Connect with us

Business

What doom loop? With AI, a 'spirit of optimism' returns to San Francisco start-ups

Published

on

What doom loop? With AI, a 'spirit of optimism' returns to San Francisco start-ups

Far from the palm trees of Miami or Austin’s taco trucks, Catalin Voss has headquartered his literacy start-up between a cannabis club and pawn shop in the heart of the Mission District.

Voss rents a nondescript office building in one of San Francisco’s most vibrant neighborhoods as a home base for Ello, a company he co-founded in 2020 that uses speech recognition technology, powered by artificial intelligence, to help struggling students develop their reading skills. The office is within walking distance of his Noe Valley apartment and only steps away from some of the city’s best taquerias and cocktail bars. And those are just a few of the perks he recited in explaining why he is headquartered in San Francisco.

Doom loop be damned.

Voss is part of a sizable cohort of San Francisco loyalists — old and new — who say they are flummoxed by the “all is lost” narrative propagated by conservative media hosts and more recently a vocal contingent of tech leaders that includes billionaire entrepreneur-turned-agitator Elon Musk.

Advertisement

The naysayers depict San Francisco as a city in decline — in Musk’s words, “a derelict zombie apocalypse” — ruined by liberal policies that allowed street crime and illicit drug use to fester. In a November debate with Gov. Gavin Newsom, GOP presidential hopeful and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis invoked the city’s notoriety multiple times, at one point holding up a “poop map” of human feces soiling San Francisco streets.

Voss, in contrast, says San Francisco is still the “it” city for innovation and opportunity in the tech industry.

“There’s no better place to do it than S.F.,” Voss said, seated in a small conference room in Ello’s apartment-style office, just around the corner from OpenAI’s headquarters.

“If you want to be the world’s best at finance, you move to New York. If you want to be the world’s best at acting, you move to L.A. If you want to be the world’s best at tech, you move to San Francisco,” said Voss, a native of Germany.

San Francisco loyalists say the city remains a vibrant hub for technology start-ups, talent and funding.

Advertisement

(Luis Sinco / Los Angeles Times)

Several tech leaders interviewed — some have spent decades in Silicon Valley, others are newcomers to the region — argue San Francisco and the Bay Area more broadly remain a thriving nerve center of talent, institutional knowledge and bountiful venture capital. They say emerging tech hubs — think Nashville, Miami, Austin — can’t really compare.

Instead, they argue, cycling through booms and busts is just a natural part of San Francisco’s rhythms. And while they acknowledge the economic hit the COVID-19 pandemic wrought as tech companies traded downtown offices for remote work, they see the next boom ahead in the industry building around artificial intelligence.

“It does feel like this really optimistic and exciting moment in time,” said Angela Hoover, who recently relocated her AI search chatbot company, Andi, from Miami to San Francisco. “People are wanting to be in San Francisco, and the folks that are on my team who live here are falling in love with the city.”

Advertisement

The move from East Coast to West Coast has been like “rocket fuel” for Andi, Hoover said. She’s found an abundance of leaders in the AI field eager to provide feedback and collaborate on ideas.

Some key data points also defy the depiction of a region in the throes of decline. The Bay Area last year maintained its top national ranking for venture capital investment, followed by Boston and New York, according to an October report by Ernst and Young, buoyed in part by investments in artificial intelligence.

And while California as a whole has lost roughly 37,200 people since July 2022, according to the state Department of Finance, San Francisco and other Bay Area counties recorded a net gain of thousands of residents. And San Francisco’s prohibitive housing prices have dropped over the last year, a trend that is expected to continue in 2024.

“I have seen in the last six months, a gradual — a gradual — spirit of optimism come back,” said Homa Bahrami, a senior lecturer at UC Berkeley’s Haas School of Business. “Every day you hear about yet another layoff, yet another layoff, yet another layoff. But at the same time you also see this new start-up got formed, this new start-up got acquired, venture money went into this space.”

Bahrami credits the Bay Area’s stature in the tech industry to its tangible resources, including education, mentorship and financing, which make it “difficult for other places to emulate.”

Advertisement

The region’s many elite schools, including Berkeley and Stanford, feed the next generation of start-ups and executives. Scores of retired CEOs are readily available to mentor younger leaders, and venture capital funding is easier to access than in many of the newer tech hubs.

“The Bay Area is a global ecosystem,” Bahrami said. “It’s not just an American ecosystem.”

Still, Bahrami urged caution in reading too much into early signs of the next “boom.”

“I would use the word ‘paradox,’” Bahrami said. “I think we’re just sort of transitioning from the pandemic-era world to the post-pandemic era. But we haven’t quite got there yet.”

And Bahrami noted that “dark clouds” are still looming, including inflation, geopolitical challenges and the struggles San Francisco faces in revitalizing its post-pandemic downtown.

