Having just had one developer decide not to join our UK based company due to this, then yes I feel brains will be next.
I'm certainly thinking about my continued residency in the UK. Berlin looks pretty interesting for me, however the tech seem definitely doesn't seem as vibrant as that of London at a quick glance.
> the tech seem definitely doesn't seem as vibrant as that of London at a quick glance.
That could change as people decide against London and for EU cities. I'd say Dublin has quite a chance, too (although certainly not to the same extent).
One of the main reasons that "IT" and developers specifically choose the UK or more specifically London it's that it's the only place where you can get salaries which are even remotely close to what you get in the US.
A developer in spain earns about 35K Euro's, a developer in Berlin earns 60K. Deserving or not IT doesn't pay more than most professional positions in the EU and in many places you would be getting paid about as much as some public sector workers and teachers.
While the average UK developer salary isn't considerably higher than Germany, the London salaries are considerably higher and it is the only tech hub where developers can break the 100K GBP(~130K US in the current market, but it was 150K+ just a year ago) mark in Europe.
Add to that the fact that non-base compensation is very low in Europe in general, bonuses are fairly low, equity is considerably rarer than in the US, large tech companies would give you access to some sort of an employee investment plan but that's about it the UK was and still is pretty important in keeping IT talent within the EU.
Given the usual risk averse culture of most of the continental states (with somewhat the exception of Eastern europe and the baltic states) it's quite unlikely that a true startup hub can emerge anywhere else, the UK or again more specifically London had access to a lot of financial capital which helped it to compensate for the usual European aversion from risk, venture capital and the startup culture in general.
>> "London salaries are considerably higher and it is the only tech hub where developers can break the 100K GBP"
This might be true for big companies but certainly not startups. In my experience mid-level developers can expect around £45K and senior £60k (at startups). You could break definitely break £100k with contract work though.
More or less but is what's available, same thing goes for the continent, a developer for Amazon in Berlin would be making 60-65K euro's.
The UK used to be a big upgrade even outside of London due to the relative strength of the currency(especially during the Euro crisis), but the EUR and the GBP are almost at parity these days so that's gone (if you are making 50K GBP it's 59K US, if you are making 50K EUR it's 55K US these days).
Just pure salary comparison isn't enough though. London has crazy living costs, and Berlin's response is the heavy taxation (about 40%-45% including the compulsory health insurance).
As the other commenter mentioned, this is after including a compulsory health insurance which is about 15% of your salary. And yes, taxation in this income bracket is higher than in the Nordic countries. Can't say if this is true across Germany.
You can also choose private insurance if your income is high enough, which can then be cheaper for you than the mentioned 15%. The income limit for that is something like 55-60k/year, if I recall correctly.
London has a high cost of living only really around rent, and if you are willing to flat share, or live in a non-central location you don't pay that much.
Sure it's not the 300 EUR a month you can get in some other major EU cities but it also doesn't have to be 3000 GBP a month for a 2 bedroom either (and it can go much higher than 3000 for a 2 bed/NYC size studio if you were wondering).
Do European start ups simply not have access to London VC money simply because its denominated in pounds?
I guess I didn't realize that the continental countries were so risk averse. Are there any Eastern European countries that have a more suitable risk profile that are also burgeoning tech sectors? Is Estonia a possibility?
The problem with Dublin is cost of living. Comparing my London costs to a friend in Dublin he's paying more for pretty much everything and usually by a significant amount. Berlin would also be a better choice for a lot of people as it is on mainland Europe so easier to travel to (people can drive with all of their belongings when moving).
There's going to be a period of uncertainty where there may be an effect, but if they hurry up and get on with it then some stability should return. If the 15% rate of corporation tax comes in or other measures it could well encourage investment.
In the meantime, I suspect Brexit will be a convenient excuse for anyone wishing to decline a job offer regardless of whether that's really their reason.
Hiring in the UK tech sector has largely stopped. There are no positions, unless you are a devop - in which case, there are tons of positions.
If people are so interested in saving the UK tech scene, why not hire people already living in the UK?
Those people will not be able to survive until consumer and investor confidence returns and they will be the first to head out to other EU countries.
> "Hiring in the UK tech sector has largely stopped."
You're basing this on what exactly? I got a new job this week and there was plenty of people hiring tech talent (I had interviews lined up with 5 different companies within 2 weeks of starting to look).
Those rules might change, one of the Conservative candidates announced that she'll kick out all EU immigrants that enter the UK after she becomes the prime minister.
To put it bluntly, Im confident the UK doesnt want ti self destruct. The immigration issue that spurred this delema was syrian, middle east abd north african immigrants. Saying "those rules may change" seems to be more fear mongering to the point of hoping for a worst possible outcome.
> The immigration issue that spurred this delema was syrian, middle east abd north african immigrants.
Not entirely, the common argument is also about cheap workers from Eastern Europe. Ironically, recent accession of countries like Poland, Romania and Bulgaria was specifically and emphatically supported by the UK.
This is perhaps what he was referring to: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jul/04/future-of-eu... . If so, it looks like she said it would be used as a bargaining chip (which is pretty bad unto itself), not that she was dead set on kicking them out.
Theresa May didn't announce that she will kick all foreigners, but she is not guaranteeing they will stay in the UK until negotiating with the EU.
So basically, holding them hostage and feeding into uncertainty and fear.
Hardly. She can't guarantee that because what if the EU wants to deport Brits who are living in the EU? Then it would have to be matched like for like.
The EU has shown it wants to hurt the UK as much as possible because its strategy for preventing further exits is, in a word, fear. You can't make any up front guarantees when negotiating with people like that, no matter how much you'd like to.
That only works if you register for a residency card using the EU path once you came in.
Most EU nationals do not officially exercise their right with the home office since they do not have to do so, it doesn't gives you any additional benefits and dealing with the UK Home Office is pretty much the worse process you can imagine.
Whether you can skip the first part is another story, you might be able to do so if you can provide proof of continuous qualification of the QP requirements over a period of 5 years which might not be so easy to do.
Frankly, nobody knows what will happen or how far deportation will go, if even anywhere at all - but that in and of itself is the issue - pre-referendum, it seemed a fair assumption that EU migrants could live and work in the UK indefinitely - but now - don't know. Can't plan in an uncertain environment, and if you can't plan, you can't run your business.
We for instance use aws heavily - hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. We invoice our customers in sterling. That lost margin has to come from somewhere, which either means charging our customers more, or cutting costs. We'll probably have to do a bit of both, but this feels like stemming the bleeding while we figure out what to do next.
About ⅓ of our workforce are EU nationals - and few bother to apply for leave to remain, as it isn't necessary under current rules - so again, they no longer know whether they can remain here, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if they're considering moving on - why stay in an uncertain environment? They've already demonstrated a willingness to be mobile.
Of all the countries, the UK is one of the most pragmatic when dealing with the economy. I don't know how the whole thing is going to pan out but the risk of mass deportation of EU nationals I think is close to zero.
You can only look at Teresa May's record, and that has been despicable. We've had vans driving around telling people to "Go home" (I am not making this up). That was an exceptional case, but the general official attitude towards immigration is hostile. Try getting leave to remain for your non-EU spouse. Unless you earn more than £18K/year and have several thousands of pounds to go through the visa process it may not be possible at all. There are many people who are stuck in foreign countries away from their husbands, wives and children.
6 years. I may be wrong but the certificate of permanent residence (EEA nationals do not apply for the card, they apply for the certificate) just certifies that you have been in the UK (permanent resident, i.e. not on and off) for 5 years but is not a visa in itself. It is a requirement to apply for a citizenship (hence the +1 year).
There are lots of reasonable arguments to investing in the UK first. They now have the opportunity to innovate without having to work on with committees with thousands of people on them (cookie laws, wtf). As an investor I have more trust in the UK than the rest of Europe. The employment argument is reasonable except, there is still plenty of Eastern European talent that was never in the EU.
It's not hard for UK companies to hire outside of the EU either, Tier 2 general and Tier 2 ICT sponsorships are pretty easy to obtain.
The cost is different tho, developers from spain can just move to the UK and look for a job.
Hiring some one internationally is usually a more complicated process.
- The UK will end up still following EU regulations because anything else would risk their access to the common market
- Even now, EU regulations affect non-EU companies. No way to avoid the "cookie law" if you want to serve EU customers.
- The list of regulations that affect startups, especially in the web/software space is rather small. The impact of regulation on the startup scene in Europe is almost zero.
