

37% of Shotput Ventures startups stayed in Atlanta - ajju
http://blog.weatherby.net/2009/09/shotput-statistic.html

======
pg
The reason so many of the startups we funded left Boston was that we flew them
out to Silicon Valley to demo to investors there. If you don't introduce the
startups you fund to investors from other towns, then of course more of them
will end up staying wherever they were. But you're not exactly doing them a
favor in that case.

~~~
sanjayparekh
I'm one of the Shotput partners. I'm not sure if the implication here is that
we specifically didn't intro our companies to investors from outside of the
southeast. If so, that is entirely not the case. Myself and other partners
continue to work with our companies to make valuable introductions for them -
both in terms of clients as well as investors.

But I'll assume you were speaking in general terms in which case, I think all
of the partners at Shotput would wholeheartedly agree.

~~~
pg
I didn't mean that you didn't introduce your companies to investors from other
places, just that without the mechanism of a demo day you couldn't introduce
them, in person, to hundreds of such investors.

~~~
sanjayparekh
Totally get you and you're totally right. I wish things like demo day existed
when I was funding my company. Would have saved me from talking to 200+
investors over a 10 month time span.

------
ajju
I had a debate with pg over 5 months ago about how many startups from Atlanta
seed fund Shotput ventures would stay back after the program was over. The
program got over 3 weeks ago and as of now, three out of the eight startups
are in Atlanta. I know that at least one (and probably more than one) of the
startups were originally from elsewhere but even if you ignore that, the
current retention rate is 37%.

pg, based on his larger data set, had predicted a 2-3% retention rate. As
Lance mentions, it's early days, but I have a hunch Atlanta is going to
maintain the higher retention rate. Why? Because we are working hard to make
it so: <http://academicvc.com/2009/05/entrepreneurial-atlanta-2/>

Addendum: Let me restate what I said in that thread. I am not saying people
should not move to the valley if that's the best thing for them. I am saying
that building an ecology that supports startups in cities outside the valley
is possible and it's a good thing. There are many people who don't want to or
cannot move to the valley.

------
mattmaroon
My guess is there's a huge sample bias here. PG was probably assuming a
similar applicant pool to what YC gets (ie if YC ran a summer in Atlanta,
almost all of them would move away after) but the reality is that Shotput's
starting pool is much different and shall we say less "serious", by which I
mean talented and motivated.

Not too be elitist, but YC is clearly the top of the food chain in the micro-
angel funding niche, where the most motivated founders go first. It was the
only one we applied to, and if I were doing it over again it still would be.
Then there's a couple others a rung below it, like TechStars, and a rung below
that with a couple players like LaunchBox and maybe Shotput. (I've actually
never heard of them, which is hard to accomplish in this industry, but I'll
assume they're pretty decent and it's just because I've been working too hard
lately).

So the startup founders move their way down the chain from the top, with the
best x% being selected at every tier. At the YC level, you've got the highest
quality and most motivated talent pool. At the bottom levels you've probably
got the people who either whiffed their way down the chain, or just are
looking for one near where they live. If I lived in Atlanta (which I could,
it's a great city) and wanted to do a startup but wasn't particularly keen on
relocating I might give it a go, assuming the Shotput guys brought enough to
the table to make up for the small equity stake.

I'd guess PG wasn't taking that into account with his initial comment. I'd
love to know what % of their funded startups have founders who lived within
driving distance beforehand.

~~~
ajju
What is your basis for assuming a 100% correlation between a person's desire
to move to the valley and their level of talent?

~~~
mattmaroon
I'm not at all. I'm simply saying that the most driven people will go
whereever they think gives them the most advantage.

~~~
ajju
So then you didn't really mean the talent part of "the reality is that
Shotput's starting pool is..shall we say less..talented and motivated" ?

------
abalashov
Atlanta is sufficiently cosmopolitan and citylike, yet considerably cheaper
than almost any other metro area in the US with a significant technology
sector. This means you get both (comparative) affordability and the benefits
of being in an IT-savvy city. Sure, it's pretty ass-backward compared to, say,
the Valley or NYC, but it's highly functional as an urban technology space.
Don't underestimate it.

That alone can be a huge advantage to a startup, especially those going the
bootstrap route who are not nearly as dependent on the systemic VC ecosystem
but highly dependent on being close to other technology companies and/or
corporate customers.

It's also a major telecom hub. That's why I stay here.

------
natrius
From the comments: _"Four companies from Atlanta, two from Boston, two virtual
entered the Shotput program. Three from Atlanta stayed. Three went back home,
and two are trying their play in SV. One of the virtuals is considering moving
back to Atlanta."_

People from Atlanta stayed in Atlanta. Why is this remarkable?

~~~
lanceweatherby
It was predicted that they would all leave.

~~~
natrius
I don't think that's what those people meant. YC-style investments were seen
by many as a way to attract talent to an area. I viewed such predictions as
saying that regional YC's would fail to attract talent. I don't see why anyone
would think that people who are already in the city would all leave just
because they've participated in such a program. If anything, it would make
them less likely. Having to leave an investor is a disincentive to moving.

