
Let's stop with the Silicon Valley comparisons - weston
http://michiganradio.org/post/lets-stop-silicon-valley-comparisons
======
Peroni
Unfortunately this isn't just a US-centric issue. The UK seems obsessed with
comparing itself to the valley.

There's even a wikipedia page for this stuff:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_places_with_%22Silicon...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_places_with_%22Silicon%22_names)

My personal favourite (in an face-palmy kind of way):
[http://i.imgur.com/WKYF1o9.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/WKYF1o9.jpg)

~~~
jballanc
Until very recently I lived in Bodrum, Turkey. One of the things it's famous
for is the castle in its bay. "Castle" in Turkish is "Kale" (pronounced as
cah-lay, close to rhyming with "valley"), so I used to joke that I worked in
"Silicon Kale".

~~~
pjmlp
Quite nice city. I was there last year.

------
codeddesign
I am sitting here rolling my eyes as I read this article. Really what it comes
down to is that state's in general want tech because tech industries tend to
bring in greater wealth and with economic wealth you have lower unemployment.

However, as a person born and raise in the Detroit suburb's, it's hard to
imagine that Detroit or the surrounding region's would ever be a location for
tech innovation.

You have a VERY large percentage of the labor force with no skill's beyond
manufacturing (auto industry), heavy small business tax, a youth population
that is migrating out to southern and western locations of the country, a non-
premium climate (winter 8 out of 12 months), heavy labor unions, and no
serious push from state officials to move internal perception towards an
industry/economy of technology.

Until the state as a whole begins actively pushing for industry reform and
SERIOUS incentives, Michigan will continue to follow it's current course which
is very little tech talent, very few tech oriented companies, high small
business tax, and very low incentive to start any type of innovation.

It is what it is.

~~~
rezistik
As another resident of the Detroit Metro, you make the world you want to see.
To say you can't _ever_ imagine the Metro being a location for tech innovation
is crazy to me.

Detroit and Ann Arbor both have decent start up support structures and they'll
increase with time and energy.

~~~
codeddesign
I highly disagree. Beyond medical/bio, Ann Arbor is way to small to support
any large scale change in the overall state market. While it does have it's
own small footing, it has little resource to expand outside of it's own due to
it's location. The location has corn fields to the north, west, and south. To
the east...between ann arbor and detroit you have...Canton, Plymouth, Van
Buren, Romulus, Taylor...all of those are heavy manufacturing communities.

Which goes on to my prior point. You have to change culture in order to do
that. The culture of the state is manufacturing with some bio/medical (Ann
Arbor, Grand Rapids).

Any innovation can really only come from 1 of 4 places... Detroit (metro), Ann
Arbor, Lansing, and Grand Rapids. Ann Arbor has a small scene, but doesn't
have the ability to grow without passing of that scene to a larger community.
Lansing is primarily government and manufacturing. There is Michigan State
University (50k+ students), but it's a school with a primary focus on
agriculture and not techonology. This leaves Detroit and Grand Rapids.

In regard's to Detroit, let's think about it for a moment.

It is very much like taking the idea that you can easily change the culture
and mindset of silicon valley from tech to manufacturing and industrial. The
people in silicon valley and the surrounding area do not have the skillset as
a whole to provide that type of industry. As well as through generations, the
mindset of the people as a whole is not directed towards a manufacturing
environment. This is what is going on with Detroit. You have had a VERY large
portion of the economy (65%+) purely based on some type of auto manufacturing.
This is why Detroit city is at around 20% unemployment and the surrounding
metro is around 8-10% unemployment.

Now..this leaves us with Grand Rapids. Which actually is a viable candidate.
It has a younger generation overall, an international airport, a moderately
sized city with room for expansion, and a vibrant downtown.

Then..we have to look further at the ability to grow a tech environment. Is
there the skill's needed? Are there investors available to fund companies in
this area? Are there incentives to stay in the area?

In reality, all of those answers are relatively "No".