> The list of regulations that affect startups, especially in the web/software space is rather small. The impact of regulation on the startup scene in Europe is almost zero.
Complete and utter nonsense.
If you're planning on establishing a start-up in the UK/Europe, and you believe this to be the case, you need a lawyer to give you a reality check sharpish.
I've been running a successful startup in Germany for 5 years and I feel the impact of bureaucracy is negligible in the scheme of things.
One exception may be employment law, but that's not made by the EU and generally, once you figure it out for your first employee, it becomes much easier for any 1+n.
You can ignore the cookie law if you're not in the EU because the EU has, at the moment, no way to enforce its laws on companies without a physical presence there. And soon the easiest way to be close to the EU without being physically present there will be to place yourself in the UK.
The UK will not end up following EU regulations, because the government has a clear instruction from the electorate not to compromise on the immigration issue. The EU will either compromise (unlikely), or face further exits in the coming years, because the UK is merely more democratically responsive than most other countries, not significantly different.
You claim many reasons, but offer only one: Innovating without interference from the EU. This is however far from reality. The UK even once it leaves for real, will still be affected by EU regulations, but now without being able to directly influence them. At this point it is unclear what kind of trade agreements the UK will have with the EU, but even if it will do a radical separation (i.e., remove free trade) it will still be affected by EU regulations if there is to be any economic relations.
I fully expect UK companies to ignore the EU GPDR assuming it's not passed into law due to Brexit, and gain significant competitive advantage over EU software firms as a result. I expect the EU will react by not really enforcing it to try and win back the firms that will leave.
> European staff suddenly have no idea how long they will be able to work in Britain.
I've heard a number of politicians say that those who are here will be able to remain. It would be such a mistake to suddenly tell people to leave. It's not going to happen.
Also a number of points about he article.
> Although Europe’s 500 million citizens dwarfs the 323 million in the US
So what. They all speak different languages, not one. So there are some hurdles there to selling to them.
In addition. Only about 4? countries in the EU are rich enough to be trading with. The rest aren't really worth a mention.
I'd easily take the 323 in the US, as I have only 1 language to deal with and immediate results in setting up a business for the US.
> “Long term I think I will have to relocate my business to the USA as the market in the UK is just too small to justify staying here,” she told me. What’s that? A market of 65 million too small? Well, yes, when just a fortnight ago it was 500 million.
This is laughable. I have a business in both the UK and the US. Even if I was just operating in the UK. I'd still have access to the US. How this article is sounding like the UK cannot trade with the EU is again laughable.
This article smacks of scare-mongering.
Finally one thing, follow the money.
> Look for talented British entrepreneurs suddenly turning up in Berlin, Stockholm, Lisbon and Barcelona.
Wasn't there an article on HN saying that Barcelona couldnt find enough tech workers? The evidence pointed to compensation.
I doubt there will be much of a brain drain, when British tech workers balk at how much they'd be losing in salary working anywhere apart from the UK or US.
Oh and waiting for the downvotes from French and German HN users.
Britain is now a direct competitor to these countries. With 1 notable exception.
Britain can now put in place any legislation she wishes to be even more competitive than the EU.
Contrast that to the EU, where you have 28? member states which have to agree whatever is ratified. Remember previously that France, Germany and Spain have shot down previous bills because it would hurt a sector of their economy?
Not Britain can do whatever is in HER best interest.
> Wasn't there an article on HN saying that Barcelona couldnt find enough tech workers? The evidence pointed to compensation
Because there's no shortage at all. That's the yearly "we need to keep wages low, so push people to study It by promising jobs" article sponsored by the big companies.
There's a shortage of entrepreneurs, VC money and in general management talent that learned to manage a company after the 80s.
> I've heard a number of politicians say that those who are here will be able to remain. It would be such a mistake to suddenly tell people to leave. It's not going to happen.
Well technically, the UK government refuses to guarantee the right to work for EU nationals (at this time). I agree that's unlikely to deport all these people, but on the other hand, I didn't think Brexit would happen so...
American software engineer who is leaving the US in 35 hours to work for a startup in the UK here. I feel like even for non-EU immigrants, the brexit makes Britain in general less attractive. Part of the reason I'm joining the company is getting to work alongside folks from across the EU and, while I strongly suspect they'll ultimately be alright, I wouldn't be surprised if they were more anxious. Another reason is that my wife loves to travel, we are going to use London as a base, and this does hurt the value of my salary for traveling in the EU.
Aside from the impact on myself, I'd strongly suspect that non-white immigrants feel less welcome due to the uptick in racist incidents (or at least the media reports thereof) which has accompanied this.
hmmm.... It just occurs to me that I've been assuming I'm still white in the UK. I think that is a safe assumption, but race is weird so I suppose there is a slight possibility that my skin is dark enough that I'm not. huh.
yea, I saw something about a Polish community center having been vandalized. The response to that vandalism was really heartwarming though.
Also, how are you doing? Thank you for the referral a while back when I was doing my job search. The EU offices weren't hiring SWEs at the time, but the referral was still helpful.
Please put away the tar brush. 52% of voters is not the majority of the UK population. I doubt even a majority of the 52% have deep-rooted hatred of foreigners. Extrapolating public feeling based on reporting of recent, horrid, despicable events is not fair nor scientific.
Even if on a shallow level someone is anti-foreigner, I believe their discontent comes from somewhere else (if they had a well-paying, secure job, a house with a low mortgage payment, excellent prospects for their children etc... they'd forget about foreigners).
I'm stating a suspicion about the perceptions held by non-UK citizens. I'm not making a claim about the mindset of UK citizens. In fact, I'm not making any claims at all about the racial angle because:
I was born here, lived here 97% of my life. Perhaps it would be prudent to listen to those that live here to confirm/deny suspicions? Your choice obviously.
Right, but I'm not saying anything about the people who've lived here. In my first sentence, I'm suspecting things about the perceptions of people outside the UK (or possibly recent arrivals).
In my second, I'm speculating wildly about how race works in the UK but stating that I really don't know.
By the way, as an actual concrete statement: Your border force is absolutely grand and made me feel so welcomed. I should be going to sleep to stave off jet lag, but I am just really excited to finally be here after many years of planning and working toward this.
"Given that the UK had been part of a single market which allowed for enormous freedom of movement, its access to all that talent in Europe is now in jeopardy."
I don't think UK Govt will jeopardise access to talent with unprogressive immigration reform. UK tech startups need not worry on this front. And just look at USA as an example. Despite VISA issues for foreigners, Silicon Valley still thrives and still has reasonable access to a global pool of talent.
Leaving the harsh regulations of this customs union can benefit Britain and non-EU trading countries.
They're better offer negotiating as a free agent.
I work in London. Since the referendum, all my European, non British colleagues -including myself - have started to discuss places we could potentially move to, "just in case". Amsterdam, Barcelona, Berlin are the most popular ones - and I've found myself thinking much more seriously that it might be time to prepare. Perhaps some of my colleagues are on the same page.
Yes, there are 2 or 2.5 years when nothing will change theoretically. But do I really want to commit to a country, with uncertainty as to what will happen after this 2.5 years?
I suggest everyone affected do their research on the options available. Luckily, there are plenty. Just in case.
I understand Berlin being a logical choice for a relocation but I haven't heard much about Amsterdam and Barcelona in terms of the tech and start up environment. Are they on par with Berlin or are they "up and comers"?
I am also curios, are there practical reasons outside of the start up tech environment that are making you consider Barcelona and Amsterdam.
Wages for tech people in Barcelona at least are dramatically worse than in places like London.
Amsterdam looks more attractive (much better levels of English as well), but the Netherlands is one of the countries most likely to go through an EU referendum within the next 18 months as well.
I fail to see what the panic is about. Britain will not want to lose access to the single market, so it is inevitable that nothing will materially change regarding immigration. Look at Switzerland whose citizens voted to control EU immigration and are now being told it is impossible. Even implementing a policy which says Switzerland can limit immigration to job sectors where the unemployment level is high is meeting resistance. And why is immigration such a worry anyhow. It is not like Britain would never have immigration. Last time I looked the USA startup scene does not seem to struggle even though they do not have an open borders policy with nearby countries.
To add to your point about the USA, how many trade tariffs tend to apply to service-based companies with a tech focus (i.e. the majority of tech startups)?
From what I've seen, the answer is pretty much none. So long as barriers to tech talent aren't put in place, there's basically nothing holding back the UK tech scene. The fear being generated by the media (along with those that repeat those fears without critical examination) is more damaging than the situation as it stands today. We're talking about something that only happened within the last few weeks, the sky isn't falling, it's all a failure of perception.