Advertisement

San Francisco’s office vacancy rate now tops 30%, according to the city’s chief economist, Ted Egan. Workers are coming into the office at only 43% of pre-COVID levels, and that’s bad news for restaurants and retail.

“Downtown before the pandemic was a pretty rich ecosystem. But at the core of it was people coming to work in offices,” Egan said. “Until you get that back, it’s going to be hard to restart a positive dynamic flywheel downtown.”

Even San Francisco’s defenders acknowledge the pandemic exodus has been a blow. In recent years, tech giants had taken over lengthy stretches of the downtown core, raising gleaming new towers that employed thousands of workers who needed places to eat and drink and shop and live.

After COVID hit and tech companies allowed people to work from home, it was only a matter of time before “home” became another city and then another state, with cheaper rents, fewer homeless camps and less property crime. Many tech leaders followed suit, realizing they could raise money and run a business from states with lower tax rates.

It’s not that Voss doesn’t see any problems. It’s that he thinks San Francisco is thriving despite them.

Advertisement

“I perceive it as noise in the background,” he said.

Voss said Ello employs about 35 people, with satellite offices in New York and Nairobi. The company recently raised $15 million in Series A funding, and Voss said he persuaded a well-known machine-learning engineer to move to San Francisco from China.

“If you are that person who is that ambitious and wants to be the best in the world at the thing you do, I don’t think you’re not going to give San Francisco a second look because of what Fox News says,” Voss said.

Russell Hancock, president and chief executive of the think tank Joint Venture Silicon Valley, agreed, saying most people in the tech world disagree with the narrative that San Francisco has somehow lost its allure.

“San Francisco is vibrant. It’s a magnificent city,” Hancock said. “There’s a reason it has appeal. And part of the appeal, let’s never forget, is it’s kind of quirky and kooky and progressive.”

Advertisement

Hancock doesn’t see other cities developing into tech centers as a bad thing, arguing that the shifting dynamics could relieve pressure on the Bay Area’s infrastructure and temper the housing prices.

But as artificial intelligence takes hold, San Francisco has a “leg up” on other regions, Hancock said.

“That’s how Silicon Valley goes,” he said. “These things come in waves. And this appears to be the next wave. And it appears to be real.”

A big part of San Francisco’s enduring appeal for tech is that it’s in the city’s DNA to be a “tolerant place,” added Peter Leyden, a Bay Area entrepreneur and, most recently, the founder of Reinvent Futures, a company that helps convene top leaders in artificial intelligence.

In Silicon Valley, Leyden said, it’s pretty much a requirement to fail with one company to get access to the capital and credentials needed to gain success with another. While the right-wing and libertarian “crypto crew” fled for red states during the pandemic, he said, the old guard stayed put, confident that San Francisco would rise again.

Advertisement

“The point is every place has its issues, and we do, too, but the narrative that’s out there is just wrong,” Leyden said. “Because there really is nothing like San Francisco.”

Business

Video: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

Published

on

Video: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

new video loaded: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

In mapping out Elon Musk’s wealth, our investigation found that Mr. Musk is behind more than 90 companies in Texas. Kirsten Grind, a New York Times Investigations reporter, explains what her team found.

By Kirsten Grind, Melanie Bencosme, James Surdam and Sean Havey

February 27, 2026

Continue Reading

Business

Commentary: How Trump helped foreign markets outperform U.S. stocks during his first year in office

Published

on

Commentary: How Trump helped foreign markets outperform U.S. stocks during his first year in office

Trump has crowed about the gains in the U.S. stock market during his term, but in 2025 investors saw more opportunity in the rest of the world.

If you’re a stock market investor you might be feeling pretty good about how your portfolio of U.S. equities fared in the first year of President Trump’s term.

All the major market indices seemed to be firing on all cylinders, with the Standard & Poor’s 500 index gaining 17.9% through the full year.

But if you’re the type of investor who looks for things to regret, pay no attention to the rest of the world’s stock markets. That’s because overseas markets did better than the U.S. market in 2025 — a lot better. The MSCI World ex-USA index — that is, all the stock markets except the U.S. — gained more than 32% last year, nearly double the percentage gains of U.S. markets.

That’s a major departure from recent trends. Since 2013, the MSCI US index had bested the non-U.S. index every year except 2017 and 2022, sometimes by a wide margin — in 2024, for instance, the U.S. index gained 24.6%, while non-U.S. markets gained only 4.7%.

Advertisement

The Trump trade is dead. Long live the anti-Trump trade.

