What's your take on this?
"Let's examine some of your points;"
Driving out to West, Texas I assume? Be sure you stop by the hospital, school, and old folks home. Oh yeah.... you can't.
Explain again how the lack of ebul guvmint business regulation and misguided austerity have made it a paradise of unending employment opportunities and incredibly high standard of living. Why aren't people flocking there in droves? You've got cheap gas? That's it? Let me explain something Sparky- when you have a high population density (1 in 8 of people in the US live in CA) + coastal inversion layers you have this little thing called "smog". As in those pics you see from China smog. Ebul guvmint stepped in and mandated lower emissions and regular testing of cars. It worked but it does mean using a different gas formulation that isn't used everywhere.
Not dead but shrinking as Life will drop hundreds of jobs as part of their acquisition.
This is a dumb post. Though a number of companies have close there are more that have taken there place. Merck invested 80 million in CALIBR and now Glxo is investing with a PE company to start 10 more drug discovery companies. Besides Hubs of Boston and San Francisco where else is there a stronger hub to live if you work in the industry. Guess what there isn't one.
Plenty of resons to stay in San Diego or SF, but TO, give me a break its a biotech desert out there exceppt for a legacy baxter facility and Ceres (Agriculture)
"why else would Amgen remain in TO after-all"
Or Genentech in SSFO, or Life Tech in San Diego etc...
I wouldn't make this a Arizona vs California arguement as clearly businesses have plenty of options, which is why we have such a dynamic biotech industry. Ultimately management will choose whether to keep a California incubated, and likely funded, business in state, or move it elsewhere. I don't see many companies flocking to California, but of course most end up staying where they started or at least maintain a presense (why else would Amgen remain in TO after-all).
Let's examine some of your points;
California HS graduation rate is 78%, less than "1 in 5".
Competiteness ranking according to cNBC, California is ranked 40th.
Arizona does have an income tax
Infrastructure depends on the locale and the same can be said for California (I've lived in both Santa Monica and San Carlos and can tell you that outside those locations the infrastructure is third world). If its so unfriendly to retirees, why are there so many people moving here (yes the real estate market is doing quite well again, house across the street was on the market for an entire day last month...4000 sq ft. view of the mountains, swimming pool and on the golf course all for $799K )
Premium gas in Tucson cost me $3.19 yesterday...($3.09 for regular). Its a 7 minute drive to work everyday and that's during rush hour.
And yet California has historically been and remains one of the largest economies in the world- bigger than most countries. Even in the current economy (and after a royal scr*wing on energy rates during a manufactured "crisis" a few years back) it doesn't run at a deficit. Good thing since somebody has to fund the flyover states. But let's be fair and check out some of those low tax, unregulated business havens, where which are surely paradises on earth with high paying jobs falling from the sky as we speak. Let's look at neighboring Arizona. No state income taxes, loose environmental regulations, short and warm winters. Also staggering unemployment, decaying infrastructure, virtually no services for the elderly or disabled (which you absolutely will be eventually), and record home foreclosures. Hmmm. Well, it is mostly desert. Let's try Texas. They've got oil and a coastline after all. Looks like 1 in 5 don't get through high school, a similar percentage live below the poverty level, and almost a third of the population doesn't have health coverage. Paradise. Here's an idea- head out to the city of West, Texas and tell the folks there about how all that 'evul gubmint' regulation is just a waste of time that hurts business. Might want to wear your running shoes.
RE: Biotech Taxes and regs question
The taxes and fees assessed to business in general to just operate are higher in California than the majority of other states. If you're in a regulated business like Biotech you've got additional fees and reports that have to be generated to do business plus you have your own state regulatory bodies................and all that's before you make any revenue. Then if you do make any money the taxes are higher here as well.
"San Francisco is the only reason this industry is in California, so so SD doesn't have a chance. California has to be one of the unfriendliest states to business, so why base a company there if you don't have to?"
BS....look at Tesla's performance today.
If they do start in California the taxes and regs kill them or they move out.........DUH.
For biotech, what specific taxes and what specific regulations are killing me?
I think Biotech in California is no different than any other industry located in here...
The problem is the overwhelming regulations and tax burden on business in this state. Those companies that can afford to stay here are because it just costs too much to relocate. The issue is that new companies and start-ups that contribute to growth aren't establishing themselves in California because it costs too much for them, so they go to Nevada, Arizona, Texas or points elsewhere with workable costs and taxes.
California has to be one of the unfriendliest states to business, so why base a company there if you don't have to?
As an actual California small business biotech owner, I would really like to see a list of your "unfriendliest" concerns. I don't get it. Really. On the plus side, we get 9 hour turnaround time on DNA sequencing with free sample pickup (even for a single sample) and 15 hour turnaround time on oligo synthesis (without paying for "next day" service) and get better shipping charges than if it went "before 10 am" FedEx.
Oh...right. The old "overburdened by taxes and regulations" meme. Good to see it back in play after what, three seconds of embarrassed silence?
Tell us about Texas, won't you? That place is a Galtian wet dream, right?
How's old Governor Goodhair and his Recombinant Garden of Eden doing? Things looking up for "Biotech's Third Coast" or whateverthefvck he calls that sewer of a state this week? Is everyone with a glob of maxi-prep goo on their upper lip going to get the safety net treatment, or just campaiign donors like Lexicon Genetics? Look it up kids...
Go ahead, move to Houston. You won't be missed.
San Francisco is the only reason this industry is in California, so so SD doesn't have a chance. California has to be one of the unfriendliest states to business, so why base a company there if you don't have to?
Jury is still out.....the industry is without a doubt disrupted right now because of reimbursement changes, reforms of healthcare system and general poor economy. It's all going to come down to showing value and actionable outcomes. Disruption will create winners and losers...
I don't think it's any worse off than anywhere else, to include the SFO bay area, Madison, WI, Biotech Alley in Montgomery County, MD, and Boston, MA to name just a few . The sluggish economy and reduced healthcare dollars for reimbursements are hurting everybody. But business theory suggests the pendulum will swing back again soon. I think also that Biotech is ripe for some disruptive innovation-NGS is no longer a new concept-where's the next big idea? I think that's the important question. If it's in Diego then I'd expect Biotech to blow up again, of course.
Have you tried getting a job here? I'm tired of hold-over employment.
Indeed it is. They gravy train is over...
What makes you think it is dying?
More information about formatting options