Let's stop with the Silicon Valley comparisons
michiganradio.org
michiganradio.org
There's even a wikipedia page for this stuff: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_places_with_%22Silicon...
My personal favourite (in an face-palmy kind of way): http://i.imgur.com/WKYF1o9.jpg
The problem here is an overblown claim rather a comparison, which is fundamentally a different issue.
However, as a person born and raise in the Detroit suburb's, it's hard to imagine that Detroit or the surrounding region's would ever be a location for tech innovation.
You have a VERY large percentage of the labor force with no skill's beyond manufacturing (auto industry), heavy small business tax, a youth population that is migrating out to southern and western locations of the country, a non-premium climate (winter 8 out of 12 months), heavy labor unions, and no serious push from state officials to move internal perception towards an industry/economy of technology.
Until the state as a whole begins actively pushing for industry reform and SERIOUS incentives, Michigan will continue to follow it's current course which is very little tech talent, very few tech oriented companies, high small business tax, and very low incentive to start any type of innovation.
It is what it is.
Detroit and Ann Arbor both have decent start up support structures and they'll increase with time and energy.
Which goes on to my prior point. You have to change culture in order to do that. The culture of the state is manufacturing with some bio/medical (Ann Arbor, Grand Rapids).
Any innovation can really only come from 1 of 4 places... Detroit (metro), Ann Arbor, Lansing, and Grand Rapids. Ann Arbor has a small scene, but doesn't have the ability to grow without passing of that scene to a larger community. Lansing is primarily government and manufacturing. There is Michigan State University (50k+ students), but it's a school with a primary focus on agriculture and not techonology. This leaves Detroit and Grand Rapids.
In regard's to Detroit, let's think about it for a moment.
It is very much like taking the idea that you can easily change the culture and mindset of silicon valley from tech to manufacturing and industrial. The people in silicon valley and the surrounding area do not have the skillset as a whole to provide that type of industry. As well as through generations, the mindset of the people as a whole is not directed towards a manufacturing environment. This is what is going on with Detroit. You have had a VERY large portion of the economy (65%+) purely based on some type of auto manufacturing. This is why Detroit city is at around 20% unemployment and the surrounding metro is around 8-10% unemployment.
Now..this leaves us with Grand Rapids. Which actually is a viable candidate. It has a younger generation overall, an international airport, a moderately sized city with room for expansion, and a vibrant downtown.
Then..we have to look further at the ability to grow a tech environment. Is there the skill's needed? Are there investors available to fund companies in this area? Are there incentives to stay in the area?
In reality, all of those answers are relatively "No".
You can get better talent in a warmer climate with the same exact (if not better) opportunities (funding, viability, community backing, tax incentives..etc) in other cities with a better climate (yes, climate is really a big deal)...such as Charlotte, Atlanta, Phoenix, San Francisco, Seattle.
Unless Michigan does something drastic like being a startup tax-haven, having major incubators, or the like; it will never happen. Too many other places offer the same or much better, but in a more comfortable climate.
(In case anyone think's climate isn't a big deal, try moving to Alaska or Montana. They offer break's for startup's, but when was the last time you heard anyone taking those states up on their offers?).
http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article/20141212/BLOG007/141219...
http://www.mlive.com/business/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2015/04/po...
http://vcwithme.co/2014/12/02/greatest-concentration-of-vent...
That could be 1 person giving a company (doesn't have to be a startup) a large sum, in which the per capita would sky-rocket.
The discussion isn't over whether someone can run a startup successfully in Michigan or Ann Arbor. The discussion is whether Detroit (or Michigan) can become a technology hub. After being born in Michigan and living their for 25 years, I can easily say that while there is deffinately the ability to build and run a startup, the ability to change the industry of the state (or even just Detroit) is really next to impossible unless the city/state was willing to go to drastic measures to attract talent/encourage startups (low/no tax, office space, incubators, free money startup capital...etc), and educate the public on their goal's.
Even is the state was able to give every startup no taxes for 10 years and startup capital, the response from the general public would be "why are you helping them?!, I am the one without the job. Why aren't you trying to attract more manufacturing?!"
While I love my state, it's not a viable place to build any startup. A high small business tax, and small talent pool that most state's face when asking themselves "how can we bring in more technology?"
Back to Ann Arbor... It's a nice cozy city with a major university. In regards to work force, where are you getting employee's? From the college? That's like the valley pulling it's entire work force from Stanford. In regard's to a startup boom in Ann Arbor, where are the people going to live? The city isn't large enough for any large scale change. Can you build multiple Google's, Apple's, or Amazon's there? Is the city viably committing to building out it's infrastructure in order to have this be a silicon valley?
Building a startup is one thing, creating an entire industry is a totally different animal. The state in general is committed to manufacturing as it has been for 100 years. In 15 years there will be a new generation of politicians and then maybe we will see if the climate changes. However, I can assure you that from a bureaucratic level, there is no such strive for a "silicon valley" in michigan.
