Post(s) tagged with "chris dixon"

What the NYC startup world needs (and doesn’t need) - Chris Dixon ⇢

Chris makes a list, and checks it twice. He thinks NYC needs:

  1. some extremely successful start-ups
  2. more product design talent
  3. more engineers
  4. high speed internet in start-up areas
  5. more marquee tech companies opening large offices here.

Personally, I disagree with his ‘doesn’t need’ list, because I think we need more of everything: more density of relationships to build a rich ecology for tech here.

@dandotlewis points out we also need more sneezers.

via Twitter / @Stowe Boyd
Chris Dixon released Forage, a new experiment that uses the Hunch API to build playlists based on YouTube URLs in your incoming Twitter stream. I tried it and twittered (shown above). Chris responded a few minutes later that no pivot is in the works, just fooling around with mashups.

via Twitter / @Stowe Boyd

Chris Dixon released Forage, a new experiment that uses the Hunch API to build playlists based on YouTube URLs in your incoming Twitter stream. I tried it and twittered (shown above). Chris responded a few minutes later that no pivot is in the works, just fooling around with mashups.

Source: twitter.com

What Do Malcolm Gladwell And Kleiner Perkins Have In Common?

Chris Dixon starts by suggesting that Malcolm Gladwell might lack a deep understanding of Twitter, and that led him to an unsupportable argument in his recent ‘the rvolution will not be tweeted’ piece. In a nutshell that real revolutions require hierarchical control and strong ties, and that Twitter doesn’t have that or support it (I have a longer version of this, too, called Weak Ties And revolutions (With A Little ‘R’).)

But then Chris goes on to suggest that others might have a similar lack of understanding of the social revolution going on:

Chris Dixon, You need to use social services to understand them

I made some jokes on Twitter the past few days about Kleiner Perkins’ new social fund. These were meant to be lighthearted: I only know one person at KP and from everything I’ve seen they seem to be smart, friendly people. But underneath the jokes lies a real issue: the partners there don’t seem to really participate in social services (something they only underscored by announcing their new fund at a press conference that targeted traditional media outlets).

I’d love to engage in a debate with smart people like Gladwell about the impact of the social web on culture, politics, activism and so on. I also think it’s great to see savvy investors like KP allocate significant resources to the next wave of social web innovation. But it’s hard for me to take them seriously when they don’t seem to take their subject matter seriously.

I agree that knowing where to invest in this market will require deep understanding, and one of the places that can be gained is through usage. Regarding the fund, I am betting it will do no better than the market as a whole.

Source: cdixon.org

NYC Catching UP With SV In Seed Funding

Om pulls some interesting data out of CB Insights regarding seen funding of internet startups:

Om Malik, By The Numbers: Seed Funding is The New Black

Here is some salient data from CB Insights’ latest report covering the July-September time frame:

  • Nearly $1.253 billion was invested in 233 Internet related deals. Series A media deal size was at an all time high of $3.4 million, once again proving that early stage investing is going through a frothy phase.
  • San Francisco saw 36 Internet deals that brought in $131 million, while New York City saw 31 Internet deals garner $126 million. In comparison, Mountain View, San Mateo & Palo Alto saw 21 deals focused on the Internet and they brought in a total of $174 million.
  • Early stage investing is dominating the New York area and accounted for nearly 63 percent of all deals. New York can thank folks like Chris Dixon and Fred Wilson for bringing investment dollars to area startups.

NYC is exploding, as I said in this piece last spring:

Hotbed

New York City’s tech scene is expanding at an astonishing rate these days, which raises the obvious question: why now? And, if New York has all the right ingredients to create a rich and deep technology culture, why didn’t it appear earlier?

My theory is that New York lacked, until recently, a critical factor: smart early stage investors.

The other parts of the puzzle were in place: great schools, brainy entrepreneurs, and abundant media and PR people. But without the manure that VCs provide, what looked to be a great greenhouse was cold, and very little would grow.

It is manure that makes greenhouses hot, that makes them hotbeds, and the critical factor is now being provided by folks like Chris Dixon, Fred Wilson, and John Borthwick. Chris Dixon recently made the case that the financial services downturn has dumped a lot of smart people out of financial sector, and also chimes in on the role that smart investors are having:

[…] why did New York City lag behind the West Coast this decade so much more than last decade?  Especially since the internet in the 2000’s has been more than ever about consumers, media, and advertising – traditional New York City strengths?