Completely agree. A full brexit could actually be beneficial for Britain as we could get tech talent from anywhere i.e. a level playing field for the whole world, not preference to those countries geographically nearby. I do not think it will happen though.
Immigration is a worry because it is no longer simply intra-EU nations allowing free movement of their members, but the millions of low-skilled Middle East and North African migrants who've entered the EU in the last few years will be a strain on nation's finances for decades. Couple this with the aging of Europe and automation on the horizon and there is not the need nor the capability to sustain the new EU residents.
AFAIK all the treaties Switzerland has with the European Union include a guillotine clause that cancels all treaties when one is broken. This is due to the difficulty getting the required number of member countries into agreement on treaties. This mean that if Switzerland instituted policies infringing on the free movement treaties, it'd need to renegotiate every single other treaty, potentially with less favorable terms, and long negotiation periods, during which Switzerland is effectively cut off from the rest of the EU. It's not impossible, but doesn't seem worth the cost for something that size.
It is almost without question that the Swiss will hold another referendum in the coming months, as their deadline for implementing the previous referendum's legislation (which they are legally bound to do) will expire in February. However due to the latency on getting new laws through Parliament they really have to start now.
There is no way to renegotiate with the EU because the EU sees any geographically European population that chooses to defy the EU as some kind of terrorist, with whom negotiation is unthinkable. They refused to negotiate with the Swiss and are now demanding the Swiss join the EU proper or else there won't be any further negotiations (ever). The Swiss do not want to join the EU. So the stage is set for a showdown.
The best case outcome for the EU is a new vote in which the Swiss choose to continue the status quo for a little while longer.
The main reason Leave won is because there was strong popular demand for "control of immigration", which implies leaving the Single Market. That doesn't mean the government won't quietly disregard that, but it does mean it's considerably less likely we take a Norway-like approach than it would have been if the public was instead obsessed with minutae like the Common Fisheries Policy or European Court of Justice.
Immigration restrictions are the least of worries for UK-based startups not focusing on the domestic market though, especially in fintech which has traditionally been London's strength. If you need company registrations, offices, contract and potentially even servers and compliance staff to be based in the EU to comply with certain regulations, it suddenly makes a lot less sense to spend all the extra overheads of having your [main] office in London, especially if other startups on the scene are starting to migrate and you don't want multiple offices. And whilst EU negotiators might want to avoid tariffs regardless of whether the UK stays in the Single Market or not, they have very little reason to secure trade agreements with the UK that grant UK firms passporting rights.
Just a bit of paperwork: Exam, a few hundred pounds in fees and yes, paperwork to get a British passport. On the other hand, other cities don't require any of that... You can keep your passport and still be accepted by the country. Keep in mind not all countries accept double nationally, so there's a chance someone would have to choose between their original passport (which would be an EU passport) and a watered down British one.
Also, what about their families? Not all of them are single white males in their 20s. Their partners would probably want to keep working, not necessarily on qualified jobs that could grant a visa anywhere in the world.
What I'm saying is that is not as easy as it might seem. People have different situations to account for.
You mean moving your house, family and business to another country which language you do not speak and will have to learn is less work and expensive than passing an exam you can prepare over a week end and a couple of forms to post in the mail?
Besides, having passed that exam myself I actually think it was a good experience. I learned a few things about the UK.
Language I can see, but then the German Abitur has a requirement of 2 foreign languages, with potentially 3 (English/French, French/Latin, last one depending on what the school offers, usually Spanish/Italian/I think Russian in NE/sometimes Chinese). Some of these languages are substantially similar, which further widens the field, e.g., a French speaker might transition to Italian easily.
A fair number of Europeans are ridiculously multilingual.
If by multilingual you meaning speaking english in addition to their mother tongue, I agree. If by multilingual you mean speaking fluently another non english language I disagree, only a small minority do. Particularly in a population of technical people (since we are taking about start ups).
In my experience, even educated young urban Germans are mostly not actually fluent (C2) in English. They can just about hold a conversation (probably B2). Many of them speak French only a little worse than that.
Either way, they'd need to learn more if they wanted to have a normal life in an English-speaking country.
So you don't speak the native language of the country you might go back to? I'm certain there are emigrees who came to the UK very young whose parents wanted them to assimilate, but somehow I doubt that's the majority. There will also be people, especially Eastern Europeans, who will want to move to a different EU country than their origin, but again this is the same kind of move they made to the UK to begin with, unless English language education has gotten much better since I lived there.
If your family can't stay or can't develop their professional careers in the UK then yes, moving somewhere else is easier than a life full of misery and regrets.
Citizenship might be unnecessary, though. People could apply for permanent resident cards. It looks like currently there's no such procedure for EEA residents, since they already have that right.
a) there is a big(?) risk for Europe itself to fall apart within the next couple of years,
b) those cities cannot possibly replace London in the next few years. I think they'll probably share the "tech" that London will lose, and the gap will shorten between them and London.
Also, by being a contractor in the UK, I now see that this nice tax efficient way of working, does not apply in other countries, Germany for example. So after all, London might still be more attractive for some. ( Ltd tax might fall even more for example )
The EU falling apart? Unlikely. Mainstream politicians have learned their lesson, which is never offer up such a dumb referendum to their electorate, even one which you would be "certain" to win.
The Eurozone: Not in the next 2 years, but the structures are fundamentally unsound so something will have to give. Most likely outcome is further political and economic integration of the Eurozone members which would avoid a breakup at the cost of being unpopular. There's just too much trade that depends on the Euro.
What you simply push aside as a dumb referendum because you do not agree with it, is silly considering your thoughts are not an accurate reflection of the issues with the EU and polling of its members.
>Polls recently conducted in Italy, France, Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands, Czech Republic and Hungary also showed that these countries could follow Britain if it succeeds in leaving the EU. Euroskeptic politicians in these countries have been adding fuel to the fire, stepping up their calls for EU-exits in light of the British referendum.
On Wednesday, French right-wing leader Marine Le Pen stressed that France should have its own ‘Frexit’ vote.
“What I'm asking for is a referendum in France. Every EU member should be able to have its say in a referendum,” the National Front leader told France's TF1 television. A March poll by the University of Edinburgh found that 53 percent of the French are in favor of a referendum on leaving the Union.
30% of Germans want to quit EU as support for Merkel’s govt. drops below 50%
While a YouGov poll in May, commissioned by Handelsblatt newspaper, found that 29 percent of Germans would leave the EU if a referendum was to take place. Only 54 percent of those living in the country supported staying in the bloc.
The mood is reportedly the same in the Netherlands, with a February opinion poll finding that 53 percent of Dutch citizens want a 'Nexit' referendum. Geert Wilders, leader of the Dutch right-wing, populist PVV party, currently topping opinion polls, openly expressed hopes a ‘Nexit’ could follow a ‘Brexit.’
https://www.rt.com/viral/348039-brexit-eu-referendum-domino/
I don't know why people are downvoting you - there certainly is a danger from far right politicians. Personally I don't see it actually happening (especially given the negative example from Brexit), but it's a possibility.
I think people only read the first sentence of most posts, and your first sentence is wrong -- everything about this referendum was dumb.
It was dumb to have the referendum in the first place. Cameron had it in order to try to resolve an internal Tory party dispute.
It was dumb to have a 50:50 threshold. A massive constitutional change should require a supermajority.
The arguments (on all sides) were largely lies.
And the outcome won't even be what anyone wants. The leavers won't get what they voted for. Almost everyone will be shafted.
I don't think it was dumb to have a referendum. I think a lot of the problems with the European project stem from perception that folk at the top are pulling a fast one over their populations - people should decide when the basis of their government changes. But the circumstance by which the referendum came about was farcical.
I don't disagree with the rest of what you say, but I would add that a government that puts together a referendum that is not a foregone conclusion, that does not prepare for an adverse decision, is incompetent and negligent enough to be considered criminal.
Labeling the referendum as dumb is IMHO accurate, not because of the outcome, but because of the way it was done. It takes an extremely complex matter and puts it into an simple yes no questions without discussing the consequences. What does it even mean to leave the EU? A lot of leave voters seemed to take it as stopping immigration, which will not happen (since a lot of immigration is coming from outside the EU and freedom of movement with EU states will likely not be removed).
There was plenty of discussion of the consequences, heck, the remain campaign focused more or less ONLY on the consequences of the EU's economic retaliation.
