Regarding being the banking Ng capital: it's been two business days. You might be jumping the gun just a little.
I strongly suspect the UK won't be able to continue any passporting[1] arrangements because it would greatly benefit Germany's financial sector if foreign banks had to establish a European presence to trade within the EU. That is an existential threat to London's finance industry. Obviously it depends on trade negotiations with the EU as the UK leaves, but really, what benefit is there to the EU to let it continue the way it is? Why would they want the UK to carry on as it is now?
I think the point was, it's not even clear if the UK will leave the EU.
The referendum result was 52-48, with some people regretting their decision since they only meant it as a protest against the current government. Others are furious that the things they thought they voted for (money for healthcare, much reduced immigration) have already been backtraced upon by politicians.
We live in interesting times.
(I'm British and live in Denmark, so I have a clear bias in this.)
It's not clear that anyone knows what will happen.
Historically the EU plays hardball with dissenters. The leavers are gambling that our trading relationships are essential to the EU - but unfortunately they really aren't. So it's unwise to expect anything too conciliatory from Brussels.
What is clear is that if the UK does leave it will have spent the last forty years building up the City as the key European/World financial center, and then thrown away that advantage through the actions of a small clique of overly ambitious and utterly dishonest politicians.
And if you take away the City, no one in power has any idea at all how to build a 21st century economy - never mind a 20th century economy, or even a 19th century economy.
While the rest of Europe will be developing new startups, England will be playing with its union jack and wondering if maybe it should build a big navy again.
MiFID 2 will make most of this talk about passporting a side show during the renegotiation.
The EU FFT is a prime example of why finance in Frankfurt or Paris is unlikely to be in a position to compete with London, NY, Hong Kong, or Singapore.
An indication of this will be on July 4, when LSE votes on the Deutsche Boerse merger.
> Regarding being the banking Ng capital: it's been two business days. You might be jumping the gun just a little. ;-)
Not only is it jumping the gun, it's an absurd proposition. London is the world's top financial center. It has been for the better part of two centuries (sometimes jockeying for the top spot with New York). Nowhere else in the EU comes close.
Marginal Revolution had an interesting discussion on the possibility of Finance leaving London [0].
Reading the discussion it seems like there's no real obvious choice for a European city which might end up owning Finance in the way London has. After all London earned its status as financial capital a long time before the EU was created and has a long history supporting this industry. The legal system and services that formed around it are unlikely to be able to be easily transplanted, so despite other cities wanting to offer themselves as substitutes it's not Banks could move without losing some economies of scale.
This is of course assuming that our government attempts to negotiate for us to stay in the 'single market' and that the finance industry itself lobbies for Europe to play ball and keep business as usual.
Of course, it is possible that we could see some decentralisation, which could weaken Europe's banking industry in relation to the US.
>> Was London at any point the startup capital of Europe?
Yes. On paper, London was home to countless new companies funded by billions of dollars. The fact that those companies were asset tools, ghosts incapable of producing anything beyond tax advantages, doesn't take away from their definition as "startups".
> Was London at any point the startup capital of Europe?
Yes, very much so. I am an experienced Data scientists, and I looked around Europe for the last four years, needing a new job every three to six months, and London consistently had the top 5 best offers, be it in quality of the project, money raised, size of the db, etc. The conferences have been consistently larger, better and more relevant here than in Paris, Stockholm, Helsinki. The Meet-ups everywhere were good, but you have usually 5 people who are familiar with your specific implementation at most, 10 more considering it; in London, you have three to ten times that many people.
I have not tried working in Berlin yet, but all signs seem positive, and life is much cheaper there.
I meant inside Germany. Will they let them in to hollow out their economy via rentier activity, giving the initial "wealth effect" via high land prices or are the Germans smart enough to know to steer clear?
Will the banks move from a country where they have totally captured the government and legal system? Will Germany guarantee no prosecutions for financial crimes like the UK tacitly did?
As for London's time as banking capital of Europe being over - at this stage all anyone knows for sure is that a "small" majority of the UK voting public voted indidacated they would like the UK to leave the current EU - that's it.
And at this early stage absolutely none of the UK or EU governing bodies or institutions currently know how this leaving process is going to be implemented or end - if it even starts.
From a UK perspective, we've largely thrown our eggs into one basket with London. It's the financial capital, but it's also the best place to work if you're involved in design, programming, recruitment, law, etc. With so much going on in London, it's only natural that you set up shop there if you want to play in the big leagues, or to move to London when you reach a certain size and want to work with the big players. I imagine funding also plays a huge part in the startup scene in London too. It's where the money is, after all.
Purely anecdotal, but London is regularly referred to as the FinTech capital of Europe, and it often seems to be because London doesn't have a lot of startup success stories to boast about. For me, the startup buzz in the UK tends to be smaller outfits away from London, either close to top universities (Oxbridge) or in larger cities with an existing digital culture (Bristol, Manchester).
Again, purely anecdotal, but I know a few people that have moved from London to Berlin, and they couldn't be happier.
Also curious about that. A few years ago (maybe 2011) another article also stated that Berlin now (=2011) wins against London as the new startup capital. As a Berliner one remembers that.
The point the article is trying to make wrt immigration is that when the UK leaves the EU, it will also leave the free movement of workers zone, making it harder to attract immigrants, regardless of how London feels about them.
Immigration system for skilled workers is not going to change. If the UK actually does leave the EU, they'll replace EU rules of skilled immigration with something similar.
The UK is a knowledge economy, it will always be open to skilled immigrants. Yet people actually believe that the UK will close down all immigration. It's absurd.
I could hop on the next plane to London and legally start working today. If they restrict freedom of movement at all that is going to fall and replaced by some process to obtain work authorization (how else could they distinguish between "skilled" and "unskilled" workers?). If that system looks in any way similiar to the one non-EU citizens have to go through today I wouldn't call that change insignificant. Having to do a financial striptease and waiting some time for the application to be processed (possibly even having to renew that a few times) instead of showing your ID card to HR is going to stop some people from working there.
And I don't want to start talking about other things, such as access to social security and cross-border cooperation thereof, automatic recognition of degrees and certifications, harmonized banking makes it easy to transfer to your home country, being able to quit a job without needing to have a new one lined-up, and so on. All that is now part of the negotiations.
> I could hop on the next plane to London and legally start working today.
That's exactly the point, and something I don't think many British people realise. (I don't think Americans etc realise it either, but I don't expect them to.)
Moving to work in a different EU country requires what I'd guess is a similar amount of paperwork as moving between US states.
- Register your address with the local government (which may lead to an id card, tax registration etc)
- Update your driving license, if applicable
- Tell the old country you'll stop paying tax there (may lead to a tax refund)
These are the same kinds of processes as are used when a child is born, a teenager gets a first job, or an adult moves house. Nothing requires permission, nothing can be refused.
Additionally, there are agreements for things like state healthcare, pensions and out-of-work benefits.
If the UK raises barriers, then London will be less appealing for other European citizens.
This is a very crucial point that a lot of people fail to grasp. With the EU laws as backing, we moved from "this is easily granted unless you fill in the wrong paper" to "this can't be denied and you don't even have to ask." which is a complete turnaround in the power balance. Employing a person from the EU requires that I notify the relevant authorities, moving within the EU requires me to merely notify the right parties. There's no applying for a permit. Having a polish partner is much less stressful, because she can't be thrown out, no matter what, no need for a residence permit, no travel documents.
We are a fintech startup in London. Some of us have advanced degrees. Others are skilled but have no degree to show for it.
There's a tsunami of red tape heading our way both in terms of visa regulations and in many other areas where EU and UK regulations are going to start to diverge.
Unless they quickly agree on Brexit in name only we will probably move into the EU, possibly to Scotland if they become independent.
This is the attitude which caught the remain campaign flat-footed - the sense that what we traditionally believed about the UK can't change. We want to snuggle up in our blankets and think nothing can go wrong. But this referendum had legal force and won by a large margin, which is how things do change.
Legal aspects aside, this referendum was also a shot across the bow to foreigners. To have such a large majority expressing such a strong disdain should give pause to anyone considering immigration, because it is unpleasant and even dangerous to have neighbors who think of you like this. Seeing as Trump has made his campaign a referendum on immigration, it will be the same in the US if Trump is elected with a similar majority.