— Katie Martin, Financial Times

Broken down into individual country markets (also by MSCI indices), in 2025 the U.S. ranked 21st out of 23 developed markets, with only New Zealand and Denmark doing worse. Leading the pack were Austria and Spain, with 86% gains, but superior records were turned in by Finland, Ireland and Hong Kong, with gains of 50% or more; and the Netherlands, Norway, Britain and Japan, with gains of 40% or more.

Investment analysts cite several factors to explain this trend. Judging by traditional metrics such as price/earnings multiples, the U.S. markets have been much more expensive than those in the rest of the world. Indeed, they’re historically expensive. The Standard & Poor’s 500 index traded in 2025 at about 23 times expected corporate earnings; the historical average is 18 times earnings.

Advertisement

Investment managers also have become nervous about the concentration of market gains within the U.S. technology sector, especially in companies associated with artificial intelligence R&D. Fears that AI is an investment bubble that could take down the S&P’s highest fliers have investors looking elsewhere for returns.

But one factor recurs in almost all the market analyses tracking relative performance by U.S. and non-U.S. markets: Donald Trump.

Investors started 2025 with optimism about Trump’s influence on trading opportunities, given his apparent commitment to deregulation and his braggadocio about America’s dominant position in the world and his determination to preserve, even increase it.

That hasn’t been the case for months.

”The Trump trade is dead. Long live the anti-Trump trade,” Katie Martin of the Financial Times wrote this week. “Wherever you look in financial markets, you see signs that global investors are going out of their way to avoid Donald Trump’s America.”

Advertisement

Two Trump policy initiatives are commonly cited by wary investment experts. One, of course, is Trump’s on-and-off tariffs, which have left investors with little ability to assess international trade flows. The Supreme Court’s invalidation of most Trump tariffs and the bellicosity of his response, which included the immediate imposition of new 10% tariffs across the board and the threat to increase them to 15%, have done nothing to settle investors’ nerves.

Then there’s Trump’s driving down the value of the dollar through his agitation for lower interest rates, among other policies. For overseas investors, a weaker dollar makes U.S. assets more expensive relative to the outside world.

It would be one thing if trade flows and the dollar’s value reflected economic conditions that investors could themselves parse in creating a picture of investment opportunities. That’s not the case just now. “The current uncertainty is entirely man-made (largely by one orange-hued man in particular) but could well continue at least until the US mid-term elections in November,” Sam Burns of Mill Street Research wrote on Dec. 29.

Trump hasn’t been shy about trumpeting U.S. stock market gains as emblems of his policy wisdom. “The stock market has set 53 all-time record highs since the election,” he said in his State of the Union address Tuesday. “Think of that, one year, boosting pensions, 401(k)s and retirement accounts for the millions and the millions of Americans.”

Trump asserted: “Since I took office, the typical 401(k) balance is up by at least $30,000. That’s a lot of money. … Because the stock market has done so well, setting all those records, your 401(k)s are way up.”

Advertisement

Trump’s figure doesn’t conform to findings by retirement professionals such as the 401(k) overseers at Bank of America. They reported that the average account balance grew by only about $13,000 in 2025. I asked the White House for the source of Trump’s claim, but haven’t heard back.

Interpreting stock market returns as snapshots of the economy is a mug’s game. Despite that, at her recent appearance before a House committee, Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi tried to deflect questions about her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein records by crowing about it.

“The Dow is over 50,000 right now, she declared. “Americans’ 401(k)s and retirement savings are booming. That’s what we should be talking about.”

I predicted that the administration would use the Dow industrial average’s break above 50,000 to assert that “the overall economy is firing on all cylinders, thanks to his policies.” The Dow reached that mark on Feb. 6. But Feb. 11, the day of Bondi’s testimony, was the last day the index closed above 50,000. On Thursday, it closed at 49,499.50, or about 1.4% below its Feb. 10 peak close of 50,188.14.

To use a metric suggested by economist Justin Wolfers of the University of Michigan, if you invested $48,488 in the Dow on the day Trump took office last year, when the Dow closed at 48,448 points, you would have had $50,000 on Feb. 6. That’s a gain of about 3.2%. But if you had invested the same amount in the global stock market not including the U.S. (based on the MSCI World ex-USA index), on that same day you would have had nearly $60,000. That’s a gain of nearly 24%.

Advertisement

Broader market indices tell essentially the same story. From Jan. 17, 2025, the last day before Trump’s inauguration, through Thursday’s close, the MSCI US stock index gained a cumulative 16.3%. But the world index minus the U.S. gained nearly 42%.

The gulf between U.S. and non-U.S. performance has continued into the current year. The S&P 500 has gained about 0.74% this year through Wednesday, while the MSCI World ex-USA index has gained about 8.9%. That’s “the best start for a calendar year for global stocks relative to the S&P 500 going back to at least 1996,” Morningstar reports.