You can get better talent in a warmer climate with the same exact (if not
better) opportunities (funding, viability, community backing, tax
incentives..etc) in other cities with a better climate (yes, climate is really
a big deal)...such as Charlotte, Atlanta, Phoenix, San Francisco, Seattle.

Unless Michigan does something drastic like being a startup tax-haven, having
major incubators, or the like; it will never happen. Too many other places
offer the same or much better, but in a more comfortable climate.

(In case anyone think's climate isn't a big deal, try moving to Alaska or
Montana. They offer break's for startup's, but when was the last time you
heard anyone taking those states up on their offers?).

~~~
segmondy
Ann Arbor has more venture capital per capita than Silicon Valley

[http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article/20141212/BLOG007/141219...](http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article/20141212/BLOG007/141219951/ann-
arbor-has-more-venture-capital-per-capita-than-silicon-valley)

[http://www.mlive.com/business/ann-
arbor/index.ssf/2015/04/po...](http://www.mlive.com/business/ann-
arbor/index.ssf/2015/04/post_3.html)

[http://vcwithme.co/2014/12/02/greatest-concentration-of-
vent...](http://vcwithme.co/2014/12/02/greatest-concentration-of-venture-
capital-not-where-you-think/)

~~~
codeddesign
"per capita" bro in a population of 100,000 people.

That could be 1 person giving a company (doesn't have to be a startup) a large
sum, in which the per capita would sky-rocket.

The discussion isn't over whether someone can run a startup successfully in
Michigan or Ann Arbor. The discussion is whether Detroit (or Michigan) can
become a technology hub. After being born in Michigan and living their for 25
years, I can easily say that while there is deffinately the ability to build
and run a startup, the ability to change the industry of the state (or even
just Detroit) is really next to impossible unless the city/state was willing
to go to drastic measures to attract talent/encourage startups (low/no tax,
office space, incubators, free money startup capital...etc), and educate the
public on their goal's.

Even is the state was able to give every startup no taxes for 10 years and
startup capital, the response from the general public would be "why are you
helping them?!, I am the one without the job. Why aren't you trying to attract
more manufacturing?!"

While I love my state, it's not a viable place to build any startup. A high
small business tax, and small talent pool that most state's face when asking
themselves "how can we bring in more technology?"

Back to Ann Arbor... It's a nice cozy city with a major university. In regards
to work force, where are you getting employee's? From the college? That's like
the valley pulling it's entire work force from Stanford. In regard's to a
startup boom in Ann Arbor, where are the people going to live? The city isn't
large enough for any large scale change. Can you build multiple Google's,
Apple's, or Amazon's there? Is the city viably committing to building out it's
infrastructure in order to have this be a silicon valley?

Building a startup is one thing, creating an entire industry is a totally
different animal. The state in general is committed to manufacturing as it has
been for 100 years. In 15 years there will be a new generation of politicians
and then maybe we will see if the climate changes. However, I can assure you
that from a bureaucratic level, there is no such strive for a "silicon valley"
in michigan.

Simply put: people want jobs. They see the west coast. They see tech as high
paying. They want high pay. They want tech. However, the cost of getting that
is going to be much greater in monetary and sacrifice than people will/are
willing to do.

------
randomsearch
> If innovation is about new and different, why would we want to be something
> that already exists?

Because you can follow the same successful approach to encouraging
entrepreneurs, but innovate by producing companies that develop new products?

You might want to ape silicon valley because of the huge amount of employment
and wealth it generates.

You don't have to be exactly the same as SV, but no reason not to be inspired
by it, if you're looking to create a startup culture.

~~~
forgetsusername
> _You don 't have to be exactly the same as SV, but no reason not to be
> inspired by it_

Did you read the article? Because this is exactly what it's about:

"To be sure, we can learn from Silicon Valley and other more mature tech
communities, but that also includes how not to do things."

~~~
randomsearch
Yes I did.

If that's the takeaway, then you're still doing comparisons.

------
hwstar
Michigan needs to ban noncompete contracts. This would go a long way towards
reviving the tech industry.

Michigan originally banned noncompetes, but the lobbyists for the auto
industry got the law changed.

