
In support of the Startup Visa - robg
http://www.boston.com/business/technology/innoeco/2010/03/in_support_of_the_startup_visa.html
======
idlewords
I'm surprised to see otherwise smart people treating this idea seriously.
Consider just the following:

\- the whole point of startups is to test high-risk ideas in the crucible of
the market. This approach promotes highly risk-averse behavior (since the
penalty for failure is getting expelled from the country, along with your
family).

\- you're replacing a market test with bureaucratic criteria. What does it
mean to create five full-time jobs? Can I hire five people the week before the
deadline? Can I fire them the week after?

\- The proposal badly skews the relationship between investor and
entrepreneur. Since the entrepreneur's immigration status is conditional on
receiving funding, the investor has essentially received a free subsidy from
the government, and holds all the cards in the relationship.

\- Competitors without startup visa founders know what targets the startup
must meet, and can undercut them in order to sabotage their ability to meet
the visa test.

I'm sure others can think of many ways this system can be gamed. The more
philosophical objection is that the proposal runs against the basic ideas of a
startup - high-risk, high-reward activity, low bureaucratic overhead, a
tolerance for repeated failure, and the market as the ultimate arbiter of
success.

The bill is well-intentioned, but displays a striking level of naivete with
regard to people's behavior, and a blithe disregard for the pressures around
obtaining and keeping legal residency.

The right way to achieve these goals is through comprehensive immigration
reform that makes it easier to work legally in the country, acknowledging the
economic contribution of millions of undocumented immigrants at every level of
the economic ladder.

~~~
DaniFong
Any system will be gamed. The question is whether or not it is preferable to
push startups that would be founded out of the country, or destroy them. None
of your arguments describe why the startup visa is a worse idea than the
status quo.

I know literally dozens of foreign residents, working at tech companies, who
would love to create a startup here in the SF Bay -- here particularly in the
SF Bay, which has advantages and friends of theirs and frankly should be their
prerogative, but cannot legally do so because of visa restrictions. This
actually kills those startups outright.

As for the remaining very important portion of immigration reform that needs
to happen, I am not sure that as a country the US can get over its xenophobia
enough to change soon.

The time is right to make it easier to start companies: we're still in a
recession, the political winds are in our favor.

~~~
psranga

      I know literally dozens of foreign residents, working at tech companies,
      who would love to create a startup here in the SF Bay ...
      but cannot legally do so because of visa restrictions.
    

Next you meet them, ask why they are under "visa restrictions". It's highly
likely it's because of the current broken immigration system. It takes 6-10
years to get a green card (with practically no job mobility during that time).

Which is precisely what the comprehensive immigration reform that the parent
called for will fix.

Second, the startup _visa_ is still a _visa_. They will still have "visa
restrictions". It's highly likely to have restrictions against bailing from
the startup you were "authorized" to start and joining another startup or
becoming an employee at a company.

~~~
DaniFong
By 'will' do you mean 'would'? What comprehensive immigration reform do
actually expect to see passed?

~~~
psranga
Just two administrative changes will go a long way.

1\. strictly FIFO processing of applications on a nationwide basis (currently
applicants for green cards in regions with a large number of applicants such
as California can be processed slower than other regions)

2\. Reform the green card process so that job mobility is available when green
card app is in progress but not yet approved. This includes formalizing a
"grace period" during which time you can remain unemployed without losing visa
status or your place in the green card queue (but not be uninsured, collecting
govt. aid etc; most immigrants whom this will help save a lot so money is not
a problem for them)

------
mseebach
I'm not going to start a company in a country where my residence permit is
conditional on factors beyond my control. That is exactly the kind of
arbitrary constraints that makes me not want to spend my career in a big-co.

If it's just me, maybe. But I could be bringing a spouse, and there might be a
child in play - and at any given time, if my company fails, I could be given
two weeks to leave the country permanently?

If you want me, I'll come. I'll sign any number of pledges to never burden any
welfare budgets, or be convicted of felonies. I'll pay my taxes, and accept it
if I can't vote. But I won't compromise on permanent residence.

~~~
DaniFong
I'm sorry to say this, but the life of your company, and by proxy your
residence, is always subject to factors beyond your control -- random
disruptions you need to get around. You could be hit by a bus. It's not all
that uncommon. These constraints are a matter of degree.

~~~
idlewords
Getting deported because your business failed to meet an earnings goal is not
a random disruption, and it's pretty un-American to boot.

We have laws that let you keep your home in the event of bankruptcy for
exactly this reason - the understanding that failure in business should not
force you to uproot your family, which is what this bill proposes.

~~~
DaniFong
Absolutely; I don't assert that being kicked out is a good thing, but it's
likely a requirement for the bill to pass, and the relevant effected parties
would, like me, prefer to be able to choose. This is just one more slightly
less risky channel through which entrepreneurs, if they accept the risks, can
travel.

You would deny them this because you wouldn't be willing to take those risks
yourself? It's _that_ which seems unamerican.

------
ethanhuynh
I'm from Vietnam and we don't have a good and friendly startup culture here.
In fact, it's pretty harsh here, entrepreneurs have to face so many
constraints outside their control like government policy, corruption,
politics, no support from the community, no angel funds etc .. this is not
good for the morale, but we know what we have to do to overcome this,
bootstrapping is the only option now, we hope that after gaining the startup
momentum, we can move our startup to some other places to continue our dream.

