worked for a 55-year-old VC's former company for a few
years. If you don't fit that profile, you need to be rich enough to not need
funding, you need to have a way to get yourself to $5m in revenue without
outside funding, or you need to move.

There were a lot of young, energetic founders working on exciting stuff
alongside us back in 2010-2011. I can think of one or two who still are. Some
of the rest moved. Most shut down their companies and went to work for a
45-year-old HBS graduate building the 6th most successful company in some
already-well-established vertical.

------
thesausageking
Odd article. If Boston is this amazing-but-quiet center of innovation, why not
feature founders and innovators ?

Besides the founders of Kayak and Runkeeper, everyone else interviewed worked
for a co-working space (tim row), a university (Abby Fichtner), a consulting
group (Michael Davies), or a large company like Microsoft (Annmarie Levins).

~~~
ghc
Most of the successful founders in Boston don't believe in the "promote Boston
tech" agenda and so probably weren't too keen on accepting the interviews.
It's basically the job of Tim Rowe, Abby Fichtner, etc. to promote Boston
tech, so of course they're the ones available to be interviewed.

------
noname123
Big shout out to Kendall Square. Just started working here. Tangential but
curious, any peeps who work at Kendall Square have any good food trucks,
restaurants, meetup's nearby to try out?

I like Clover/Chipotle, Sebastian's is too expensive and co-op food court is
still shut-down :(

Are there any cool meetup's to check out at Microsoft NERD center or at CIC?
Or any ideas about the hack/reduce, enterprise data science hacker-space vs.
the one in central square which seems to be more DIY. Also any cool talk
series/clubs I should check out at MIT, the only one I know is the 2600 meetup
and also their computational biology talks at STATA.

And has anyone been to the Kendall Sq. ice rink or any art-house film meetup's
at Kendall Sq. Cinema or other recreational stuff nearby?

EDIT: re: original post, I agree largely with the author's impression of the
local scene not heavily invested in "progressive consumer-tech" and want to
keep it that way! The Bay Area isn't for everybody and it isn't certainly for
me, so I hope that not every city try to emulate that and try to find their
niche.

~~~
praccu
Momogoose for life. There are a bunch of food trucks behind the T stop.

Also, check out Aceituna.

~~~
smeyer
Yes, this. Momogoose is fantastic. They have a truck by the T stop and a stand
by the mall.

~~~
jkestner
Oh, have they started making good food? I've had pieces of plastic fork in my
food, which itself was actually bitter tasting. When they got the order right.
They rebranded with a hip paint job to keep up with Clover when it showed up
and stole all the customers.

Friendly Toast/Cambridge Brewing Company is a nice spot. Area IV could be
awesome. Flour and Miracle of Science are the best.

~~~
smeyer
Yeah, I have heard the occasional horror story like year, but they seem to
have things mostly under control. I haven't been eating there all that long,
but word on the street is it's definitely better than back in the day.

Definite second to all of your other suggestions as well. I'm glad to see
HNers by and large seem to have good taste in Kendall area food joints.

~~~
praccu
Jumping (back) onto the Kendall food comment train:

Other places I haven't seen mentioned:

\-- Squeaky Beaker

\-- Boca Grande

\-- Take-out from Similans

Also, what happened to the MIT food court and when is it coming back? I want
terrible Chinese food again.

~~~
jkestner
The food court at the Kendall stop? That place has (had?) the best terrible
Chinese food. Cheap warm student fodder with too much rice. The one in the
student center had decent Indian food.

Oh, and how could I forget Helmand? So good! Afghani food is like a cross
between Indian and Middle Eastern, judging by them.

------
kylequest
Conservative VCs that feel comfortable investing in the "sure thing" or
defensible/patented tech (it's their money, so they are free not to invest it
:-)) and mostly conservative companies (noncompete agreements are just one of
the indicators).

Kendall Square is ok if you are a young kid (in school or just out of school).

The Microsoft NERD Center IS a good place to host tech events/meetups.

------
bcardarella
Money. Unfortunately VCs and Angels in Boston have a very poor reputation for
taking risk on startups. Instead they want to invest in companies that have
already proven their model or just need money to scale.

Public transportation. I know that every city dweller thinks their city has
poor public transportation options. Let me tell you, Boston has you beat. When
we take into consideration the perceived importance of the city and how
difficult it is to get from one side to another.

Insider's club. Unfortunately Boston still has a pretty strong insider's club
that affects most aspects of business in town.

Racism. Boston has a bad history of racism. For a city that prides itself on
being so progressive this is a black eye that I personally don't feel the city
has gotten over.

Weather. I know that this point was dismissed in another comment but it just
isn't about the winter. The two months of cold grey sky rain in the early
Spring is curshingly depressing.

Lack of a true "anchor" tech company. There really is no large tech company
that draws others in or produces talent. Many here think that Hubspot will be
that company, that remains to be seen.

San Francisco envy. It is pretty pervasive here. We call it the Boston Brain
Drain. The perception is that Boston is just a stepping stone on a developer's
career. "I learn in Boston I work in SF!"

Cost of living. I realize that SF and NY are more expensive but Boston I
suspect that you get more for your money in those cities. In Boston $3k/month
will get you into a triplex in Somerville with no T access. Living _in_ Boston
is out of the question for many making below six figures. (also for many
making above six figures)

Cost to run a business. I can count on my hand the number of neighborhoods in
the city that have office space below $30/sq-ft. Nearly everything in the city
is North of $40/sq-ft. And for that you get some run down Class B office space
that was recently bought by a Class A property company that wants high-end
Class B rates. And they are all pushing $1/sq-ft increase per year. With
nearly $2/sq-ft utilities. Startups looking for private office space have a
difficult time finding any in Boston.

All this to say that the medical industry does not have this same talent
retention problem. What keeps the world's best doctors in Boston but pushes
away the world's best software engineers? If Boston wants to make up ground on
SF (and even NY at this point) I think starting with this question might lead
to potential solutions.