I don't think that it's fair to say that everyone, or even perhaps a majority, of leave voters voted that way due to xenophobia. They were lied to fairly blatantly about the economic aspects by a sophisticated campaign.
> If the UK actually does leave the EU, they'll replace EU rules of skilled immigration with something similar.
Do you understand how EU freedom of movement works? As an EU citizen I can get on a plane tomorrow, and go to any other EU country, and work there. Skills or no skills. And if I'm not happy with my job there I can quit and get another without fear of being deported. And so on...
A points-based system would be a very different proposition. There'd be far more bureaucracy involved in getting in in the first place, and then once you're in there'd potentially be issues with changing job, and with long-term residence, and with medical care, and with this, that and the other.
There is no possible way in which shutting down free movement wouldn't make the UK a less attractive destination. Of course, this is irrelevant; the UK will almost certainly have to accept free movement as part of its future EEA or EFTA member status.
it's actually 'freedom of movement for workers': if you lose your job and can't get another, and don't have the ability to support yourself independently then the host country is within its rights to deport you
This right does not immediately cease to exist. If you lose your job you very likely have access to unemployment benefits for some time and there are certain conditions that need to be met before you can be deported. If you have lived there for at least five years it's basically impossible.
This is far stronger than anything you can get via other immigration routes and such deportations of EU citizens are really rare.
Offtopic-ish; What makes London attractive besides investors though? I work at a (fintech) startup with an office just outside London and I don't see much positive things for startups there at all compared to, say, Berlin besides money. I see partners and other startups we work with moving out of London for all the reasons I would say London is not all that great for startups. Again, outside companies who get millions of funding so they can pay to be in London.
>I don't view Berlin as a viable replacement as a top start-up hub because wages in Berlin are simply ludicrously low.
>With Google's investment in the Zurich office, and the much, much more internationally competitive wages you can earn in Switzerland, I think Zurich could be better positioned.
>There's certainly no reason to believe that specifically an EU city would be the next to take off. And in most other ways, the Swiss job market is just much more competitive.
>I'm also depressed by the article using a picture of an anti-human violently wide open co-working space as a stereotype of a thriving start-up culture. Nothing says you're being totally taken advantage of like a wide open floor plan.
I don't understand your points about wages being too low in Berlin. If low wages are a problem for a start-up, what is keeping it from offering high wages, even in Berlin?
On the other hand, I could imagine that start-ups would rather keep costs low, especially in the beginning. Then it would be a problem to be situated in a city like Zurich.
Investors may choose to invest with a company in a certain city, like Nashville or Berlin or Singapore, because wages are low. So if wages become a problem for the company, the investors stop being interested. There won't be money available to raise wages (for that, the investors will just go back to markets like NYC, Boston, or SF that they trust more).
So from birth, companies based in these areas are predicated on the idea that wages must be low -- that's what makes them attractive to investors -- and as a result they really are not recruiting good people.
The whole thing basically amplifies the casino effects in start-ups. You invest in Berlin/Nashville/Singapore start-ups because it's an insanely cheap scratch-off ticket that costs you mostly nothing, has very low chance of striking it big, but offers you entertainment, or bragging rights, or something else, as an investor.
Companies in these areas will not be in a position to raise their wages to a truly competitive level for very long periods of time (most won't live that long anyway). So by agreeing to work for them, you are simply resigning yourself to a permanent reduction in real wage (i.e. after accounting for cost of living). Not to mention, for international workers anyway, adding visa risk, tax complications, equity complications, etc.
For a very talented developer who can earn far enough about market salaries even in NYC or SF so as to live a comfortable life in those places, it would only make sense to bear all these risks and join a firm in Berlin if you were being paid a premium -- i.e. that your wage in Berlin was even higher above cost of living than what your ~ $180k salary would be in Brooklyn -- and you should not at all consider it if someone starts conning you with arguments like, "but it's so much cheaper in Berlin ... and you can drink beer in the park and watch Bayern or Dortmund play here twice a year, go to Berghain on the weekends, etc. etc." (unless, of course, your utility function responds more to beer and soccer than to money).
A lot of this is very true. Though it doesn't factor highly talented looking at quality of living beyond disposable income. The one thing I would say is a shared motivation for many of these types moving to Berlin is they are looking for more diverse environments provided by a city not yet choking on its housing costs, or cities that relegate them always to the bubble of the financially fortunate. Disposable income models don't capture this factor. I personally think a company that chose to pay well in Berlin would find a ton of highly qualified talent. Meh, I could obviously be totally wrong.
In what way are lower wages good for the employees you're trying to attract? While some aspects of cost of living are low, others are not low at all. I guess if you're looking for nothing more than a temporary lifestyle involving enough money to go to concerts and eat at restaurants, the wage is fine for a younger person in Berlin. But it's a fantasy to believe you can effectively grow a company that way. You really do need to hire experienced people, often with families and expectations for a higher quality of living conditions, etc., who aren't particularly interested in the youth culture offerings of Berlin.
For these people, earning ~ 50k euros / year in Berlin is a way, way, way, way, way worse deal than earning ~ 200k dollars in San Francisco, despite SF's insane costs. You just simply cannot do anything with 50k euros/year in Berlin unless you have no outside obligations and are happy spending the money of minor lifestyle perks.
I'm surprised that any of this is even controversial. The same is true for start-ups almost anywhere else in continental Europe too. To a very limited extent there are some companies in Amsterdam that actually pay a "real" wage (i.e. you can support a family, enjoy life, and save for retirement), and some across Switzerland, but not many.
Thinking in terms of "yay, cost of living is low so I don't need much of a salary" is the classic immature analysis of a recent grad who looks at it more like a program for teaching English is southeast Asia than like they are actually working a job, building a career, etc.
A bit of feedback from someone who tried to make it in Germany with a 40K salary (in the south) and couldn't. It's just not doable. You need at least 60-70K to get started in medium towns, and around 80-90K for large expensive cities. Otherwise you either have to downgrade your standard of living to that common in third-world countries or accept it to live with a chronically empty bank account and most likely with a long-term debt as you're trying to pay back your initial accommodation expenses. Cheap is an illusion for a brochure.
You really need to check up on what 3rd world country life style is. I used to live in Munich on a 45k wage and while I wasn't living in a huge flat in a posh area, I made a comfortable living. Granted, that's been a while ago, but even now my cousin as a policeman in Munich is far far from anything even resembling 3rd world. And he's certainly not earning 60k.
Something like living in a flat infested with insects, walls not properly isolated making it pretty cold in winter with the heating set on maximum so you need to sleep in a sweater and a jacket, broken electrical wiring and the lights shutting down every now and again, a mixer that could not deliver a constant temperature water stream. Loud music, smoking, a construction place less than 100 meters away. Was my reality in Stuttgart. Couldn't find anything better. Or, more to the point, I could but that would necessitate a salary of 80-90K to be able to pay back whatever expenses such a rental would incur.
I know of course that even by German standards it's a luxury. Many working people (non-IT) can only afford a room.
Sometimes I think the government really needs to step in and cap the rental prices to 1/3 of the average salary in the area. Otherwise that inflation never ends.
Plus the total amount of taxes (Income, VAT, GEZ/ARD) a person has to pay on a wage higher than the average in Germany, and inability to legally keep multiple citizenship, make the location even less appealing than CH and UK in a long run.
I made 50k in a more expensive city, Paris. From that my partner and I were able to buy a flat, put our son into a catholic school, travel (squeezyjets €20 flights), dine out, and save a little. This would not be possible anywhere in the US including SF. Child rearing costs are punitively high in the US. Medical was less than 10% of my salary.
If my calculation is right the typical 2BR apartment in SF is $5000/month. Or $60000/year. That is almost 1/3 of $200k SF salary. Add childcare at another $12000/year. And medical.
It doesn't seem as far as lifestyle they are that far off. CoL plays a huge role. This is the typical American attitude at looking across the pond and not knowing how the other side lives but just assuming it's that bad.
You really do need to hire experienced people, often with families and expectations for a higher quality of living conditions, etc., who aren't particularly interested in the youth culture offerings of Berlin.
And yet these startups, everywhere, are able to do exactly that. They use equity as a carrot to lure experienced people from a sure thing all the time.
