
On Buying Silicon Valley - barry-cotter
Silicon Valley 2<p>If one wishes to replicate the Valley's success and status as a startup hub one needs to mimic the 
ecosystem and support structures that have grown up around it, the angels, VC funds, (money) 
legal expertise, financial infrastructure (enabling infrastructure) and entrepreneurial culture (residual).
The money and enabling infrastructure will accrete around the residual if it exists, quickly or slowly.
Paul Graham has proposed that for US$30m-$100m this could probably be achieved in any US city 
fulfilling certain criteria, with greater or lesser likelihood of success dependent on the degree to 
which it fulfils them.<p>The money can realistically come from three types of sources, governments of whatever level, private 
individuals, or corporate bodies, profit-oriented or not, or some combination of the three, acting in concert.
Given the electoral dynamics they labour under it is unlikely that any politician or party in serious danger 
of being out of power 10 years after the funds have been allocated would commit to this plan; and with the 
added proviso that all the startups funded should be at a minimum within an hours travel of each other 
on average only unitary municipalities would work, there being no US ~city-states barring D.C., whose 
freedom of action exists at the pleasure of Congress. The only US city that loosely fits this description 
to my knowledge is Chicago, given the iron grip of the Daley dynasty on the mayoralty.<p>What advantage would accrue to non-government actors who kickstarted this hub beyond the uncertain 
monetary return once the paper profits were booked? In other words, how can they capture as much of the 
value created by this new hub as possible? Given a long enough time horizon buying up property within an 
hour or so's travel of the chosen location would show handsome returns, assuming success. If we assume, 
I think conservatively, that 20 years would be sufficient for a hub to be mature, we have to ask who invests 
on these kind of timescales besides governments? Charitable foundations, university endowments, insurance 
companies and family offices, that's who. With the concentration of elite universities in Cambridge, MA, their 
great, if recently depleted endowments and the locale's current position as #2 startup hub of the US and thus 
the world, they might be able to equal the Valley, generate a handsome profit and prime the pump for future 
benefices from grateful students. Alternatively, anyone with a substantial portion of the minimum neccesary 
to fund could put said funds in escrow, not to be paid out until matching funds were committed by other 
parties. Or one wealthy individual desirous of leaving a lasting positive legacy to a city they hold dear could 
do it altrustically. Say, Warren Buffett for Omaha or Steve Schwarzmann for New York.<p>And outside North America? It would be easier to jumpstart a global city than somewhere with minimal 
legal or financial infrastructure but for $100m you could probably jumpstart a minor city of 500,000. The 
better the pre-existing institutions the bigger the bang for the buck.<p>Singapore
A city-state run by economically literate technocrats who plan for the long term, with the rule of law, 
an educated workforce, good if not elite universities, and a liberal immigration policy. It also has form 
with the deliberate cultivation of expertise, e.g. it's biotech industry and the state holding company, 
Temasek's, investment in oil rig expertise despite the fact that it was unprofitable for over a decade.<p>China
The CCP is not constrained by the unpopularity of targetting small areas for rapid development instead 
of spreading the pork around. Look at Shenzhen Special economic Zone, going in fifteen years from a 
fishing village to a manufacturing metropolis of huge importance to world trade. They could probably 
do it even if they did it wrong. Imagine a commitment of US$10m for each of ten years to competing
Y Combinator clones, university backing as worthy gap years after a degree at Tsinghua or Peking, 
enticements to ethnic Chinese with Valley experience to come over, act as angels and VCs, etc.<p>Britain and Ireland<p>As close to being the USA as you get on the wrong continent, well, apart from Australia.<p>The only elite university in Computer Science is Cambridge, and it an edge case. With all of the EU and 
EFTA to draw upon for talent and no immigration restrictions, this is less of a problem than it seems.
The money is there, whether private or possibly governmental. It seems likely that Labour is on the way 
back to the political wilderness for a generation, and throwing money at some  Northern city, e.g. 
Birmingham would be a grand political gesture for a new Tory government, and possibly even a vote 
winner in the city. To my mind just doing it in Cambridge would be the better idea, but absent the 
University taking the initiative this seems unlikely.<p>Ireland is an unlikely candidate, but it has a reasonably competent industrial development agency and the 
experience of developing a second tier financial centre from nothing by careful planning and a devotion to 
tailoring a conducive legal environment. Dublin probably isn't quite dominant enough to be able to overcome
the desire to spread the startups around which would defeat the point. Only here because I'm Irish. I suspect 
the Auctomatic lads would just say "Nah, no way"<p>Western Europe
Luxembourg. Only a new, no account university, but fully able to draw on the surroundings, small enough 
that the entire country would share in the benefits, so the "Where's my pork?" problem doesn't arise, many 
many rich people and an establishment small enough that you might be able to get it done by talking to the 
right civil servant at a cocktail party. The expertise in crafting a conducive legal environment point from Ireland  
applies here too.<p>Berlin. City-state with a population that's a quarter non-German and you can get by on just English. Fantastic 
culture and surroundings, very good universities, internal migration magnet, cheap. Best European bet.<p>Zurich. Has ETH, world class university, easy for EU/EFTA citizens to get a residential visa, wonderful city. 
Switzerland's only disadvantage is the high cost of living. Ramen profitable would actually be a substantial 
barrier.<p>Paris, and it's suburb, otherwise known as France. My Economist reading sneer says no way, and the dirigiste
tendency is strong, see the abortion that is Quaero, but if you could convince someone it would just be done. 
One very substantial disadvantage is the legal obligation that the working language be French.<p>Eastern Europe
Romania seems to have a phenomenal over-representation in CS circles given its population, and Russia pulls
its substantial weight. St. Petersburg would be my pick as the most cosmopolitan Russian city that isn't Moscow 
with its disadvantages (no parks worth a damn, expensive as all get out, but it shares that last with St. Petersburg)<p>Israel
Much like Cambridge, MA, Tel Aviv is already a hub of note. The amount needed to prime the pump would be higher 
but again, a very good prospect if the funding was available.
======
thepanister
If I want to be a billionaire, I want to be, just to replicate the Silicon
Valley here in Cairo, Egypt!

One of my big wishes is having a copy of Stanford University here... and what
a crazy? I want to make it for free for high talented "poor" students.

