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

571–580 of 583 posts

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#571

Post by manigandham »

someguydave wrote: post #570
manigandham wrote: post #569

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A business needs cash to operate. It doesn't matter what talent you have if you can't pay them. Startups die when they run out of cash, not because they couldn't hire anyone. Startups offering more cash has no implication that they must generate revenue (although that's obvious to building a good business). The point is that operational costs exist - and so a business must already have cash to exist - and increasing…

That’s an interesting point of view. Do you think engineers are much more “interchangeable parts” than most HN folks seem to believe?

Customers care about solutions to their problems, not the engineering behind it. Many VC funded startups with the latest AI tech have failed because they never actually served the customers. Meanwhile there are millions of profitable small businesses running with simple boring tech that works enough to provide value to their clients.

Engineering talent is in oversupply across the US and definitely across the globe. You can easily hire PhD level talent from Brazil or India. Also FAANG companies have long ago exhausted the best talent available. Most of their hires at this scale are no better than engineers elsewhere, it's more about the interview process, benefits, location and internal politics than raw quality now.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#573

Post by jzl »

askafriend wrote: post #95
ng12 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to mention it's 1% of a $20b company that has yet to go public and seems intent on staying private.

They do biannual liquidity events internally. If you’re an employee you can sell your stock back to the company for cash.

I think they only started doing that recently, after they stayed private so long that many employees started approaching the 10 year mark at which point their options would expire.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#574

Post by Roritharr »

mancerayder wrote: post #550
Roritharr wrote: post #291

Having spent the past 15 years chasing the dream, working as a Founder and a couple of C-Level positions while not really amassing any sort of wealth I can't recommend enough to do your financial due diligence when accepting trade-offs for chances to reach your life-goals. I'm close to 32 and have two kids now, so the financial pressure is there, while having accepted relatively low pay in high cost-of-living locatio…

Do startups even bother hiring people not in their 20's or early 30's, though? 32 is one thing, one if you're 35, 38, 40? You come back with your financial cushion, ready to hit the startup circuit, but who will actually hire an older guy (or gal) with salivating 25 year-old grads waiting around the corner?

35-40 wouldn't be an issue at our startup, but we can't afford corporate salaries/benefits.

That's the hit you would have to take, accepting a lower salary again, which most can't combine with a less comfortable environment where your responsibilities are less narrowly defined and many of the support structures that a large org can offer are not in place yet.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#575

Post by skillvisor19 »

Advice to VCs on this thread trying to convince hiring folks away from tech. giants.

Re-consider (if you can) how you attract engineering talent and capitalize the "product-market-fit" stage of your startups - higher early stage valuations and higher pay for the market rates for the talent. Most talent (I know of) at FAANG is tired of being "cog-in-a-giant-wheel" and, some, would love the opportunities that startups always offered (I am assuming I don't have to enumerate these opportunities for this crowd)?

If you think higher valuations at earlier stages is not a fair ask - just look at capitalization at Series-C, Series-D growth stage companies - most of this money is being used to "buy" revenue these days. In other words, to pay commissions for sales and marketing folks. Buying engineering talent at early stages should be no different in 2019 in my opinion.

We don't have to rob Peter(Founders) to pay Paul(non-founding employees) and pitch one against the other. Just make the pie bigger at early stages. From what I hear, there is plenty of capital chasing good startups.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#576

Post by ryankshaw »

discordance wrote: post #529
Hermitian909 wrote: post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not OP but I've been thinking about this as cofounder of a "hard tech" company. If we live long enough that we're in a position to hire real talent we can't compete on total yearly comp. The business just won't be able to afford a 500k a year engineer for years. However right now FAANG companies generally do not offer either the following: - Reduced work weeks - Remote work I've talked to several staff and principle…

I work at one of the FAANGMs and my group of about 700 engineers are all allowed to be 100% remote if they want to be. It’s actually promoted by our leadership.

I'm curious: which FAANGM? And where could I find the job openings for that group?

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#577

Post by jackthetab »

manigandham wrote: post #558
jackthetab wrote: post #546

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And again, if you think founders should take less equity then you're free to start your own venture and show everyone how well it works. I've yet to see single example of this though. This topic was covered in Episode 3 of Gimlet Media's "Startup" podcast[1]. He ended up do a 50/50 equity split. They seem to have done well for themselves[2]. [1] https://gimletmedia.com/shows/startup/8who49/gimlet-3-how-to... [2] ht…

They're both founders and equity is split evenly between them, which is extremely common with any startup. That's not the same as founders giving up majority to their employees.

I'll have to go back and re-listen but IIRC the other guy wasn't a co-founder, he was employee #1.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#578

Post by emodendroket »

dunkelheit wrote: post #555
emodendroket wrote: post #542

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there were no economies of scale it certainly would seem strange that it could possibly be cheaper to rent computers from Amazon than to run your own data center.

Operating AWS and the datacenters involves massive economies of scale. Writing the software that powers AWS - not so much.

Yes, but since most of us (I think, anyways) are working on Web-hosted software that stuff all matters. It also matters that an Amazon or Facebook has whole teams dedicated to developer tools, operations management, and so on.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#579

Post by diafygi »

garry wrote: post #369
diafygi wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The world is full of capital, and it's not going to the right people who can solve problems. Hmmmm, isn't being a VC kind of exacerbating this problem? The business model of being a VC is entirely based around moonshots, which means that you are pigeonholed into only making bets on certain types of founders that either (a) already have extremely high risk tolerance or (b) can be pushed by VCs to take risks beyond t…

If you look at our portfolio we do try to find people who are not necessarily that classic "moonshot" type. Things that turn out to be moonshots often look like niche businesses. We try to put what you say to practice, but it's an inexact art, far from a science. I still look for two things: a/ great engineers/designers/product folks with deep empathy for problems people have, and b/ a real problem to solve. From my…

> I still look for two things: a/ great engineers/designers/product folks with deep empathy for problems people have, and b/ a real problem to solve.

That... sounds like just regular investing. Rather than trying to save the VC brand (which is already pretty tainted in entrepreneur circles), why not come up with another name and scale that?

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#580

Post by eeZah7Ux »

garry wrote: post #257
thatsenough wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not pessimism. People should just get to hear both sides, and know that VCs typically offer this advise because, first and foremost, it benefits the VCs. The VC typically has enough money to be set for life, several times over. They bet on many companies simultaneously to diversify their own risk. Most companies will fail, and the employees will go down with the ship, but the VC only needs a handful of bets to pa…

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…

> The world is full of capital

This is one of the most entitled statements I've heard.

Post reply on HN