>> I made 50k in a more expensive city, Paris. From that my partner and I were able to buy a flat, put our son into a catholic school
Having a partner doubles your income. More, if French taxation works in any way similarly to the German system, then an official relationship puts you in a different taxation category. Having children moves you into yet another category where your net income noticeably improves. You're probably making an equivalent of 100K for a single person without realizing it.
>> And yet these startups, everywhere, are able to do exactly that. They use equity as a carrot to lure experienced people from a sure thing all the time.
Not really. Everywhere where I've been I've only seen kids writing code. Anybody who is senior has always been an independent contractor, and it's usually them who actually advance the work by leaps and bounds. But those, today you have them working for you, tomorrow they're elsewhere. And with the young and inexperienced, you won't accomplish much.
Also, experienced people with families usually ignore any talks about equity and start the initial offer analysis with a calculator in their hands. I'm yet to encounter a true senior specialist with family obligations that takes equity over hard currency.
That's only true if the partner earns about the same as you do. Being married (or in an official relationship) lowers your tax burden if you're earning unevenly (you're basically taxed based on the average of your wages in a system with a progressive tax rate), but that's all. It doesn't magic any money into existing. If you're both earning the same, you savings are exactly 0.
What having a partner really helps with is sharing costs. You only need a single flat (but probably a larger one), a single household, maybe share a car, ...
I've contemplated your comment for a while now and I think there is no way for me to reply to it except to say that I truly do not believe you.
I'll add one caveat -- if you are saying that you and your partner both earned around 50k euros/year (combined household income of around 100k euros/year), then I would believe you, and it would not be surprising nor would it contradict anything I'm saying.
If instead you are claiming that you supported the kind of lifestyle you describe on a 50k euros/year salary, I simply do not believe it.
If you want to equivalently spend about 1/3 of a 50k salary on rent in Paris, that will be 1388 euros/month, or $1534 / month. It's ludicrous for you to claim that you can easily find a 2-bedroom apartment with clean accommodations and a reasonable commute distance from central Paris for $1534/month. So, very likely, you'll be spending more than 1/3 of your income on rent in metro Paris, if you earn 50k, so a greater fraction even than in SF. It's actually quite a lot more than 1/3 after you take into account taxes. (Also, re: medical, I've worked at large & small, young & old companies and only 1 out of the 4 has required me to pay any premium on medical insurance, and even then it was low. I know this is not always the case in America, but you definitely can find jobs that provide this if it matters to you.)
When I lived in Paris in 2010, I lived near the Exelmans stop (close to Parc des Princes), which was a long-ass trek into the city center (and even longer for me going to Universite Paris 7 for work). It was a 1-bedroom apartment shared between me and a flat mate (I slept on a pull-out sofa). There was no dryer, only a washer, and the water closet was separate (across the whole apartment) from the bath/shower, and had no sink. We also had to flip a metal sheet up onto the top of the washing machine in order to have any counter space when cooking.
That apartment was 1300 euros/month (650 split between two roommates) and we were only given that price because the apartment owner said he found the two of us (graduate students) to be especially responsible and was hoping for good stewards to take care of it, so he offered a discount down from the 1500 euros/month he listed originally.
Thus, from my own experience, 1/3 of a 50k salary in Paris will if you're lucky get you a very cramped 1-bedroom with sub-par appliances and accommodations that is way outside the city center and requires onerous commute times.
This was in 2010, so I can't imagine how much prices have risen.
Absolutely no way will you be able to afford a 2-bedroom place on that budget unless you're way outside of Paris. And with the remaining ~ 30k euros not spent on rent, you will be very unlikely to afford private school and the rest of what you claim -- and I'm not even factoring in the much higher tax rates.
Even looking on lodgis right now, even all the way out in the 16eme where I lived before, I'm seeing rents of 2500 - 3100 euros/month for anything with 2 bedrooms. This is somewhere around $3000. Sure, yes, that's lower than in SF or New York, but just as I have been arguing, it's not lower by a large enough amount to justify the drastic reduction in wages.
Facing these prices, I'd be much, much better off earning in the high $100k range in SF/NY than I would be earning anything below 100k euros in Paris/Berlin/Amsterdam/etc.
But pretty much the only country in all of Europe where a visa worker can actually approach a 100k euro salary is Switzerland.
The reduced cost of living is not enough to justify the even-more reduced wage you're paid. It just does not make economic sense. If you have access to developed American job markets, you are better off in real wage terms than in almost any situation possible in Europe.
It's deeply unfortunate too. I absolutely loved life i...
It doesn't balance out at all. If you care about being a very successful start-up, then you are implicitly competing for international talent, whether you like it or not. The same people choosing to work in SV are the people you should be trying to convince to work in Berlin.
Saying they get ~ 50k euros/year but don't worry, the cost of living is low is a universal non-starter. That's just simply not competitive. The cost of living is not so low that a person can reduce their salary to around 1/3 of what they could make in New York or SF and expect to have the same quality of life.
You're basically handcuffing one arm behind your back by basing yourself in Berlin (or many other places) because now your pool of applicants is limited to only those people who have some ulterior reason to be interested in living in Berlin and are willing to make a Faustian bargain regarding huge reduction in their wage (even relative to cost of living).
american and german salaries are fundamentally not comparable if you look at the bare numbers. German salaries already include pension and healthcare for example, for which the employer pays 50% of the total, which goes on top of the salary. That alone makes a 50k EUR salary more similar to a 75k USD salary (not taking into account the exchange rate, which adds another 10% as of today). There's also at least 4 weeks of paid holidays and unlimited paid sick-leave. Rent difference can easily account for something like 1k to 2k per month. Rent is still comparatively cheap even in the most expensive and central parts of Berlin. Having 15 minutes of travel to the office instead of hours can also change the equation massively, at least if you're looking at your quality of life. The crucial number is how much money is left in your bank account after all your expenses are paid for - and that can vary massively depending on your personal lifestyle. The salary before taxes and other costs is a fairly uninteresting figure.
In 3 out of the 4 jobs I've had in America, I have paid zero premium for health insurance (100% paid by employer), and had either 4 or 5 weeks of vacation (not including between 9 and 12 company holidays too).
Even with the exchange rate, my base salary was more than triple the $50k euros amount, and I have < 4 years of experience. I am a specialist in my area which makes my case a bit harder to compare, but still, the offer of provided healthcare and 4 weeks vacation doesn't make foreign jobs more attractive to me. I've had that in almost every American job I've had and also was paid a wage that was high enough to comfortably exceed local cost of living. In fact, I generally find that when an employer has to start nervously listing side perks like medical coverage or vacation as apologetic offerings to excuse an obviously poor salary relative to cost of living, it's a huge red flag that they know they are not equipped to recruit exceptional people.
In all my comments I am already talking about how much money you have left after general cost of living expenses. Even though such costs are lower in Berlin than in many major US cities, the salaries in Berlin are even lower at a disproportional level. Unless you adopt a more ascetic lifestyle, your lower salary in Berlin will not stretch as far despite the lower costs. The costs, while lower, aren't low enough.
You forget a very big factor: only US citizens can move to SV or NY without many hoops.
If you are from EU, you can go to Berlin with no fuss, if you can get a job. Maybe your US counterpart can go to SV, but you need a visa rain dance, which make sense only if you are a star that some company want to pay a fortune to bring there.
Maybe Google and Facebook take the 0.001 % of the top developers. But, top 1% is not bad either.
Also, there is a lot of talent in Eastern Europe. For them, there are hoops and work visas for both EU and US, but, US hoops are much more difficult to pass.
Not to mention that Berlin has a great nigthlife. SF? Only complaints about the male/female ratio and nerd-dominated culture.
So, while SV is certainly the center of the industry, 100K in Berlin can give a much better life than 200K in SV, especially for people with EU citizenship.
I'd love to see the tech landscape in Zürich grow but there are a few problems:
- Sponsoring non-EU immigrants has become extremely difficult in Swizterland.
- Google trounces the competition by a margin that is completely out of reach for European start-ups.
- Switzerland itself is a very small market. The cash-flow of your typical SaaS start-up is going to be mostly in € or $ with all the associated burdens and risks.
Also it's funny you mention Amsterdam since from what I've seen, wages are even lower than in Berlin, which is insane given the higher CoL.
