neximo4's comments

There aren't too may startups in the Square Mile as it's defined. Just a couple of fintech ones in Canada square.

My point is still the same, not many people live in SF or in London but most of the people there during the day there, commute there.

But people still commute there right? This is the point i'm trying to make, No one (and by that I man a small minority) lives in the city centre because it is too expensive. Applies to any major city on Earth which has suburbs.

I imagine the population during the day swells more than 100 fold...

Please tell someone this in Australia with a straight face (and London, but things have slightly changed over the past 2 or so year). It is not as easy to get capital as you think..

There is a difference in company culture in the US and the non US tech-spheres. The US isn't conservative at all in its approach to get growth & this is reflected in fund raise sizes.

From what I read it was something along the lines of it lacks multiculturalism and is closed off.

Of course that isn't the issue where an entire continent is compared to a small American town...

Edit: Oh I see, of course I have never visited Oakland so I do not understand what is said between the lines. Unless the implication was a small town is as diverse as a continent in some kind of hyperbole.

This comment isn't very good. For one thing Africa is very very diverse (heck the most genetically diverse place on Earth) and full of different cultures, including western cultures.

Also 'Africa' isn't very closed off to the rest of the world contrary to what you may believe. Things have changed over the past few decades.

If you're going to generalise you might want to visit Africa before comparing her to something else, or mention a city that is a more apt comparison to Oakland.

How is this different to SF (the 'city' in London isn't actually that big and smaller if you mean 'the square mile'), I assume most people commute to SF in as well?

It's not an apt comparison as firms are geographically distributed all over the bay area.

Every country wanted something out of the EU other countries may have not agreed to, the French wanted agricultural subsidies. If you have 28 countries in a trade union, you're bound to have disagreements.

The government in the UK was particularly enraged about FTT (Financial Transaction Tax) a couple of years ago & that is what has actually led to this whole referendum thing. Every country is good at its own things and they wouldn't like it if was attacked. Imagine a tax on manufactured exports, Germany would have a fit.

It's not like there are policies in the EU that attempt to reduce trade in financial services such as the tobin tax on financial transactions. Italy enacted the tax and its reduced trade quite considerably.

Every country has it's own fight in the EU, it's not just Britian, France had the subsidies problem, Greece had its bailout problem.. each has had its own. There isn't a reason for Britian to be treated differently.

Sweeping generalisations you say? Have you not asked Frenchmen their opinions of the UK in the EU? There are a couple of firms that have done unbiased polls all over the EU and Frenchmen quite simply do not like the UK in the EU, some things just don't change.

CDG is long dead but he is still relevant as he chimes in with the unchanged opinions.

I should have clarified, French people don't like the EU. More than half don't want the UK in the EU. In addition CDG infamously vetoed the UKs entry in the days of the EEC.

The differences in culture in Europe divides people, trade unites them so I guess these companies love it.

There are problems with being in the EEC but not in the EU.

For the 'sovereignty' issue this is the worst as there is no representation in the creation of the laws. That would be even worse than being out of the EU.

Keep in mind Norway pays something like 90% per person of what the UK pays for its EEC membership. One day Brussels will make a law Norwegians don't like and they will be upset about it and won't be able to do anything about it.

A trade zone requires consistent laws among its members too.

Yup No not in the EU but they are in the EEC meaning they have unrestricted trade access to the EU including the 3 freedoms.

I mentioned each of these have a varying degree of integration to the EU. Being in the EU means there is representation of which Switzerland, Norway and Iceland do not have.

This isn't a great situation though as these places effectively enact EU legislation without representation and nearly pay full fees for EU membership (per person).

> Perhaps then should be a referendum to ask the "Euro mainlanders" if they want a UK with the privileges they have.

The EU mainlander area's elected representatives forged this deal.

The privileges the UK sought like the 'red card' system apply to the whole of the EU.

There's nothing stopping an EU country from getting the same terms on the integration bit, indeed some countries have done that to varying degrees - Switzerland (EEC), Iceland (EEC), Denmark (own currency), Norway (EEC with EU laws) & Sweden (own currency) & Turkey (customs union)

If you're a Spaniard don't you have to worry about Catalonia?

The EU allows states to 'minitiarize' and devolve down once the trivialities of sovereignty and the '3 basics' EEC principles are sorted out

The choice is really for British people not Euro mainlanders. The western European nations, particularly the French do not like the UK in the EU.

There's a lot to be gained from being in the EU. As a startup having the possibility to 'passport' into the EU is one of the most magnificent things, one license 28+ countries. This includes banking & finance (FCA) licenses. It is enviable to do this even in the US where 50 separate licenses are needed in some cases.

1) Uber would offer an alternative web app immediately

2) Uber would sue Apple for damages and try to get back into the app store & using its monopoly to influence other businesses.

3) Uber would encourage users to use Android and possibly raise awareness of Android and begin supporting its development in OSS circles. It would also support OSS projects that improve the app experience of web apps.

4) Uber would also start offering incentives to its api developers to make their own Uber apps for the app store as an alternative. So none of that referrals crap, proper cash incentives. Maybe even invest in a couple of startups creating these apps.

5) Undoubtedly Uber will use its PR team to write negative articles about iOS and use it as an opportunity to 'fight back' and gain customers. It will ask users to also write to Apple or ask them to boycott Apple products.

I wasn't aware they use in app purchases?

If you use UKTI to help you, especially if you're a fintech startup, they'll help you through that.

It surely can't be that bad?

Is it not possible to do this all online? In the UK it took a day and 15 or so pounds to set up a company, got the official company documents the next day. It's also possible to get it the same day with a bit more money. Took a visit to the Branch but had the business bank account within the week in addition to the Stripe account activated within 5 minutes.

Well its about time. I wonder if they waited for the prices of startups to turn down.

Ireland is waiting :)

Citi, HSBC and JPM in certain cases do this.

America is ruled by corporations. It is unjust but can you imagine Apple, an american company, having fines or being rendered such that it was disadvantaged to sales in China/India or setting off its decline.

The only time the exception was ever made was to prevent monopoly about a hundred or so years ago.

Otherwise its perfectly ok to be an American corporate citizen and challenge the law.