ABSTRACT
While previous chapters are helpful to analyse broad differences between the US and Europe, it must be acknowledged that SME and equity-market differences within Europe are far greater than they are within the US. That is, while California and the northeast Atlantic cities may have more of a ‘buzz’ associated with their venture capital and SME dynamism than other parts of the US, the US market generally is far more uniform from region to region than Europe’s. Also, within the US, some of the regional differences which do exist are exaggerated by the fact that financial centres (e.g. New York) agglomerate the capital of many parts of the country, and then invest the money of diverse citizens from one central location. In other words, the headquarters of a national pension fund may be located on Wall Street, but the money flowing in and out of that fund may be national. This exaggerates the power of financial centres as apparent ‘controllers’ rather than channels of national capital. In terms of regions that absorb extensive investment, California (especially Silicon Valley), Massachusetts (especially around Boston), New York (especially NYC), and Texas are more dynamic than other locations, but the people who are creating business headquarters in these locations could be from any part of the country, employing workers from any part of the country. It could be argued that California in particular has a more high-risk climate for entrepreneurship than other states, especially in the 1990s, but it could hardly be said to have self-contained cultural or political institutions or a self-contained local, regional, or even national population. The entrepreneurs who settle there – to seek capital, a high-quality workforce, markets, and ideas – are from all over the US and indeed many parts of the world.