Wages in Amsterdam are lower than London, but the Netherlands have a great deal for ex-pats: the so called "30% rule", which means that you only pay tax on the remaining 70% for the first 8 years there. So your take home pay can be really good (and it has other benefits like a good healthcare system, free education for the kids, etc).
Also, if you want to start a start-up low wages are actually a plus...
(Source: I started a startup there and have several employees on the 30% rule)
I have been in Berlin for 8 years and would not change it for London at all. In data science at least there's far more action here. More interesting technologies (Flink), people taking more technological risk and reaping the benefits.
I've lived in Berlin for 3 years and have never had to use German to interact with people in the startup community. Since a high number of startup founders/employees are from other european countries, it's more practical to use English as the language of business.
Finnish is not a Nordic language, while Estonian is a Finnic language.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnic_languages
Ethically Finland is a Baltic nation rather than a Nordic one, It's also was never a part of the 3 monarchies of Scandinavia until the more modern use of Scandinavia for tourism.
Hence my reply to "Does Estonia count as a Nordic state" question :)
Geographic/country classification, languages and genetic roots all mesh differently in this case. Languagewise the Baltic countries apart from Estonia have Slavic majority languages. Biologically Finnish genetic makeup comes from a mix of Sami, Swedish & ugric peoples and is quite diverse [1] but does have a lot of overlap with Estonians. Culturally Finland differs due to having avoided Soviet occupation.
Your argument is sadly still not clear to me.
Some one asked is Estonia a nordic country, I said that in my book it as much as one as Finland because those 2 countries share an ethnic bound that is probably stronger than what Finland shares with Denmark.
This has nothing to do with ethnic similarity between ests and fins. The only reason why Finland is considered nordic is that it still has swedish speaking population and it is second official language. Estonian swedes left because of WW2. Linus as you might know is from Finland but speaks swedish.
> It's also was never a part of the 3 monarchies of Scandinavia until the more modern use of Scandinavia for tourism.
Finland was a part of Sweden from ~1200 to 1809. Finland also still has a large Swedish minority and has Swedish as an official language. The biggest religion is Lutheran due to Swedes forcing it on people when they conquered the land. Estonia is more Orthodox.
More importantly, Finland has been co-operating with the other Nordic nations politically and economically for the ~century that it has been independent. Remember that the Nordic nations aren't just a cultural region, but they also share political, social and legal systems, have a passport union (although that overlaps with the EU nowadays) and, while they have not been able to develop any official military alliance due to Russian and American pressure, they co-operate a lot.
All in all, Estonia has some things in common with Finland, but it doesn't have much claim to being a "Nordic nation". They might be in the future, but not today.
CCP is Icelandic and while it's "nordic" it's kinda far out there, it's also not a particularly big company.
Unity Technologies started in Denmark but they moved to SanFran quite early and effectively Unity grew up in SV AFAIK Unity Tech doesn't have an office or any presence in Denmark and that has been true since the very early days.
There are quite a bit of other game related successful ventures up in the north, DICE, Remedy, Nordic Games, Funcom and quite a few others come to mind.
It is very common for Swedish startups to incorporate in the UK, even if you keep the office in Sweden. It is easier and cheaper to incorporate there, and you get better access to London VCs. I wonder if that will get more difficult.
Maybe unwilling. There is no legal problem with doing so (apart from the additional hassle of having to know about a different set of laws.) This is similar to the Delaware situation.
Stockholm has severe housing problem. It is impossible to get long term contracts which means you have to move somewhere else every six months approximately. Living expenses are too high comparing to low salaries. Only a few companies in Stockholm pay higher than 40k swedish krona. (that means 25k after tax. 25k -> 2.6k euros). If you are not a native here, you can only get a flat through black market. Eventually, you pay around 8k-12k sek for a single bedroom with 30 mins commute. Tough winter is also another case.
Denmark has better chance for being the capital of startups in Europe. Higher pay and no rent problem. Stockholm obviously is not going to scale.
If you are planning to move EU, I would definitely suggest Berlin. You can make 55k-70k euros easily. Cheap rent and food. Nothing to say about its nightlife. (best in EU)
Shouldn't we hope that something does? By all accounts, the house price situation in London has become bad enough that it's wiping out the middle class, which is very bad news; the rise of the middle class was a key factor in enabling the transition from feudal society to modern civilization.
But while I'm here, I'll throw in a shameless plug: Dublin is still in the EU, and is an English-speaking capital city with modern infrastructure, a skilled workforce, a pleasant climate and low corporate taxes.
The house-pricing problem is not due to startups (although this has put pressure on/gentrified a few small areas). The startup scene is a very small part of London as a whole. It is the combination of under-investment in new housing, building the wrong types of new housing (vast luxury flats instead of smaller, affordable units), and selling large amounts of it to foreign buyers as investments (often left unoccupied), putting further pressure on the remaining stock. Many other factors too - it's a big complicated mess, but these are some of the biggest ones.
Oh, you're right, startups aren't the main cause of the problem, but anything that moves out of London will help a bit, and it would certainly be good if people who want to create or work in startups had better options.
Yeah, the extent to which the banking sector leaves might make an impact, but the collapse of sterling is probably going to drive more investment into London property, not less.
I think, from watching this happen in Berlin, most property investors are not looking for short gains. In Berlin I think the rent-protection laws pretty much force you to be a long term investor, if you are going to invest. I'd assume most property investors in London are also long term. As you mention, gains will be years from now. But unless the fundamentals of international capital change in those years, it's likely anyone with spare capital will find the 10 year wait on a London investment more than pays off during recovery.
Sounds to me like the same kind of crap that has been going on everywhere since the 80s or there about. A while lot of household debt being funneled into a Ponzi scheme based on flipping properties.
Yes. The housing situation in Dublin is not as good as I'd like it to be, but it is significantly better than London, even if that is damning with faint praise.
The regularity and amount of rainfall in Ireland is greatly exaggerated. The west of the country certainly is a good deal wetter than the east, facing the Atlantic. This list ranks Ireland 80th in terms of rainfall, below Switzerland the UK, Japan, and New Zealand.
The weather is actually terrible. Not cold in the winter, it rarely snows, but just dull, rainy and windy all year round. It's so bad that in sunny summer days people wish each other "enjoy the sun", and sometimes companies give employees half a day off to celebrate.
The middle-class seems to be something tied to a different era, of industrialization and lifetime jobs. The dwindling middle-class may have more to do with our changing work behavior and desires, than it does cost of living?
-Enjoy low corporate tax rate of 12.5%? Pro-business government?
-Enjoy friendly, well educated, English speaking, Pro-American people, good beer, decent music, nice quality of life, low crime and safe green natural environment? (Look how much fun even our soccer fans are http://www.irishexaminer.com/euro2016/euro2016-banter/10-rea...)
Invest in Ireland -> http://www.idaireland.com
This has been a public service announcement from the country next door. #irelandlovesyou :)
Is it very multicultural though? I've heard from friends who have travelled there that non-white folks aren't treated the same and there's a bit of cultural bias. i'd love to visit though.
It's a small place so never going to be as multi-cultural as New York or London but it's done a decent job of integrating new cultures over the past two decades...of course if you English be prepared to have people take the piss out of you during football/rugby matches etc... :)
I think Berlin and Stockholm are two of the front runners of being "Startup Capital" (whatever that is suppose to mean), having lived in both I can offer some reflections, IMHO of course.
Stockholm is pretty great when it comes to technical and investment maturity. We blew through and did all the stupid dotcom stuff in late 90's, while some have been repeated many successful entrepreneurs learned from that time. Internet access has been really good leading to a lot of good technical talent. It's a beautiful city that want's to be "international" and overall things are very polished. Sweden's also has a track record of producing a few gigantic hits such as Spotify, Soundcloud, Klarna, Skype, Minecraft etc etc.
On the downside the housing situation is insane and everyone has borrowed to the hilt trying to keep up with the ever increasing prices. You can't get hold of an apartment without buying. It's also a pretty expensive place to live. It get's pretty dark & pissy in the winters but summer's are great. I used say that living in Stockholm is 9 months of wondering why the hell you live here and three months where you get the answer.