Leaving the EU will absolutely allow immigration to be pushed down, though likely not to the "tens of thousands per year" figure that seems to have been arbitrarily chosen simply because that'd result in too many very useful and in-demand people being excluded. But the type of immigration that has caused so much malcontent in the regions can absolutely be close to eliminated, i.e. poor unskilled workers coming from eastern Europe and undercutting the wages of the locals.
Are you asking how I would do the referendum? Certainly not with a 16 page manifesto and basically asking "Wanna leave the EU?" It should have included considerations what would happen with Northern Ireland, Scotland and Gibraltar.
How will leaving the EU push immigration down? As I pointed out, a good deal of immigration coming from outside the EU. And the EU part will probably not be affected by Brexit either, because free movement is tied to free trade. Or do you think that the UK will give up free trade with the EU?
Free trade and free movement are unrelated, as evidenced by the fact that the EU is trying to sign free trade deals with Canada and the United States. It's only countries geographically in Europe that are told they must accept both or neither.
The EU will either sign a free trade deal with the UK of some sort (possibly not as free as within the single market), or it will simply fuel its own collapse.
Actually, you and the parent are not quite right on the free trade issue v movement of people issue. It is the single market in services that is tied to notions of free movement of people. The free trade and restrictions on movement of people is not controversial.
It was a dumb referendum because it pitted a specific, known option (remain in the EU) against a complete unknown. The unknown option won by cobbling together a coalition of several different, mutually exclusive agendas (some of which were/are based on fantasies, like the EU giving the UK free access to the common market while choosing which regulations it would follow), thus guaranteeing that there's probably no conceivable exit deal that more than 20% of the country (certainly nowhere near 52%) would be happy with, and even more than 80% will be unhappy with the one that is eventually negotiated.
You don't have to be pro-EU to see this as a bad way to run a country (although it helps).
The "complete unknown" is not actually unknown. Just look at any country that is not in the EU.
The exact details of a relationship post-Brexit are impossible to know because the EU refuses to even contemplate such a possibility, let alone discuss it. That's a problem of their own creation however, and that attitude is exactly what has stoked the fires of euroscepticism across the continent. You can sometimes put off reality by denying it, but not forever.
You might get away in a restaurant in Berlin speaking only english, but it's no fun to live in a country where you can't understand anything written, whether it is to fill your taxes, or interact with your bank, or where every website will be localized to the local language.
If you and your whole team speak Dutch and Spanish and German, then of course you can hesitate between London, Amsterdam, Barcelona or Berlin.
It takes time. I was actually working and taking German classes after work. But that adds to frustration, since you get more tired and you still don't understand anything because it takes a lot of time to get proficient.
Having spent many years living in Switzerland (and learning German), it's really hard for people in our industry to do that. Maybe if you work as a bartender all day you'll get fluent fast, but in the software business the entire industry is oriented around English, so you tend to use English all day even in places where most of your colleagues are from other European countries.
And you want to make friends, right? Well, there are lots of other people who want to make friends too: other foreigners who moved there. Who also don't speak the local language.
So you end up finding that learning German or whatever ends up being not much easier than doing so in high school: your opportunities to practice are limited. I have learned it, but basically through just doing lessons. My best Swiss friend comes from the French speaking part, so that was no help.
One weekend is not what I'd call "a lot of opportunities". If you think it is then we're discussing different levels of fluency. I'm quite conversational in German. I would not say I have a lot of opportunities to practice because restaurant and supermarket German are so simple they don't help me get any better.
Swiss people learn English in school. I have only met a few who cannot speak English well. It's a much more common issue that I want to speak German with them, but they don't actually like German (it's something of a foreign language too compared to dialect), and they prefer to practice their English with me. Linguistic tugs of war are always awkward.
> One weekend is not what I'd call "a lot of opportunities". If you think it is then we're discussing different levels of fluency. I'm quite conversational in German
I fully agree with you, I was at a beginner's level on that occasion. Yes, if you are conversational then it's not going to change much (from your original post it seemed you barely spoke German)
And yes, the way to progress from conversational to the upper levels is mainly through classes
> but they don't actually like German (it's something of a foreign language too compared to dialect)
Ah that's true. Nobody speaks Hochdeutsch on everyday life. And Schweizerdeutsch is weird
That is a more serious issue but there's the option of Dublin/Ireland and other places where the population is English-fluent and everything is available in English.
It is funny that people in the start-up industry are unwilling to be 'agile' about languages. Personally, I'm terrible at learning languages, but limiting myself to potentially a hazardous place to live in just because they speak english, is not a great reason.
It is quite plausible that the Swiss will have their own "Swixit" by next year, because avoiding it now requires another referendum to undo the effects of a previous referendum that would result in automatic cancellation of most (all?) EU/Swiss treaties. Also, the EU has been playing hardball with the Swiss lately, and they don't like it one bit.
You might want to at least give things six months to a year to "settle", for appropriate definitions of settling. You may feel silly fleeing the UK because of Brexit only to discover that the country you fled to exits as well, or enough other countries exit that there isn't any escape from the problem. Or, more relevant than perhaps "feeling silly", you might spend an awful lot of money only to end up in the same place anyhow.
The pressures that led to Brexit are not unique to the UK, and have been building for many years. Maybe it'll be unique. Maybe it'll be contained. In fact, maybe it won't even happen. It hasn't happened yet. But with at least similar order-of-magnitude probability, maybe by this time next year one to three other countries will have exited to some extent as well. If you mistake your own political inclinations or beliefs for what is actually likely, no-one will save you from the consequences of your error. It's easy to spin Brexit as a fluke, but it's pretty easy to spin it as a bellweather, too.
Don't panic. Wait until the dust has settled (maybe a year) and then start taking decisions. I'm certain everything will look much less dramatic by then.
Above link might help understanding of the politics behind our vote. I had a bad feeling when I saw how very close the opinion polls were. Once Farage did the immigration poster it was game over. Our first political assassination this century seemed to polarise the situation as well.
Using the orthogonal scales explained in the link above, you guys are neo-liberal economically and have a cosmopolitan outlook. Many - not a majority, just enough - people in England have a communitarian outlook and are left wing economically.
What you have going for you is that the government is also right wing economically. The leadership may move slightly to the communitarian end - it only has to move enough to make it work.
The new leader and her government will need to dance like anything - they will have to conduct a complex set of negotiations (remember UK has not negotiated a trade deal for 40 years) that will involve the usual performance you do when making deals - but at the same time they will have to keep public opinion reassured (or at least bored - i.e. avoid upsetting it). Not an easy trick. One candidate seems to be on a bit of a learning curve from this morning's news.
Remember that those of us who ticked the 'remain' box basically all wanted the same thing - status quo. What did those who ticked the 'leave' box want? Quite a few incompatible things from my conversations over the last few weeks. The new Prime Minister will be making more than half the people unhappy - this last idea comes from an Irish Times columnist whose name escapes me right now.
You need to hedge for uncertainty in any way you can.
PS: If you think London has problems, think about how things look from Belfast.
I work in a London startup where about 90% or our engineers are not British. They tell me that they are already seeing adverts saying 'move to berlin/dublin' on their facebook feed. There is a real danger that as well as not being able to recruit people, the people that are already here will simply leave.
For all those reading this article and agreeing with it, I'd like to point out that it follows the classic scaremongering approach... suggests the worst case scenario based on an uncertain future, and explores no possible solutions. The only people it holds value for are those that seek to gain from dividing us.
From what I can see, the central claim the article makes is that hiring tech talent is going to be harder post-Brexit. There are a number of issues with this claim. For one, the perceived issue with immigration was pretty much never with those who were filling a skills shortage. I've never heard anyone complaining about doctors and nurses being brought over to work in the NHS, for example. The perceived issue was with low-skilled workers and/or people who were resistant to integration with Western values. I personally don't have an issue with immigration (and believe the problems are hugely exaggerated by the media), but to be fair to those that do have concerns about immigration, it should be pointed out that their misgivings weren't really directed at high-tech workers.
Secondly, there's the issue that talented individuals from EU countries may be less interested in coming to the UK. There is likely to be some people who perceive the situation this way, but there's plenty of tech talent all across the world, and the UK will remain a destination that people from less economically developed countries are interested in coming to, especially as the English language is widespread across the world.
I hope that the new Conservative leader will lay out a plan that makes it clear the people who are currently living in the UK can continue to do so, regardless of the state of our EU membership. I think it'd be a great help in putting immigration speculation to bed.
