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

Downsides to working at a tech giant

blog.garrytan.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 583 posts

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#531

Post by someguydave »

munk-a wrote: post #328
fatnoah wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The reason why is the math changed. Very true. Making it even more unbalanced is that a startup exit may not be profitable to non-founders. I spent the first 17 years of my career at 3 different startups. Two were acquired and one is still chugging as a lifestyle business for the founder. The net value of my options (> 1% even after dilution in two of them) amounted to a $2000 capital loss due to there being no mone…

I think this is a really good argument as why graduated corporate taxes really need to be increased in the US. I'd be curious how productive you felt at each position and if you think the FAANG job is more difficult and stressful. I'd like to think that no matter which of these paths we chose - the more stressful and risky life or the more secure and corporate FAANG one - we'd all have a chance to live a decent life.…

No it’s a good argument for eliminating corporate tax- no matter what the level it hits entrepreneurs the hardest.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#532

Post by someguydave »

manigandham wrote: post #487
munk-a wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely, stock options in the US are super strange, they can be performance tied and for non-qualified shares. The thing I'd actually like to see is a better default governance for companies - companies are wholly owned by founders and I think there is just something fundamentally wrong with treating all employees as contractors by default until it's decided to grant them options or actual ownership. A bunch of pe…

Employees get cash, that's the compensation like any other worker. Why should equity be a default option? Most startups fail so that's like saying workers should get something that has a high probability of being worthless while suffering all the tax implications. If anything equity should be decreased. Startups are better off competing on cash and other benefits like work flexibility and increased responsibility.

That would imply that they make revenue, which is somewhat unfashionable.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#533

Post by someguydave »

malandrew wrote: post #436
garry wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I started in 2006, here, just like you, reading Hacker News. I spent most of my day writing code. I learned on this site how to build things for other people, ship and release them, and yes, eventually build a company. I learned I wasn't meant to have a boss. The only reason I became a VC is that I want to be here to help people who really should be start companies actually figure out that they can! People helped me…

I’ve been active on HN almost as long as you. It’s not 2006 anymore. I would still follow the same career path based on what the world, HN and Silicon Valley were like in 2006. I wouldn’t based on 2020 world, HN and Silicon Valley. Would you? Rents are astronomical. Startup math has worsened. FANG math has improved. In fact only the G in FANG even resembled the FANG of today. FANG has done a great job figuring out th…

I’m not so sure that FANG companies have solved the innovators dilemma. Do you really see new and ground breaking tech come from them these days? I do agree that innovating is more expensive than the 2006 days of “we made a website”

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#534

Post by chaos_emergent »

thecleaner wrote: post #16
lordleft wrote: post #2

The simple truth is that working for the equity of an unproven start-up is a gamble, and statistically unlikely to pay off. And sadly more and more start-ups are undermining access to equity in shady ways. Not that one should never work for a start up on the hopes it breaks big, but we should also never forget that the successes are outliers, by a massive margin. Just understand the trade-offs of your decision and th…

I mean this is really not talked about more frequently. At this point, with all the shady tactics that most startups now pull, it would appear that only an idiot would really want to be swindled this way. Furthermore, this is not something that will go away since with less IPOs actually being successful and a mature tech market, hoarding the most value you can from your company seems to be in vogue these days.

> Furthermore, this is not something that will go away since with less IPOs actually being successful and a mature tech market

You’re implying that less successful IPOs mean less liquidity options for private company employees. That increasingly isn’t the case as private markets opens up to sales of startup equity. Success is no longer the same as an IPO and the number of companies that are becoming successful and the cumulative value in those companies are both increasing

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#535

Post by napoleond »

TuringNYC wrote: post #341
garry wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a great reminder. I was impressed by the recent documentary "General Magic" by how much smart people seem to congregate around new ideas. The old Mac team was the same one trying to create the smartphone 10 years before it was possible, and it was that core of folks who ended up doing it at Apple and Android later anyway.

I saw the documentary and enjoyed it. But finding that company in 2019 seems harder. That said, I perhaps I'm not seeing it -- how do you find that company of today? There are thousands of start-ups in their A round right now. A bit less in their B round. Which is going to be Apple of 2040? Which will be the Google of 2030? Which will be the Stripe of 2025? It is like one of those quotes "if you purchased gold in 200…

This is less difficult than you're implying. It's true that selecting the Stripe of 2025 is difficult; you need to pick between companies that are only 3 years old. Similarly, if you want to select the Google of 2040, you would need to pick between a bunch of companies working out of their friends' garages, and that would not be easy. But to select the Google of 2030, you need to look at companies which:

1. Are about 10 years old.

2. Are close to IPO (Google was already 4 years post-IPO when it was 10 years old, but IPO timing has changed since then).