Berlin in contrast feels like something very unique in Europe and Germany. It's like melting pot of different countries and not quite grown up mentality. Housing is still relatively accessible and affordable, there's even rental contracts to be had. Food and drink is overall cheaper. The startup spirit in Berlin still felt a bit naive when I was there, like a first wave city, but it's big and enthusiastic. However they seem to struggle to product big hits outside of their own country. Maybe the difference between Sweden and Germany is that Sweden is so little we have to go international, and also we're more anglofied. Big companies generally haven't been so big on Berlin since they don't have an international airport, leaving the city wide open for everyone else. On the downside Berlin is a bit meh when it comes to scenery and nature.
Outside the tech scene the English in Berlin is pretty bad and some look down at any not speaking German. Swedes grow up with English and most love every opportunity to use it.
I think there's a good bet Berlin will start to dominate as a "Silicon Valley of Europe", if nothing else because there's a vacuum there that can be filled, and it will become even more international than german. Even Swedes look at Berlin simply because it's cheaper and more accessible. It also has a bit bigger scene when it comes to small "startuppy" kinda ventures while Stockholm dominates on the more serious ones.
Working as an employee seems to suck in Berlin because everyone is looking for a job and job's pay poorly. But if you work for yourself and/or with investment money that doesn't matter and you're in a good position to leverage that money.
> The "startup capital of Europe"? Is that like being the soccer capital of America?
Wouldn't that mean that Europe has a fairly strong, by global terms, actual performance in startups, despite European popular culture mostly ignoring startups?
The American team made it to the semi-finals. They had one bad loss to Argentina but it's pretty inaccurate to characterize their performance as "getting crushed".
> The American national soccer team got crushed in Copa America
No, they won their group, won and advanced from the knockout stage, and, yes, got crushed in the semi-final round by Argentina, to finish ranked fourth in the tournament.
Europe never had a proper startup capital, or more accurately never did well at startups in general. It's not unlikely that there will just be less investment, nobody has to win.
Given the very small numbers, every European country [1] has a lot of potential to multiply their startup output. I doubt any trade deals or policy changes are going to bring it about. Not happening without major cultural change IMO. One might as well say that UK just 'bought' itself the ticket to make some major changes (tho I'm not betting my money on it either).
Just look at Israel, that tiny 8 million country consistently tops most European countries in terms of absolute funding. [0]
I'll second that. I lived in both the US and Israel, eventually settling in the EU precisely because the culture here is much less risk-friendly. People value security more than potential in much of middle EU.
Traditionally, in Europe the state saves for your retirement, and in the US you save for your retirement.
This leads to the US general population having much more savings in their disposal, enabling both bootstrapping via founder savings, and seed funding from friends, family and fools.
I think Berlin will benefit from brexit but I'm more interested in watching Dublin. Seems to me it should do very well: big tech companies already there, attractive corp tax rates, cheap and easy to incorporate a company (AFAIK?), similar legal concepts and biz regs as the UK, similar banking environment, cheaper rents, everyone speaks english, there are local VCs and presumably London VCs would also find it very easy/familiar to invest.
The one thing the UK still has going for it is SEIS/EIS but there's nothing preventing other countries copying this (e.g. Portugal is about to introduce something similar to SEIS).
I don't know of many big startups coming out of Dublin. Having many big corp HQs (who are there for tax sheltering and lower income workers) doesn't translate to a lively entrepreneurial scene.
For example, just north of Toronto is a small suburban city called Markham which calls itself the "high-tech capital of Canada" but the only notable thing about the area is the countless glass office towers of multi-national tech companies who built their Canadian HQ there. But the Toronto startup scene is entirely downtown, far from Markham. Or in Waterloo near the university there. I've even not heard of any events taking place up in Markham either, it's just not part of the community in any significant way.
The kind of people who go to work at IBM and AMD don't often leave to create companies nor do the CEOs participate in the startup communities very much. They're people who usually live in the suburbs with families and are happy working 9-5. Nothing wrong with that but the distinction between high-tech corps and startup scenes are often confused as homogeneous entities by outsiders.
As a developer I'd wish companies would treat Europe more like United States of Europe and generally accept remote positions in order to have a broader pool of talent and allow employees to economically make the most out of their salary.
I don't want startup capitals, I want an adjustment of mindsets that goes with the rest of the tech advancements.
I've had interviews for already internationally distributed teams where the HR manager insisted on having me full-time onsite without a good argument.
Silicon Valley is ...nice...in certain areas...but overall, I don't like the US way of planning living areas - seems like that unless you have a lot money, you'll be living in some endless suburban sprawl and commuting 90 minutes to work in bumper-to-bumper traffic.
I know pay in Berlin must be lower compared to that in the Valley, but what's life in Berlin like if you're in software?
How's the job situation, relative pay, quality of life? Does anyone regret living there? How are the locals treating you?
I have an EU passport and already speak a little bit of German, if that matters....
Berlin is a really cheap city by European standards for developed countries, I live in Stockholm and just went two weekends straight to Berlin (I really love the city), basically if you work with software you're well off.
Food, drinks, entertainment, everything is cheap, your salary will be around €50~55k/year, that means you'll probably get close to €3k/month after taxes, rent is raising but it's still cheap for an European capital (between €700~1.2k depending on what you are looking for) and probably around €150 for utilities (maybe a little less, I'm basing on the numbers a friend who's moving there has been telling me).
Plenty of job openings, every day I check them and there are tons of new openings on LinkedIn, SO Careers, Landing.jobs, etc.
Overall seems to be a great city to live if you like urban gritty cities, I personally love it and plan to move there next year if possible.
Probably you can regret it if you are looking for a calm city to live in, Berlin is very alive and kicking all the time, the Germans I know from Berlin are among the friendliest people I've know in my life (and I'm Brazilian).
And knowing German seems to help a lot, the locals mostly know English but they can be a bit shy to speak it all the time so when you eventually end up with a bunch of Germans they'll be speaking German between them.
Please, if someone see any misinformation correct me as I'm very interested to know better.
Now in a position? Ask Londoners and they will tell you that Berlin has already won that battle. The thing is that Berlin is already expected to be on the downturn, actually.
Feel free to enjoy our 40000 - 50000 EUR salaries (I'm not saying whether this is bad or good, it's just something to be aware of; don't expect any SV silliness regarding salary here).
This will hopefully trigger a Central European response (in part caused by stemming emigration). Germany pays into the coffers of the EU in order to basically pay for access to cheap labor from the East and to keep borders open to push its products without suffering tariffs. The result is that Germany experiences a net benefit but at the cost of draining the East of labor it needs to rebuild after the Cold War and stamping out competition in those countries by flooding the market with its products, thus stifling the growth of the economic base in those countries (turning a country like Poland into a giant German service center isn't creating an economic base, it's economic colonialism). This way, Germany maintains dependence and superiority. The only solution for that region is to form the Intermarium to counteract German and Russian dominance in the region. It's an old idea that sadly didn't have the opportunity to be implemented, but perhaps its time has come.
148 comments
[ 4.5 ms ] story [ 137 ms ] threadMaybe it was the banking capital of Europe, but that time is over now.
Regarding being the banking capital: it's been two business days. You might be jumping the gun just a little. ;-)
A striking example would be the move of the entire banking industry from Montreal to Toronto, due to the growing separatism in and around Montreal.
I strongly suspect the UK won't be able to continue any passporting[1] arrangements because it would greatly benefit Germany's financial sector if foreign banks had to establish a European presence to trade within the EU. That is an existential threat to London's finance industry. Obviously it depends on trade negotiations with the EU as the UK leaves, but really, what benefit is there to the EU to let it continue the way it is? Why would they want the UK to carry on as it is now?
[1] https://www.eba.europa.eu/regulation-and-policy/passporting-...
The referendum result was 52-48, with some people regretting their decision since they only meant it as a protest against the current government. Others are furious that the things they thought they voted for (money for healthcare, much reduced immigration) have already been backtraced upon by politicians.
We live in interesting times.
(I'm British and live in Denmark, so I have a clear bias in this.)
Historically the EU plays hardball with dissenters. The leavers are gambling that our trading relationships are essential to the EU - but unfortunately they really aren't. So it's unwise to expect anything too conciliatory from Brussels.
What is clear is that if the UK does leave it will have spent the last forty years building up the City as the key European/World financial center, and then thrown away that advantage through the actions of a small clique of overly ambitious and utterly dishonest politicians.