EUs trade with each other represents only 16% of all trade in the world and this number is declining. The EU has no fintech/startups center beside the UK and thats not going to change (Berlin doesn't have the money)
EU is killing, not fostering startups. If anything startups thrive where there is complexity because it means there are problems to solve.
The EU is politically trying to solve a lot of problems but they have nothing but technocratic reasons to do so. I.e. they aren’t actually very good at allocating resources to the right problems for europeans because they have no feedback mechanism allowing for a better insight into what are the EU citizens problems.
Instead they are solving problems with the very bureacracy they helped create themselves to begin with.
If anything the EU should stop trying to solve politically what can be solved through technology and via startups.
The UK's fintech sector is going to be just fine and most probably boosted because it's not the problems of the EU that makes UK's fintech successful it's the world.
Technology does and can make up for any legislative complexity and it's going to foster a whole new slew of startups.
So the UK is going to benefit greatly for this and can now make trade deals that benefit the UK while continuing to do fintech without any problems what so ever.
EU isn't some economic powerhouse which one should only be so lucky to be part of. It's primarily catered towards supporting old industries and trade barriers. More countries should reverse back to the common market.
The fact is no one knows whats going to happen. But if history is any indication the UK is going to come out stronger not weaker from this.
Using Dublin as an example is like comparing Boston with SF. You just don't have the talent or the infrastructure or alumni there and it's not just something you build up like that.
If it's laughable then why does the EU have the lowest number of unicorns of any super region in the world? Why is it's growth declining? Why is it's unemployment increasing?
The UK is the country with most unicorns, most fintech startups, most important financial market in all of the EU.
Thats not just something they got because of the EU they got it despite the EU as they had it before too.
And if the EU is so important for trade and export why is it that a country like Denmark export to the US is now rivaling export to Germany and is said to go move beyond that.
EU is loosing it's economic power not gaining it.
There is not a single thread of evidence that the EU is making it easier to conduct business. If anything though it's great for big corporations because they can lobby any challenger out of the market because of the legislative burdens.
I am for the common market but the EU is killing the very advantage of having individual countries with different cultures by trying to harmonize their culture.
Diversity is an asset not a liability especially for startups.
The rest of the EU has few fintech startups in part because financial passporting across the EU meant that fintech startup could serve customers in the whole of the EU from an office in London.
That's likely to change...
The idea that this is less of an asset to London startups than increased diversity of culture and regulation between countries is, to put it politely, utter nonsense.
As I pointed out, the UK's ability to serve EU markets via financial passporting will almost certainly disappear assuming the UK opts to leave the Single Market. Which is a problem if you're a startup aiming to provide regulated services to European markets and currently have London as a base (obviously it's less of a problem if you're a multinational bank and already have a Frankfurt office to relocate the relevant back office departments to). The legislative burdens still exist: they're just legislative burdens that will make performing certain services for EU citizens/companies impossible rather than merely complicated for a young company based solely in London.
But please feel free to dismiss that argument as "anger" in lieu of any ability to support your claim that cultural differences are far more valuable to startups (?!).
Well yes, it would be less damaging for the UK's fintech industry if the government opts to defy the will of a population that voted Out in a campaign dominated by debate over "control of immigration" in order to remain in the Single Market, precisely because all of the harmonised regulation you've claimed is the problem would continue to apply...
This is the Euro all over. The amount of scaremongering that was put out for not joining the Euro yet the UK and Denmark managed just fine in fact more than fine.
Because (i) they still abide by virtually all the EU regulations you've criticised in order to have access to the single market and (ii) as a condition of single market access they accept unlimited EU immigration; the end of which was promised as the key result of voting for Brexit by the successful Out campaign and is trumpeted by both the current candidates for British Prime Minister.
But yes, there are feasible arrangements which would allow the UK to remain in the EU in virtually all aspects except name and voting rights after Article 50, which would be less damaging to startups after the uncertainty ended.
I feel like I might be repeating myself a little here...
I am repeating that I DO know that your claim that EU regulation does nothing to help the UK fintech sector is flatly and indisputably wrong, because its ability to serve EU markets from a London office is heavily dependent on financial passporting (and aided by other regulatory harmonisation) and whilst nobody knows for certain what will be negotiated or if Brexit will even happen, I DO know that all the available indicators point against your equally baseless assertion that the resulting settlement will "probably" be better for them than the status quo.
Repeating that nobody knows exactly what solution will be negotiated and that it might be quite similar to remaining in the EU doesn't make you any less wrong on the subject of the benefits of EU passporting to UK startups.
I'm glad you've now come around to the idea Brexit represents a problem to be solved rather than a boon to fintech...
If you think their negotiation objectives are going to be achieved "easily" despite the EU have a strong vested interest in not extending trade agreements to support London's financial service industry, and UK politicians having a strong political need to avoid a Swiss/Norwegian-type arrangement with unlimited immigration, I've got a bridge to sell you.
> There is not a single thread of evidence that the EU is making it easier to conduct business.
While I agree with the regulatory capture remark, how much financing comes from the EU again? Besides the single-market and freedom of movement facilitations.
> I am for the common market but the EU is killing the very advantage of having individual countries with different cultures by trying to harmonize their culture.
Yes, and as much as I don't like big bureaucracies, some countries have a tendency of having worse regulations and more bureaucracy than what we can expect with the EU
(and the EU usually doesn't touch purely cultural aspects, maybe in things like Cheese with Maggots or some other "traditional" dishes)
>they aren’t actually very good at allocating resources to the right problems for europeans because they have no feedback mechanism //
Do you have something in mind here, some examples. One of the big things at the moment is how well EU money was targeted to poor areas in need of social support. All these poor areas seem to have voted to remove vital EU subsidies; there no way the Tories are going to reinstate any of it (nor spend any saved capitation on the NHS, IMO, not without first privatising it).
Doesn't a collapse pound make it much harder for businesses that import or use overseas factories at all. It may be a small effect but if it's as easy to startup something in the EU, then surely even a little advantage is good?
Giving money to poor areas isn't actually proof of anything besides money is taken from some other regions and given to others. Who gets what in the EU is purely based on the various countries and organizations ability to make the most out of it.
Denmark had an area which spend billions subsidizing various efforts with EU money without any success.
So while that might be great for the local community getting money from the EU isn't a sign of anything besides the EU gives out money based on your ability to get money of out the EU. It's not based on some system of fairness or priority.
The pound is not going to collapse just as little as the Danish krone did when we decided not to be part of the Euro. Back then the amount of scaremongering about what would happen to Danish economy was insane, yet Denmark is one of the countries who fared best after 2008 and still have tripple a rating.
The EUs funds are largely there for the taking. If you can make a case based on some vague notions you can get money from the EU. That can easily be solved by the individual countries instead.
Those subsidies are hardly vital, they are mostly flushed down the toilet on wastage or at best spent on things locals don't care about, like opera houses instead of doctors.
Subsidies in Cornwall have received a lot of focus because Cornwall voted out. But why should the local people care?
I'm afraid no one in my EU high-skilled network is going to stay in New Little England long term after Brexit: there is simply too much resurfacing from under the elitist carpet of multiculturalism and cosmopolitanism, nothing of our strict business really.
It's okay - they can still hire visa bound slaves, err workers, that they can pay lower than the market value and impose harsh terms on - as they do with non eu migrants at the moment.
I think there is a much stronger point that is being ignored. No one is currently hiring in London. There are 700,000 less jobs ads then before the referendum. If EU hubs actively pick up those who are unemployed in London, it would be enough of a 'brain-drain' for London start-ups to notice.
175 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 249 ms ] threadI'm certainly thinking about my continued residency in the UK. Berlin looks pretty interesting for me, however the tech seem definitely doesn't seem as vibrant as that of London at a quick glance.
That could change as people decide against London and for EU cities. I'd say Dublin has quite a chance, too (although certainly not to the same extent).
Add to that the fact that non-base compensation is very low in Europe in general, bonuses are fairly low, equity is considerably rarer than in the US, large tech companies would give you access to some sort of an employee investment plan but that's about it the UK was and still is pretty important in keeping IT talent within the EU. Given the usual risk averse culture of most of the continental states (with somewhat the exception of Eastern europe and the baltic states) it's quite unlikely that a true startup hub can emerge anywhere else, the UK or again more specifically London had access to a lot of financial capital which helped it to compensate for the usual European aversion from risk, venture capital and the startup culture in general.
