

Why are there no Googles, Microsofts, Twitters, Facebooks etc from UK? - pclark
http://network.businessofsoftware.org/forum/topics/why-are-there-no

======
vaksel
I think its partially due to the size of the market.

Most British startups start out building products for the British market. So
they have a 10-20 million target. Once they achieve major success, they figure
they'll go overseas.

U.S. startups start out building products for the American market, so they
have a 300 million target. And since our version of English is much more
prevalent online that target is even higher.

Since growth rates are more or less the same, you have British companies at a
disadvantage. While a US company might have 10 million users after 5 years,
the same exact company in Britain would only have 100K users.

The market share may be the same, but due to the sheer size of the market, the
U.S. company has a lot more customers. And once those customers start paying,
the U.S. company has a ton more $$$ to play with to grow even further.

There are obviously a number of exceptions, British companies doing well in
the American market. But those are the culturally aware companies, that
realize that the British culture is different from the American one.

~~~
kmcgivney
While you are correct that the population of the USA is around 300 million,
the population of the UK is roughly 60 million. Of course both numbers are
presumably more than the "target" you are talking about, but I think it's safe
to say that Great Britain is about 20% of the size of the USA.

Also, I don't understand the growth-rate math. Why would the UK company have
1/100th the number of users?

How much would the variety of English you use on a website alter your traffic?
I'm asking because I really don't know. Does anyone have research on this?

~~~
thirdusername
I can't point you at research but I've recently found that it does seems like
my American friends have a much tougher time understanding British-English
than I do as a non-native English speaker and from my experience non-native
speakers don't care what version is used as long as it's consistent (for those
that care a little at all). Personally I don't really notice if I'm reading
American or British English, I only notice when it's pronounced.

I too would love to see research.

------
pg
For Google, Twitter, and Facebook, the main reason is that there are fewer and
more conservative investors in the UK. Google and Facebook in particular
seemed super risky at first, and were only able to raise money from angels,
even in the Valley.

Microsoft is a different case. They're a generation older, and didn't rely on
investors. They were in the US because the microcomputer revolution happened
mainly in the US. The reasons for that are complicated, including the fact
that the British government interfered with (in both the British and American
senses) the British computer industry, and that getting rich was effectively
banned in the UK at the time the startup was being invented in the US.

------
oldgregg
In my own limited experience with brits I've found that culturally they love
creativity but only within conventional constraints. If you try to do
something that is really subversive I've gotten this "who do you think you
are?!" kind of attitude. They just generally don't share this American sense
of "you can be anything you want to be!" Just a contributing factor.

~~~
theblackbox
Just want to point out Banksy and his _best selling_ Wall and Piece. Shows the
depths of the "subversive" art scene here in the UK. From what I can tell the
creative industries here in the UK are not as few and far between nor as
obsequious as it might seem. I think it's harder to access and with less
momentum, but then that's in comparison to a trundling behemoth shouting
"Follow me!!!" at the top of it's voice....

------
symesc
The US strikes me as having less aversion to financial risk than any other
nation.

It's how they get into trouble (economic downturn) but it's also how they pump
out true innovation.

The US also has an overall aversion towards the distribution of wealth. If you
make money, you keep more of it there than in many other countries.

That attracts the people who want to be financially successful. And when you
have more of those people around, the more likely something good is going to
happen.

Go big or go home? They live it.

Clearly they have societal issues, but the US is a great place to be if you've
got money and talent. If you don't have those things, live somewhere else. . .
.

------
nailer
Spotify are UK / Swedish. I think they'll be bigger than Twitter.