And if you take away the City, no one in power has any idea at all how to build a 21st century economy - never mind a 20th century economy, or even a 19th century economy.
While the rest of Europe will be developing new startups, England will be playing with its union jack and wondering if maybe it should build a big navy again.
The EU FFT is a prime example of why finance in Frankfurt or Paris is unlikely to be in a position to compete with London, NY, Hong Kong, or Singapore.
An indication of this will be on July 4, when LSE votes on the Deutsche Boerse merger.
Not only is it jumping the gun, it's an absurd proposition. London is the world's top financial center. It has been for the better part of two centuries (sometimes jockeying for the top spot with New York). Nowhere else in the EU comes close.
Reading the discussion it seems like there's no real obvious choice for a European city which might end up owning Finance in the way London has. After all London earned its status as financial capital a long time before the EU was created and has a long history supporting this industry. The legal system and services that formed around it are unlikely to be able to be easily transplanted, so despite other cities wanting to offer themselves as substitutes it's not Banks could move without losing some economies of scale.
This is of course assuming that our government attempts to negotiate for us to stay in the 'single market' and that the finance industry itself lobbies for Europe to play ball and keep business as usual.
Of course, it is possible that we could see some decentralisation, which could weaken Europe's banking industry in relation to the US.
[0] http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2016/06/whi...
Yes. On paper, London was home to countless new companies funded by billions of dollars. The fact that those companies were asset tools, ghosts incapable of producing anything beyond tax advantages, doesn't take away from their definition as "startups".
Yes, very much so. I am an experienced Data scientists, and I looked around Europe for the last four years, needing a new job every three to six months, and London consistently had the top 5 best offers, be it in quality of the project, money raised, size of the db, etc. The conferences have been consistently larger, better and more relevant here than in Paris, Stockholm, Helsinki. The Meet-ups everywhere were good, but you have usually 5 people who are familiar with your specific implementation at most, 10 more considering it; in London, you have three to ten times that many people.
I have not tried working in Berlin yet, but all signs seem positive, and life is much cheaper there.
Will the banks move from a country where they have totally captured the government and legal system? Will Germany guarantee no prosecutions for financial crimes like the UK tacitly did?
As for London's time as banking capital of Europe being over - at this stage all anyone knows for sure is that a "small" majority of the UK voting public voted indidacated they would like the UK to leave the current EU - that's it.
And at this early stage absolutely none of the UK or EU governing bodies or institutions currently know how this leaving process is going to be implemented or end - if it even starts.
Purely anecdotal, but London is regularly referred to as the FinTech capital of Europe, and it often seems to be because London doesn't have a lot of startup success stories to boast about. For me, the startup buzz in the UK tends to be smaller outfits away from London, either close to top universities (Oxbridge) or in larger cities with an existing digital culture (Bristol, Manchester).
Again, purely anecdotal, but I know a few people that have moved from London to Berlin, and they couldn't be happier.
The things that make London attractive to startups will stay the same. Not being in the EU won't change that.
Additionally, it talks about UK attitudes to immigration, but London is completely separate from the rest of the UK in terms of these sort of things.
Expect a lot of very silly things to be written about UK/EU over the coming months.
The UK is a knowledge economy, it will always be open to skilled immigrants. Yet people actually believe that the UK will close down all immigration. It's absurd.
And I don't want to start talking about other things, such as access to social security and cross-border cooperation thereof, automatic recognition of degrees and certifications, harmonized banking makes it easy to transfer to your home country, being able to quit a job without needing to have a new one lined-up, and so on. All that is now part of the negotiations.
That's exactly the point, and something I don't think many British people realise. (I don't think Americans etc realise it either, but I don't expect them to.)
Moving to work in a different EU country requires what I'd guess is a similar amount of paperwork as moving between US states.
- Register your address with the local government (which may lead to an id card, tax registration etc) - Update your driving license, if applicable - Tell the old country you'll stop paying tax there (may lead to a tax refund)
These are the same kinds of processes as are used when a child is born, a teenager gets a first job, or an adult moves house. Nothing requires permission, nothing can be refused.
Additionally, there are agreements for things like state healthcare, pensions and out-of-work benefits.
If the UK raises barriers, then London will be less appealing for other European citizens.
This is a very crucial point that a lot of people fail to grasp. With the EU laws as backing, we moved from "this is easily granted unless you fill in the wrong paper" to "this can't be denied and you don't even have to ask." which is a complete turnaround in the power balance. Employing a person from the EU requires that I notify the relevant authorities, moving within the EU requires me to merely notify the right parties. There's no applying for a permit. Having a polish partner is much less stressful, because she can't be thrown out, no matter what, no need for a residence permit, no travel documents.
There's a tsunami of red tape heading our way both in terms of visa regulations and in many other areas where EU and UK regulations are going to start to diverge.
Unless they quickly agree on Brexit in name only we will probably move into the EU, possibly to Scotland if they become independent.
Legal aspects aside, this referendum was also a shot across the bow to foreigners. To have such a large majority expressing such a strong disdain should give pause to anyone considering immigration, because it is unpleasant and even dangerous to have neighbors who think of you like this. Seeing as Trump has made his campaign a referendum on immigration, it will be the same in the US if Trump is elected with a similar majority.
Do you understand how EU freedom of movement works? As an EU citizen I can get on a plane tomorrow, and go to any other EU country, and work there. Skills or no skills. And if I'm not happy with my job there I can quit and get another without fear of being deported. And so on...
A points-based system would be a very different proposition. There'd be far more bureaucracy involved in getting in in the first place, and then once you're in there'd potentially be issues with changing job, and with long-term residence, and with medical care, and with this, that and the other.
There is no possible way in which shutting down free movement wouldn't make the UK a less attractive destination. Of course, this is irrelevant; the UK will almost certainly have to accept free movement as part of its future EEA or EFTA member status.
This is far stronger than anything you can get via other immigration routes and such deportations of EU citizens are really rare.
I'll repeat the comment I gave there:
>I don't view Berlin as a viable replacement as a top start-up hub because wages in Berlin are simply ludicrously low.
>With Google's investment in the Zurich office, and the much, much more internationally competitive wages you can earn in Switzerland, I think Zurich could be better positioned.
>There's certainly no reason to believe that specifically an EU city would be the next to take off. And in most other ways, the Swiss job market is just much more competitive.
>I'm also depressed by the article using a picture of an anti-human violently wide open co-working space as a stereotype of a thriving start-up culture. Nothing says you're being totally taken advantage of like a wide open floor plan.
On the other hand, I could imagine that start-ups would rather keep costs low, especially in the beginning. Then it would be a problem to be situated in a city like Zurich.
So from birth, companies based in these areas are predicated on the idea that wages must be low -- that's what makes them attractive to investors -- and as a result they really are not recruiting good people.
The whole thing basically amplifies the casino effects in start-ups. You invest in Berlin/Nashville/Singapore start-ups because it's an insanely cheap scratch-off ticket that costs you mostly nothing, has very low chance of striking it big, but offers you entertainment, or bragging rights, or something else, as an investor.
Companies in these areas will not be in a position to raise their wages to a truly competitive level for very long periods of time (most won't live that long anyway). So by agreeing to work for them, you are simply resigning yourself to a permanent reduction in real wage (i.e. after accounting for cost of living). Not to mention, for international workers anyway, adding visa risk, tax complications, equity complications, etc.
For a very talented developer who can earn far enough about market salaries even in NYC or SF so as to live a comfortable life in those places, it would only make sense to bear all these risks and join a firm in Berlin if you were being paid a premium -- i.e. that your wage in Berlin was even higher above cost of living than what your ~ $180k salary would be in Brooklyn -- and you should not at all consider it if someone starts conning you with arguments like, "but it's so much cheaper in Berlin ... and you can drink beer in the park and watch Bayern or Dortmund play here twice a year, go to Berghain on the weekends, etc. etc." (unless, of course, your utility function responds more to beer and soccer than to money).
For these people, earning ~ 50k euros / year in Berlin is a way, way, way, way, way worse deal than earning ~ 200k dollars in San Francisco, despite SF's insane costs. You just simply cannot do anything with 50k euros/year in Berlin unless you have no outside obligations and are happy spending the money of minor lifestyle perks.