~~~
mbenjaminsmith
No offense but that's exactly why Vietnam (and countless other places) are
suboptimal for startups. As soon as people make a mark they jump ship and take
with them their knowledge and ability to attract investment. Why don't you
become a success AND stay in Vietnam. Help develop a startup culture and
educate investors. I'm doing the same thing in Thailand. Feel free to contact
me if you want to chat about anything matthew [@] jukaroo [.] com.

~~~
ethanhuynh
I think Thailand and Vietnam have many things in common regarding the startup
culture, you were right mentioning that we can stay in Vietnam and be a
success, actually, that's what we always wanted to do. The point here is that
most people in Vietnam don't give entrepreneurs enough respect, and being an
entrepreneur here means you have to bear a great cost of being seen as
"jobless", and in my country, being "jobless" is the next worst thing to being
a criminal (Actually my girlfriend just left me because I don't have a job,
her family rejected me because I don't have a job).

When you go to VC (we have IDG venture fund here, they're the only one fund in
tech) to sell your idea, they'll ask you about things like IPs, proven
business model, stats about market size, market trends, demographic view and
yes, they look at your background carefully, ironically, if you're a
businessman with 15 year experience in business and tech and the like and can
come up with the "great" idea like Facebook clone (<http://bit.ly/c21XyJ>) or
Linkedin clone (<http://bit.ly/96o8lm>), chances are high that you'll get the
investment. Having relations with government officials is also important here
if you want to survive in the long run, especially when it comes to sensitive
things like Internet related services like social network or social news ...
So, when it comes to new product in new and untested market, you have to do it
on your own with your own budget, test and learn. I see many friends of mine
gave up their startup dream because they don't have enough support. It's a sad
thing, and this must be fixed soon.We want to prove that this is the wrong
thing

~~~
mbenjaminsmith
I just got your ping and I'm going to shoot you an email. Peace.

------
BerislavLopac
The Startup Visa is the most ridiculous idea ever, as I've been telling and
will continue to.

Instead of backing a stupid legislation to bring founders to the US, investors
should travel the world and fund startups in other countries. There is nearly
nothing one can do when starting up in the States than anywhere else.

~~~
hga
One of the common exceptions to "nearly nothing" is establishing a legal
business quickly and cheaply.

How about the need for cheap _and_ reliable electricity? In plenty of places
you have to budget for a serious UPS plus generator setup.

Rule of law, in a reasonable time frame?

Heck, until very recently it was impractical for a foreign VC firm to invest
in Canada.

Anyway, the existence of Silicon Valley, it's much smaller brother in the
Boston area, and the pale shadows of those two in the rest of the country
suggests that while one "can do" a startup elsewhere there seem to be location
specific competitive advances.

~~~
benologist
Those are solvable problems, and it's not like you can never _be_ in SF just
because you're based elsewhere in the world ... it's only a plane or two when
you're physically needed there.

There are negatives to being in SF or the states as well ... you can hire a
team in some parts of the world for less than you'll rent space in SF.

What are the things you and your startup _needs_ on a daily basis that you can
only get in SF / the USA?

~~~
idlewords
"it's only a plane or two when you're physically needed there"

That's assuming you're from a visa waiver country. If you're from anywhere
outside Western Europe, Japan or Australia/NZ, getting into the US is a
hassle.

~~~
benologist
That's true and it's a valid point, but when you're from a non-waiver country
the US embassies look for reasons you'll _leave_ the states and your business
is going to contribute to the list of reasons you'll come back. Certainly
there's no guarantee though that some people will ever get into the US.

My point really is what _on-going_ reasons are there to be based in the states
or specifically SF ... most of the time you're not going to be meeting with
investors or other entrepreneurs or hiring, you're just going to be working
and that part can be done anywhere.

~~~
idlewords
Mostly I meant that the friction of obtaining a visa makes it inconvenient to
make any trip on short notice, whether to meet investors, attend a conference,
or meet with potential partners.

~~~
BerislavLopac
The inconvenience is mostly for the investors, who would then have to travel
to other countries. So, does that mean that the US is about to set legislation
based on the inconvenience for a bunch of VCs? :-o

------
csomar
Am I missing something or what? How does this new Visa helps me? It even makes
it more awkward.

Let's assume I have a great idea in mind and got accepted at YC; will this
Visa help me bootstrap? No, so what's the advantage of this visa.

If you succeed to bootstrap from your country, so why move to the US?

------
ahmedaly
I hope they are serious about it. I am Egyptian, and I lost a funding
opportunity because of a visa refusal. But what is worse is.. that at the
American embassy, they did not understand what does a startup means :S

------
stse
What I personally think is most exciting if this gets adopted, is not the bill
itself but that US "hackers" see that they can influence politics. I've always
been impressed that you, even early on, had organizations like the Electronic
Frontier Foundation, the Free Software Foundation and Creative Commons. But
when you talk with Americans today in regards to things like the Pirate Party,
you're mostly meet with overall disappointment over the US political system.
So hopefully you now get the chance to find a different way to do something
similar.

Edit: If there isn't already one, someone should make a site for forming and
joining interest groups.

~~~
davidw
> US "hackers" see that they can influence politics.

Err... the ones pushing this through are VC's, who are, pretty much by
definition, a fairly well to do group. Closer to hackers than, say, Warren
Buffet, probably, but still, not quite the same thing.

~~~
stse
That's awesome, getting downvoted and commented on for the one word I put
inside quotation marks. I was referring to hackers as in Hacker News i.e. the
"startup community". Also it's pretty much impossible to do anything
political, especially in the US, without the help of influential people. I
could tell you the details of how it's done over here, but something tells me
you're not interested.

~~~
davidw
I didn't downvote you, and I commented because, well, I think you were to some
degree wrong (but not wrong in a bad, downvotable way, just incorrect). The
"startup community" is not what is driving this bill, it's the VC's.

------
dnsworks
It will be fun to read this bill right before it goes through it's final vote,
to see how many ridiculous additions have been tacked onto it..

~~~
protomyth
Believe me, after a while depression sets in when you do that.