It wouldn’t be unusual for the discrepancy between the U.S. and global markets to shrink or even reverse itself over the course of this year.

That’s what happened in 2017, when overseas markets as tracked by MSCI beat the U.S. by more than three percentage points, and 2022, when global markets lost money but U.S. markets underperformed the rest of the world by more than five percentage points.

Economic conditions change, and often the stock markets march to their own drummers. The one thing less likely to change is that Trump is set to remain president until Jan. 20, 2029. Make your investment bets accordingly.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

How the S&P 500 Stock Index Became So Skewed to Tech and A.I.

Published

on

How the S&P 500 Stock Index Became So Skewed to Tech and A.I.

Nvidia, the chipmaker that became the world’s most valuable public company two years ago, was alone worth more than $4.75 trillion as of Thursday morning. Its value, or market capitalization, is more than double the combined worth of all the companies in the energy sector, including oil giants like Exxon Mobil and Chevron.

The chipmaker’s market cap has swelled so much recently, it is now 20 percent greater than the sum of all of the companies in the materials, utilities and real estate sectors combined.

Advertisement

What unifies these giant tech companies is artificial intelligence. Nvidia makes the hardware that powers it; Microsoft, Apple and others have been making big bets on products that people can use in their everyday lives.

But as worries grow over lavish spending on A.I., as well as the technology’s potential to disrupt large swaths of the economy, the outsize influence that these companies exert over markets has raised alarms. They can mask underlying risks in other parts of the index. And if a handful of these giants falter, it could mean widespread damage to investors’ portfolios and retirement funds in ways that could ripple more broadly across the economy.

Advertisement

The dynamic has drawn comparisons to past crises, notably the dot-com bubble. Tech companies also made up a large share of the stock index then — though not as much as today, and many were not nearly as profitable, if they made money at all.

Advertisement

How the current moment compares with past pre-crisis moments

To understand how abnormal and worrisome this moment might be, The New York Times analyzed data from S&P Dow Jones Indices that compiled the market values of the companies in the S&P 500 in December 1999 and August 2007. Each date was chosen roughly three months before a downturn to capture the weighted breakdown of the index before crises fully took hold and values fell.

Advertisement

The companies that make up the index have periodically cycled in and out, and the sectors were reclassified over the last two decades. But even after factoring in those changes, the picture that emerges is a market that is becoming increasingly one-sided.

In December 1999, the tech sector made up 26 percent of the total.

In August 2007, just before the Great Recession, it was only 14 percent.

Advertisement

Today, tech is worth a third of the market, as other vital sectors, such as energy and those that include manufacturing, have shrunk.

Since then, the huge growth of the internet, social media and other technologies propelled the economy.

Advertisement

Now, never has so much of the market been concentrated in so few companies. The top 10 make up almost 40 percent of the S&P 500.

Advertisement

How much of the S&P 500 is occupied by the top 10 companies

With greater concentration of wealth comes greater risk. When so much money has accumulated in just a handful of companies, stock trading can be more volatile and susceptible to large swings. One day after Nvidia posted a huge profit for its most recent quarter, its stock price paradoxically fell by 5.5 percent. So far in 2026, more than a fifth of the stocks in the S&P 500 have moved by 20 percent or more. Companies and industries that are seen as particularly prone to disruption by A.I. have been hard hit.

Advertisement

The volatility can be compounded as everyone reorients their businesses around A.I, or in response to it.

The artificial intelligence boom has touched every corner of the economy. As data centers proliferate to support massive computation, the utilities sector has seen huge growth, fueled by the energy demands of the grid. In 2025, companies like NextEra and Exelon saw their valuations surge.

Advertisement

The industrials sector, too, has undergone a notable shift. General Electric was its undisputed heavyweight in 1999 and 2007, but the recent explosion in data center construction has evened out growth in the sector. GE still leads today, but Caterpillar is a very close second. Caterpillar, which is often associated with construction, has seen a spike in sales of its turbines and power-generation equipment, which are used in data centers.

One large difference between the big tech companies now and their counterparts during the dot-com boom is that many now earn money. A lot of the well-known names in the late 1990s, including Pets.com, had soaring valuations and little revenue, which meant that when the bubble popped, many companies quickly collapsed.

Advertisement

Nvidia, Apple, Alphabet and others generate hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue each year.

And many of the biggest players in artificial intelligence these days are private companies. OpenAI, Anthropic and SpaceX are expected to go public later this year, which could further tilt the market dynamic toward tech and A.I.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Methodology

Sector values reflect the GICS code classification system of companies in the S&P 500. As changes to the GICS system took place from 1999 to now, The New York Times reclassified all companies in the index in 1999 and 2007 with current sector values. All monetary figures from 1999 and 2007 have been adjusted for inflation.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending