The following video is part of a series of videos I did for the University of Washington’s Entrepreneurship Club.  This part is called “Doing Business Abroad.”

The following video is part of a series of videos I did for the University of Washington’s Entrepreneurship Club.  This part is called “Winning A Lawsuit Isn’t Everything.”

The following video is part of a series of videos I did for the University of Washington’s Entrepreneurship Club.  This part is called “Potential Concerns in Interviewing/Hiring.”

Part I

Part II

Part III

The following video is part of a series of videos I did for the University of Washington’s Entrepreneurship Club.  This part is called “Always Know a Good Lawyer.”

The following video is part of a series of videos I did for the University of Washington’s Entrepreneurship Club.  This is the first part on the intersection of law & business.

The following video is part of a series of videos I did for the University of Washington’s Entrepreneurship Club.  This part is called “Understanding Products Liability.”

Silicon Valley.  Palo Alto.  Sand Hill Road.  The Bay Area.  Nobb Hill.  Stanford.  Y Combinator.  Mountain View.  SFO.

For most technology startuppers, these words conjure images of the epicenter of the startup universe: the San Francisco Bay Area.  And there is certainly a great deal of truth that the Bay Area does represent the epicenter of the startup universe.  More venture capital is invested in the Bay Area than any other geography around the globe.  Many of the leading technology companies started in northern California and many of the largest players from Facebook to Google to eBay all reside here.  And it isn’t just IT, but leading biotech, medical device and even the growing area of clean technology companies all flock to northern California.

There’s been quite a bit of research into the “cluster” phenomenon of the Bay Area — why startup technology companies and venture investing has been so concentrated there.  But this post isn’t about research or why Silicon Valley over another market… instead this is more about some observations from personal experience from my visit south.

Visiting the Bay Area

Last week, I had the opportunity to travel down to the bay area for work, and decided to check out a couple bay-area startup networking events during my time there.  On their face, these events were similar to most of the events I’ve been to here in Seattle — lots of smart people talking about technology and generally enjoying good a good venue and a beer or two.

But this trip was a bit difference because I was an outsider and had the chance to observe, listen and learn.  And from that experience I noticed a few key things from my observations, my interactions and my eavesdropping.  On Wednesday evening, I attended SF Beta, which was a networking event featuring 30 or so demos from startup companies.  On Thursday evening, I attended the launch party held at Google Ventures.  Both were great events and gave me a nice intro into the bay area startup/tech scene.  Here’s a few takeaways…

Emphasis on Collaboration/Cooperation.  Perhaps the most interesting point I found during both of these bay area events was an emphasis on working collaboratively with other startups.  Sometimes I’ve heard of a hesitancy of startups to partner or work together because of a fear that two startups working together don’t add risk, but make risk exponential.  So I’d heard many startup CEOs specifically say they’d avoid partnering with other newer, small startups.  But that didn’t seem to hold true from the startups I met.  At these events, I was floored at all the talk and conversations focused around collaboration and cooperation — often between two small companies I’d never heard of (and I can only assume were both startups).  Specifically, as I walked around the SF Beta event watching people interact with the demo presenters and listened to the conversations, I was fascinated by all the talk of working together, collaborating and “seeing how our stuff fits together.”  Most of the demos had a list of partners somewhere in their pitch or materials (many of whom I figured were local-area startups that I’d never heard of), but it seemed to help build a ‘network effect’ around the idea and in fact increased the credibility among the crowd.  Overall, there seemed to be a sense that by working on projects together, both teams/ideas/projects were more likely to be successful.  At first I thought it might be just the demos I was listening to or the people I was around, but it was something that I heard throughout the evenings and across events.  This “working together” attitude was actually very positive and gave me a feeling as I left that many of these ideas could actually see success.  It was unique and different than I’d seen at similar demo-like events in other places.

Diversity of Startuppers.  One of the things I sometimes lament going to a “startup” event is the lack of women at many of the events I attend related to the startup community.  There are always a few women, but at these events, I’d safely say the ration was 55-45 men-women and maybe event 50-50.  In addition, I saw a much broader age range and a strong cross section of races and backgrounds.  The room really felt like a very unique mixing pot of people.

Pivoting.  One of the interesting things I noticed in the demos of the various companies at the SF Beta event was how many of them represented a substantial pivot in their past (and that these companies weren’t afraid of the fact they were pivoting).  One company had moved from widgets to advertising.  Another had switched from a market research platform to a platform that connected advertisers to their target market.  And a third was a pivot from a nonprofit promotion tool to a tool that helped nonprofits increase donations by jointly advertising with sponsor-companies.  (Do you detect a theme here about advertising?  I did too… but there were other pivots besides these three I just mentioned.)  What I also found interesting was how open each of the companies was about their obvious pivot.  To me it showed a sense of confidence and the “stick-to-it-ness” that you like to see from an entrepreneur.  Sure, they may have admitted that their first idea had failed or not been the homerun they were hoping for, but they’d readily admitted they read the tea leaves and moved with the market.

