Live data from Hacker News

Working at a startup is overrated, both financially and emotionally

every.to

351–360 of 430 posts

Re: Working at a startup is overrated, both financially and emotionally

#351

As much as I agree with everything said in this article I wouldn't trade my years at a start up for anything. Both financially and emotionally it was awesome. I didn't get rich, and I worked way too much, but it was awesome. I loved the constant change and chaos. I learned so much, way more than I would've in any other type or work place. I made great friends too. It was as bad as the article, but it was way waaaay b…

>I didn't get rich, and I worked way too much, but it was awesome. I loved the constant change and chaos. I learned so much, way more than I would've in any other type or work place.

How are startups different from average joe soft with 20ppl?

Re: Working at a startup is overrated, both financially and emotionally

#352
post #344

This article is responding to the romantic version of the startup story that was popular 10-15 years ago, in the early heyday of YC and HN. In that sense it is 10 years out of date. There has been since at least one major wave, which was characterized by disillusionment and cynicism about startups ("just buy a lottery ticket", "startup equity isn't worth the paper it's printed on", etc.). This became standard fare on…

This is an interesting take, and largely correct, but you describe these "waves" as if they are some literary or artistic trends that just play themselves out, and not takes on a very real situation, which is what they really are.

Yes, the 2nd wave of cynicism is now well-established, the comments are predictable and preaching-to-the-choir.

However, has it become any less correct or accepted? This isn't literature or art where folks will become disenchanted with a take purely because it has become cliche.

IMHO the answer is "no". This take has indeed become so established, that it is now simply taken for granted, as the foundation for discussion on sites like Blind.

Everyone understands that startups now provide less value to their employees than top tech companies (FAANG etc), the startup culture in the US is doing nothing to address this (senior engineers are still getting crumbs of equity, your total compensation at a startup will still be far lower than FAANG, there is effectively zero concern for providing the long-term career growth you'd get in top tech, etc), so nobody takes startups seriously as an option unless they are among the handful of well-known unicorns.

Everyone is targeting top tech ("FAANG") and pre-IPO unicorns and that's it.

It's widely accepted that you'd look at any non-unicorn non-pre-IPO startups only as a fallback option after completely failing to get an offer from any of the above. Even then, you'd constantly try to ascend to the real winning options, and any call from a FAANG recruiter will take you away from the startup role you had to settle for.

I believe startup culture can change that, but it will take much effort and actual sacrifice (e.g. reserving more equity for employees). Until then, startups will remain a strictly less desirable option, and just because everyone now knows and agrees on this take doesn't make it any less true. I anything, it's becoming more entrenched and harder to change.

Re: Working at a startup is overrated, both financially and emotionally

#353
post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're in a thread talking about how equity compensation at startups is generally not sufficient to overcome the pay cut that folks would take from working at a top tier tech company, so even if you come at this from a purely transactional perspective, you may want to be less stingy with equity. You can do whatever you want of course, but I think people should ask themselves if trying to hold onto all the returns is h…

> equity compensation at startups is generally not sufficient to overcome the pay cut ... so don't take the job. Everything will naturally sort itself out -- a startup will increase their grants, hire different people, or not hire and fail. :shrug: This thread sure looks like it's full of people who can't get that well paid job at google, are taking jobs at less demanding employers out of necessity, and are mad about…

I have to say, I am in agreement. We are not talking about computer illiterates here who cannot find work if their life dependent upon it.

Re: Working at a startup is overrated, both financially and emotionally

#354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should leaders and team builders be more “equitable” than what is transactionally afforded by their diligent appreciation of their assets? How is the utility of money not best suited for those who created something from nothing versus those who entered into the tent after it was pitched? Aren’t there gradients of personal ambition being demonstrated between the two parties? If so, wouldn’t society be abler if the…

We're in a thread talking about how equity compensation at startups is generally not sufficient to overcome the pay cut that folks would take from working at a top tier tech company, so even if you come at this from a purely transactional perspective, you may want to be less stingy with equity. You can do whatever you want of course, but I think people should ask themselves if trying to hold onto all the returns is h…

You are the one bringing up the utility of money.

Re: Working at a startup is overrated, both financially and emotionally

#355
post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fully agree that the fervor around FAANG is unhealthy. However, if you are just at the start if your career, that is the best time to move to wherever the jobs you are interested in are, rather than restricting yourself to what is available near where you currently are. There will be folks that have obligations preventing that, but most recent college grads should have little holding them from moving.

This comment is a good summary of the problem I was describing: It's easy to say that anyone who can get a FAANG job should get a FAANG job, but if circumstances don't line up, what else? That's where many students draw a blank, because all of the advice they've consumed revolves around FAANG job offers that may not arrive. Statistically, more people are rejected than accepted by FAANG companies. A lot of my mentorin…

The number of successful top tech companies keeps growing. The winner-takes-all reality of our current tech business environment means that the job market is:

1. These top companies that pay very well and offer excellent career growth prospects.

2. Everything else below.

So the real answer is "keep working at your fallback option until you can finally graduate to one of the lucrative positions at the top of the pyramid".

