Plenty of startup ideas, plenty of money, plenty of entrepreneurs in Atlanta. Not enough venture capital, but that's becoming less and less relevant to many classes of startups.
This is quite creditable for Atlanta. But I wouldn't say "Move over, SF". This includes all businesses, from new ice cream shops to new biotech companies. SF probably still leads if you look at tech startups.
I seriously doubt if SF was ever leading in tech startups. I think you're confusing "digital media/entertainment" with "tech". SF is all about page ranks and eyeballs, just like TV channels are. Twitter is as much "tech" as Fox: each heavily depends on technology but hardly innovates/builds any.
I think Seattle, with their rich ecosystem of Microsoft-centric startups easily beats SV/SF as far as technology startups are concerned. Austin/Dallas duo is also tech-heavy, as well as Boston area.
Internet-media is only a niche and "technology" isn't just an alias to "web site", it actually has its own meaning.
I've lived and worked at startups in both places (Seattle, now SF), and the bay area is much more vibrant and active.
You're right that the bay area startups that you /hear/ about are largely media-oriented, but that's just confirmation bias. There are just tons of other startups and small companies that you don't hear about. In Seattle, people still look at you a little funny if you work at a startup (why wouldn't you just work at Microsoft or Amazon?)
Wow, thanks. I'm fairly new to the area, and my startup occupies the majority of my time, so I have met few other founders so far. I'll have to leave my cave from time to time to hit some of these.
Check out @startupgossip on Twitter. I'm trying to post most of the events there. I also post stuff on my blog at sanjayparekh.com (altho I've been slack lately) when it comes to events I'm running. Start coming to events and you'll meet a ton of us who are in and around Atlanta doing startups.
Hmm, spend most of your time in your cave. What Brian said is right. There are so many events that it's easy to get caught up in the scene and spend more time talking about startups than actually working on one.
This mixes up "startups" (leveraging, VC investment candidates) with "new small businesses". Hey, always good to see people doing the entrepreneurship thang, but terms matter. It's like the notion of a scientific "theory". Don't willfully misuse the term.
Interesting tidbit:
"Internet publishing" was considered a low-income-potential business but "software publishing" was considered a high-income-potential business.
2 days in a row, same author, 2 of the same article in the the atlanta journal constitution with the same spiel about Georgia having a high startup rate all with pretty much the same quotes from different state government related people...I'm sure there are more elsewhere if I look.
Metro NY is roughly 4 times larger than metro ATL and only has 2 times the number of tech jobs... Of course, this comparison is pretty much as valid as the craiglist one.
This is always an interesting question for me. What exactly is a "startup" I recently created a technical services company (software design and development). I don't consider it a "startup" per se, mostly because I'm not creating a product so much as a service.
Anyway this report is about new business creation which is an interesting data point.