Broader Eco-system.  It may have been a factor of the locations, the events or something else, but I was quite impressed at the varied types of attendees.  I met investors, HR professionals, engineers, students, employees from big tech companies, design/art students, entrepreneurs, wantrapreneurs, sales people, outsourcing shops, consultants and more.  The SF Beta event in particular brought together a very broad coalition of folks that were interested in or involved with the startup community — and their involvement could be that they just wanted to sell to startups, and that was okay!  While SF Beta was advertised as a “startup” event, non-entrepreneurs were not only welcomed, they were an interesting part of the community.

Lack of Companies Listed on the Nametags.  I don’t have a specific takeaway from this point, but I found it oddly fascinating that each of these two events gave attendees the chance to write their own nametags and for the most part (definitely more than half at each event) no one listed their employer or company on their nametag.  I too decided not to list my name (somewhat out of fear that people would shun the lawyer, but also to follow the crowd).  It made introductions a bit more unique and in some cases the “so, where do you work” or “so, what do you do” lines didn’t come until much later than normal.  I liked it and thought it really made conversation more about conversation than about who you are.

Being from the Outside Was an “Interesting” Trait.  And finally, the people I met seemed genuinely interested in the scene from Seattle.  It certainly wasn’t a “what’s it like in the backwaters of technology” interest, but was a genuine curiosity.  Perhaps I expected a bit more self-awareness or self-centeredness about the Bay Area’s place at the center of the technology universe, but I didn’t get that vibe.  Instead, the people I met were no different that entrepreneurs and members of the technology community in Seattle, Boston, or DC.   Maybe I expected people to be different, but I was happy to see how similar startuppers really are.  And people wanted to know about Seattle and what the world was like.

Overall Takeaways

In general, I was glad to see another startup community up close, and it felt like a place that I could quickly integrate into.  People were very welcoming, eager to talk, and happy to share their story and listen to yours.  So that was quite reassuring being someone from out of town.

More specifically, I will say that there was an obvious sense of collaboration in the air.  I noticed the “cluster” effect just from my interactions, and I wondered if that attitude really did have an impact on the success of the bay area as a technology epicenter. Does that willingness to cross-collaborate, partner across the community, interact with diverse people and professions, and focus on the people help the bay area continue to lead?  Is there something about the attitudes and actions of the people of SF that make it what most other technology clusters aspire to be?  Can that diversity and can-do attitude transfer outside of the region?

Obviously, there is something unique about the bay area that allows it to continue to attract talented individuals and their new ventures (as well as the investors and the community that follow them).  I plan to continue to spend more time in the Bay Area (and that comes from a growing number of relationships and clients in that area).  I’ll be back and am glad to know that the scene is vibrant even for an outsider.

For me, I was glad to have seen that community in action and to see a few of the lessons that the other markets can learn.  Thanks for the hospitality SF — now back to Seattle!

During the weekend of September 24, 2010, I will be climbing Mount Rainier with three friends (Ken Kamada, Adam Krupa, and David Wilson). We will summit Mount Rainier – 14,410 feet above sea level – on the morning of September 27, 2010. All of us have been training all summer and spent lots of evenings and weekends getting ready for the highest and most challenging climb we have ever attempted.

Pledges to Kiva (www.Kiva.org)

In addition to viewing our endeavor as a physical and mental challenge, I’m also using it as a challenge to raise money for an important charity I support, Kiva. Kiva facilitates micro-lending to entrepreneurs in developing countries to build and grow their businesses (more information about Kiva is below).

My wife Allison and I are committed to matching up to $1441 (ten cents for each foot) in micro-loans made by our friends and family. Kiva is a great organization and I’d love for everyone to make a small donation and see how your efforts can make a difference. My goal is to have $1441 pledged by friends and family to Kiva by the time we ascent from the top of Mount Rainier on September 27th. You can make a single loan in the amount of $25 or pledge more for multiple loans. $25 really does make a significant difference through microlending with Kiva.

Go to this site to make your donation: http://www.razoo.com/story/Micro-Lending-To-Entrepreneurs-In-Developing-Countries

Thanks to all of you for your support. I hope each of you can become involved with Kiva, either now or at some time in the future. I’ll keep you posted regarding our climb and fundraising efforts. Here’s hoping for great climbing weather and lots of Kiva lending!

