[bante]

"Especially for information technology, I don't understand the rationale why it has to be concentrated at certain places."

It's concentrated _because_ it doesn't have to be at certain places. Your post office that had to be close to you is now run by a couple of thousand people at Google.

"Why can't a successful startup not be in Dallas, Amarillo, Miami or Des Moines?"

Again, without being to annoying, why does it have to be in Dallas? It doesn't, so it mostly isn't.

[amyjess]

> Again, without being to annoying, why does it have to be in Dallas? It doesn't, so it mostly isn't.

Actually, the answer is that Dallas is already a tech hub.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_Prairie

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecom_Corridor

[bante]

As far as I know that only tells you why it might have had to be Dallas at some point when regional centers made sense. Which changed somewhere around Paypal if not earlier.

I'm not saying that Dallas (or any other city) can't have some, even quite successful, startups. Just that you can't really compete being say "the third to fifth best choice for startups". At that point you're competing with too(!) many different cities. You have to be the obvious choice in a few, preferably large, categories; capture a lot of local talent (which is harder in the US), and most likely both.