http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_30027782/santa-clara-county-job-market-booms-reaches-all
>Santa Clara County's red-hot job market is more than just booming -- it has surged to a level not seen since the days of the dot-com boom. Fueled by a gain of 5,800 jobs in May, the South Bay ventured into record territory, reaching an all-time high for jobs and leading the Bay Area in employment growth last month, according to a state labor report released Friday.
>Despite the rebound in tech, experts pointed out that the technology industry is much changed from the dot-com era. Gone are thousands of computer and electronics manufacturing jobs. In their places are internet, social media, software, networking and mobile tech jobs.
We're in another dotcom bubble. The NASDAQ peaked at 5210 on 7/17/15 like it did at 5048 on 3/10/00. VC money has dried up, as everyone has iphones now and the market has cooled. Meanwhile the only places where growth could be possible (the BRICS) are experiencing recession. Companies like Uber can blow through two billion a year without profit, at some point investors pull the plug. That point will be reached within the next 6-12 months.
so what do you suggest we do?
5048 plus 15 years of inflation and I might believe you.
>>1320599
You're high, Uber hasnt even IPOd yet. The money only dries up when investors stop getting paid and theyre still getting paid big time.
I can confirm the econony here is booming, however. I'm in highend construction and contractors are busier than I've seen since 2007
Go write for zero hedge.
This guy >>1320615 makes a great point. We're nowhere near 2000 levels.
>>1320632
>I'm in highend construction and contractors are busier than I've seen since 2007
Only in RWC and San Jose because of the caps most peninsula cities have in place. The locations of San Carlos's airport and Mineta have proven to be massive headaches for developers and planners.
That said, the party can't continue forever and nothing looks good on the horizon. How can the tech industry keep growing, if there is nowhere to grow into?
>>1320643
No it's everywhere. In places they cant build new, people gut and remodel. Remember I said high end as in multi million dollar homes. We are closest to the money out here and it is booming. It doesnt start getting scary until average employees start financing giant remodels, then the bubble is about to blow.
>>1320643
Why do you say there is nowhere to grow?
>>1320652
>remodel
yeah, but not grow. That's outright banned in most places due to quotas on office space. People can add inlaw bedrooms but they can't add a second story or run a walk-in business out of their garage. Long term anti-growth policies will have the desired effect. And the places where growth is allowed, there's a fucking airport that caps the allowable height. Also the state won't let anyone sell their parking lots because of parking requirements (but you obviously know this).
On topic: the massive expansion of social media/web media is going to come crashing down since most companies aren't making enough money. For every Facebook or Google there's 10 failed ideas. Not that the public gets to know, since it's all backroom deals with VCs and not public IPOs that require disclosure.
>>1320664
I said HIGH END construction. These people get what they want. I didnt mention it as a measure of growth, I only mentioned it because we're literally building houses for the investors you are talking about. And business is booming (the money is still being made.)
I would welcome some sources and numbers on the VC money dissapearing. It sounds like you are just speculating
>>1320658
Everyone has a smartphone now, and the big players have already been decided. The big thing now is in e-zine like things (ala wired) aka web media, but even that is getting chewed by the rise of adblocking and data caps (the latter of which gives a financial incentive for adblocking).
The big player is China, since US firms have no presence there. The hope was that they'd be able to compete against China's domestic apps, but this hasn't happened. Meanwhile China's economy is dropping into recession. When Mark Zuckerberg talked about "fighting against barriers to communication", he wasn't talking about the US. He was talking about China. And he's been mostly unsuccessful there (FB's recent money is in video).
>>1320674
So what? You said yourself that we arent building hardware anymore. The fact everyone has a smartphone now means the market for software startups is bigger than it ever was. I'm not buying your permabear attitude unless you post stats and sources
>>1320673
>I would welcome some sources and numbers on the VC money dissapearing. It sounds like you are just speculating
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesgiancotti/2016/06/07/declining-vc-funding-hurts-startups-globally-but-hope-remains-in-asia/#d6add6e1f948
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/08/public-markets-are-dead-says-venture-capitalist.html
http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-tech-downturn-20160429-story.html
http://fortune.com/2016/02/28/fidelity-slashes-more-startup-valuations/
>>1320678
The problem arises in how these companies make money: advertising. Specifically, ads derived from google or facebook apps. Ad revenue itself is up, but due to adlbocking many publications have to resort to extreme measure to try and get people to turn them off (again, data caps play into this). The people who actually produce content are seeing smaller returns on their end.
