Thank you for this post..it really is a breath of fresh air after all the buzzword-laden but completely substance-free pitches you tend to hear after spending time in the Bay Area.
When startups respond to the question of "How will you make money" with "We'll get VC funding", you know there is a problem.
Here's a bigger problem: It seems that the set of people building the next big thing social whatever and looking for VC funding and the set of people who know about business stuff and lead generation rarely intersect.
This is the great paradox of the valley: It seems that most of the people who know about sales, driving traffic, etc and are thus most likely to succeed are building unsexy businesses in web hosting, B2B services, etc. In other words, the kinds of businesses Valley investors are not interested in it all.
The people who are clueless about marketing or generating revenue get the lion's share of the funding...because they're making a social iPad app(or whatever is hot at the moment).
In a way, Silicon Valley has become the tech world's Hollywood. Wide-eyed, talented people are encouraged to move across country and make their fortune in a big way. And like Hollywood, they're not encouraged to slowly build their craft and name, through theater and small roles, they're encouraged to go and pitch their Superman reboot and try and get discovered by David Fincher.
It's why I've always been skeptical of Silicon Valley. I don't like get-rich-quick schemes, even if they sometimes (although rarely) work. The social damage done to those who fail, especially when they make up the vast majority of those who try, can create a terrible reputation for an industry.
Of course, Hollywood has been chewing people up and spitting them out for decades, so maybe this is a sustainable cultural model, if you don't mind the repercussions.
Fortunately the world needs more programmers than it does actors so there is some underlying demand to soak up the programmers who don't make it big. A backup plan of $60-100K a year is hardly the same as being a barista at starbucks for the next 30 years.
Well, a Starbucks manager in Los Angeles doesn't make that much far off from $60k, but regardless, you're right that that's the case for now, but I would point out that Silicon Valley is extremely young in comparison to Hollywood.
But most importantly, the point I'd make is this: If Silicon Valley is our Hollywood, where is our Broadway?
I'll temper the cynicism by saying that, despite everything, if you want to have any chance at being successful in the movie industry, you come to Hollywood.
Same thing with Silicon Valley, despite its flaws.
When startups respond to the question of "How will you make money" with "We'll get VC funding", you know there is a problem.
Here's a bigger problem: It seems that the set of people building the next big thing social whatever and looking for VC funding and the set of people who know about business stuff and lead generation rarely intersect.
This is the great paradox of the valley: It seems that most of the people who know about sales, driving traffic, etc and are thus most likely to succeed are building unsexy businesses in web hosting, B2B services, etc. In other words, the kinds of businesses Valley investors are not interested in it all.
The people who are clueless about marketing or generating revenue get the lion's share of the funding...because they're making a social iPad app(or whatever is hot at the moment).