I'm surprised that any of this is even controversial. The same is true for start-ups almost anywhere else in continental Europe too. To a very limited extent there are some companies in Amsterdam that actually pay a "real" wage (i.e. you can support a family, enjoy life, and save for retirement), and some across Switzerland, but not many.
Thinking in terms of "yay, cost of living is low so I don't need much of a salary" is the classic immature analysis of a recent grad who looks at it more like a program for teaching English is southeast Asia than like they are actually working a job, building a career, etc.
I know of course that even by German standards it's a luxury. Many working people (non-IT) can only afford a room.
Sometimes I think the government really needs to step in and cap the rental prices to 1/3 of the average salary in the area. Otherwise that inflation never ends.
If my calculation is right the typical 2BR apartment in SF is $5000/month. Or $60000/year. That is almost 1/3 of $200k SF salary. Add childcare at another $12000/year. And medical.
It doesn't seem as far as lifestyle they are that far off. CoL plays a huge role. This is the typical American attitude at looking across the pond and not knowing how the other side lives but just assuming it's that bad.
You really do need to hire experienced people, often with families and expectations for a higher quality of living conditions, etc., who aren't particularly interested in the youth culture offerings of Berlin.
And yet these startups, everywhere, are able to do exactly that. They use equity as a carrot to lure experienced people from a sure thing all the time.
Having a partner doubles your income. More, if French taxation works in any way similarly to the German system, then an official relationship puts you in a different taxation category. Having children moves you into yet another category where your net income noticeably improves. You're probably making an equivalent of 100K for a single person without realizing it.
>> And yet these startups, everywhere, are able to do exactly that. They use equity as a carrot to lure experienced people from a sure thing all the time.
Not really. Everywhere where I've been I've only seen kids writing code. Anybody who is senior has always been an independent contractor, and it's usually them who actually advance the work by leaps and bounds. But those, today you have them working for you, tomorrow they're elsewhere. And with the young and inexperienced, you won't accomplish much.
Also, experienced people with families usually ignore any talks about equity and start the initial offer analysis with a calculator in their hands. I'm yet to encounter a true senior specialist with family obligations that takes equity over hard currency.
That's only true if the partner earns about the same as you do. Being married (or in an official relationship) lowers your tax burden if you're earning unevenly (you're basically taxed based on the average of your wages in a system with a progressive tax rate), but that's all. It doesn't magic any money into existing. If you're both earning the same, you savings are exactly 0.
What having a partner really helps with is sharing costs. You only need a single flat (but probably a larger one), a single household, maybe share a car, ...
I'll add one caveat -- if you are saying that you and your partner both earned around 50k euros/year (combined household income of around 100k euros/year), then I would believe you, and it would not be surprising nor would it contradict anything I'm saying.
If instead you are claiming that you supported the kind of lifestyle you describe on a 50k euros/year salary, I simply do not believe it.
If you want to equivalently spend about 1/3 of a 50k salary on rent in Paris, that will be 1388 euros/month, or $1534 / month. It's ludicrous for you to claim that you can easily find a 2-bedroom apartment with clean accommodations and a reasonable commute distance from central Paris for $1534/month. So, very likely, you'll be spending more than 1/3 of your income on rent in metro Paris, if you earn 50k, so a greater fraction even than in SF. It's actually quite a lot more than 1/3 after you take into account taxes. (Also, re: medical, I've worked at large & small, young & old companies and only 1 out of the 4 has required me to pay any premium on medical insurance, and even then it was low. I know this is not always the case in America, but you definitely can find jobs that provide this if it matters to you.)
When I lived in Paris in 2010, I lived near the Exelmans stop (close to Parc des Princes), which was a long-ass trek into the city center (and even longer for me going to Universite Paris 7 for work). It was a 1-bedroom apartment shared between me and a flat mate (I slept on a pull-out sofa). There was no dryer, only a washer, and the water closet was separate (across the whole apartment) from the bath/shower, and had no sink. We also had to flip a metal sheet up onto the top of the washing machine in order to have any counter space when cooking.
That apartment was 1300 euros/month (650 split between two roommates) and we were only given that price because the apartment owner said he found the two of us (graduate students) to be especially responsible and was hoping for good stewards to take care of it, so he offered a discount down from the 1500 euros/month he listed originally.
Thus, from my own experience, 1/3 of a 50k salary in Paris will if you're lucky get you a very cramped 1-bedroom with sub-par appliances and accommodations that is way outside the city center and requires onerous commute times.
This was in 2010, so I can't imagine how much prices have risen.
Absolutely no way will you be able to afford a 2-bedroom place on that budget unless you're way outside of Paris. And with the remaining ~ 30k euros not spent on rent, you will be very unlikely to afford private school and the rest of what you claim -- and I'm not even factoring in the much higher tax rates.
Even looking on lodgis right now, even all the way out in the 16eme where I lived before, I'm seeing rents of 2500 - 3100 euros/month for anything with 2 bedrooms. This is somewhere around $3000. Sure, yes, that's lower than in SF or New York, but just as I have been arguing, it's not lower by a large enough amount to justify the drastic reduction in wages.
Facing these prices, I'd be much, much better off earning in the high $100k range in SF/NY than I would be earning anything below 100k euros in Paris/Berlin/Amsterdam/etc.
But pretty much the only country in all of Europe where a visa worker can actually approach a 100k euro salary is Switzerland.
The reduced cost of living is not enough to justify the even-more reduced wage you're paid. It just does not make economic sense. If you have access to developed American job markets, you are better off in real wage terms than in almost any situation possible in Europe.
It's deeply unfortunate too. I absolutely loved life i...
Saying they get ~ 50k euros/year but don't worry, the cost of living is low is a universal non-starter. That's just simply not competitive. The cost of living is not so low that a person can reduce their salary to around 1/3 of what they could make in New York or SF and expect to have the same quality of life.
You're basically handcuffing one arm behind your back by basing yourself in Berlin (or many other places) because now your pool of applicants is limited to only those people who have some ulterior reason to be interested in living in Berlin and are willing to make a Faustian bargain regarding huge reduction in their wage (even relative to cost of living).
Even with the exchange rate, my base salary was more than triple the $50k euros amount, and I have < 4 years of experience. I am a specialist in my area which makes my case a bit harder to compare, but still, the offer of provided healthcare and 4 weeks vacation doesn't make foreign jobs more attractive to me. I've had that in almost every American job I've had and also was paid a wage that was high enough to comfortably exceed local cost of living. In fact, I generally find that when an employer has to start nervously listing side perks like medical coverage or vacation as apologetic offerings to excuse an obviously poor salary relative to cost of living, it's a huge red flag that they know they are not equipped to recruit exceptional people.
In all my comments I am already talking about how much money you have left after general cost of living expenses. Even though such costs are lower in Berlin than in many major US cities, the salaries in Berlin are even lower at a disproportional level. Unless you adopt a more ascetic lifestyle, your lower salary in Berlin will not stretch as far despite the lower costs. The costs, while lower, aren't low enough.
If you are from EU, you can go to Berlin with no fuss, if you can get a job. Maybe your US counterpart can go to SV, but you need a visa rain dance, which make sense only if you are a star that some company want to pay a fortune to bring there.
Maybe Google and Facebook take the 0.001 % of the top developers. But, top 1% is not bad either.
Also, there is a lot of talent in Eastern Europe. For them, there are hoops and work visas for both EU and US, but, US hoops are much more difficult to pass.
Not to mention that Berlin has a great nigthlife. SF? Only complaints about the male/female ratio and nerd-dominated culture.
So, while SV is certainly the center of the industry, 100K in Berlin can give a much better life than 200K in SV, especially for people with EU citizenship.
- Sponsoring non-EU immigrants has become extremely difficult in Swizterland.
- Google trounces the competition by a margin that is completely out of reach for European start-ups.
- Switzerland itself is a very small market. The cash-flow of your typical SaaS start-up is going to be mostly in € or $ with all the associated burdens and risks.
Also it's funny you mention Amsterdam since from what I've seen, wages are even lower than in Berlin, which is insane given the higher CoL.
Also, if you want to start a start-up low wages are actually a plus...
(Source: I started a startup there and have several employees on the 30% rule)
But do learn German for everyday needs.