This might be true for big companies but certainly not startups. In my experience mid-level developers can expect around £45K and senior £60k (at startups). You could break definitely break £100k with contract work though.
(Against all rumors, Germany doesn’t have universal nationalized healthcare)
You can also choose private insurance if your income is high enough, which can then be cheaper for you than the mentioned 15%. The income limit for that is something like 55-60k/year, if I recall correctly.
not sure developers in Switzerland, especially those at Googles European hub in Zurich would agree.
I guess I didn't realize that the continental countries were so risk averse. Are there any Eastern European countries that have a more suitable risk profile that are also burgeoning tech sectors? Is Estonia a possibility?
There's going to be a period of uncertainty where there may be an effect, but if they hurry up and get on with it then some stability should return. If the 15% rate of corporation tax comes in or other measures it could well encourage investment.
In the meantime, I suspect Brexit will be a convenient excuse for anyone wishing to decline a job offer regardless of whether that's really their reason.
You're basing this on what exactly? I got a new job this week and there was plenty of people hiring tech talent (I had interviews lined up with 5 different companies within 2 weeks of starting to look).
What are devops salaries over there? Not interested in leaving my current gig, but I'm always curious (in the US, its between $80K-130K/year USD).
I have been inundated with applications from France, Germany, Barcelona and other EU places.
I have contacted each applicant from the EU and asked them why they want to work in the UK. 1 thing came to the forefront over and over. WAGES.
Even one from Berlin commented that the tech scene in Berlin wasn't that interesting at all.
Well, after 5 years they can stay indefinitely.
https://www.gov.uk/apply-for-a-uk-residence-card/permanent-r...
You can apply for a permanent residence card after you’ve lived in the UK for 5 years. This will prove your right to live in the UK permanently.
Edit: source: https://twitter.com/samcoatestimes/status/751682424405430272
All rules can change but this is how it as at the moment.
https://mobile.twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/75168242440...
Not entirely, the common argument is also about cheap workers from Eastern Europe. Ironically, recent accession of countries like Poland, Romania and Bulgaria was specifically and emphatically supported by the UK.
The EU has shown it wants to hurt the UK as much as possible because its strategy for preventing further exits is, in a word, fear. You can't make any up front guarantees when negotiating with people like that, no matter how much you'd like to.
Thanks
Whether you can skip the first part is another story, you might be able to do so if you can provide proof of continuous qualification of the QP requirements over a period of 5 years which might not be so easy to do.
Frankly, nobody knows what will happen or how far deportation will go, if even anywhere at all - but that in and of itself is the issue - pre-referendum, it seemed a fair assumption that EU migrants could live and work in the UK indefinitely - but now - don't know. Can't plan in an uncertain environment, and if you can't plan, you can't run your business.
We for instance use aws heavily - hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. We invoice our customers in sterling. That lost margin has to come from somewhere, which either means charging our customers more, or cutting costs. We'll probably have to do a bit of both, but this feels like stemming the bleeding while we figure out what to do next.
About ⅓ of our workforce are EU nationals - and few bother to apply for leave to remain, as it isn't necessary under current rules - so again, they no longer know whether they can remain here, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if they're considering moving on - why stay in an uncertain environment? They've already demonstrated a willingness to be mobile.
(Which just goes to show how "we can't hire people outside of the EU while in the EU" is complete BS)
- Even now, EU regulations affect non-EU companies. No way to avoid the "cookie law" if you want to serve EU customers.
- The list of regulations that affect startups, especially in the web/software space is rather small. The impact of regulation on the startup scene in Europe is almost zero.
Complete and utter nonsense.
If you're planning on establishing a start-up in the UK/Europe, and you believe this to be the case, you need a lawyer to give you a reality check sharpish.
One exception may be employment law, but that's not made by the EU and generally, once you figure it out for your first employee, it becomes much easier for any 1+n.
The UK will not end up following EU regulations, because the government has a clear instruction from the electorate not to compromise on the immigration issue. The EU will either compromise (unlikely), or face further exits in the coming years, because the UK is merely more democratically responsive than most other countries, not significantly different.
The cookie law is of course utter nonsense, but it will not go away with the Brexit: https://www.cookielaw.org/blog/2016/6/27/brexit-and-the-cook...
I've heard a number of politicians say that those who are here will be able to remain. It would be such a mistake to suddenly tell people to leave. It's not going to happen.
Also a number of points about he article.
> Although Europe’s 500 million citizens dwarfs the 323 million in the US
So what. They all speak different languages, not one. So there are some hurdles there to selling to them.
In addition. Only about 4? countries in the EU are rich enough to be trading with. The rest aren't really worth a mention.
I'd easily take the 323 in the US, as I have only 1 language to deal with and immediate results in setting up a business for the US.
> “Long term I think I will have to relocate my business to the USA as the market in the UK is just too small to justify staying here,” she told me. What’s that? A market of 65 million too small? Well, yes, when just a fortnight ago it was 500 million.
This is laughable. I have a business in both the UK and the US. Even if I was just operating in the UK. I'd still have access to the US. How this article is sounding like the UK cannot trade with the EU is again laughable.
This article smacks of scare-mongering.
Finally one thing, follow the money.
> Look for talented British entrepreneurs suddenly turning up in Berlin, Stockholm, Lisbon and Barcelona.
Wasn't there an article on HN saying that Barcelona couldnt find enough tech workers? The evidence pointed to compensation.
I doubt there will be much of a brain drain, when British tech workers balk at how much they'd be losing in salary working anywhere apart from the UK or US.
Britain is now a direct competitor to these countries. With 1 notable exception.
Britain can now put in place any legislation she wishes to be even more competitive than the EU.
Contrast that to the EU, where you have 28? member states which have to agree whatever is ratified. Remember previously that France, Germany and Spain have shot down previous bills because it would hurt a sector of their economy?
Not Britain can do whatever is in HER best interest.
That's nice, but it's far from a promise. Sometimes uncertainty and instability can be worse than an actual bad situation.
Because there's no shortage at all. That's the yearly "we need to keep wages low, so push people to study It by promising jobs" article sponsored by the big companies.
There's a shortage of entrepreneurs, VC money and in general management talent that learned to manage a company after the 80s.
Well technically, the UK government refuses to guarantee the right to work for EU nationals (at this time). I agree that's unlikely to deport all these people, but on the other hand, I didn't think Brexit would happen so...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36707573
hmmm.... It just occurs to me that I've been assuming I'm still white in the UK. I think that is a safe assumption, but race is weird so I suppose there is a slight possibility that my skin is dark enough that I'm not. huh.
Also, how are you doing? Thank you for the referral a while back when I was doing my job search. The EU offices weren't hiring SWEs at the time, but the referral was still helpful.
Even if on a shallow level someone is anti-foreigner, I believe their discontent comes from somewhere else (if they had a well-paying, secure job, a house with a low mortgage payment, excellent prospects for their children etc... they'd forget about foreigners).
1) I don't live in the UK yet
2) Race is weird
In my second, I'm speculating wildly about how race works in the UK but stating that I really don't know.
By the way, as an actual concrete statement: Your border force is absolutely grand and made me feel so welcomed. I should be going to sleep to stave off jet lag, but I am just really excited to finally be here after many years of planning and working toward this.
What's it like dating in London. Are interracial couples ok?
I had to laugh at that one. No one bats an eyelid - AT ALL.
Sadly, it seems to be the reverse in the US, still a lot of opposition to it.
I would say the US is still a billion times more racist than the UK/London.
I don't think UK Govt will jeopardise access to talent with unprogressive immigration reform. UK tech startups need not worry on this front. And just look at USA as an example. Despite VISA issues for foreigners, Silicon Valley still thrives and still has reasonable access to a global pool of talent.
Yes, there are 2 or 2.5 years when nothing will change theoretically. But do I really want to commit to a country, with uncertainty as to what will happen after this 2.5 years?
I suggest everyone affected do their research on the options available. Luckily, there are plenty. Just in case.
I am also curios, are there practical reasons outside of the start up tech environment that are making you consider Barcelona and Amsterdam.
Amsterdam looks more attractive (much better levels of English as well), but the Netherlands is one of the countries most likely to go through an EU referendum within the next 18 months as well.
From what I've seen, the answer is pretty much none. So long as barriers to tech talent aren't put in place, there's basically nothing holding back the UK tech scene. The fear being generated by the media (along with those that repeat those fears without critical examination) is more damaging than the situation as it stands today. We're talking about something that only happened within the last few weeks, the sky isn't falling, it's all a failure of perception.