I think the only explanation is that the finance bubble of 2003-2008 was a giant talent suck on the East Coast.  The people I knew graduating out of top engineering or business programs on the East Cast were all trying to work at hedge funds or big banks or else felt like fish out of water and moved west.   Money was flowing so freely in the finance world that there was no way the risk/reward trade off of startups could compete.  Eventually it just became downright idiosyncratic to be a startup person on the East Coast.  The Larry and Sergey of the East Coast were probably inventing high frequency trading algorithms at Goldman Sachs.

But this is why New York City now seems poised for a technology startup boom. The finance bubble has burst and the industry will hopefully return to its historical norm, about half its bubble size.  The traditional advertising and media businesses are in disarray.  The people who work in them will no doubt find new applications for their talents.

There is also a nice ecosystem developing in New York City.  Union Square Ventures is one of the best VC’s in the country, with early stage investments in companies like Twitter and Etsy (that were followed on by top West Coast VCs at significant markups).   Bessemer is an old firm that has a managed to stay relevant with investments in Yelp, Skype, and LinkedIn among others.  There is also a new wave of scrappy Boston firms spending a lot of time in New York City – specifically Spark, General Catalyst, Flybridge, and Bain Ventures.  First Round Capital out of Philadelphia is extremely active in early stage investing in New York.  There are a bunch of veteran entrepreneurs actively investing in and mentoring seed stage startups.  Google has a big office here and many people seem to be leaving to go start companies.

Fred Wilson of Union Square Ventures, recently made the point that NYC has been slowly growing as a start-up hub for a decade:

Chris [Dixon] argues that for the past decade, hedge funds and wall street have been a huge talent suck here in NYC and now that they are scaling back, our kinds of companies will find it easier to attract the best and brightest. I agree completely.

But I take some offense to Chris’ view that NYC was “irrelevant” in the 2003-2008 internet boom. TACODA, Right Media, Gawker, Quigo, Delicious, Etsy, Meetup, Indeed, Tumblr, Return Path, etc, etc.  I don’t call that irrelevant. I call it misunderstood. Good thing people, including our Mayor, are waking up to what a good thing we’ve got going here.

I think a tipping point has been reached, though, where all the pieces are now connecting, and we are moving past an inflection point into explosive growth.

And the result will be a richer, growing, and more dominant tech scene in NYC.

Source: gigaom.com

Things I'd do if I ran a big VC firm - cdixon's posterous ⇢

I like the things he would do, which is mostly about acting like a start-up and not like fat cat bankers.

I was especially struck by the all male and overwhelmingly White White White partners at Polaris, Battery, and Venrock. Yipes.

Hotbed

[originally posted at Hotbed]

New York City’s tech scene is expanding at an astonishing rate these days, which raises the obvious question: why now? And, if New York has all the right ingredients to create a rich and deep technology culture, why didn’t it appear earlier?

My theory is that New York lacked, until recently, a critical factor: smart early stage investors.

The other parts of the puzzle were in place: great schools, brainy entrepreneurs, and abundant media and PR people. But without the manure that VCs provide, what looked to be a great greenhouse was cold, and very little would grow.

It is manure that makes greenhouses hot, that makes them hotbeds, and the critical factor is now being provided by folks like Chris Dixon, Fred Wilson, and John Borthwick. Chris Dixon recently made the case that the financial services downturn has dumped a lot of smart people out of financial sector, and also chimes in on the role that smart investors are having:

[…] why did New York City lag behind the West Coast this decade so much more than last decade?  Especially since the internet in the 2000’s has been more than ever about consumers, media, and advertising – traditional New York City strengths?

I think the only explanation is that the finance bubble of 2003-2008 was a giant talent suck on the East Coast.  The people I knew graduating out of top engineering or business programs on the East Cast were all trying to work at hedge funds or big banks or else felt like fish out of water and moved west.   Money was flowing so freely in the finance world that there was no way the risk/reward trade off of startups could compete.  Eventually it just became downright idiosyncratic to be a startup person on the East Coast.  The Larry and Sergey of the East Coast were probably inventing high frequency trading algorithms at Goldman Sachs.

But this is why New York City now seems poised for a technology startup boom. The finance bubble has burst and the industry will hopefully return to its historical norm, about half its bubble size.  The traditional advertising and media businesses are in disarray.  The people who work in them will no doubt find new applications for their talents.

There is also a nice ecosystem developing in New York City.  Union Square Ventures is one of the best VC’s in the country, with early stage investments in companies like Twitter and Etsy (that were followed on by top West Coast VCs at significant markups).   Bessemer is an old firm that has a managed to stay relevant with investments in Yelp, Skype, and LinkedIn among others.  There is also a new wave of scrappy Boston firms spending a lot of time in New York City – specifically Spark, General Catalyst, Flybridge, and Bain Ventures.  First Round Capital out of Philadelphia is extremely active in early stage investing in New York.  There are a bunch of veteran entrepreneurs actively investing in and mentoring seed stage startups.  Google has a big office here and many people seem to be leaving to go start companies.