Also you might be in a meetup and some presentations might happen in German
If there is startup capital in Europe, it's Stockholm.
https://medium.com/creandum-family/the-nordics-in-context-th...
Also from Nordic countries:
1. Linux 2. Irc 3. Demoscene 4. DICE
[1] "consist of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_countries
Hence my reply to "Does Estonia count as a Nordic state" question :)
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finns#Genetics
Finland was a part of Sweden from ~1200 to 1809. Finland also still has a large Swedish minority and has Swedish as an official language. The biggest religion is Lutheran due to Swedes forcing it on people when they conquered the land. Estonia is more Orthodox.
More importantly, Finland has been co-operating with the other Nordic nations politically and economically for the ~century that it has been independent. Remember that the Nordic nations aren't just a cultural region, but they also share political, social and legal systems, have a passport union (although that overlaps with the EU nowadays) and, while they have not been able to develop any official military alliance due to Russian and American pressure, they co-operate a lot.
All in all, Estonia has some things in common with Finland, but it doesn't have much claim to being a "Nordic nation". They might be in the future, but not today.
But then there is this. http://satwcomic.com/new-nordic (sorry, I just needed a reason to post a SATW link)
Jumping on the bandwagon
There are quite a bit of other game related successful ventures up in the north, DICE, Remedy, Nordic Games, Funcom and quite a few others come to mind.
Denmark has better chance for being the capital of startups in Europe. Higher pay and no rent problem. Stockholm obviously is not going to scale.
If you are planning to move EU, I would definitely suggest Berlin. You can make 55k-70k euros easily. Cheap rent and food. Nothing to say about its nightlife. (best in EU)
I take it you don't live here, it's arguably worse but salaries are noticeably higher so it's impact is not as big.
But while I'm here, I'll throw in a shameless plug: Dublin is still in the EU, and is an English-speaking capital city with modern infrastructure, a skilled workforce, a pleasant climate and low corporate taxes.
If there's a recovery it will be years from now, when there are easy profits to be made.
Currently there are easy losses to be made, and no one wants that.
I've heard that washing your car in Ireland is a non-issue; the climate takes care of that.
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Geography/Ave...
-Want to stay in the EU?
-Want to trade in the Eurozone?
-Enjoy low corporate tax rate of 12.5%? Pro-business government?
-Enjoy friendly, well educated, English speaking, Pro-American people, good beer, decent music, nice quality of life, low crime and safe green natural environment? (Look how much fun even our soccer fans are http://www.irishexaminer.com/euro2016/euro2016-banter/10-rea...)
Invest in Ireland -> http://www.idaireland.com This has been a public service announcement from the country next door. #irelandlovesyou :)
Stockholm is pretty great when it comes to technical and investment maturity. We blew through and did all the stupid dotcom stuff in late 90's, while some have been repeated many successful entrepreneurs learned from that time. Internet access has been really good leading to a lot of good technical talent. It's a beautiful city that want's to be "international" and overall things are very polished. Sweden's also has a track record of producing a few gigantic hits such as Spotify, Soundcloud, Klarna, Skype, Minecraft etc etc.
On the downside the housing situation is insane and everyone has borrowed to the hilt trying to keep up with the ever increasing prices. You can't get hold of an apartment without buying. It's also a pretty expensive place to live. It get's pretty dark & pissy in the winters but summer's are great. I used say that living in Stockholm is 9 months of wondering why the hell you live here and three months where you get the answer.
Berlin in contrast feels like something very unique in Europe and Germany. It's like melting pot of different countries and not quite grown up mentality. Housing is still relatively accessible and affordable, there's even rental contracts to be had. Food and drink is overall cheaper. The startup spirit in Berlin still felt a bit naive when I was there, like a first wave city, but it's big and enthusiastic. However they seem to struggle to product big hits outside of their own country. Maybe the difference between Sweden and Germany is that Sweden is so little we have to go international, and also we're more anglofied. Big companies generally haven't been so big on Berlin since they don't have an international airport, leaving the city wide open for everyone else. On the downside Berlin is a bit meh when it comes to scenery and nature.
Outside the tech scene the English in Berlin is pretty bad and some look down at any not speaking German. Swedes grow up with English and most love every opportunity to use it.
I think there's a good bet Berlin will start to dominate as a "Silicon Valley of Europe", if nothing else because there's a vacuum there that can be filled, and it will become even more international than german. Even Swedes look at Berlin simply because it's cheaper and more accessible. It also has a bit bigger scene when it comes to small "startuppy" kinda ventures while Stockholm dominates on the more serious ones.
Working as an employee seems to suck in Berlin because everyone is looking for a job and job's pay poorly. But if you work for yourself and/or with investment money that doesn't matter and you're in a good position to leverage that money.
Wouldn't that mean that Europe has a fairly strong, by global terms, actual performance in startups, despite European popular culture mostly ignoring startups?
Baseball, (American) Football, Basketball, … I guess coming in fourth does feel crushing.
No, they won their group, won and advanced from the knockout stage, and, yes, got crushed in the semi-final round by Argentina, to finish ranked fourth in the tournament.
Like Brazil? Yes, it is.
Given the very small numbers, every European country [1] has a lot of potential to multiply their startup output. I doubt any trade deals or policy changes are going to bring it about. Not happening without major cultural change IMO. One might as well say that UK just 'bought' itself the ticket to make some major changes (tho I'm not betting my money on it either).
Just look at Israel, that tiny 8 million country consistently tops most European countries in terms of absolute funding. [0]
[0] http://www.slideshare.net/gdibner/europe-israel-4-q14-deals-... [1] maybe with exception of Sweden, it seems to pull of good numbers sometimes (given the small population), but doesn't seem consistent
I'm not sure how the Nordic countries get around that though. A stronger social safety net is probably negatively correlated with risk-aversion.
This leads to the US general population having much more savings in their disposal, enabling both bootstrapping via founder savings, and seed funding from friends, family and fools.
The one thing the UK still has going for it is SEIS/EIS but there's nothing preventing other countries copying this (e.g. Portugal is about to introduce something similar to SEIS).
For example, just north of Toronto is a small suburban city called Markham which calls itself the "high-tech capital of Canada" but the only notable thing about the area is the countless glass office towers of multi-national tech companies who built their Canadian HQ there. But the Toronto startup scene is entirely downtown, far from Markham. Or in Waterloo near the university there. I've even not heard of any events taking place up in Markham either, it's just not part of the community in any significant way.
The kind of people who go to work at IBM and AMD don't often leave to create companies nor do the CEOs participate in the startup communities very much. They're people who usually live in the suburbs with families and are happy working 9-5. Nothing wrong with that but the distinction between high-tech corps and startup scenes are often confused as homogeneous entities by outsiders.
I don't want startup capitals, I want an adjustment of mindsets that goes with the rest of the tech advancements.
I've had interviews for already internationally distributed teams where the HR manager insisted on having me full-time onsite without a good argument.
I know pay in Berlin must be lower compared to that in the Valley, but what's life in Berlin like if you're in software?
How's the job situation, relative pay, quality of life? Does anyone regret living there? How are the locals treating you?
I have an EU passport and already speak a little bit of German, if that matters....
Food, drinks, entertainment, everything is cheap, your salary will be around €50~55k/year, that means you'll probably get close to €3k/month after taxes, rent is raising but it's still cheap for an European capital (between €700~1.2k depending on what you are looking for) and probably around €150 for utilities (maybe a little less, I'm basing on the numbers a friend who's moving there has been telling me).
Plenty of job openings, every day I check them and there are tons of new openings on LinkedIn, SO Careers, Landing.jobs, etc.
Overall seems to be a great city to live if you like urban gritty cities, I personally love it and plan to move there next year if possible.
Probably you can regret it if you are looking for a calm city to live in, Berlin is very alive and kicking all the time, the Germans I know from Berlin are among the friendliest people I've know in my life (and I'm Brazilian).
And knowing German seems to help a lot, the locals mostly know English but they can be a bit shy to speak it all the time so when you eventually end up with a bunch of Germans they'll be speaking German between them.
Please, if someone see any misinformation correct me as I'm very interested to know better.
Brexit has really no direct consequence on startups.
With housing prices down and no worries about EU legislation, London would be a great place.
The only outstanding issue would be how the new EU worker visa program would work.
Neither London nor Berlin were huge on startups, this won't materially change anything.