------
melling
"The region is plagued with astronomical rent and real estate prices, heavy
traffic, and a hyper-competitiveness that leaves depression and anxiety in its
wake"

The rent, real estate, and heavy traffic issues can be avoided with a little
urban planning.

Build a village with lots of green space:

[https://h4labs.wordpress.com/2015/08/12/views-from-
hoboken/](https://h4labs.wordpress.com/2015/08/12/views-from-hoboken/)

------
lighthawk
Look into Detroit, but the Triangle area of NC (Raleigh, Durham, and Chapel
Hill) is one of the best for startups, currently. Google just setup shop in
Chapel Hill, there are plenty of startups in Durham and Raleigh, a number of
major tech corps in the area, three large universities nearby, etc.

------
daemonk
There is an ideology that silicon valley stands for and the reality of the
place. Those two things may be very disparate concepts, but that's another
debate.

I think the popular use of the silicon valley comparison is an attempt to get
at the ideology rather than the reality of the place.

------
Tycho
Wierd how the article states that Über doesn't solve "real" problems.

~~~
flohofwoe
Uber is the archetypical example of a Silicon Valley company projecting it's
narrow US-centric-view onto the rest of the world.

From what I gather, taxi businesses in the US seem to be in the hand of Mafia-
like criminal organizations. That's not the case in most Western-European
cities with good and cheap public transport and well-regulated taxi systems.

If I can get from anywhere to anywhere at any time for little money already
for the last 30 years, what's the point of a service like Uber, especially
Uber with their shady business practices and aggressive stance towards
established labour laws.

~~~
xenolies
I'm pretty sure that creating a fleet of self driving cars operating on
dynamic dispatch would have worldwide ramifications. But I see your point re
public transport.

~~~
flohofwoe
That must be a different company. The Uber I know is that evil company lead by
incredibly arrogant *ssholes trying to aggressively price-dump taxi drivers
(that don't make a lot of money to begin with) out of their jobs by employing-
but-not-really-employing a cheap workforce without paying their part on the
drivers insurances. Basically an illegal taxi business ;)

~~~
icebraining
Yes, that's the story that people like Evgeny Freidman paint, when they
started seeing their rent-seeking investment - buying medallions and charging
drivers hundreds of dollars to rent them so that they could work - begin to
drop.

This story shows the situation for taxi drivers, way before Uber:
[http://www.nytimes.com/1995/04/09/nyregion/driving-a-taxi-
di...](http://www.nytimes.com/1995/04/09/nyregion/driving-a-taxi-difficult-in-
best-of-times-gets-tougher.html)

Some quotes:

 _The average rate a cabbie paid to take a taxi out for a 12-hour shift
climbed 11 percent, to about $85, between 1990 and 1993 (...) In 1993, 32 to
45 percent of the income of a fleet or lease manager was profit, or $16,000 to
$21,300 per car, up from $5,500 to $9,800 in 1986, according to the taxi
commission._

 _Lease drivers rent the medallions, and usually the taxis, for a day or a
week from their owners or a middleman. Depending on the owner and the night of
the week, a lease driver pays $72 to $100 to take a car out for a 12-hour
shift, or about $450 to $650 for a weekly lease. The driver must also pay for
gas, at $15 to $20 a night. Drivers keep whatever fares and tips they collect,
but they often start a day 's work $100 or more behind._

------
aclissold
As a metro Detroiter about to move to Silicon Valley, this was very
interesting to read!

------
zoren
Let's stop comparisons period.

------
saiya-jin
why so? it's a bubble inside a bubble. i know that feeling a bit, living in
Switzerland now

------
awinder
"Many articles and lawsuits have documented the region’s lack of diversity and
history of sexism and sexual harassment."

Glass houses time! Michigan has the 10th highest female / male pay gap in the
nation, it's been rated with an F by NARAL, and 47% of Michigan residents have
no access to paid sick leave. I know it was a slick ding to break out, but if
you're interested in making a distinction with California on inclusion of
women and issues of sexism, michigan is lagging in this area by some key
metrics. Maybe work to be done at home before worrying about other states.

