It's going to be interesting to see whether or not the development market collapses in the next couple of years when SF is finally either out of ideas or full on people (if it arguably isn't already), and the rest of the country can't keep in step because most other cities' markets are clamoring just as badly (if not worse) for the seniors. The issue, though, is that it's a catch-22 right now. Companies in smaller cities want seniors so they can get work done and not have to train anyone, but the seniors generally don't want to work in places that aren't SF/NY.Someone has to budge, unless the market is to die completely. I can't mention how many times I've seen companies posting for the same position for upwards of a year instead of simply taking a chance on someone. Sometimes it doesn't work out, but that's business. Don't run one if you can't take the risks.
michaelochurch|12 years ago
Disagree strongly. In fact, I'm moving to Baltimore (from NYC) for a few years (probably) and really looking forward to it. There are a lot of smart people there-- a lot of different kinds of smart people, unlike in, say, the Valley where there's one kind of smart people and that's programmers-- and DC is only an hour away. I might end up in California eventually, but I'm seeing a lot of interest in the most talented people in getting away from the legacy-laden "star cities". It's not quite an "exodus", but I hear more conversations about Austin than San Francisco around NYC. Six or seven years ago, Austin was barely on the map; even New York was the hinterlands except for Wall Street. Now, the general sense is that the Bay Area is for older people who were able to get in and buy a place at a reasonable price, before it got all fucked up.
Makers like new places and open opportunity, as well as freedom from established hierarchies. That means they'll always be moving around from one generation to the next. To tell the truth, though, macrolocation (California vs. Texas; Northeast vs. South) seems to matter a lot less over time, and microlocation (cities vs. suburbs, proximity of cafes and bike paths) matters more. I think that trend's continuing, thanks to the Internet. 20 years ago, or even 10, being an unusual person (3-sigma intelligence; gay; artistic inclination; minority religion or, in many communities, no religion) in a B city meant social isolation. In 2013, it really doesn't; you can find your tribe even if you are, say, an atheist in the South.
Someone has to budge
I think that the next 15 years of talented young people are going to be more dispersed than the last 15. That means there will be fewer superhubs and that's a good thing. It does, however, fragment the labor market, which means that the volatile culture-- the two-sided itchy trigger finger dynamic-- of promiscuous job hopping and fast firing will have to go. Companies will also be more willing to invest in talent. They'll have to be that way; the extremely liquid talent market of the Bay Area now won't exist (anywhere) in 10 years.
Stwerner|12 years ago
I'd also love to hear why you think there will be fewer superhubs (and why that's good). A lot of my reading lately has suggested the opposite - growing superhubs, and why that is a good thing.
tocomment|12 years ago
vonmoltke|12 years ago
Its one of many frustrations driving me back towards electrical engineering, though EE employers are even worse about this one particular point.