Can London Tech City become a serious competitor to Silicon Valley?
Back in June, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev visited Silicon Valley in the hope of finding out how this small part of California continues to turn tiny firms into huge companies. A couple of weeks ago, the British cultural secretary, Jeremy Hunt, did the same.
The Russians are planning to create an innovation center - “Innograd” - in the suburbs of Moscow.
The British, as David Cameron announced, have similar hopes for East London, only their innograd will be called Tech City.
Noting that "Silicon Valley occupies a leading place in the world in the development of high technologies and innovations," Cameron announced his intention to "turn Britain into the most attractive place in the world to start and invest in innovative technology companies."
This is an honorable tradition. For decades, political leaders have announced the creation of various silicon swamps, marshes, swamps and ravines. But no one has yet managed to repeat the incredible success of the original Valley or its attractiveness for innovation and the launch of new companies.
')
Will East London Tech City go against this trend? Much of what the prime minister suggests is quite correct. His idea of ​​lightweight visas for entrepreneurs may well cause a young Indian or Korean director to change his mind about buying a one-way ticket to San Francisco.
The incubatory style of working spaces is important for any business-friendly zone, as is the access provided by East London financial and legal services in the City nearby.
Cameron’s proposed changes in intellectual property laws will also help, although anyone familiar with the problematic history of theft of ideas and “betrayal” of employees in Silicon Valley knows that a business culture that is too close to intellectual property can kill so many companies as it creates.
Tech City will be linked to several universities, but deciding to place only small separate campuses will make it more difficult to create a kind of college culture “when I grow up, I want to be an entrepreneur,” which has made Stanford so important for Silicon Valley.
Still, on the whole, the plan correctly combines financial and infrastructure projects. And it is right that the branches of technological titans, such as Google and Facebook, will be located nearby, even if their more important headquarters are not accommodated here.
But all this is only part of what is really necessary to compete with the Valley. Just because you build a platform for entrepreneurs, there is absolutely no guarantee that they will come.
Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg was recently asked why he moved his young but already thriving startup from Harvard to Palo Alto. His answer: the density of the entrepreneurial support system in Silicon Valley. This is the result of decades of organic growth, setbacks and revivals of companies.
Zuckerberg admitted that if you know what you are doing, you can grow a startup almost anywhere. But the seed in the unique soil of the Valley gives your company the best chance of success.
As a Briton living here, I see that the Valley is getting richer, and therefore the complexity of playing it in another place only increases. And what, perhaps, is creating the most important question for Cameron's initiative: why compete with Silicon Valley at all?
If only something completely unforeseen happens to California, something built in the East End will not really have a hope of repeating the developed eco-system of Silicon Valley - which, according to Cameron, “takes the leading place in the world in the development of high technologies and innovation.
This may, however, be something else. What if the prime minister proposes building an eco-system that is as exciting and successful as in Silicon Valley - and at the same time focused on a completely different one?
Think, for example, of unique British media products, style, culture, marketing and fashion. Then think about how digital media and social networks revolutionize the way we interact with each other and with the world around us.
Forget about locating Google and Intel in East London Tech City. Why not run companies like Aardman Animation with Imperial College kids who are dreaming of creating the next Facebook instead?
Then add art schools and lots of East End artists, drama schools, the BBC Film division and SoHo creative half - and give them all the same technical, financial and legal support as is offered today.
Who knows what this may lead to? But I’m sure that British artists of truly world-class would have a good chance to create innovations - changing the world just like Silicon Valley, and all based on ideas that can’t be better or less risky pursued elsewhere.
This is only one alternative. But the secret of competition with the success of Silicon Valley, perhaps, is to create a new business culture, which also looks fiercely, but is not another attempt to create a Silicon clone.
The Russians are planning to create an innovation center - “Innograd” - in the suburbs of Moscow.
The British, as David Cameron announced, have similar hopes for East London, only their innograd will be called Tech City.
Noting that "Silicon Valley occupies a leading place in the world in the development of high technologies and innovations," Cameron announced his intention to "turn Britain into the most attractive place in the world to start and invest in innovative technology companies."
This is an honorable tradition. For decades, political leaders have announced the creation of various silicon swamps, marshes, swamps and ravines. But no one has yet managed to repeat the incredible success of the original Valley or its attractiveness for innovation and the launch of new companies.
')
Will East London Tech City go against this trend? Much of what the prime minister suggests is quite correct. His idea of ​​lightweight visas for entrepreneurs may well cause a young Indian or Korean director to change his mind about buying a one-way ticket to San Francisco.
The incubatory style of working spaces is important for any business-friendly zone, as is the access provided by East London financial and legal services in the City nearby.
Cameron’s proposed changes in intellectual property laws will also help, although anyone familiar with the problematic history of theft of ideas and “betrayal” of employees in Silicon Valley knows that a business culture that is too close to intellectual property can kill so many companies as it creates.
Tech City will be linked to several universities, but deciding to place only small separate campuses will make it more difficult to create a kind of college culture “when I grow up, I want to be an entrepreneur,” which has made Stanford so important for Silicon Valley.
Still, on the whole, the plan correctly combines financial and infrastructure projects. And it is right that the branches of technological titans, such as Google and Facebook, will be located nearby, even if their more important headquarters are not accommodated here.
But all this is only part of what is really necessary to compete with the Valley. Just because you build a platform for entrepreneurs, there is absolutely no guarantee that they will come.
Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg was recently asked why he moved his young but already thriving startup from Harvard to Palo Alto. His answer: the density of the entrepreneurial support system in Silicon Valley. This is the result of decades of organic growth, setbacks and revivals of companies.
Zuckerberg admitted that if you know what you are doing, you can grow a startup almost anywhere. But the seed in the unique soil of the Valley gives your company the best chance of success.
As a Briton living here, I see that the Valley is getting richer, and therefore the complexity of playing it in another place only increases. And what, perhaps, is creating the most important question for Cameron's initiative: why compete with Silicon Valley at all?
If only something completely unforeseen happens to California, something built in the East End will not really have a hope of repeating the developed eco-system of Silicon Valley - which, according to Cameron, “takes the leading place in the world in the development of high technologies and innovation.
This may, however, be something else. What if the prime minister proposes building an eco-system that is as exciting and successful as in Silicon Valley - and at the same time focused on a completely different one?
Think, for example, of unique British media products, style, culture, marketing and fashion. Then think about how digital media and social networks revolutionize the way we interact with each other and with the world around us.
Forget about locating Google and Intel in East London Tech City. Why not run companies like Aardman Animation with Imperial College kids who are dreaming of creating the next Facebook instead?
Then add art schools and lots of East End artists, drama schools, the BBC Film division and SoHo creative half - and give them all the same technical, financial and legal support as is offered today.
Who knows what this may lead to? But I’m sure that British artists of truly world-class would have a good chance to create innovations - changing the world just like Silicon Valley, and all based on ideas that can’t be better or less risky pursued elsewhere.
This is only one alternative. But the secret of competition with the success of Silicon Valley, perhaps, is to create a new business culture, which also looks fiercely, but is not another attempt to create a Silicon clone.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/111534/
All Articles