About Kiva

Kiva’s mission is to connect people, through lending, for the sake of alleviating poverty.Kiva empowers individuals to lend to an entrepreneur across the globe. By combining microfinance with the internet, Kiva is creating a global community of people connected through lending.Kiva was born of the following beliefs:

• People are by nature generous, and will help others if given the opportunity to do so in a transparent, accountable way.
• The poor are highly motivated and can be very successful when given an opportunity.
• By connecting people we can create relationships beyond financial transactions, and build a global community expressing support and encouragement of one another.

Kiva promotes:

• Dignity: Kiva encourages partnership relationships as opposed to benefactor relationships. Partnership relationships are characterized by mutual dignity and respect.
• Accountability: Loans encourage more accountability than donations where repayment is not expected.
• Transparency: The Kiva website is an open platform where communication can flow freely around the world.

As of November 2009, Kiva has facilitated over $100 million in loans.

Recently, I had the privilege to work on the Startup Visa issue with folks like Brad Feld, Congressman Jarod Polis, Dave McClure, Eric Reis, Paul Kedrosky, Jason Mendelson, Andy Grove and others.  Yesterday, I wrote a post about why I think the issue is an important one — thanks for all the retweets and comments.  Glad to know people are still thinking about the issue.

This post isn’t simply about the Startup Visa though.  Instead, it is about any issue that entrepreneurs, startups and small businesses care about — and how to make a difference in those issues you care about.

Startup Visa: Now What?

The Startup Visa issue began as a series of blog posts and eventually became a full scale lobbying effort.  For me, through the efforts of the Startup Visa, I was able to participate on calls with congressional staffers, immigration experts from Capitol Hill, and various others.  In fact, I even got to help with the drafting of the legislation ultimately submitted by Congressman Polis on the issue.  On the Senate side, Senator Kerry’s team drafted legislation in support of the Startup Visa.

Today, bi-partisan leaders in Congress have drafted bills in support of Startup Visas and numerous other leaders are behind the issue; VCs have publicly supported the issue; lawyers were behind it; immigration experts support it… and yet, months later both of the bills remain buried in committee.  Comprehensive immigration reform probably won’t be addressed in 2010.

Frustrating, yes.  But not the end of the battle.  Efforts are continuing to build support for the legislation post-November elections.  With any luck, the continued citizen advocacy will pay off.

And while their is no guarantee of success, the issue is firmly in the hands of Congress, more every-day people are aware of the issue and people just like you and me now have the power to “hold their feet to the fire” to make this become a reality.

But, what does that mean?  How can people like you and I push this bill or other pro-startup public policy forward? And what should we push forward? Great questions and something I hope to accomplish in this post — whether it is the Startup Visa, health care for entrepreneurs and small businesses, or tax reform, how can you make a difference on the things you care about?

Pro-Startup Public Policy

Startup Visas are just one plank of the pro-startup public policy goals.  William Carleton has a very nice post where he summarizes some of the key public policies that support or would support startups, small businesses and entrepreneurship.  These are some general changes that can be made to federal and state laws, policies and regulations to impact and enhance startups, small businesses and entrepreneurship.  What I like about William’s post is its simplicity… so kudos!

Here’s a mashup of a pro startup public policy agenda:

1. Tax dividends and capital gains at the same rate.
2. Vigorously enforce net neutrality.
3. Extend Medicare to all startup employees, regardless of age.
4. Allow angels to exclude 100% of gains from the sale of “Qualified Business Stock.”
5. Hand a green card to every immigrant who earns an engineering degree at a US school or starts, or lands a job at, a startup.
6. Overturn Citizens United.
7. End gerrymandering.

Joe Wallin, another of the blogging attorneys here in Seattle, has his own set of proposals that may be a bit more details and slightly more ‘progressive’ in favor of startups.  Again, I applaud the effort to lay out some key legislative and regulatory reforms that would most definitely benefit entrepreneurs, small businesses and startups.

Why it matters?

The question I think average people out there are asking is, do these “suggestions” or “proposals” ever amount to anything? Was the efforts on the Startup Visa worth it when the bills remain in limbo?  Unfortunately, average people have become more jaded than ever about the political process, the partisan wrangling, and the ability to make pragmatic and tangible changes.  It seems like the old Schoolhouse Rock video needs to be updated to include hiring a lobbyist and ensuring you have support from congressional leadership in “safe” districts!

But the truth is that average citizens can and do influence legislation — the Startup Visa movement was inspired by a blog post by Paul Graham and a follow-up blog post by Brad Feld.  And for the entrepreneurial, small business and startup community, these issues can be influenced directly by you.  I’ve got numerous friends that work on Capitol Hill and each of them swears up and down that their member listens, cares about constituent needs, and wants to do the best for the country.  And, frankly, I  believe them.  But that said, it also takes more than an issue that “makes sense” to get something passed in the federal or state governments.

So what are steps you can take to be involved in the process?

Read the full story