Settling the Cost of Living Debate
I cringe every time I read a blog post purporting starting a company outside of Silicon Valley because “rent is cheaper.” I would eat my hat if I ever heard a failed entrepreneur lamenting “the expensive rent” in his quest for glory. The general intuition is simple: you gotta spend money to make money, and rent is a minuscule (i.e., negligible) expenditure if you’re truly building a real company with millions in revenue. These words never seemed to pack enough of a punch, though. Fortunately, Hacker News reader, Joel Sutherland, states it beautifully:
Joel: Low cost of living. For a tech startup, Ramen and split-rent costs about the same everywhere. A low cost of living generally means that the people around you are used to paying less for things. Silicon Valley is nice because the population has money and is ready to spend it and founders can get by for dirt cheap just as they would anywhere else.
Q: I don’t understand. It sounds like you’re saying rent costs the same everywhere. It manifestly does not.
Joel: If I’m going to quit my job for a full-time startup the difference between $500 on rent in Omaha and $1000 rent in SF is not large enough to optimize for.
Those numbers are probably exaggerated as well. If you really wanted to live cheap you could do $300 and $600 I’m sure. The point is that the difference between the costs of living decreases in an absolute sense when you are living cheap.
Paying double for Ramen is not a big deal if it means you are living in an area where there are investors.
I’m not going to state how the ecosystem pushes you forward in the competitive landscape, or cite the endless success stories, or elegize the world-class university system. I just want to keep a permanent record of this for reference.
