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

Ask HN: Strategies to land fully remote $250k+ job

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 515 posts

Re: Ask HN: Strategies to land fully remote $250k+ job

#201

Post by syshum »

300bps wrote: post #113
rco8786 wrote: post #48

You just need to apply for roles with public companies that offer liquid equity. Very few of us are getting 250k+ on base salary alone. Most of us have the salary bands you’re already in, but have additional equity pay on top. It doesn’t have to be a FAANG either. There are loads of public companies out there hiring engineers at 250k total comp .

$150 per hour is $300,000 per year including two weeks vacation per year. I have a side client that I met 11 years ago that I charge $150 per hour for remote development. They feel lucky to get that rate! Most people around us charge $200 per hour but since I work full time for someone else and can’t always be available I give them that discounted rate. I don’t think they’re hard to find at all for consulting. Being…

$150 / hr as a 1099 Contractor, is more like $75/hr has a W2 employee after you factor in employee benefits (normally 30-40% of your total comp) and taxation (10-15% more for self employment depending on your deductions)

Re: Ask HN: Strategies to land fully remote $250k+ job

#203

Post by newaccount74 »

thelastknowngod wrote: post #61
jacknews wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> EDIT: And if you're outside of the US, set up a local LLC so that US-based companies can treat you like an independent contracting business. By local, do you mean a US-based company (eg delaware), or local to where you are?

Local to wherever your customers and/or employer are. They can use their normal process for expenditure or payroll or whatever in their accounting software to pay him.

In my experience US companies had no problem paying my Austrian invoices. Setting up an LLC in the US sounds like an expensive and unnecessary bureaucratic nightmare when all you want to do is a bit of contract work.

I've also talked to a bunch of people who have done contract work for US companies, and they all just have a business registered in their home country.

Noone wants to be subject to US taxation voluntarily.

Re: Ask HN: Strategies to land fully remote $250k+ job

#204

Post by alisonkisk »

baobabKoodaa wrote: post #194
Jensson wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getting $100k sticker price worth of stocks per year is worth about $100k a year. If stocks go up they are worth more, otherwise less. On average they will be worth more than cash, and for a big company it is rare for them to go down a lot, so I'd say that getting the $100k worth of stocks a year is at least as good as just getting the cash. Edit: Not sure why people think otherwise. Maybe they are used to companies…

> at least as good as getting cash This claim is patently false. If you receive $100k in cash, you can immediately exchange that to $100k in public company stock. The opposite is not true (if you receive stock with a vesting period, you cannot immediately exchange it to cash). Therefore, getting cash is at least as good as getting public company stock, not the other way around.

When you get an offer of $100K cash + $100K in stock, that's before appreciation. So 3 years from now your equity is appreciated but your cash is not, so you get $225K in cash equivalent.

Re: Ask HN: Strategies to land fully remote $250k+ job

#205

Post by hermannj314 »

codegeek wrote: post #158
hermannj314 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original suggestion was to work 2 jobs. The post I replied to projected that (for some reason) into being a bad idea because of some story deceptive, poor-performing, contracting violating, three concurrent jobs. I stand by my statement. It is not wrong to work two jobs. That was the original claim despite what this other guy wanted to make it about.

But you used your father as an example and my question is if your father worked for both at the same time. That matters a lot. Your comparison is not appropriate because there is a huge difference between working a job and then working another job at a totally shift/time than working 2 remote jobs concurrently where you are supposed to be available for both.

My comparison is comparable because all the original post said was to work 2 jobs. This other post comes in and tries to equate working two jobs with contract violation.

No - my dad worked one job during the day and the other at night. Why would you by default assume the worst in people? The original post was always about two jobs. Most people that work two jobs do so legally and ethically.

What on Earth are you all on about adding all these extra conditions to prove the original poster wrong. He never said - get two jobs, work them at the same, make sure this violates your contract, do a poor job, and lie about it.

You all trying to poison the water of this topic by equating it to something else entirely.

Re: Ask HN: Strategies to land fully remote $250k+ job

#206

Post by deagle50 »

bitcharmer wrote: post #129
rco8786 wrote: post #48

You just need to apply for roles with public companies that offer liquid equity. Very few of us are getting 250k+ on base salary alone. Most of us have the salary bands you’re already in, but have additional equity pay on top. It doesn’t have to be a FAANG either. There are loads of public companies out there hiring engineers at 250k total comp .

