Startup Visa Canada | Hacker News Reader

Startup Visa Canada

startupvisa.ca

40 pointsdomino24 comments

I think it is a great move to exploit the fact that USA immigration laws are hell bent upon shutting doors in the faces of startups unless you are the next Facebook. What really bothers is the high fee of $150k. I mean companies bootstrap or seek angel investments in the range of $15k-$100k. What on earth makes them think, if I already had that cash, I would be willing or even think of relocating? If my business already has enough traction, then why would one bother. And if at all I had to relocate spending that much, I would rather do that in making the right inlays into US.

i've been asked to sign on...and honestly I am wrestling hard. In principle - as a Canadian Entrepreneur - I am for it. But, it's hard for me to imagine many scenarios where it works. What kind of non-Canadian entrepreneur still has 30% of the company after raising $150? I wish it were true that it would work this way all the time, but the odds are really slim IMO. If it is, chances are we're talking about someone who has "done it before", and in those cases they likely have more freedom to move around and don't have the same need for VISA. It seems to me a like misdirected energy. And how about a program that incents talent to come home? That's something I'd love to see today.

As a Canadian citizen who has worked hard to get a US visa to be able to work in SF/Silicon Valley, but has the 'easier' option of being based north of the border, I'm not really clear why a startup would want to be based out of Canada.

I'm not against the idea of a startup visa for Canada but the site startupvisa.ca might want to sell some of the benefits of being based in Canada because I'm not seeing them.

Canada has advantages for someone coming from the developing world. Better internet infrastructure than many countries, educated workforce, socialized health care, a culture very welcoming to immigrants, easy access to the US market, and proximity to Canadian and US investors (particularly Bay Area and Seattle).

It's also easier to get foreign workers, generally, into Canada, so you have your pick of the local workforce, as well as the rest of the world (even Americans!).

I've worked for a startup in Vancouver that took advantage of all the above. Vancouver is one of the best places to live in the world, period, and it's especially great for raising kids or if you're into outdoor sports. So it has its charms even if you already work in a startup hub like San Francisco. You could probably do something similar for Montreal or Toronto, although it would be a harder sell. And the startup would have to be pretty hot or pursuing a unique niche.

If opportunities were equal, there would be very little reason for a startup to choose Canada over the USA. However, since the USA seems determined to shut the door here, Canada can take advantage of that.

You mention proximity to US investors in Bay Area - my experience is that investors in Bay Area tend to only want to fund Delaware C Corp companies with founders based locally. Anything outside of that is unlikely to get funded in many cases (Aside from the proximity issue, I'm guessing for local Canadian employment laws and to get this visa you would have to be running a Canadian registered company).

All of your comments about Vancouver are true, but none of them has anything to do with whether it makes a great place to do a startup.

The biggest reasons to do a startup in Canada are SRED claims, , depressed wages (in Vancouver), and enforceable non-competes.

People say Vancouver is the best place to live, but I'd rather live elsewhere, Portland or SF come to mind.

Enforceable non-competes may vary by province; I haven't had a reason to check it out, but they may be against labour law in Ontario.

Enforceable probably only in Canada. I doubt there is little to no legal redress for anyone competing across the border, esp in California which bans non-competes.

I personally wouldn't put an employee under a non-compete - a) because they tend to be unenforceable and b) I wouldn't work under such a contract myself.

After I got into work, I did a quick search and found that it's not under labour law as such, but Ontario courts (and presumably Canadian courts in general) frown on non-competes. This article from 1999 suggest that non-solicitation agreements are acceptable, but there's nine conditions that make a non-compete acceptable because it's an 'exceptional' situation.

http://www.zvulony.com/non_compete.html

This is upheld in other articles that I've read that are more recent:

http://www.toronto-employmentlawyer.com/law-advice/employmen... http://blogs.hrhero.com/northernexposure/2008/10/14/noncompe... http://www.brazeauseller.com/articles/29/12/2008/245.aspx

http://www.zvulony.com/non_compete.html

This is upheld in other articles that I've read that are more recent:

http://www.toronto-employmentlawyer.com/law-advice/employmen... http://blogs.hrhero.com/northernexposure/2008/10/14/noncompe... http://www.brazeauseller.com/articles/29/12/2008/245.aspx

The $150k bit seems entirely unreasonable. Are they expecting immigrants to have funding before they launch their startup? Or are they only hoping to attract rich Indian and Chinese college students/grads riding on Daddy's money? Either approach seems naive if they truly want to build a vibrant startup culture in Canada.

It seems reasonable if they want to attract VC firms too (or already have them), so the VCs can find entrepreneurs overseas and send them to Canada.

That seems like an edge case, and a strategy predicated upon the US remaining unfriendly to qualified immigrants.

The entrepreneurial immigration path is a way of jumping the queue, so yes it requires significant personal assets if you want to take advantage of it. Otherwise you can just utilize the normal immigration path.

When I was asking about startups in Canada in HN a few weeks ago (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2060383), I got a very negative picture basically stating that tech startups do not exist in CA.

Startups exist in Canada, but there are only a few markets that are starting to develop quickly (Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver) - none of which is as active as San Fran. The Valley is a unique place, but let's not forget, most companies are not started there.

It's a step in the right direction. It's definitely not ideal but 150K is better than 300K.

I think money and resources are global, you just need a good reason for investors to buy your idea.

Each place has its own pros and cons. Establishing yourself in Silicon Valley brings different kinds of issues like salaries. According to the WSJ, most VC funds are spend on employee wages because of competition from Google and Facebook. http://blogs.wsj.com/venturecapital/2010/12/29/the-war-for-t...

Good initiative. I'm interested in such program as startup founder. However, if implemented as proposed, it wouldn't give me any benefit. Amount of 150K is too high.

> The $150k bit seems entirely unreasonable.

Fair enough, but what criteria should they use?

Remember - the goal is to increase startups, not to let random people into Canada. (They have other programs for the latter.)

Ask HN: What would be the best location in Canada?

Vancouver, but I'm biased :)

How about Waterloo? Google has offices there.

I'm a fan of Toronto...but I'm biased too

Reply on news.ycombinator.com