More importantly when it comes to web media, there's Youtube, Facebook and Twitter. That's it. They are the winners right now since they buy out all their competition. Nobody else is able to compete. Which ultimately means that if you work outside established companies, you're not making money. This is especially true when FB and YT themselves can't break into foreign markets (again, see China which is the big prize due to the sheer amount of untapped smartphones they have).
>>1320674
>>1320691
to illustrate my point:
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/08/public-markets-are-dead-says-venture-capitalist.html
even VCs are willing to admit that there is a big disparity in justifying a high market cap to them compared to the public market. Normally this isn't a problem but valuations have become so out of whack that if a "successful" tech company won't go public without fear of a massive devaluation, that says a lot about the ability of VCs to discern value
>>1320681
I'm not sure you actually read those
>first article's author states the startup market is even healthier now and forecasts growth
>second article is one person's about opinion about IPOs, not VC. Once Uber IPOs, he's gonna get BTFO (not sure what he's thinking). Also acquisitions have become the new IPO for paying out private capital
>third article is also about startups fixing their balance sheets, which is a good thing
>fourth article: those are almost all biotechs
I'm just not seeing it. After reading those articles, I actually feel better about our economy. Corrections are healthy. The 3rd article was right about the ridiculous things some tech startups were spending money on (full wet bars, etc). I'm glad to see some attention paid to balance sheets and I'm sure private investors will be as well
>>1320701
You said it in your other post: startups are being bought out by the big tech companies. You don't need to IPO when Facebook buys you out for $150 billion
just want to point out that bitcoin solves the revenue problem caused by ad blockers. the internet is going to become a giant cloud mine sooner or later.
>>1320744
Expand?
>>1320728
>Corrections are healthy.
It's also where money is lost. "Correction" is a way of rationalizing either no growth or negative growth.
Also, Uber is not profitable. They just threw $2 billion down the toilet trying to compete in China. And they're now in a position where they will likely unionize during a price war with Lyft.
>>1320762
No, corrections are healthy. I don't think anyone would argue startup culture wasnt getting a little ridiculous with the way they were spending money. It's healthy to force a return to business basics and more reasonable valuations to fuel another leg up.
>>1320636
>then buy everything
everything of what exactly?
>>1320636
>The BRICS are dead, the EU is stagnant (with an unresolved debt crisis), while the US economy teeters on recession (hence why the fed rate hike was pushed off). The tech industry doesn't exist in a vacuum.
NONE of this means we're in a dotcom bubble.
>>1320599
I thought you said internet, social media software, networking, and mobile tech?
What does uber have to do with that?
And it's known that uber runs their company that way, why the hell does that mean companies in completely different industries, that DON'T operate that way, are going to have investors pull the plug on them?
"The price of chicken is rising, that means peak oil has been reached." What the fuck are you talking about dude?
>>1320632
>I'm in highend construction and contractors are busier than I've seen since 2007
the lack of self awareness is outstanding
>>1320748
Currently, websites like newspapers or other content providers do not charge for usage (unless monthly subscriptions).
They've been trying to implement a pay-by-usage type of model where if for example you want to read a single article, you could pay two cents to read it. The problem is with current payment systems, (it will cost far more to send the 2 cent transaction than the actual cost of 2 cents)
Bitcoin, or similar, with its zero transaction costs could solve this, which will help businesses incentivise content with less intrusive adverts to make revenue.
Or at least that's my take on it.
>>1320898
Anecdotal at best
>>1320969
Interesting
>>1320632
>This guy >>1320615 makes a great point. We're nowhere near 2000 levels.
A point which is trumped by the accumulation factor which takes the form of a funnel. The same mega-pools of cash that sold into the 2000 levels bought back during the recession. In this stage of monetary development consecutive cycles get tighter and tighter because financial evolution leads to mega-pools of cash competing more and more shrewdly. It's obvious the cartels dominate an even larger portion of the stock market than before and common sense alludes that they aim to sell into the late stage of the cycle; the current stage of the cycle. This is all corroborated by the correction pattern witnessed in the S&P 500 for the past 2 years. Wall Street can't corner the stock market anymore, they lost their leverage by spending their gains.
You can't have your cake and eat it too.
>>1320969
there's more to it than just that. when you wait for content to load the bottleneck is bandwidth which leaves some processing power unused.
imagine every time you wait for a video to load, instead of leaving your cpu idle, it mines a small bit of bitcoin. this is already done by some websites!
>>1320811
>>The BRICS are dead, the EU is stagnant (with an unresolved debt crisis), while the US economy teeters on recession (hence why the fed rate hike was pushed off). The tech industry doesn't exist in a vacuum.
>NONE of this means we're in a dotcom bubble.
But it does mean we're in a hipster-business bubble.
