
Choosing New York over San Francisco - kellysutton
http://kellysutton.tumblr.com/post/901431677/choosing-new-york-over-san-francisco
======
ardit33
I think one major argument that he didn't mention is that NYC beats SF hands
down in the 'getting laid' department.

If you are young and your idea of having a good time is going out, partying
until 4am, and getting laid often, then you should stay in NYC.

If you a super hipster, social outcast and/or into weird stuff, then come to
SF. Your friends are already here.

~~~
geebee
I actually had a similar experience. Spent most of my life in SF but lived for
about 6 months in Manhattan. It was far, far easier to meet women. In fact, a
guy can even be a bit of a wallflower and still meet women in Manhattan,
because they will take the initiative. Funny, up to that point, I thought SF
was a pretty good place to meet women, because my only point of comparison was
San Diego, which is a pretty rough dating scene for men. I actually still
think SF is ok, because it has a greater concentration of jobs that appeal to
women, as opposed to the valley. But it's no manhattan (I suspect that nowhere
else in the world really compares). You know, this is actually one of the
benefits of being in a city where tech isn't the main industry. New York is a
far bigger center than SF for fashion, publishing, advertising, and so forth -
fields that attract more women than men.

~~~
wilschroter
Having lived on the east coast, midwest, and west coast, I would say the
resources are certainly different at a business level (capital, talent, etc)
although you can certainly make do wherever you go.

However, anyone who thinks there are hot girls in SF has never left SF.

~~~
sabat
_anyone who thinks there are hot girls in SF has never left SF_

Wil, you haven't lived here long enough to even know where to look. Also, SF
!= the bay area.

------
wooster
Not every time, but much of the time, I try to talk about what I do with a New
Yorker (most East Coasters, actually), they start by bringing a lot of stop
energy[0]. They'll say something like "Why are you doing that when there's
already X?"[1], "That'll never work because of Y"[2], "Why did you quit your
job at Z?", "Why don't you go work at ABC Investments, Hedge Funds, and
Worldwide Arbitrage, Inc?"[3], etc.

It's frustrating and tiring to have to run through a huge body of what should
be background knowledge just to have a conversation with someone about what
I'm doing.

In the Bay Area, I generally don't have to deal with:

\- Huge amounts of stop energy.

\- Myopic views about which industries/products/companies/places[4] matter.

\- Support of entrenched monopolies or ideas.

\- Excessive amounts of negativism.

For example, when the iPhone came out, people in Silicon Valley were really
excited. Meanwhile, talking to people in New York, it was almost a non-event;
all I heard from them was why it would never matter because the Blackberry was
so freaking awesome.

[0] <http://www.userland.com/whatIsStopEnergy>

[1] Why are you going to work for Apple? Nobody uses Macs and Microsoft is a
much bigger tech company.

[2] Nobody here uses iPhones, you'd better get yourself a Blackberry!

[3] The future is bundling mortgage securities!

[4] If you can't find it in Manhattan, it can't be found! Best city in the
world!

~~~
haseman
I'm not sure a little stop energy is such a bad thing. I'd say take their
views with some salt...but Silicon Valley tends to be an echo-chamber. What's
important in the valley isn't always important everywhere else. Unless your
business/venture/idea is only targeted at people in the Bay Area, it pays to
keep a little attention elsewhere.

~~~
wooster
Sure, but I and most of my friends and colleagues spend all day every day
thinking about and working on things which could be described as "the future".
The things I think are important are often things I think are going to be
important 3 or more years down the road, and that's why I'm working on them.
That potential may not be realized, but I can derive absolutely no value from
talking about them with someone who refuses to look beyond the here and now.

~~~
haseman
An imagined future with no grounding in the present is as useful as an oil rig
on a hot air balloon. ;-) Keep inventing the future...but ignore the Luddites
at your own peril.

------
probablycorey

      San Francisco is fun, don’t get me wrong. Compared to New York, 
      it’s boring. I have trouble even thinking about living in an 
      apartment in Mountain View, Cupertino or Palo Alto. Those places 
      are socially dead.
    

