How Burrowing Owls Lead To Vomiting Anarchists (Or SF’s Housing Crisis Explained) – TechCrunch

How Burrowing Owls Lead To Vomiting Anarchists (Or SF’s Housing Crisis Explained) – TechCrunch

San Francisco's housing crisis is a complex issue that has been brewing for decades. The city's height limits, rent control, and permitting process are all products of various movements that have shaped the city's landscape. These movements, including tenant, environmental, and preservationist movements, have influenced the city's policies and regulations.

One of the underlying factors contributing to the housing crisis is the changing demographics of the city. As people marry later and employment becomes more temporary, there has been a shift in the population. Young adults and affluent retirees are moving into the urban core, while immigrants and the less affluent are moving out. This change in population dynamics has put pressure on the housing market.

Another factor is the changing nature of work. Lifetime employment is no longer the norm, especially in the tech industry. San Francisco's younger workers rely on a network of weak ties, moving from one company to the next. This constant movement and reliance on temporary employment have contributed to the demand for housing in the city.

The tech industry itself has played a significant role in shaping San Francisco's culture and housing market. The big wave of the last decade, social networking, has favored social density. Companies like Facebook, Snapchat, Foursquare, and Twitter have all grown out of critical mass in specific locations. This concentration of tech workers in cities has fueled the gentrification wave, which has been ongoing for much longer than the dot-com era.

San Francisco's progressivism, often misunderstood as socialist or radical, is primarily concerned with protecting the city's environment, architectural heritage, neighborhoods, diversity, and overall quality of life. This protectionist mindset has influenced policies that limit development and prioritize preservation. One side effect of this approach is the slow rate of housing construction in the city, which has not kept up with population growth.

Building permits in San Francisco are discretionary, meaning that they require approval rather than being automatically granted. This discretionary permitting process further slows down the rate of housing development in the city. Additionally, the market has been producing housing units primarily for people with above moderate incomes, leaving a significant portion of the population struggling to find affordable housing.

If the Bay Area had a more elastic housing supply, it would not only make living affordable for most people but also contribute to economic growth. A more abundant supply of housing would allow a larger portion of the population to find jobs and contribute to the local economy. It would also reduce the need for long commutes and the associated costs.

In conclusion, San Francisco's housing crisis is a multifaceted issue with roots in changing demographics, the nature of work, and the concentration of the tech industry. The city's progressivism, while focused on protection, has inadvertently contributed to the slow rate of housing development. To address the housing crisis, it is essential to prioritize the construction of affordable housing, streamline the permitting process, and encourage the development of a more elastic housing supply.

Actionable Advice:

1. Encourage the construction of affordable housing to address the growing demand for housing in San Francisco. This can be achieved through public-private partnerships and incentives for developers.
2. Streamline the permitting process to speed up the rate of housing development. By making the process more efficient and less discretionary, more housing units can be built to meet the needs of the population.
3. Focus on developing a more elastic housing supply to make living affordable for a larger portion of the population. This can be achieved through zoning reforms and incentives for developers to build housing in underserved areas.

Choosing Your North Star Metric - Future

Choosing a North Star Metric is crucial for businesses to optimize their growth and success. Companies like Airbnb, Netflix, and Spotify have intentionally focused on specific metrics to drive their growth and differentiate themselves from competitors.

The North Star Metric is the driver behind a given purchase or usage and allows businesses to optimize their strategies in a way that their competitors cannot. It helps teams maintain a laser focus on a single metric that accelerates the business's flywheel.

There are six categories of North Star Metrics: revenue, customer growth, consumption growth, engagement growth, growth efficiency, and user experience. Different businesses prioritize different metrics based on their business models and goals.

Marketplaces and platforms, for example, often prioritize consumption growth as their North Star Metric. They aim to increase the number of transactions or interactions happening on their platforms. By focusing on consumption, these companies can drive the growth flywheel and attract more users.

Freemium team-based B2B products, on the other hand, prioritize engagement and customer growth. These products rely on user engagement and adoption to drive their growth and success.

Consumer subscription products often prioritize engagement or customer growth. These products aim to keep users actively engaged and satisfied with the product to encourage subscription renewals.

An alternative approach to choosing a North Star Metric is to consider the jobs users are hiring the product to do. By understanding the underlying needs and motivations of users, businesses can align their metrics with customer satisfaction and success.

Having a singular North Star Metric leads to more cohesive planning and decision-making strategies across the company. It allows teams to align their efforts and prioritize actions that directly impact the chosen metric.

To choose a North Star Metric, businesses should break it down into its component parts and identify the input metrics that drive it. By focusing on these input metrics, businesses can generate ideas and strategies that will move the North Star Metric.

In the early stages of a company, the focus should be on cohort retention. If people are not sticking around and using the product, other metrics become irrelevant. Building a product that people want and finding product-market fit should be the primary goal.

Actionable Advice:

1. Identify the North Star Metric that aligns with your business model and goals. Consider the specific needs and motivations of your target audience.
2. Break down the North Star Metric into its component parts and determine the input metrics that drive it. Focus on these input metrics to generate ideas and strategies.
3. Prioritize cohort retention in the early stages of your company. Ensure that people are sticking around and using your product before diving into other metrics.

By combining the insights from both articles, we can see that San Francisco's housing crisis and the concept of choosing a North Star Metric share some common points. Both highlight the importance of focusing on specific metrics to drive growth and success. In the case of San Francisco, the city's policies and regulations have been shaped by various movements and changing demographics. Similarly, businesses choose their North Star Metrics based on their business models and goals.

The housing crisis in San Francisco can be addressed by prioritizing affordable housing, streamlining the permitting process, and developing a more elastic housing supply. Similarly, businesses can optimize their growth by choosing the right North Star Metric, breaking it down into input metrics, and aligning their efforts to impact the chosen metric.

By taking actionable advice from both articles, businesses and policymakers can make informed decisions and take steps towards addressing the housing crisis and driving growth and success in their respective domains.