Sadly, going for equity in these scenarios is a mine field and almost never as profitable as advertised by the employer.

RSUs are almost the same as a regular paycheck, and in my experience the employer has a lot more flexibility to meet your demands when you're negotiating total comp. So yes, the stock could go down, but you're getting more when you start than you would in salary and if doesn't go down you pocket the upside.

The vesting schedule is where you need to be careful.

Re: Ask HN: Strategies to land fully remote $250k+ job

#207

Post by Rastonbury »

jollofricepeas wrote: post #176
rco8786 wrote: post #48

You just need to apply for roles with public companies that offer liquid equity. Very few of us are getting 250k+ on base salary alone. Most of us have the salary bands you’re already in, but have additional equity pay on top. It doesn’t have to be a FAANG either. There are loads of public companies out there hiring engineers at 250k total comp .

This is true in the Midwest. I’m seeing two strategies that are friends are using to get to $250k+ right now and much more… 1. Several have left for left/right coast former startups companies that are publicly traded. Their base comp is $160-180k but they are also receiving a large pool of equity that vests in tranches of $75-100k a year. 2. With everything being remote, several senior engineer friends are working tw…

Wait two fulltime 250k+ jobs?

Re: Ask HN: Strategies to land fully remote $250k+ job

#208

Post by UweSchmidt »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #159
UweSchmidt wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are not replacing "needed traders", i.e. people that used to execute trades required by real people or companies, like "buy some Apple stock". These firms are playing their very own game in the markets, ultimately extracing money from the economy, with the supposed public benefit of "creating liquidity" (not needed for real investors who can very well wait a day or two before closing a deal) while actually disto…

No one is stopping the buyers who can wait a day or two from placing limit orders. If the HFT firms are earning profits, it is because someone wants to pay them for the liquidity.

Anyone who buys organically is buying after the HFT firms have made their buying decisions on the entirety of the market, it's not possible to "wait a day or two". The deal will be incrementally worse as these firms extract value, your price will be the one that all of these firms deemed "meh".

It's like walking into a grocery store and the banana you really want it 1$ and you'll buy. Because that's the price that highly sophisticated middlemen between the store and you have determined to be good.

The liquidity argument is abstract and unquantifyable enough to be used as a fig leaf for the industry. Real investors who are in it for fundamental values, dividends or strategy don't need to sell in a nanosecond. Now that you can sell in a nanosecond your deal is bad, as in the moment you hear of the Volkswagen scandal all the trading algorithms are done with their work already.

Re: Ask HN: Strategies to land fully remote $250k+ job

#209

Post by Rastonbury »

baobabKoodaa wrote: post #194
Jensson wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getting $100k sticker price worth of stocks per year is worth about $100k a year. If stocks go up they are worth more, otherwise less. On average they will be worth more than cash, and for a big company it is rare for them to go down a lot, so I'd say that getting the $100k worth of stocks a year is at least as good as just getting the cash. Edit: Not sure why people think otherwise. Maybe they are used to companies…

> at least as good as getting cash This claim is patently false. If you receive $100k in cash, you can immediately exchange that to $100k in public company stock. The opposite is not true (if you receive stock with a vesting period, you cannot immediately exchange it to cash). Therefore, getting cash is at least as good as getting public company stock, not the other way around.

If it's about timeframes it can be thought of as like a year end bonus being paid out when it vests. With some risks in terms of share price (which is like variable cash bonuses). The only reason most prefer cash is because it's a hard number that base increases/bonus are computed by and for negotiation in next job.

Re: Ask HN: Strategies to land fully remote $250k+ job

#210

Post by deagle50 »

baobabKoodaa wrote: post #194
Jensson wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getting $100k sticker price worth of stocks per year is worth about $100k a year. If stocks go up they are worth more, otherwise less. On average they will be worth more than cash, and for a big company it is rare for them to go down a lot, so I'd say that getting the $100k worth of stocks a year is at least as good as just getting the cash. Edit: Not sure why people think otherwise. Maybe they are used to companies…

> at least as good as getting cash This claim is patently false. If you receive $100k in cash, you can immediately exchange that to $100k in public company stock. The opposite is not true (if you receive stock with a vesting period, you cannot immediately exchange it to cash). Therefore, getting cash is at least as good as getting public company stock, not the other way around.

As soon as your RSU vests, you can sell it for cash. Most companies offer an auto-sell option that works even during restricted windows. With a good vesting schedule, it's almost identical.
Post reply on HN