Mountain View, Cupertino or Palo Alto are not San Francisco. It is like
saying...

    
    
      New York City is fun, don’t get me wrong. Compared to San Francisco, 
      it’s boring. I have trouble even thinking about living in an apartment 
      in Staten ISland, East Rockaway or Westchester. Those places 
      are socially dead.

~~~
moxiemk1
True, but the error is more of a mis-choice of words ('San Francisco' instead
of 'Bay Area') rather than ideas, since If we're only considering San
Francisco, the tech dominance starts to fade a little bit.

Also, while we're calling people for misspeaking, Staten Island _is_ New York
City.

~~~
jseliger
_Also, while we're calling people for misspeaking, Staten Island is New York
City._

True, but Staten Island _feels_ like New Jersey -- even, I suspect, to most
New Yorkers. I have a friend from Staten Island, and when I talk about going
back to New Jersey, it drives her crazy.

I can't imagine people from New Jersey minding being mistaken for New
Yorkers...

------
lr
I agree with the (title of the) post very much, but one major point I would
like to make is: Mountain View != San Francisco! I find it very misleading
when people talk about San Francisco (usually in a negative light) and what
they are really talking about are the suburbs of SF. Please stop doing that.
That would be like saying NYC is boring because you are actually talking about
Yonkers.

~~~
jbooth
Yeah, but 80% of the tech employment is down there. So you either have a
horrific commute or get to live in the suburbs.

That alone seals it for me, I'm staying in NYC. Although maybe I'd get more
work done if my immediate environment bored me to tears.

~~~
papa
Well it is possible to work for a tech company and stay in SF. You just need
to work with a more restrictive set of job requirements. I got tired of doing
the long commute in 2003 and decided to only look at companies within the city
limits. It took a year to find something I really liked, but it was life-
changing to be able to work and live in the same place and avoid the 50-mile
one-way commute.

And, of course, you can start and operate your company out of SF (which is
what I eventually did as well).

------
marcusbooster
I've lived in a number of cities and surprisingly the Internet looks the same
in all of them.

~~~
gaustin
I agree.

The internet is the same here in Helena, MT as it is in any other city or town
on the planet. Sure, the connection speeds leave a bit to be desired and
there's little startup community. But there are exceedingly few places that
have a quality of life to match it, especially if you are into trail running
and mountain biking.

Maybe it'll be a bit harder to startup here. Maybe I'll end up moving if I
create a startup with legs, or after I completely trash my body running
ultras.

I've made my choice. I hope everyone else does too.

------
mkelly
Well said. The point that Wall Street != New York is particularly important
here, w.r.t Antonio's post. I've only been here a year, but I know New York is
_big_ , and it is _not_ homogeneous. I don't think Antonio ever realized that.

Also, kudos to blip.tv. I had a chance to meet a few of the blip kids a few
months ago and you guys were really cool.

~~~
biggitybones
Seconded. I rarely interact with those types, and I work for a major
consulting company in the city. There are multiple ways to avoid that crowd,
starting with staying out of Murray Hill.

The thing I love about New York is the inherent challenge. You're among some
of the most competitive people in the world who love nothing more than to
squash your idea. And if you manage to convince those people or rise from
their negativity, you know you're onto something.

I view it in many ways as its own little market economy with (close to)
perfect competition among commodities. If something facing fierce competition
(like restaurants, for example) can hold its own, you know there's some
quality behind it.

~~~
davidw
> The thing I love about New York is the inherent challenge. You're among some
> of the most competitive people in the world who love nothing more than to
> squash your idea. And if you manage to convince those people or rise from
> their negativity, you know you're onto something.

So you're saying that if you have the ability to make it there, the
probability of making it in other locations is high?

~~~
biggitybones
I always have trouble wording it in a way that doesn't convey that logic.. I
just mean there's much more resistance to go through to vet your idea, for
better or for worse. The NY tech community has a lot of the same personality
as the HN community - just because you are a part of it doesn't make you less
likely to succeed without it but it's great at providing guidance and
critique.