If you disagree I'd enjoy a thoughtful response
https://medium.com/@octskyward/ok-what-now-e3f64d38f7#.q4vch...
It is almost without question that the Swiss will hold another referendum in the coming months, as their deadline for implementing the previous referendum's legislation (which they are legally bound to do) will expire in February. However due to the latency on getting new laws through Parliament they really have to start now.
There is no way to renegotiate with the EU because the EU sees any geographically European population that chooses to defy the EU as some kind of terrorist, with whom negotiation is unthinkable. They refused to negotiate with the Swiss and are now demanding the Swiss join the EU proper or else there won't be any further negotiations (ever). The Swiss do not want to join the EU. So the stage is set for a showdown.
The best case outcome for the EU is a new vote in which the Swiss choose to continue the status quo for a little while longer.
Immigration restrictions are the least of worries for UK-based startups not focusing on the domestic market though, especially in fintech which has traditionally been London's strength. If you need company registrations, offices, contract and potentially even servers and compliance staff to be based in the EU to comply with certain regulations, it suddenly makes a lot less sense to spend all the extra overheads of having your [main] office in London, especially if other startups on the scene are starting to migrate and you don't want multiple offices. And whilst EU negotiators might want to avoid tariffs regardless of whether the UK stays in the Single Market or not, they have very little reason to secure trade agreements with the UK that grant UK firms passporting rights.
The US has a very restrictive visa system. It didn't prevent the development of the silicon valley.
Also, what about their families? Not all of them are single white males in their 20s. Their partners would probably want to keep working, not necessarily on qualified jobs that could grant a visa anywhere in the world.
What I'm saying is that is not as easy as it might seem. People have different situations to account for.
Besides, having passed that exam myself I actually think it was a good experience. I learned a few things about the UK.
Language I can see, but then the German Abitur has a requirement of 2 foreign languages, with potentially 3 (English/French, French/Latin, last one depending on what the school offers, usually Spanish/Italian/I think Russian in NE/sometimes Chinese). Some of these languages are substantially similar, which further widens the field, e.g., a French speaker might transition to Italian easily.
A fair number of Europeans are ridiculously multilingual.
Either way, they'd need to learn more if they wanted to have a normal life in an English-speaking country.
https://www.gov.uk/apply-for-a-uk-residence-card/permanent-r...
But, as counter arguments I see that,
a) there is a big(?) risk for Europe itself to fall apart within the next couple of years,
b) those cities cannot possibly replace London in the next few years. I think they'll probably share the "tech" that London will lose, and the gap will shorten between them and London.
Also, by being a contractor in the UK, I now see that this nice tax efficient way of working, does not apply in other countries, Germany for example. So after all, London might still be more attractive for some. ( Ltd tax might fall even more for example )
The Eurozone: Not in the next 2 years, but the structures are fundamentally unsound so something will have to give. Most likely outcome is further political and economic integration of the Eurozone members which would avoid a breakup at the cost of being unpopular. There's just too much trade that depends on the Euro.
Not if "non-mainstream" politicians win election. Not unlikely at all at this moment.
>Polls recently conducted in Italy, France, Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands, Czech Republic and Hungary also showed that these countries could follow Britain if it succeeds in leaving the EU. Euroskeptic politicians in these countries have been adding fuel to the fire, stepping up their calls for EU-exits in light of the British referendum.
On Wednesday, French right-wing leader Marine Le Pen stressed that France should have its own ‘Frexit’ vote.
“What I'm asking for is a referendum in France. Every EU member should be able to have its say in a referendum,” the National Front leader told France's TF1 television. A March poll by the University of Edinburgh found that 53 percent of the French are in favor of a referendum on leaving the Union.
30% of Germans want to quit EU as support for Merkel’s govt. drops below 50% While a YouGov poll in May, commissioned by Handelsblatt newspaper, found that 29 percent of Germans would leave the EU if a referendum was to take place. Only 54 percent of those living in the country supported staying in the bloc.
The mood is reportedly the same in the Netherlands, with a February opinion poll finding that 53 percent of Dutch citizens want a 'Nexit' referendum. Geert Wilders, leader of the Dutch right-wing, populist PVV party, currently topping opinion polls, openly expressed hopes a ‘Nexit’ could follow a ‘Brexit.’ https://www.rt.com/viral/348039-brexit-eu-referendum-domino/
I think people only read the first sentence of most posts, and your first sentence is wrong -- everything about this referendum was dumb.
It was dumb to have the referendum in the first place. Cameron had it in order to try to resolve an internal Tory party dispute.
It was dumb to have a 50:50 threshold. A massive constitutional change should require a supermajority.
The arguments (on all sides) were largely lies.
And the outcome won't even be what anyone wants. The leavers won't get what they voted for. Almost everyone will be shafted.
I don't disagree with the rest of what you say, but I would add that a government that puts together a referendum that is not a foregone conclusion, that does not prepare for an adverse decision, is incompetent and negligent enough to be considered criminal.
In comparision, the Scotish referendum was more detailed and got a lot more debate. The blog article "Brexit was a con" explains that in the first part: https://medium.com/@kirstymhall/brexit-was-a-con-67532113a7c...
There was plenty of discussion of the consequences, heck, the remain campaign focused more or less ONLY on the consequences of the EU's economic retaliation.
Leaving the EU will absolutely allow immigration to be pushed down, though likely not to the "tens of thousands per year" figure that seems to have been arbitrarily chosen simply because that'd result in too many very useful and in-demand people being excluded. But the type of immigration that has caused so much malcontent in the regions can absolutely be close to eliminated, i.e. poor unskilled workers coming from eastern Europe and undercutting the wages of the locals.
How will leaving the EU push immigration down? As I pointed out, a good deal of immigration coming from outside the EU. And the EU part will probably not be affected by Brexit either, because free movement is tied to free trade. Or do you think that the UK will give up free trade with the EU?
The EU will either sign a free trade deal with the UK of some sort (possibly not as free as within the single market), or it will simply fuel its own collapse.
You don't have to be pro-EU to see this as a bad way to run a country (although it helps).
The exact details of a relationship post-Brexit are impossible to know because the EU refuses to even contemplate such a possibility, let alone discuss it. That's a problem of their own creation however, and that attitude is exactly what has stoked the fires of euroscepticism across the continent. You can sometimes put off reality by denying it, but not forever.
I'm confused. Do you agree or disagree with zb that the referendum pitted a well known against a complete unknown?
You might get away in a restaurant in Berlin speaking only english, but it's no fun to live in a country where you can't understand anything written, whether it is to fill your taxes, or interact with your bank, or where every website will be localized to the local language.
If you and your whole team speak Dutch and Spanish and German, then of course you can hesitate between London, Amsterdam, Barcelona or Berlin.
And you want to make friends, right? Well, there are lots of other people who want to make friends too: other foreigners who moved there. Who also don't speak the local language.
So you end up finding that learning German or whatever ends up being not much easier than doing so in high school: your opportunities to practice are limited. I have learned it, but basically through just doing lessons. My best Swiss friend comes from the French speaking part, so that was no help.
> your opportunities to practice are limited
I spent 1 weekend in Zurich. I had a lot of opportunities to practice, falling back to English only when needed.
Then I went to Germany for a bit and again had endless opportunities to practice.
You still have to deal with eating, shopping, renting a place, going to a doctor, etc.
If the first thing that comes out of your mouth is "English, bitte?", yeah, you're not learning anything.
And the other foreigners there? Some have better German than English. They also want to learn.
Swiss people learn English in school. I have only met a few who cannot speak English well. It's a much more common issue that I want to speak German with them, but they don't actually like German (it's something of a foreign language too compared to dialect), and they prefer to practice their English with me. Linguistic tugs of war are always awkward.
I fully agree with you, I was at a beginner's level on that occasion. Yes, if you are conversational then it's not going to change much (from your original post it seemed you barely spoke German)
And yes, the way to progress from conversational to the upper levels is mainly through classes
> but they don't actually like German (it's something of a foreign language too compared to dialect)
Ah that's true. Nobody speaks Hochdeutsch on everyday life. And Schweizerdeutsch is weird
The pressures that led to Brexit are not unique to the UK, and have been building for many years. Maybe it'll be unique. Maybe it'll be contained. In fact, maybe it won't even happen. It hasn't happened yet. But with at least similar order-of-magnitude probability, maybe by this time next year one to three other countries will have exited to some extent as well. If you mistake your own political inclinations or beliefs for what is actually likely, no-one will save you from the consequences of your error. It's easy to spin Brexit as a fluke, but it's pretty easy to spin it as a bellweather, too.