3. Have market fit with multiple products (Google had Gmail, Maps, and Chrome already when it was 10 years old).

4. Are still founder-led.

To select the Apple of 2040, you need to look at companies which:

1. Are about 20 years old.

2. Are about 10 years past IPO (again, Apple IPO'd 4 years after its founding, but the same company today would probably IPO a bit later)

3. Are still actively innovating, and launching successful new products.

4. Are still founder-led.

These companies exist, and they have been substantially de-risked relative to the 3 year-old startups. Engineers that join them today will have similar financial outcomes to those that joined Google in 2008, or Apple in 1996.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#536

Post by nullspace »

ehnto wrote: post #422
dunkelheit wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The reason why is the math changed. The gap between startup and tech giant is much larger now than it was in 2010. This is true but also kind of depressing. With the means of software production cheaply available to everybody is that stable job at a tech giant really the pinnacle of the software engineering career? I understand that everybody's got the bills to pay, kids to raise etc. and maybe I'm a bit naive but…

I find a lot of joy in smaller, industry niche companies. Like 1-20 employees small. Not VC funded startups, but long running companies with proven value in an industry outside of the startup bubble. There is a lot of them, and they can be very rewarding to work at. While they'll have less compensation, it's in real money and they're often located in smaller cities with lower cost of living. You get to work directly…

Just curious can you give examples of this?

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#537

Post by quotemstr »

geofft wrote: post #78
seph-reed wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you work for a giant corporation of any sort, you are inherently breaking capitalism as it is. There's no foreseeable way around this , it's irresponsible, and all the suffering you're seeing it the world is the cost of many many millions of people giving themselves a pass on this. I strongly urge you to recognize that any of the life benefits you get from working at one of these places are reaped from the lives…

I don't disagree with you in theory, but when an article is suggesting that you should instead make $200M in equity by working for a venture capitalist - and not just any venture capitalist, Peter Thiel, the man who is sad about women's suffrage because it means unchecked libertarianism is less likely to be chosen by free elections - for spy firm Palantir? Go work for a big tech company, it's far more ethical if you…

> These concentrated payoffs only come at the expense of others

Capital creation is not zero sum. It's positive sum and makes us all better off. This idea that if one person succeeds, it's because he's stolen from someone else has led to immense misery in history.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#538

Post by acheron »

christiansakai wrote: post #390
keithwhor wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason I haven’t responded to the math changing is because it’s Christmastime and I’m spending time with family. Some of the responses to my post require a much more thoughtful answer than I can muster while at the gym between meeting family members. Be patient. I’ll respond to the other post if you wait.

Please do. I honestly want to hear. I am debating whether to join a startup again for my next job or just crank Leetcode and go FAANG and stay for the rest of my life there.

Unless you’re 80, you’re not going to spend the rest of your life at Facebook or Google. Imagine someone in 2004 saying they’re going to work the rest of their life at MySpace or Yahoo.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#539

Post by CPLX »

nullspace wrote: post #314
austenallred wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google and FB were paying less when they were founded than most startups I see today, adjusted for inflation. The difference is that now Google and FB pay way more . More than startups could ever dream of competing with. Everyone I know at FB or Google is making $225k+, with the average/median being around $300k/yr. Absolutely no way new startups can play ball with those salaries, and FB/GOOG certainly weren’t paying…

> The difference is that now Google and FB pay way more. More than startups could ever dream of competing with. Logically speaking, the only way that a company can pay more and still be profitable is if they produce value more efficiently. On a general, macro level. So, if startup founders cannot even dream of providing either cash or equity (adjusted to risk) comparable to the big-techs, does this mean that startups…

C) The largest tech companies are receiving windfall profits after a decade of successfully engaging in predatory anti-competitive behavior and regulatory capture.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#540

Post by yowlingcat »

acheron wrote: post #538
christiansakai wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please do. I honestly want to hear. I am debating whether to join a startup again for my next job or just crank Leetcode and go FAANG and stay for the rest of my life there.

Unless you’re 80, you’re not going to spend the rest of your life at Facebook or Google. Imagine someone in 2004 saying they’re going to work the rest of their life at MySpace or Yahoo.

There are 100% people who have spent their entire career at Microsoft who are financially extremely well connected and financially set for it. Folks who have been there from 1995-2015 and beyond. Don't underestimate the possibility of doing something similar, whether for MSFT or somewhere else.
Post reply on HN