I hope that clarifies, I still haven't found a great way to articulate it
appropriately.

~~~
pvg
[http://www.lyricsfreak.com/f/frank+sinatra/new+york+new+york...](http://www.lyricsfreak.com/f/frank+sinatra/new+york+new+york_20056380.html)

Take a look at the 5th stanza. Then look at the comment you're replying to.

------
Ixiaus
I like this rebuttal, a lot. I will say, having lived in California, Nevada,
New Mexico, and Kentucky (not in that order) has made me realize this: culture
counts for a lot, the internet is prolific, and calling any large American
city a "technological backwater" is a farce.

A lot of people = a diversity of ideas = culture = innovation. New York has _a
lot_ of people and _a lot_ of culture, quite a bit of innovation has come out
of that city; California (as a whole, not just the Valley, I live in SD right
now) has _a lot_ of people and _a lot_ of culture. The same can be said for
Atlanta, Dallas, etc...

I will note this difference, though: much of California's culture embraces the
leading edge more than it's east coast counterparts - computers and the
internet _is_ the leading edge; the internet is an agent of social reform and
change, technology (computers) is the vessel through which widespread social
reticulation is delivered. Therefore, I do not think New York is a
technological backwater; but I do think the people in
California/Portland/Seattle can be more progressive and this is why the west
coast is carrying the torch.

Small disclaimer: I've been to New York but I haven't lived there, my
conclusion is derived much more from intuition than actual experience.

------
jonknee
> Given the lifestyle in the City, products are much closer to the pavement
> and are a solution to a real-world problem from Day 1. Not some social
> network plaything.

Humorous considering it's hosted by Tumblr, a social plaything based out of
NYC. Foursquare is another that comes into mind as a questionably "real-world
problem" solver social network plaything that came out of NYC.

~~~
prodigal_erik
Real-world problems? I get that a lot of software is just toys, but isn't NYC
the home of economy-jamming fictional assets which only exist so a permanent
overclass of full time traders have something to make more side bets on?

------
gunmetal
Palo Alto is not in San Francisco. Look at a map. Comparing New York City to
Palo Alto is like comparing San Francisco to Burlingame.

------
cageface
Another common gripe about California that I'll echo here: there's no weather!
It may sound masochistic but I miss the seasons, the snow, wearing a scarf,
sheltering inside with a cold nose and hands with something warm. The passing
of the seasons gives life a constant pulse and direction. The eternal summers
of CA get to be disorienting after a while.

~~~
pjhyett
I find the ability to drive and experience seasons, like going to Tahoe during
winter, is far more agreeable than being forced into them.

I spent 20 years in Chicago with its freezing winters and hot and humid
summers and San Francisco's mild climate is a dream.

~~~
risotto
Hear hear.

I do suspect no seasons makes some of the LA natives a bit wacky. It's good
character building to deal with shitty weather for a while.

But CA has all the advantages here. The day-to-day weather is consistent and
mild, and there is easy access to whatever nature you desire for a change.
Mountains for skiing, the ocean for swimming, surfing or boating, forests and
deserts for hiking.