~~~
frostmatthew
> All this to say that the medical industry does not have this same talent
> retention problem. What keeps the world's best doctors in Boston but pushes
> away the world's best software engineers? If Boston wants to make up ground
> on SF (and even NY at this point) I think starting with this question might
> lead to potential solutions.

It's curious you didn't lead with this paragraph since all but two of your
points (lack of anchor and SF envy) are applicable to biotech/medicine - thus
unlikely to be [significant] factors.

~~~
bcardarella
I agree with the exception of public transportation. Many of the hospitals
have deals with affordable housing in and around the hospital areas that
doctors early in their careers get preferential treatment for. Walking
distance commute to work, no MBTA needed.

------
bceagle
There are a few comments here that imply the problem with Boston is the
weather or culture. That is way off base. Of course there are people that hate
the weather or don't like the culture, but there are just as many people that
love it.

Also, while Boston doesn't have a huge consumer success story, the startup and
tech scene is thriving. Just spend a couple months going to meetup groups or
other events like the CIC Venture Cafe and you will understand.

The problem as the author alludes to is not with starting companies, but
growing them. More specifically, there is no doubt funding for consumer-based
companies is easier in the bay area. It really bummed me out to see Technical
Machines and Platiq move to the San Fran.

That said, I do think things can and will eventually change. Paul English and
others have started to heavily invest in consumer based businesses in Boston.
I believe like he does that other than the issues getting funding, there is no
reason why consumer based businesses can't thrive here.

------
freyr
Why would I, as an engineer, choose Silicon Valley over Boston? It's a petty
reason, perhaps, but tech workers on the west coast enjoy prestige.

In Boston, you rub shoulders with a large population of well-heeled management
consultants, bankers, and corporate lawyers whose annual bonus might be
several multiples of your total compensation (this exists everywhere, of
course, but the banking and management consulting industries are more
conspicuous in the northeast). There's also a huge medical community and many
doctors in the area. These constitute the high-status jobs, and unfortunately
tech falls way lower on the social ladder.

~~~
ghc
I think you've pretty much nailed it. A highly paid engineer is still
basically upper middle class in a land of multinational corporate lawyers,
consultants and bankers.

------
Agathos
Boston Tech? Didn't it move to Cambridge and change its name?

------
owly
voltage coffee. clover. tatte. mead hall. etc.

------
escapefromb
The problem with Boston tech is having to live in Boston.

I recently heard someone describe Boston as "racist San Francisco with worse
weather".

------
inthewoods
Nothing.

------
michaelochurch
California's non-compete ban (see jhallenworld's post on the issue) is huge.
California also bans "we own your side projects" clauses, which is major. Even
if, on technicalities, the states may not be very different, the perception is
strong enough to scare people into California, a state that otherwise wouldn't
have more than weather and inertia.

One of my posts is already linked here, by mwhite, and my perception hasn't
changed. I don't see progressivism in Boston companies. I see smart people but
old thinking. Then again, the old thinking (reinvented using fratty Young
Republican types who get funded) is invading the Valley.

I'm glad to see that Boston is taking on Real Technology. That's great.
Honestly, if something can be run by Lucas Duplan or Evan Spiegel, it probably
shouldn't be done and it certainly shouldn't be funded at the expense of
something legitimate. All that said, one of my gripes with Real Technology
(and with Boston) is that there tends to be a militant PhD Bigotry in it. I
get that advanced degrees are more common than pigeons out there, but it's a
bit irksome to be treated like a junior just because one doesn't have an
doctoral degree.

I mean, look, I'm not without cognitive ability. If I weren't a public figure,
I could lie and say I was a Stanford PhD in CS and would easily pull it off.
Almost everyone would believe me (except for Stanford CS graduates, who could
call me out on campus specifics or professors). I have zero interest in lying
about my background or history; my point is that I'm smart enough that I could
get away with it and hold up. So the lack of a credential shouldn't matter,
yet I've had more than one Boston company (when interviewing with them, in the
past) tell me that I wasn't a _real_ data scientist or a real quant because I
didn't have a PhD. Never mind that I am so much smarter than the person who
set these little rules in place that I could claim that I invented the letter
"Q" and they'd believe me.

