Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Work at a Startup

workatastartup.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 88 posts

Re: Work at a Startup

#71

Post by bengl »

faramarz wrote: post #43

I admire so many of those companies listed that I'd highly consider applying. Problem is, I'm in Toronto and only through a NAFTA VISA I can work there. I highly doubt many of the jobs are open to this Visa. That's frustrating.

I'm in the same boat in Ottawa. Many Canadians have gone on to work for startups in the US. What I've always seen, from friends and family who've been down this road, is that US companies (big or small) wanting to hire Canadians have always been very helpful in the visa process. Of course, your mileage may vary.

I think your best bet is to throw your resume in, clearly indicating your current location.

Re: Work at a Startup

#73

Post by roel_v »

doki_pen wrote: post #38
1053r wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based upon some completely unscientific asking around, it seems like a person who has an employee number under 10 is likely to make 1/50th to 1/400th of the total exit after taxes. So $100mm for the company = $500K plus or minus. Not total crap, but also probably not worth it based upon the money alone. The reason to work for a startup as an early employee is the fun (if you like working 12-14 hour days on cool stuff…

Is the 12-14 hour thing necessarily true? I know some people at startups and they don't work that much. It seems that a lot of startups say they value life/work separation. There has also been research to suggest that working that much is anti-productive. Of course, I understand crunch time, but as a rule 12-14 hours a day!? That seems a little outrageous.

> It seems that a lot of startups say they value life/work separation.

Of course they say so. Deloitte says so too, and Wachtell, and Cravath, and every other high pressure professional outfit. Doesn't make it true.

> There has also been research to suggest that working that much is anti-productive.

Yeah but most of those are in different circumstances. It all depends on where the motivation comes from. If you take a wage slave and whip him into working 80 hours, while paying for 40, and not dangling any form of carrot in front of him/her (making partner), of course productivity will go down. If you've got a product you believe in, a vision to make it come true, an innate drive to succeed no matter what, and no personal life, you can work 80 or 100 hours a week for months on end and get the work of 5 or 10 people done in that time.

Re: Work at a Startup

#74

Post by [deleted] »

zackattack wrote: post #64
pg wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's actually a good question. There are several answers. One is that being a founder is not merely a matter of competence. It's also financially risky, and very stressful. So someone who was just as competent as the founders but wanted less risk or stress might prefer to be an early employee. You can titrate the amount of startupness you get in your job by the size of the company you join. If you're the first pers…

Okay, what's the appeal of "changing the world" for its own sake? I often hear things like "entrepreneurs endure the stress because they want to change the world."

[deleted]

Re: Work at a Startup

#75

Post by abalashov »

pg wrote: post #59
abalashov wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't seem to me that a lack of interest in starting a company is simply indicative of a lack of tolerance for stress or financial risk, nor the absence of an adventurous spirit or anything like that. Business is a very particular discipline in its own right. While the technocrats and bureaucrats of corporate America's professional management and executive corps have certainly done enough to exaggerate its exclu…

Yes, that's a good point. Another reason not to be a founder is that you don't want to waste your time working on all the random crap that founders inevitably have to. Though actually the first several employees usually have to do a lot of random crap too. I'm not sure how big a company has to get before there start to be people who don't have to. I'd guess at least 10 people.

True, but I think my point is that there are many personality types that do not want to be Random Crap Central, nor marketing central, nor leadership central, nor cashflow central, but that doesn't mean the only reason for that is that they're fragile, coddled or "don't have what it takes." They just aren't interested in business, and prefer to leave it to the business guys.

Re: Work at a Startup

#76

Post by cbernini »

jl wrote: post #3
gsiener wrote: post #2

I'm really interested in attending something like this but am on the East Coast. Will there be any audio/video available from this event?

Yes, we'll broadcast the event on Justin.tv.

Great news. I'm in Brazil and was wondering if there would be a live stream.

I wonder if anyone here knows a startup with people working all over the globe. That would be just the optimal scenario for me.

Re: Work at a Startup

#78

Post by jodrellblank »

zackattack wrote: post #64
pg wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's actually a good question. There are several answers. One is that being a founder is not merely a matter of competence. It's also financially risky, and very stressful. So someone who was just as competent as the founders but wanted less risk or stress might prefer to be an early employee. You can titrate the amount of startupness you get in your job by the size of the company you join. If you're the first pers…

Okay, what's the appeal of "changing the world" for its own sake? I often hear things like "entrepreneurs endure the stress because they want to change the world."

People who want to change the world think their change will be an improvement, they aren't doing it "for it's own sake".

Re: Work at a Startup

#79

Post by known »

sayrer wrote: post #16

This comment will sound a little confrontational, but here it goes. Why would anyone competent enough to work at one of these companies choose that path instead of being a founder?

I think you also need to be connected to roll out a successful start-up.

Re: Work at a Startup

#80

Post by rfrey »

sayrer wrote: post #16

This comment will sound a little confrontational, but here it goes. Why would anyone competent enough to work at one of these companies choose that path instead of being a founder?

This is contained in the other responses, but to make it explicit: another reason is to learn from somebody better or more experienced than you.

I'm currently a founder of a company that is likely to have a pretty good outcome in the next not-too-long. I've learned so much about what I don't know, that I've determined my next gig will be working for somebody who can mentor me and help me climb to the next level of competence.

Post reply on HN