That's the real, no-BS best course for the employees themselves. For companies below that top, that is horrible situation because it means all their employees (and especially their best) are temps just waiting for their real shot elsewhere. However, it is also the reality: most employees do leave for that golden top-tech offer that pays them x2+ their current comp with no risk.

Non-top companies don't really help the situation much themselves; as we all know having FAANG on your resume is the surest way to get interviews, offers, and career upgrades everywhere outside of FAANG as well.

So, the "top-tech or bust" attitude will continue.

Re: Working at a startup is overrated, both financially and emotionally

#356
post #349
post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In that case, you leave. If you're a decent engineer you'll find work in a few weeks and any other startup will be happy to have you. Unfortunately for non engineers I understand that may be more difficult and for those starting out too. So matter of perspective definitely since engineers aren't the only employees at a startup, but I would hope with due dilligence that is caught while you're interviewing.

> In that case, you leave. Depending on how long it takes you to get to this point, it could have cost you a great deal in lost opportunity and benefits. The fact that you can get another job is irrelevant to that. Which is the point of this overall thread - you could easily have been better off at an established company.

I don't know how that follows, you're not going to necessarily escape terrible bosses just by going to an established org. If that's the thought you'll have quite the rude awakening.

Everything you just said is true of working at a big co as well.

Plenty of people at big cos have bad bosses, plenty get over worked. Plenty feel they have no input etc etc, this is a human organizational and work issue that is true of both small startup and big org.

I've listened to my mother gripe about some of the biggest financial companies in the world from various positions all the way to fairly senior management for the last 20 years with everything that has been said here. The only solution she had was to jump to another company after investing sometimes up to 5 years of her time in places like that.

Re: Working at a startup is overrated, both financially and emotionally

#357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you’re making Bezos richer while you get rich yourself. the 2nd part is important

Forgoing the latter is worth not doing the former imo. Again, unless we’re talking millions per year, which 99% of FAANG employees aren’t making. The best one could hope for is high six figures, probably toping out around $800-$900k after 15 years. As I said though, this only makes sense if your goal is money. I personally don’t value money over other things like mental health and enjoying my work. I know I would hav…

That's 900k per year. Their net worth in 15 years will be 5M or even higher (thanks to stocks growth). That's complete financial freedom at the age of 45.

Re: Working at a startup is overrated, both financially and emotionally

#358
post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but then the lesson to take away from this is that the company in question apparently isn't offering enough to make that job worthwhile, and that's not the fault of the people turning them down. When the company phrases their rejection as "we don't think you're committed enough to do this", that's when things smell off to me. They're hiring for a specific role, they should act like it. As an analogy, if you hir…

You could be right and it could well be the case, but we don't know really. We are only aware that the GP turned them down, but it's quite possible they had the position filled. One person wearing many hats is rather typical in small companies and early stage startups. Being asked to do extra is not something insulting per se, as long as you compensated accordingly, either with more hard money or (a lot more) equity.…

> CTO/dev/ops/support in one That one little phrase sums up the problem with most startups. Hire someone who doesn’t know any better and tell them they are the “CTO”.

Re: Working at a startup is overrated, both financially and emotionally

#359
Reading all these grumpy comments made me think that there's a well.. startup opportunity for a counsel type firm that gives consultations to would be employees and guides them thru the startups minefield for an extra fee. This service would partner with law and accountings firms and terms would be a fixed 500 usd fee for a more or less standard consultation and an offer review, plus 5% of stock options gains should the employee make the bank later. I bet SV and all VCs will hate this firm with passion.

Re: Working at a startup is overrated, both financially and emotionally

#360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm part of a mentoring group for recent college grads. One of our biggest challenges is that much of the conversation on HN, Twitter, Blind, and other sites assumes that FAANG admission is guaranteed. This becomes a major struggle for juniors when they realize that there aren't any FAANG offices in their location. Many others apply to FAANG but don't receive offers, which is devastating if every HN comment, medium a…

I work at a company that doesn’t offer a total compensation package competitive with a FAANG, but still definitely very healthy, and we do lose many straight-outta-college candidates all the time who are demanding base pay of $200k+ because “that’s what I’d get if I worked for Google.” After denying that, unfortunately, some candidates insinuate that being offered $1.x * 10^5 for an entry-level position is a shrewd p…

> After denying that, unfortunately, some candidates insinuate that being offered $1.x * 10^5 for an entry-level position is a shrewd ploy to brazenly take advantage of their valuable skills at low cost.

There are no absolute anchors in the compensation market, it's all relative.

Once enough companies pay $200k for entry-level, then anyone paying $130k is underpaying, regardless of how "big" that number looks to you, or how much lower it was 5-10 years ago.

Why are we implicitly criticizing young engineers for trying to maximize their value in the market? C-level execs reject multi-million offers all the time if they can get a better one. There's no room for moral outrage here at the "snooty young devs scoffing at $130k pay", this is just market economics.

Also, these young engineers are keenly aware of the huge impact that a starting comp of $200k will have on their future comp, career prospects, etc. This is just a reality and we shouldn't disparage our fellow engineers for responding to it.

Post reply on HN