Real Technology can afford PhD Bigotry now because there isn't much of it and
(unlike the consumer web space, which is mostly stupid and product-driven but
takes more chances on people) it can be picky, so long as it doesn't try to
expand. But these academics and ex-academics need to realize that if they want
to be relevant again instead of falling into another AI Winter, they've got to
drop the pedigree bigotry.

Ok, that last rant has more to do with technology in general than with Boston.
I guess I'm here to say that I'm very glad to see Boston's high valuation
applied to _substance_ getting it some press. I want Boston's tech scene to
succeed. Anything that can compete with the Valley deserves unwavering
support. In order to do so, however, it has got to enter the 21st century.

~~~
pentelkuru
> _Honestly, if something can be run by Lucas Duplan or Evan Spiegel, it
> probably shouldn 't be done and it certainly shouldn't be funded at the
> expense of something legitimate._

Wow, you really have an axe to grind with those two, don't you? Despite their
issues, they became "public figures" by tapping into something people want,
rather than by writing endless bitter diatribes about how the world is unfair
for not recognizing their brilliance.

> _Never mind that I am so much smarter than the person who set these little
> rules in place that I could claim that I invented the letter "Q" and they'd
> believe me._

You've very publicly defined yourself as a guy with a massive chip on his
shoulder, who blames everyone but himself when he doesn't succeed. Good luck
with that.

~~~
michaelochurch
_Wow, you really have an axe to grind with those two, don 't you?_

How is Clinkle "something people want"? Snapchat, sure. I'll give it that.

These unlikeable Joffreys are bad for the world and bad for our image as
technologists. Thanks to them, people think of technology as a playground for
reckless rich kids, not a slow and laborious and _thoughtful_ process. That's
going to lead to backlash like we haven't seen. (Vomiting on a bus isn't
"backlash". We haven't see it yet.) I'd like to prevent that by having an
honest dialogue with the public at large about what technology really is and
what it should be doing. In order to get there, we have to toss away some
distractions (and the midlife crisis sadsacks who fund unqualified frat boys
to live vicariously through young sociopaths).

Obviously, these guys are envy flashpoints: they're young, not that bright,
unlikeable, and insanely well-connected. (And Spiegel is rich. Duplan, maybe
not.) I'm well aware of that. I don't pick them because of personal envy, but
I am cognizant of this fact about them, because (a) it makes them useful when
proving a point because of the visceral resentment they draw, and (b) because
they're such a risk to _our_ image as technologists. These are the ones we'll
have to control and mute _now_ before we lose the trust of the public. It was
people like Spiegel and Duplan getting funded in the '90s that created the
perception of us (all of us, even though those types were a minority) as being
arrogant and immature, and that made the 2002-04 startup winter so brutal.

~~~
eli_gottlieb
Disclaimer: I know jack shit about these men.

I don't think the douchebags are the problem. The insane, Gilded Age-level,
verging-on-Medieval-level inequalities of income and wealth are the problem.

~~~
api
That's kinda like saying the problem is clouds, not rain. :)

~~~
eli_gottlieb
Which means I'm succeeding in complaining about the cause rather than the
effect, yes ;-).

~~~
michaelochurch
The douchebags <-> inequality connection goes both ways.

Extreme inequality produces douchebags because it enhances the importance of
authority and favors promotion of those who'll uphold arbitrary authority (in
order to enjoy a powerless but _privileged_ status, hence the connection
between the douchebag and what is sometimes called "white privilege") over
those with actual talent.

That said, those douchebags are promoted for a reason, which is their
usefulness as stewards of an unfair, failing society who'll keep the secrets
of the shit running it. This keeps them in power and enhances social
inequality.

------
hnriot
Boston's losing tech startups to SF because the weather here is drastically
better (well, not today...)

All other things being equal, we have better beer, more sunshine, a bay that
doesn't turn to ice in winter, an airport you can fly in and out of reliably
without the constant storm closings, faster public transport and of course
California Girls (1) :)

1\.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuENHA1l_K0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuENHA1l_K0)

~~~
NateDad
Almost everything you said is blatantly incorrect with the possible exception
of better weather (some of us actually like having seasons... But it is
obviously much colder in winter).

~~~
hnriot
I think you mean to say patently, but aside from that mistake I just don't see
what you're saying, clearly CA has better weather, it's not a matter of being
a "possible exception", the rest well, Cambridge has some decent beers it's
true, I lived and worked there for a couple years, but the micro breweries in
CA are better. SFO is much more reliable to fly in an out of, I should know, I
flew into and out of Logan so many times and countless times flights are
cancelled. By the time I'd get to SFO it would be clear blue skies and
uneventful arrivals. As for MUNI vs MBTA, SF has much newer, faster trains,
MBTA is like going back 40 years to rickety old trains and antiquated (but not
quaint) stations. I suppose you disagree, and of course some of this is a
matter of opinion, you might like your trains and you might like airport
delays, traffic delays, shitty weather for 8/12ths of the year. One thing
Cambridge does do better than SFO is universities. I'll give you that.
Colorado makes better beer than either Cambridge or San Francisco, better
still, English beer of course.

There's a reason why most startups are here, the brightest minds want to live
here, after going to school there and getting sick of all the above.

