6 Responses

1. Alex Hillman

   21|Jul|2007 1

   I’ve begun making some notes on this article. I plan to re-read it a few times and put together a (late) response to many of Pauls points. He may have been right when this piece was written, but I think we’ve proven him wrong on many more points in the mean time. More details, point by point, as I make time to respond completly.

2. rzklkng

   21|Jul|2007 2

   On balance, I don’t disagree with the author. But he makes some unspoken assumptions that don’t necessarily reflect the current reality.

   The condo rush in Center City and retiring baby boomers will likely concentrate wealth into the core of the city, which will change everything. Philly has been in decline as a manufacturing city post-WW2, the problem is that nothing has stepped in to fill the void. Perhaps the influx of late-20s and early-30s “hipster” creatives.

   I can’t disagree with the brain-drain, Philly’s been fighting that. And our nationwide war on science certainly isn’t helping in producing the next batch of innovators.

   Gov’t involvement no longer means “the Manhattan Project”. Instead, it is grants, funding, contracts, and incentives, not bureaucrat-run enterprise.

   The biggest unspoken assumption is what a “Silicon Alley” would mean in Philly. The companies, products, and technologies that he pines for seem to be 1960-1990s era, and largely hardware-centric. It’s unfortunate, but we as a nation have been getting out of that business for a long time. That is clearly at odds with the current service-focused innovations that we’re seeing, such as mashups, webapps, and social networking.

   All Philly needs are some small-c creatives (entreprenuers) to complement the big-C Creatives (artists, designers, and such), and the embryonic community that we are seeing insures we can be competitive.

3. Toonerstan

   21|Jul|2007 3

   The Viddler people could probably say more but as a web-based startup ramps up traffic, I think the heavy costs are for servers and bandwidth. It would help if there were a ready source of local VC/angel money for the three post-college guys brainstorming in a room to tap into to bring their idea to the next stage. I think a difference between here and Silicon Valley is that local money sources may be too conservative and risk-averse. In Silicon Valley the cultural expectation for both entrepreneurs and VC/Angel investors is that most startups fail, the first failure is not a big deal or bad thing because you’ve learned something, and it’ll probably take 3 or 4 tries before you have a hit. VC’s fund and make money readily available to new startups based on the expectation that the hit will more than compensate for the losses.

4. toonerlisa

   21|Jul|2007 4

   Have you guys read the second half of the article, at http://www.paulgraham.com/america.html ? I think it puts the high tech development in to a global perspective.

5. Reed Gustow

   22|Jul|2007 5

   Good article, very thought provoking and written clearly. A couple of my thoughts – First, what do we want here in Philadelphia? I am not sure that our MAIN goal has to be the creation in Philadelphia of another Silicon Valley (meaning a high concentration of tech based startups that become so successful that they almost define the area. I realize that I have just made a definition that all may not agree with, but I need a focus.) This would be a good thing, but not having that model is not failure.

   Rzklkng makes some very good points. My thought would be that we need to build a community where tech creatives, nerds if you like, find these things: 1) a comfortable, interesting place to live, 2) enough work 3)ready access to one another, 4)no significant barriers to their interconnection, and 5) reasonable access to funding for those startups that want it.

   Philadelphia still has the old neighborhoods with the personality that Graham described. I can’t comment on the job and work market, but I am hearing more people say that they are busy than say that they are scrambling for work. This very site is one piece of evidence that we are trying to reach out to one another and I don’t believe that funding is the problem. In other words, Philadelphia does have excellent potential.

   A few things on the other side: Toonerstan mentioned to me at BlogPhila that our main area of startup development was in life sciences, not web/tech companies. What little I know of this says he is right. However, this isn’t all that negative in terms of attracting and keeping the bright folks around. It does bring to mind Graham’s point about needing a critical mass – either the development takes off or it does not.

   Being just slightly biased, I don’t agree that there is no point to trying to make an old ex-industrial city like Philadelphia a city that has a vibrant tech center. I say this because we have so many of the factors for success he noted: the right kind of neighborhoods and housing, reasonable weather, lots of universities (not sure it has to be just one world-class tech school), sources of funding, and finally! a city government that is paying attention to the importance of the creative community. (Not that the government is the answer, but support is good and neglect is bad for us.)

   I believe that the critical mass can be built, and that there are folks out there sitting up at night doing just that. It is a great thing to see and be part of.

6. Toonerstan

   22|Jul|2007 6

   One thing I would like to see more of in Philly that I haven’t yet is regular informal events like New York’s or Silicon Valley’s Tech Meetups or Boston’s Web Innovators Group where geeks and VCs/Angels would have a chance to get to know each other, sitting side-by-side, and then be able to go out for a beer together afterward to bat ideas around.