~~~
vaksel
not when they block U.S. ips due to licensing issues

~~~
nailer
So did Apple when iTunes first came out. They'll make the deals and resolve
each territory step by step.

------
petewarden
As a Brit who moved to the US, I blogged my personal take on this a few days
ago: [http://petewarden.typepad.com/searchbrowser/2009/07/you-
cant...](http://petewarden.typepad.com/searchbrowser/2009/07/you-cant-fail-if-
you-dont-try-or-why-i-left-the-uk.html)

------
Kirby
IMDb is, well, a worldwide collaboration, but if pressed I'd say the driving
force was primarily British. (With help from America, Italy, Australia,
Germany, and a few other geeks of the day.) I suppose obsessive data gathering
is consistent with the stereotypical British mindset.

(It's been long since bought by Amazon, an American company, but a large
portion of IMDb employees are still in the UK.)

All things considered, though, my guess is that it has a lot less to do with
national character, and a lot more to do with the fact that the Valley is an
oddity. It's a great place to find exactly the right mix of people to make a
startup work, from potential smart employees to investors to experienced folks
who can give key advice. A startup in San Jose has a better chance at making
it out alive than one in London. And a fair number of entrepreneurs head to
the Valley from around the world for just that reason - the statistics are
hard to gather, but if you were to figure out what percentage of startup
_founders_ were British, of successful companies, the gap would narrow
considerably.

I'm currently at an awesome company in the Washington DC area (thinkgeek.com,
a Hacker favorite!) and we're having a real hard time finding competent senior
Perl people who are willing to live out here. I'm sure we'd have no problems
in Palo Alto. (I lived there for most of the 90s. And would again, happily.)

------
tybris
Can't speak for the UK. In the Netherlands we have Hyves instead of Facebook,
Marktplaats instead of eBay, bol.com instead of Amazon, and even the most
popular search engine was Dutch for a long time (ilse). The problem is it's
hard for these companies to enter foreign markets with such a limited base.

------
teamonkey
Last.fm is/was British

~~~
christofd
With an Austrian co-founder; employees were a European/international
hodgepodge; so, not necessarily brits in a strict sense.

~~~
teamonkey
Perhaps so, but based in Britain (London, to be precise).

------
zandorg
As for Google, Autonomy had Kenjin.

I think in the UK people are just after a career, and I know people who
wouldn't work on a speculative software project without applying for grants
(eg, free money).

The other problem is that VC's will probably only give to Cambridge/Oxford
grads.

I read in some place: "You need a PhD to turn research into a product" (in the
UK).

~~~
anigbrowl
All quite true. I like the British and lived there a long time but there's a
bias against startups and small companies which makes it hard to get the ball
rolling. Also, it's true that the grant culture is heavily embedded - partly
because of the social system, but also because the cost of living in the UK is
relatively high. Remember that in the UK as with most other European
countries, sales tax is close to 20%. In general, I'd say living in London is
about 50% more expensive than living in San Francisco.

------
crocowhile
I think it is pretty much for the same reason why there are relatively little
startups in Ohio or Wisconsin or South Dakota or younameit compare to the bay
area. There's a nice piece from PG online where he counts the most common
reasons why people do not start startups. The first 10 are, on my view, very
personal: 1\. Too young 2\. Too inexperienced 3\. Not determined enough 4\.
Not smart enough 5\. Know nothing about business 6\. No cofounder 7\. No idea
8\. No room for more startups 9\. Family to support 10\. Independently wealthy

The last 6, which apparently are the most powerful inhibitors, are rather
"social" IMO

    
    
        11. Not ready for commitment
        12. Need for structure
        13. Fear of uncertainty
        14. Don't realize what you're avoiding
        15. Parents want you to be a doctor
        16. A job is the default
    

I believe these latter are particularly influential in most European
countries.

------
jsmcgd
Many British entrepreneurs travel to California, like many other entrepreneurs
from around the world and like many non Californians within the USA. Brits and
other non Americans are well represented at the places mentioned and other
Valley start ups.

------
fauigerzigerk
At least one of my most admired companies, Autonomy, is UK based.

------
known
pg wrote an excellent article on "Why Startups Condense In America"
<http://www.paulgraham.com/america.html>

------
vldr
They already invented the web.

~~~
nailer
I think that was the Swiss.

~~~
nailer
Ah there you go, TBL is English. I stand corrected.

------
ptomato
Legal might be part of it. UK/EU libel laws, etc.

~~~
fauigerzigerk
I don't think litigation risk is greater in Europe than in the US at all.

------
access_denied
Apricot Computers was awesome. ARM, BBC Micro, Acorn.

~~~
zandorg
Definitely Psion in there too!

Oh, and Symbian is the British 'iPhone/Smartphone'.

