First, the Signalfire data which is the source of the decline data doesn't say what they claim it says.
1) Startup employment fell almost everywhere.
2) Austin's drop matches Boston's; so is Boston over too?
3) Only startups funded by the "top 100" VCs. How is the list defined? Likely a coastal bias.
Second, the article leans on one person who has cycled through New York, Austin, Boston, DC, and now SF in 3 years & another who is a founder of a software dev shop that didn't gain traction. Not the most credible sources.
3rd, since the article was published we have had 3 new data driven reports on Austin.
1) DealRoom ranked Austin the 5th Best Tech Ecosystem in the World
2) Carta ranked Austin with the 5th highest amount of VC funding in the US over the last year
3) Startupblink ranked Austin 6th in US & 16th Best Startup Ecosystem in World
The WSJ article has almost no basis in fact.
First, the Signalfire data which is the source of the decline data doesn't say what they claim it says.
1) Startup employment fell almost everywhere.
2) Austin's drop matches Boston's; so is Boston over too?
3) Only startups funded by the "top 100" VCs. How is the list defined? Likely a coastal bias.
Second, the article leans on one person who has cycled through New York, Austin, Boston, DC, and now SF in 3 years & another who is a founder of a software dev shop that didn't gain traction. Not the most credible sources.
3rd, since the article was published we have had 3 new data driven reports on Austin.
1) DealRoom ranked Austin the 5th Best Tech Ecosystem in the World
2) Carta ranked Austin with the 5th highest amount of VC funding in the US over the last year
3) Startupblink ranked Austin 6th in US & 16th Best Startup Ecosystem in World
Follow the data not the headlines
Thanks much for the detailed take-down Jason!
I've spent the last week smacking around the WSJ 😂