[Iftheshoefits]

I've often wondered why startups locate in the SF/Bay area instead of elsewhere.

Right now outside of truly hot tech areas like SF the hiring scene is stacked heavily in employers' favor: there are fewer job opportunities with fewer companies. That's true even in places like St. Louis (or Austin, or any of a number of other supposedly "hot startup" areas). I get some recruiter-spam from St. Louis and Austin based recruiters looking for candidates for "hot" startups and established businesses in the areas, but these opportunities are all with hospital/medical companies (STL) or corporate-y .NET type stuff (Austin). It's a bit baffling, actually, since my resume pretty clearly puts me far outside of those boxes.

It seems to me there's an opportunity there for would-be startups to exploit. On the other hand, the very same phenomenon leads to a kind of resistance: the density of "talent" to draw from reduces substantially outside of the SF/Bay area because a lot of it has already been drawn here to the very same job imbalance.

[guyzero]

"I've often wondered why startups locate in the SF/Bay area instead of elsewhere."

For a non-trivial number of startups, the founders were already working at a big tech company in the Bay Area before they started their own company.

For others it's access to investors or really critical employees. If you want someone who can build Amazon/Facebook/Google-scale datacenters, you're not going to have much luck in St. Louis.