Fred Wilson of Union Square Ventures, recently made the point that NYC has been slowly growing as a start-up hub for a decade:

Chris argues that for the past decade, hedge funds and wall street have been a huge talent suck here in NYC and now that they are scaling back, our kinds of companies will find it easier to attract the best and brightest. I agree completely.

But I take some offense to Chris’ view that NYC was “irrelevant” in the 2003-2008 internet boom. TACODA, Right Media, Gawker, Quigo, Delicious, Etsy, Meetup, Indeed, Tumblr, Return Path, etc, etc.  I don’t call that irrelevant. I call it misunderstood. Good thing people, including our Mayor, are waking up to what a good thing we’ve got going here.

I think a tipping point has been reached, though, where all the pieces are now connecting, and we are moving past an inflection point into explosive growth.

One of the other factors, that can’t be downplayed, was the cold water that got splashed all over the San Francisco tech environment in the fall of 2008.

Sequoia’s infamous ‘Good Times: RIP’ presentation — and the thinking behind it — infected Silicon Valley’s venture world like a zombie plague. In a nutshell, the venture firm had a secret meeting of its partners and key staff after the banking sector melted down, and shared a vision of rising financial insecurity and the need to decrease risk exposure. The result was a Valley wide cut back in deals, and a push to make portfolio companies more lean through staff cuts, decreased marketing, and slower technology roll-out. Over the next 18 months many companies would lose their funding, and thousands of developers, designers, and marketing folks would lose their jobs or contracts.

While the funded entrepreneurs and investors in the Bay area were busily patting themselves on the back for being so austere and forward-looking, the migration of start-up aspirants from Montana, Ohio, and Mumbai slowed. The big freeze stopped decades of software immigrants heading for the West Coast to start the next big thing. Now it looks like New York City might be the new tech Mecca.

Ron Conway, the great angel investor, made a presentation last November at a Betaworks brown bag lunch. He stated, more or less, that his group had made 25 investments in NYC companies by that point in 2009, out of 37 investments in total. (I may have the exact numbers wrong, but not by much.) In the previous year, he made only one investment in NYC, and in all the previous years he had been an investor, none.

Yes, this is a single investor, and it could represent a new-found willingness to invest outside of California on his part. Still, I find it indicative of the piling-on effect of smart money chasing other smart money in an environment that is creating enough innovation to justify it.

So, this new project, called Hotbed, is a vehicle for me to examine what is going into this creative frenzy, this exploding scene. I am an economic migrant, myself. In late 2009 I left San Francisco, a city I had used as my base of operations for 4 years, and I am now rerooting myself in New York City. This will be the journal of my inquiry into the peculiar chemistry of New York’s start-up explosion. I will continue to write about more global topics at /Message, as I have been doing since 2005. But Hotbed is all about New York tech start-ups, and the shifting, swirling scene that supports them.

About

Web anthropologist, futurist, author. My focus is the future, and the tectonic forces pushing business, media, and society into an unclear and accelerating future. more.

Working on longer format projects, Sign up for the newsletter.

GigaOM Research analyst and curator.

Also writing beaconstreets.com.

Contact me. or ask me a question.



My Vizify profile.

Socialogy

  • John Hagel | John offers up some great insights, like the fact that passion is lower the larger that businesses get.

  • Euan Semple | A chat with my old pal, and the author of Organizations Don't Tweet, People Do

  • Will McInnes | The author of Culture Shock and managing director of Nixon/McInnes

  • Jennifer Magnolfi | An interview with the woman who said, 'Work is not a place you go, it's a thing you do'.

  • Hot Now

  • What Drives Us? | A draft chapter of my book, discussing motivations, Maslow's hierarchy, and fluidarity.

  • Socialogy: Interview With John Hagel | I Speak with Joh Hagel about the innovation at the edge.

  • Complex organisation arises from webs of interaction among causal factors | So, it turns out that DNA is, in fact, a great metaphor for business culture, but only after you realize that DNA is not a few hundred off-on switches, but instead a universe of unknowable complexities, that we can interact with, and understand at some abstract cartoonish level, but not control, and never fully comprehend.

  • Bitcoin May Be the Global Economy’s Last Safe Haven | Paul Ford

  • Innovators Get Better With Age | Companies make a mistake by relying too much on the innoations of the young, because Nobel laureats don't come into their prime until their 50s.

  • Oldie

  • Infodemics | 2009 | Passing incomplete or inaccurate information about some risk event can make people take actions that increase the damage of the event itself.