[7Figures2Commas]

> Part of the reason we don't attract accelerators like TechStars is the lack of a healthy startup ecosystem.

As an entrepreneur, you do not need a "healthy startup ecosystem" to build a successful company. Let me repeat: as an entrepreneur, you do not need a "healthy startup ecosystem" to build a successful company. If you have a great product or service and are willing to make the effort to get in front of customers, you can build a successful company anywhere. Starting today.

I won't argue that the things that come with a "healthy startup ecosystem" (accelerators, venture capital firms, etc.) can't be helpful, particularly to certain kinds of entrepreneurs chasing certain kinds of opportunities, but as a general rule, the people who are going to build successful companies aren't waiting for their cities to become startup hubs. It's simply irrelevant to their ability to execute.

> If your tech isn't energy related it won't hit the radar.

Any entrepreneur in any industry passively waiting to "hit the radar" is going to be disappointed. If you want attention from customers, investors, media, etc., you almost always have to go out and get it. Ironically, this is even more true in the Bay Area because there are so many companies and there is so much noise.

> The technology startup successes I've seen in my 30 or so years here were built inspite of a (nonexistent) local startup ecosystem.

Even in Silicon Valley, which has the "startup ecosystem" that is the envy of the world, most startups fail. You just don't see the graves because they're covered by the latest batch of startups.

> Lastly, 9 out of 10 great people I've worked with here have left to go places with more tech opportunity. The talent is voting with its feet.

While it's easy to get the impression otherwise, lots of people come and go in the Bay Area too. Just because this is the tech capital of the world doesn't mean the grass is greener for everyone.

[ryanmarsh]

I think you're agreeing with me. The tech startups that are successful here do so in spite of the ecosystem. We're missing whatever that seed is that gets a healthy community going that would feed on itself and create more successes and make us appeal to TechStars.

[7Figures2Commas]

No, I think you're placing way too much emphasis on the "ecosystem." Again looking at Silicon Valley, there are exponentially more failures than successes even though it has the ecosystem that is the envy of the world.

[ryanmarsh]

I can't help but wonder how much you actually know about the history of Silicon Valley, Fairchild, and military funding.

[7Figures2Commas]

I know people who lived here when Silicon Valley still had orchards and whose parents were employed by some of the early companies. Silicon Valley's history, however, has little relevance to the discussion at hand.

You seem absolutely convinced that entrepreneurs can't build successful companies without a certain kind of "ecosystem" in their city. It's simply not true, but please don't take my word for it.

If and when you leave Houston and come to an area with a great ecosystem, like the Bay Area, you'll soon discover that despite the ecosystem, there are tons of entrepreneurs and wantrapreneurs who aren't any better off. The only difference might be that instead of the excuses you've provided ("there's no ecosystem", "the investors don't invest in tech") you'll hear a different set of excuses ("I can't find a co-founder", "YC rejected me for the fifth time", "the VCs won't invest in my company").

[ryanmarsh]

You are projecting. I am under no such illusion. I've lived and worked in the Bay Area at startups and in Houston, Austin, and Chicago at startups. I'm not saying the ecosystem is the constraint on entrepreneurial success. I'm saying there's something that would attract TechStars and Houston is missing it. My guess is community. I assert that ecosystem helps more than you appreciate.