I was stuck in Michigan weather for 20 years too. Literally stuck in the
winter. Having options is much nicer than not having options.

~~~
shadowfox
> no seasons makes some of the LA natives a bit wacky

By the count entire countries in the tropics should be wacky :P

------
usaar333
Nothing like an inflammatory rebuttal to an inflammatory essay.

"The social component of a real city with museums, clubs, venues, pubs, bars
and barcades is important."

SF has all of these. Obviously less by virtue of being in a metro area a third
the size of NYC, but you aren't going to get bored.

"Am I paying for a car? No."

Many San Franciscans don't drive. That being said, having a car always has its
benefits - and a car in NYC (at least in Manhattan) is even tougher than in
SF.

"In short, New York City is more interesting and—I believe—better suited for
the startup and a young guy’s lifestyle"

Well, we all have different lifestyles. I enjoy yearlong mountain biking
that's only minutes away. I enjoy awesome snowboarding only 3 hours away. I
enjoy climbing 14,000 foot mountains. I enjoy not sweating in humid, hot
summers and freezing in snowy, cold winters.

I've spent about a month of my life in NYC (over various trips) and would
hands down take SF over it.

------
elbrodeur
This rebuttal is hilarious.

Kelly's TL:DR summary at the end should have been:

• NYC is more fun! And interesting! I'm 23. • I work at a big company, but
startups have happened here at least once. • What do I know? I'm only 23.

The original article was articulate if a bit bombastic. The most salient
points, which Kelly failed to address, were in my mind:

• The Bay Area has a culture and history of tech innovation • The Bay Area has
thousands of VCs and venture money • The Bay Area has top engineering schools
• The Bay Area has tons (metric!) more startups, entrepreneurs, hackers,
coders, etc.

The most telling sentence in Kelly's post is: "The social component of a real
city with museums, clubs, venues, pubs, bars and barcades is important."

A "real city"! Wow. By Kelly's estimation there must be at most only 2 or 3
real cities on the entire planet.

------
sdh
The title says "San Francisco" but the article only mentions "Mountain View,
Cupertino or Palo Alto" ... ???

What kind of comparison is this?

~~~
sabat
It shows us that the poster didn't understand where he lived. That's OK; there
are enough of us here, don't you think?

------
chaostheory
_Every once in awhile, you see a Google emerge from the Valley. But for every
Google emerging from the Valley, there are ten thousand equally ambitious
startups that fail. Some of them fail catastrophically... Given the lifestyle
in the City, products are much closer to the pavement and are a solution to a
real-world problem from Day 1. Not some social network plaything._

This is the main reason NY will never usurp Silicon Valley. Tech-wise NY's
culture is too conventional.

"Why build Z when X is good enough?"

"This idea is stupid."

"What's the point? It doesn't make any money."

------
dmor
Title really should be "Choosing New York over Silicon Valley" - the city of
San Francisco is night and day different from bedroom communities like Palo
Alto, Mountain View, etc.

------
wangwei
If you are trying to do a life style start up, New York is probably a good
place. (i don't have anything against life style business). Most of the
examples you gave,including the startup you work for are life style business.
So sure they would be more practical and making money from day 1. But you're
trying to do anything more ambitious, silicon vally is still the place to go.

------
commanda
"Given the lifestyle in the City, products are much closer to the pavement and
are a solution to a real-world problem from Day 1."

This makes no sense. How does NYC's "lifestyle" create products that are any
closer to "the pavement" than SF's does? Maybe Kelly should illustrate his
point by choosing some NYC companies and comparing their products with SF
products, or the products of startups from anywhere else for that matter?

------
Dnewz
Is san francisco ruby or python?

~~~
api
I don't know, but Boston is C++. Its mixture of hacker culture, hyper-IQ
academia, and classical puritan social values is sort of like implementing
closures with template metaprogramming and special #ifdefs everywhere for
compiler backward compatibility.

It's puritan social values plus academic liberalism plus nerds. It is backward
compatible but not strictly a superset.

Comparing cities to programming languages thread GO!

~~~
zackattack
Do you think Boston is the best city for nerds? I'm looking for a genuinely
pro-intellectual climate.

~~~
api
It's pro-intellectual, but it's also a bit stuffy and introverted.

If you like the quiet life, lots of academic options, and very tame social
gatherings then Boston is for you. If you like excitement, extraverted social
culture, and lots of new experiences then I'd look at SF.

Boston has some plusses: it's a walking city... possibly the only true walking
city in the country (of any size). You do not need a car. It's ridiculously
safe for a big urban area. Bostonians' idea of a bad neighborhood is one
without a Starbucks in eye-shot. It's very economically healthy and has a lot
of good high paying techie jobs.

But some of that could be said about SF too... just not the walking city part.
(Well, SF proper can be handled without a car, but all the techie stuff is in
the valley which is a car-centric suburb.)

Both are among the nicest cities in the country.

