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

OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

overpaid.lol

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 395 posts

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#71

Post by melenaboija »

zpeti wrote: post #57
bratao wrote: post #54

I know this is a common trope here, and yeah, plenty of MBA-type CEOs are trash. But speaking as a founder/CEO of a small company, the quality gap between an average hire and top talent at the director level is night and day. Proven talent comes with a massive price tag, but it's almost always worth it. The times I regretted going with the 2nd or 3rd place candidate because they were cheaper ended up setting us back…

Unfortunately this is not what 95% of HN wants to hear, even though its the truth. But you have my upvote.

The post is a satire and when writing this I see it at #1 of the front page and the comment is #1 too. So I guess you are kinda wrong.

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#72

Post by mikert89 »

bratao wrote: post #54

I know this is a common trope here, and yeah, plenty of MBA-type CEOs are trash. But speaking as a founder/CEO of a small company, the quality gap between an average hire and top talent at the director level is night and day. Proven talent comes with a massive price tag, but it's almost always worth it. The times I regretted going with the 2nd or 3rd place candidate because they were cheaper ended up setting us back…

No I think for the last 10-15 years, ivy types could legitimately just raise series A type money, run a company like shit, but capital was a moat and so ended up as CEOs.

This is actually how the world works

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#74

Post by liveoneggs »

bratao wrote: post #54

I know this is a common trope here, and yeah, plenty of MBA-type CEOs are trash. But speaking as a founder/CEO of a small company, the quality gap between an average hire and top talent at the director level is night and day. Proven talent comes with a massive price tag, but it's almost always worth it. The times I regretted going with the 2nd or 3rd place candidate because they were cheaper ended up setting us back…

Good employees are good and bad employees are bad?

"proven talent"?

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#75

Post by datakan »

reactordev wrote: post #49

This is the kind of agent I want to see. Board rooms and executive management need to be just as scared as the rest of us.

They should be, I see them as the prime targets for AI. Most of what they do is bullshit, they're often massively over paid, and AI will produce answers 100 times faster than they will.

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#76

Post by happymellon »

helsinkiandrew wrote: post #13
ForHackernews wrote: post #5

This is a fun joke, but there's a real element of truth to it: A big fraction of senior executives' work is vulnerable to replacement by AI. In other fields, where automation or tooling has enabled technicians to do work that previously required expensive expertise, there's been a drive from management to replace those costly professionals. What's the parallel for executives? Is the CEO market ripe for disruption by…

> A big fraction of senior executives' work is vulnerable to replacement by AI. A big fraction of a senior executives' work can also be delegated to others in the company (or outside consultants and services), the thing that can't is being ultimately responsible for making the final decisions - product, people, direction etc.

Which they don't take responsibility for anyway.

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#77

Post by tgv »

bratao wrote: post #54

I know this is a common trope here, and yeah, plenty of MBA-type CEOs are trash. But speaking as a founder/CEO of a small company, the quality gap between an average hire and top talent at the director level is night and day. Proven talent comes with a massive price tag, but it's almost always worth it. The times I regretted going with the 2nd or 3rd place candidate because they were cheaper ended up setting us back…

That's only if the company's revenue is in excess of 100B. There aren't many companies like that. Certainly not enough for an AI platform to monetize.

But don't you fall in the same trap as they try to lure you with: expressing a CEO's value as revenue/profit optimization? With that kind of logic, you should pivot your business, whatever it is, to whatever is looking more profitable in the short term. It's short-sighted. And it misses the ethical and social aspect of the organization that forms the company.

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#78

Post by hibikir »

bratao wrote: post #54

I know this is a common trope here, and yeah, plenty of MBA-type CEOs are trash. But speaking as a founder/CEO of a small company, the quality gap between an average hire and top talent at the director level is night and day. Proven talent comes with a massive price tag, but it's almost always worth it. The times I regretted going with the 2nd or 3rd place candidate because they were cheaper ended up setting us back…

But a lot of "proven" talent with a huge price tag is also no good, really achieved what they did elsewhere due to sheer luck/help from a product that couldn't go wrong, and will drag you into a hole with their comp. I have seen this over and over again: Big pedigree, top of the line personality, zero results.

Everyone thinks they are hiring the star, not the fraudster, or just the lucky one. That's how we end up with overpaid execs.

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#79

Post by reactordev »

datakan wrote: post #75
reactordev wrote: post #49

This is the kind of agent I want to see. Board rooms and executive management need to be just as scared as the rest of us.

They should be, I see them as the prime targets for AI. Most of what they do is bullshit, they're often massively over paid, and AI will produce answers 100 times faster than they will.

I mostly agree with you. There are a few exceptions of some CEOs I have met that just truly understand the industry they are in. Like rain main counting toothpicks, they just know their space so well that they can anticipate where their market is going. The ratio of these types vs the “normies” is about 3:4000 though.
Post reply on HN