Simply put: people want jobs. They see the west coast. They see tech as high paying. They want high pay. They want tech. However, the cost of getting that is going to be much greater in monetary and sacrifice than people will/are willing to do.
I am in Charlotte, NC now. My wife and I moved away about 3 years ago.
I do have family in Traverse City, Houghton Lake, Grand Rapids, Lansing, and Troy.
Because you can follow the same successful approach to encouraging entrepreneurs, but innovate by producing companies that develop new products?
You might want to ape silicon valley because of the huge amount of employment and wealth it generates.
You don't have to be exactly the same as SV, but no reason not to be inspired by it, if you're looking to create a startup culture.
Did you read the article? Because this is exactly what it's about:
"To be sure, we can learn from Silicon Valley and other more mature tech communities, but that also includes how not to do things."
If that's the takeaway, then you're still doing comparisons.
Michigan originally banned noncompetes, but the lobbyists for the auto industry got the law changed.
The rent, real estate, and heavy traffic issues can be avoided with a little urban planning.
Build a village with lots of green space:
I think the popular use of the silicon valley comparison is an attempt to get at the ideology rather than the reality of the place.
Or perhaps we should acknowledge that Silicon Valley these days is mostly about becoming the biggest brand in service-mediation, and running on external funding while making net losses year after year, and in the process pushing everybody else out of the market. It is not so much about technical innovation anymore. Look at how a lot of open source software is written in Europe and monetized in the US.
I'm fairly sure the staff of Uber would strongly disagree with you there. The logistics they manage must be vast. Dealing with the real-world is messy and hard.
From what I gather, taxi businesses in the US seem to be in the hand of Mafia-like criminal organizations. That's not the case in most Western-European cities with good and cheap public transport and well-regulated taxi systems.
If I can get from anywhere to anywhere at any time for little money already for the last 30 years, what's the point of a service like Uber, especially Uber with their shady business practices and aggressive stance towards established labour laws.
The kind of market "efficiency" seen in the housing market where huge amount of property is left empty.
This story shows the situation for taxi drivers, way before Uber: http://www.nytimes.com/1995/04/09/nyregion/driving-a-taxi-di...
Some quotes:
The average rate a cabbie paid to take a taxi out for a 12-hour shift climbed 11 percent, to about $85, between 1990 and 1993 (...) In 1993, 32 to 45 percent of the income of a fleet or lease manager was profit, or $16,000 to $21,300 per car, up from $5,500 to $9,800 in 1986, according to the taxi commission.
Lease drivers rent the medallions, and usually the taxis, for a day or a week from their owners or a middleman. Depending on the owner and the night of the week, a lease driver pays $72 to $100 to take a car out for a 12-hour shift, or about $450 to $650 for a weekly lease. The driver must also pay for gas, at $15 to $20 a night. Drivers keep whatever fares and tips they collect, but they often start a day's work $100 or more behind.
Their latest move - after getting a court order to ban Uber, which they fortunately were too incompetent to get right - was trying to leech tourists by asking for a flat fee for any trip starting at the airport that would be enough to cross the whole city.
Regulations protecting the safety of citizens (both inside and outside the taxi) might be necessary, and Uber should be punished if they violate them. But competition shouldn't be regulated away, and Uber for all its flaws has given a well overdue kick in the pants of complacent companies.
Uber offers me these small things that stack up: - automatic transaction - google maps destination (one less thing to explain to the driver) - happy drivers, always - slightly higher air conditioning temperature by default (taxis like to blast you with cold air and you have to ask them to put it up) - lesser chance of a bumpy driver - a chance to meet and chat with a new person, who isn't necessarily a professional taxi driver, and from that a fun life story or two
And that's enough to make me switch and even evangelise the service.
Then I go abroad and I get google maps "taxis" with no need to take out foreign cash, and it's warming somehow.
Here's some real problems which Uber addresses:
- taxi services being run by organised crime
- taxis wasting fuel driving about looking for fares
- massive shortage of taxis on a Saturday night in the city centre
- having to wait on the street in a queue for a taxi rank, probably in the rain, in a crowd of drunk people
- people getting mugged/assaulted because they had to walk home because they couldn't get a taxi
- being totally surrounded by cars but unable still being unable to get from Point A to Point B
- owning a car and a drivers licence, being unemployed, and not being able to put your skills and capital goods to use
- taxi drivers not knowing how to get to your destination
- not being able to get a taxi because you don't have cash
- not knowing when your taxi is going to arrive
- not having any log of the fact you ordered and got into a taxi, in case no one ever hears from you again
Ironically in ex-communist Russia, they don't really have these problems because people apparently just flag down any car on the road and hitch a ride, probably for a little cash.
Glass houses time! Michigan has the 10th highest female / male pay gap in the nation, it's been rated with an F by NARAL, and 47% of Michigan residents have no access to paid sick leave. I know it was a slick ding to break out, but if you're interested in making a distinction with California on inclusion of women and issues of sexism, michigan is lagging in this area by some key metrics. Maybe work to be done at home before worrying about other states.