Launch HN: The Lobby (YC W18) – 1-on-1 calls with company insiders to get hired

Hello! Appreciate your deep dive on the thread and agree that if we look at bits and pieces of my comments, it's not totally clear. So let me write up a unified answer here.

In some cases, this is definitely against the company's policy. For those companies, we focus on former employees most of which are no longer bound by any contract (if any).

We protect our insider's identity and that leaves them protected, but we also encourage them to check with HR to make sure they're allowed to do this.

I already addressed the ethical/moral bits - we are simply giving more people access to the same insights you would get if you had a friend on the inside. You're just paying for it in this one interaction, whereas the privileged person paid for it by being born into or falling into the right circles (higher kindergarten, middle school, high school, college tuition, and being in the right families or circles).

Without The Lobby - the alternative is to live your life cold emailing and trying to find these connections, which is both inefficient and in our view very different. If you get some of these folks to answer you - you're not sure if they're going to be helpful or just discount you as a non-eligible candidate because you don't have what they're looking for. Being in a friendly dynamic where their goal is to help you makes this the opposite.

In terms of legal risks, please look up GLG, AlphaSights, and other expert networks. They have been doing this in what I consider to be a real ethical gray area with higher up executives and much larger dollar sums - and still is legal. Let me be really clear here - I'm not agreeing with what they do, I'm just pointing to it as an example where this has worked with much more sensitive information than "interview prep" and has maintained to protect its supply side and operate, which is why I'm confident we will be able to as well.

The only thing I hope this thread proves is that HN or those seeing The Lobby execute is that we have the right intentions. That goes a long way - whether you agree with our particular approach or not.

This was a personal problem, and our solution we've seen solve a real problem mainly as an information gap. Solutions like the ones you're suggesting on karma points or donating to charities as suggested below are on our roadmap- but for now we're staying focused on making this work well first :).

Hope this answers the question and if anyone wants to chat on this topic further - please reach out! deepak@thelobby.io

Again here would suggest you check out GLG, Alphasights and other expert networks. They deal with much more sensitive info than "interview prep,"and much larger dollar figures; they do this with 1099's and have no issues for their supply side (which are employees or former employees at highly regulated institutions).

You are not required by law to report 1099's to your employer from what I understand - but we still encourage them to check with employers before agreeing to join The Lobby.

Last point, we've learned that if you use marketplace features on Stripe or PayPal, you potentially don't need to issue 1099's if you make less than $20k in a calendar year, which we don't know any of our individual insiders will make even at scale (if they make $20k, I suspect they’ll find a way to make the paperwork work!)

Exactly on chicken & egg - but we feel the hyper local approach is a really actionable way to solve it, we're already seeing it work in our niche.

It's not really our responsibility at all, even to make sure people abide by company policies or to prevent insider trading.

I still however answer all these questions because we think about the ethical implications a lot and we thought through everything in detail before choosing this model. I'm comfortable with the risks, I believe the rewards far outweigh them. Thank you!

>What's the price you can put on that?

As you might guess, I would have paid anything. I did eventually find a way in but that doesn’t change the point.

Let it commence then. Ramp this thing up and make it scale. Do it so well I’ll want to brag about even trying to challenge your ideas. For real man, make it so.

> Usually, "shut down" implies that the company failed.

Of course it failed, from the standpoint of the VCs, at least. It just didn't run out of cash.

That doesn't say anything one way or the other about the business model of taking a percentage of salary, which is what is under discussion.

> It says right in the article that WeWork offered the founder $5M in comp

Again, not particularly relevant, other than an indication that the founder thought that money "now" was a much better deal than risking it on that startup's business model.

> If that's not selling out, I don't know what is.

I'm not confused as to the usual meaning of the term. I'm just confused at to the significance to the conversation.

> unprincipled opportunism.

Even this doesn't make any sense to me, since the primary principle at play is making money, on all sides. Nobody was swindled here. Investment in startups hardly translates to indentured servitude.