~~~
ChristianPerry
I moved from SF to Boston about six months ago.

SF is a great place to build a startup, but a lousy place to live. I never
felt like I could really be myself there (despite meeting hundreds of
supposedly like-minded people).

Bostonians are far less friendly on the surface, but man, you can really get
to know them. People are nerdy, intellectual, informed (and not just about
tech), opinionated, and largely quite sane.

The pace of the city is slower, too, in a way that I appreciate. When I go to
a tech event here, I'll often meet someone and spend an hour locked in
conversation with them. That kind of deep, engaged conversation _never_
happened in SF, where people are perpetually on the go, and cutting from one
thing to the next.

Outside of work, Boston (and by this I specifically mean Cambridge and
Somerville -- or "Camberville" as we call it) is the best place in the country
to be a nerd. The place is filled with swing dancers, LARPers, grad students,
cult movie screenings, comic book and game shops, and quite possibly more CTY
alumni than any other city.

Simultaneously, we've got a lot of general culture, too -- lectures, theater,
good food, and so on.

Stuffy and introverted? Sure, a bit. But you can get past that quickly, and
discover a wonderful place to live.

------
derekc
Why the * does this matter? Start sh* anywhere.

------
jasonlbaptiste
What about Boston in this whole discussion?

~~~
techiferous
We're too busy coding and working on our startups to comment. ;)

------
michael_h
"My city is better than yours!"

"No, it isn't!"

It's weird how opinions work, isn't it? I don't like either place - where does
that leave me?

~~~
risotto
Hopefully it leaves you in the city you live in, content with your life and
work and surroundings, just like the rest of us.

------
kp212
What about vendors for Wall Street? Anyone know where I could find vendors to
Wall Street that are still essentially tech companies? I figure that market is
huge in New York and might be a good alternative to the tradition IT in an IB
job.

------
capedape
Having lived both places SF feels like the place where new ideas meet with the
least resistance. In New York I'm more inclined to want to go out and ogle
girls in summer dresses, but NY is a very inspiring place to live, no doubt.

------
apinstein
+1 from a guy that did 2 startups in NYC over 3 years as well. My sentiments
exactly.

They are different environments with pros and cons, but I preferred the social
scene in NYC to SF by far.

------
steilpass
>along with Seattle, Los Angeles, Düsseldorf and Berlin So how is Düsseldorf,
Berlin compared to NYC and SF? Would you have moved to Berlin if blib.tv was
there?

------
mildweed
If you want an affordable, quality place full of capable, motivated people,
not to mention the headquarters of the Kauffman Foundation... Kansas City is
the place.

~~~
jakejohnson
I second this, KC is a great city for startups and very affordable. Lots of
motivated people at Startup Weekend and other events... many Ruby and PHP
devs, not enough design talent. UMKC is pushing entrepreneurship through their
E&I institute and student venture incubators.

------
cb33
Palo Alto is "socially dead"?

------
sabat
_Compared to New York, it’s boring. I have trouble even thinking about living
in an apartment in Mountain View, Cupertino or Palo Alto. Those places are
socially dead._

This post suffers from the presumption that everyone wants the same thing from
a city. So SF (really, the Bay Area) was not for you. It's for a lot of us.

Not all of us want to suffer awful winters and unbearable summers. Some of us
love natural beauty -- and not just the girls. And many of us like a different
kind of social scene than NYC offers.

Sure, NYC is exciting. I've been there, and not as a tourist. But it's not for
me. (Then again, I'm not 20.) SF (proper, not the Bay Area in general) is the
birthplace of cafe society. Mountain biking was born on Mt. Tam. This is a
unique, beautiful place, and a lot of people can't figure it out -- and so
they move. That's fine: we're already the largest state in the union. We don't
need any more people, thank you.

