Comment by mrtksn
9 hours ago
Being EU company is so hard, you can never pass the purity tests.
Reminds me of this: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/vHfbUIQeW_A
You move to USA from a 3rd world country, take money from the Americans, Arabs and the Chinese, hire bunch of Israeli, Pakistani, Canadians, Romanians and Russian engineers and and you become an American success story.
You found a robotics company in Germany and you instantly fail the purity test, you are American company if you took too much US money, you are actually Polish if you hired too many Polish engineers etc.
It's just weird attitude.
Yeah well HN is predominantly for and by American audiences I think and that already explains a lot of the attitude towards non-USA. A lot of Americans seem to think they are the main character in every story, and even if they are not, they try their best to somehow alter the narrative until they are.
For startup finance, which this forum was born from, the US is very much the main character by far.
https://dealroom.co/charts/us-hubs-map
60% of the entire world's startup funding comes from the US.
So you agree with the parent? It’s just a weird way of saying it.
AFAIK there are many companies that just create an HQ in USA for the attitude when all the work is done in Poland or Turkey etc.
In a lot of cases it "just makes sense", since its easier for the US-PE-VC-guys to invest if you have a HQ in US
You are not wrong. However, I don't see how your point relates to the post to which your responding.
I have traveled the world and the United States is functionally different than every other nation state on the planet.
The primary reason people immigrate to America is so that they can make money or become wealthy in some way. That’s it, there’s no other driver, so in general (not universally) the public doesn’t care whether you get your money from, cause they figure it’s yours now.
Why is that? It’s because it’s the simplest country to start a company and tons of liquid money is here.
You literally only have to have a legal resident of a state create an LLC with somewhere between 10 and $50, and you can start accepting payments for services the same day as incorporating the organization.
The regulations are only on enforcement when they get caught, and fines are usually manageable if you’re profitable, for the major majority of labor activities.
I just don’t think people understand the uniquely anarchic reason America continues to dominate capitalism: “Nobody is practically going to stop you from starting something cause you just move states which have different laws but the money flows fine”
A lot of Europeans are salty about the continent's decline into near irrelevance in terms of leading edge innovation. It's 90% the US and China at this point. But would be great to see that change.
There is a lot of innovation happening in Europe, it is just that Europe is better in small and medium businesses than startups that become unicorns and tech giants. Interestingly that has always been the case, so it isn't even a recent development. For example while Ford is known to have invented the assembly line, in Germany it is the car supply industry that always came up with innovations and the car manufacturers then just put the components together to make full cars (sure, this is a simplified view). So there are some large companies, some of which are known and very successful worldwide, but they are not usually thought of as innovators. Large companies in Europe don't take real risks, so it falls on small companies that do that with limited funding. It's just a shape of the economy that Americans have a hard time to wrap their heads around.
1 reply →
After WWII Europeans decided to build an egalitarian society and focus on wealth creation, peace and cooperation. Pre WWII they were just too much for the world, as the concentration of powers, including clash of ideologies and need of survival, led to ultra competitive environment at a cost of aforementioned values. They were a leading edge once, due to continental race of industrialization. Because of this structure basically 80% of the world was under European rule. They just prefer watching from the backstage now. Let’s pray this continues.
Unfortunately I don't think that it looks promising for US either. "It's 90% the US and China" started to look more and more like the joke about how US and Albania together form the greatest military power and US isn't the US in the joke.
What US has a great entrepreneurial culture but it is extremely inefficient and the Chinese appear to be innovating much faster with much less drama, utilizing the resources much better. Chinese phones for example have much better batteries and some other specs although Apple has upper hand in branding and UX, Chinese are on par or even better in AI and really very few things are more advanced in US.
Maybe it wasn’t a good idea to give 100s of billions of money to a guy to spend on 3D avatars and goggles just because figured out social media? I bet you that if US had better distribution of wealth(not talking about socialism, just greater number of middle class people and even billionaires that are not all commanding 10s of billions) it wouldn't have ben "90% US and China" but %90 US. This %90 US and China combination seems to be tipping more and more in China's favor. More like %50 US %40 China, up from %70 US %20 China from a few years ago?
If anything, US looks more and more like late imperial Europe these days with nationalism, desires to have a king(and desire to get rid of that king), conserve instead of innovate, identity and pedigree over meritocracy, gender control, sex control, control of the politics by wealthy families or individuals, fascist ideals and so on.
1 reply →
The CEO did move to the US “to focus on the fastest growing market”. Usually that means that they start building an engineering org there and embracing a more US working culture.
Feels like eventually this company ends up being based there and no longer an “EU” company.
To be fair, it all depends on the definition you choose. It's often useless to have a general definition. If you try really hard you can claim that Apple is an Irish company or Chinese company. I always buy my MacBooks From Ireland and I can track it arriving from China.
> If you try really hard you can claim that Apple is an Irish company or Chinese company
Whatever makes you feel better, I guess?
It matters who owns the company. Where your employees come from matters much less.
As long as there is no investors from Europe, these startups will just be a money funnel to America.
It's actually not just funneling money if the company gives jobs to people in the country as well, paid with the sales of the product sold worldwide. Everyone knows US is where business is done, but it's not like money stays there and never leaves the country. It would make no sense at all if that was the case.
And companies here (in eu) would immediately create a competitor. As long as we both "eat" we're friends.
Americans on HN acting like they have an ownership stake in what their ruling class owns is as much a classic as Europeans coping with having no efficient capital markets.
Isn’t that naturally a function of who owns the most available investor money globally?
Also risk appetite.
Note specifically, my emphasis.
"alongside new backers Cherry Ventures and European Tech Collective"
Invest then?
It’s not listed.
2 replies →
IDK why all these replies are assuming OP was insinuating some negative judgement. To me, it's interesting that US investors are apparently interested in this EU firm that is pursuing the US market, despite no shortage of US startups in the same space.
Probably because no one is questioning the nationality of the money on any US startups?
Isn't the big money always American (in startups in the US and Europe)? What example do you have in mind? I don't mean the human-scale money risked by some immigrant, I mean the big money.
No need to be defensive. It's simply true, and I say that as a European. The money and attitude required for it is just not present in Europe. German money is much more conservative and risk averse. So the funding will have to be from the US. It's perfectly justified to roll one's eyes when these cases are presented as if Europe could produce these companies by itself.
I agree and I am not against taking US money at all. People want to build things and people with money who want to partner with people who want to build things are usually in USA. US has an amazing business and entrepreneurship culture and the capital.
It's an old world attitude.