Above link might help understanding of the politics behind our vote. I had a bad feeling when I saw how very close the opinion polls were. Once Farage did the immigration poster it was game over. Our first political assassination this century seemed to polarise the situation as well.
Using the orthogonal scales explained in the link above, you guys are neo-liberal economically and have a cosmopolitan outlook. Many - not a majority, just enough - people in England have a communitarian outlook and are left wing economically.
What you have going for you is that the government is also right wing economically. The leadership may move slightly to the communitarian end - it only has to move enough to make it work.
The new leader and her government will need to dance like anything - they will have to conduct a complex set of negotiations (remember UK has not negotiated a trade deal for 40 years) that will involve the usual performance you do when making deals - but at the same time they will have to keep public opinion reassured (or at least bored - i.e. avoid upsetting it). Not an easy trick. One candidate seems to be on a bit of a learning curve from this morning's news.
Remember that those of us who ticked the 'remain' box basically all wanted the same thing - status quo. What did those who ticked the 'leave' box want? Quite a few incompatible things from my conversations over the last few weeks. The new Prime Minister will be making more than half the people unhappy - this last idea comes from an Irish Times columnist whose name escapes me right now.
You need to hedge for uncertainty in any way you can.
PS: If you think London has problems, think about how things look from Belfast.
I work in a London startup where about 90% or our engineers are not British. They tell me that they are already seeing adverts saying 'move to berlin/dublin' on their facebook feed. There is a real danger that as well as not being able to recruit people, the people that are already here will simply leave.
From what I can see, the central claim the article makes is that hiring tech talent is going to be harder post-Brexit. There are a number of issues with this claim. For one, the perceived issue with immigration was pretty much never with those who were filling a skills shortage. I've never heard anyone complaining about doctors and nurses being brought over to work in the NHS, for example. The perceived issue was with low-skilled workers and/or people who were resistant to integration with Western values. I personally don't have an issue with immigration (and believe the problems are hugely exaggerated by the media), but to be fair to those that do have concerns about immigration, it should be pointed out that their misgivings weren't really directed at high-tech workers.
Secondly, there's the issue that talented individuals from EU countries may be less interested in coming to the UK. There is likely to be some people who perceive the situation this way, but there's plenty of tech talent all across the world, and the UK will remain a destination that people from less economically developed countries are interested in coming to, especially as the English language is widespread across the world.
I hope that the new Conservative leader will lay out a plan that makes it clear the people who are currently living in the UK can continue to do so, regardless of the state of our EU membership. I think it'd be a great help in putting immigration speculation to bed.
EU is killing, not fostering startups. If anything startups thrive where there is complexity because it means there are problems to solve.
The EU is politically trying to solve a lot of problems but they have nothing but technocratic reasons to do so. I.e. they aren’t actually very good at allocating resources to the right problems for europeans because they have no feedback mechanism allowing for a better insight into what are the EU citizens problems.
Instead they are solving problems with the very bureacracy they helped create themselves to begin with.
If anything the EU should stop trying to solve politically what can be solved through technology and via startups.
The UK's fintech sector is going to be just fine and most probably boosted because it's not the problems of the EU that makes UK's fintech successful it's the world.
Technology does and can make up for any legislative complexity and it's going to foster a whole new slew of startups.
So the UK is going to benefit greatly for this and can now make trade deals that benefit the UK while continuing to do fintech without any problems what so ever.
EU isn't some economic powerhouse which one should only be so lucky to be part of. It's primarily catered towards supporting old industries and trade barriers. More countries should reverse back to the common market.
The fact is no one knows whats going to happen. But if history is any indication the UK is going to come out stronger not weaker from this.
Other cities like Dublin are getting investment. And yes, most were in the UK until now. They might go to Amsterdam and Frankfurt as well
> EU is killing, not fostering startups.
This is laughable. Number26? Spotify? Delivery Hero?
In fact, they are ahead of Canada in the startup world. The business friendly, less regulation Canada.
If it's laughable then why does the EU have the lowest number of unicorns of any super region in the world? Why is it's growth declining? Why is it's unemployment increasing?
The UK is the country with most unicorns, most fintech startups, most important financial market in all of the EU.
Thats not just something they got because of the EU they got it despite the EU as they had it before too.
And if the EU is so important for trade and export why is it that a country like Denmark export to the US is now rivaling export to Germany and is said to go move beyond that.
EU is loosing it's economic power not gaining it.
There is not a single thread of evidence that the EU is making it easier to conduct business. If anything though it's great for big corporations because they can lobby any challenger out of the market because of the legislative burdens.
I am for the common market but the EU is killing the very advantage of having individual countries with different cultures by trying to harmonize their culture.
Diversity is an asset not a liability especially for startups.
That's likely to change...
The idea that this is less of an asset to London startups than increased diversity of culture and regulation between countries is, to put it politely, utter nonsense.
No nonsense about that at all. Switzerland is doing just fine as far as I can see and they are not members of the EU.
But I understand that its politically charged and people has a hard time tempering their anger which yours and the previous post are nice examples of.
But please feel free to dismiss that argument as "anger" in lieu of any ability to support your claim that cultural differences are far more valuable to startups (?!).
But feel free to claim certainty that this will happen where none exist.
This is the Euro all over. The amount of scaremongering that was put out for not joining the Euro yet the UK and Denmark managed just fine in fact more than fine.
But yes, there are feasible arrangements which would allow the UK to remain in the EU in virtually all aspects except name and voting rights after Article 50, which would be less damaging to startups after the uncertainty ended.
I feel like I might be repeating myself a little here...
Repeating that nobody knows exactly what solution will be negotiated and that it might be quite similar to remaining in the EU doesn't make you any less wrong on the subject of the benefits of EU passporting to UK startups.
So keep repeating whatever you want you are guessing as much as the next guy.
If you think their negotiation objectives are going to be achieved "easily" despite the EU have a strong vested interest in not extending trade agreements to support London's financial service industry, and UK politicians having a strong political need to avoid a Swiss/Norwegian-type arrangement with unlimited immigration, I've got a bridge to sell you.
After the US, and China (a closed market?)
https://www.cbinsights.com/research-unicorn-companies
> that a country like Denmarks export to the US is now rivaling export to germany and is said to go move beyond that.
15Bi to Germany, 5Bi to the US, 5Bi to the UK
http://www.worldsrichestcountries.com/top_denmark_exports.ht...
> There is not a single thread of evidence that the EU is making it easier to conduct business.
While I agree with the regulatory capture remark, how much financing comes from the EU again? Besides the single-market and freedom of movement facilitations.
> I am for the common market but the EU is killing the very advantage of having individual countries with different cultures by trying to harmonize their culture.
Yes, and as much as I don't like big bureaucracies, some countries have a tendency of having worse regulations and more bureaucracy than what we can expect with the EU
(and the EU usually doesn't touch purely cultural aspects, maybe in things like Cheese with Maggots or some other "traditional" dishes)
http://graphics.wsj.com/billion-dollar-club/
The US is expected to take over Germany soon in export for Denmark.
That chart tells me there are 148 total, and if I click on Europe it says 17. It says 89 for the US.
Do you have something in mind here, some examples. One of the big things at the moment is how well EU money was targeted to poor areas in need of social support. All these poor areas seem to have voted to remove vital EU subsidies; there no way the Tories are going to reinstate any of it (nor spend any saved capitation on the NHS, IMO, not without first privatising it).
Doesn't a collapse pound make it much harder for businesses that import or use overseas factories at all. It may be a small effect but if it's as easy to startup something in the EU, then surely even a little advantage is good?
Denmark had an area which spend billions subsidizing various efforts with EU money without any success.
So while that might be great for the local community getting money from the EU isn't a sign of anything besides the EU gives out money based on your ability to get money of out the EU. It's not based on some system of fairness or priority.
The pound is not going to collapse just as little as the Danish krone did when we decided not to be part of the Euro. Back then the amount of scaremongering about what would happen to Danish economy was insane, yet Denmark is one of the countries who fared best after 2008 and still have tripple a rating.
The EUs funds are largely there for the taking. If you can make a case based on some vague notions you can get money from the EU. That can easily be solved by the individual countries instead.
Subsidies in Cornwall have received a lot of focus because Cornwall voted out. But why should the local people care?
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cornwall-33360841
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/8829410/...