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

Show HN: Our alternative to recruiter spam

trypitchbox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 178 posts

Re: Show HN: Our alternative to recruiter spam

#111

Post by ig1 »

I used to run a software developer job board startup for several years and I came the the conclusion that what the market needs is a better way of reaching passive job seekers.

While I think this approach is along the right lines, the big problem is that it's incredibly hard to get passive job seekers to sign-up, so mostly you'll get active job seekers signing up and then you'll essentially just be another curated job board / CV database.

I think your key to success will be if you can figure out someway of getting lots of passive job seekers to signup.

Personally if I was doing it I'd go the route of making hyper-targetted mailing lists. So like a reverse groupon catering to specific niches. So have one for developer evangelists, one for flash games developers, etc. with the idea being that the niches are specific enough that people want to be on the list not because they're job hunting but because they want to keep their finger on the pulse of their niche.

(feel free to email me if you want to talk more about the developer recruitment space; I've spent a lot of time thinking about it!)

Re: Show HN: Our alternative to recruiter spam

#112

Post by bitsweet »

basseq wrote: post #55
bitsweet wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our focus has been developers because we are most familiar with how messed up the status quo is for us and how we can improve it. That being said we have also seen an overwhelming response from those that don't write code. We are figuring out how to expand the product.

I feel like you could emphasize your DEVELOPER-ONLY focus a little better: it's not clear who should be filling out the form a) unless you scroll down the page and read all the content or b) until you get to the github handle input and think, "Hmmm..."

thanks for the feedback!

Re: Show HN: Our alternative to recruiter spam

#113

Post by Peroni »

spleeyah wrote: post #109
Peroni wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

25% is pretty standard across US, we're less then that with our flat rate. Fair comment however your flat fee equates to 25% of a $100k role. It doesn't become a viable economic alternative for employers until you reach the $150k mark. If your primary target is CTO level roles then great, otherwise your fee is ridiculous.

I think you might be underestimating the level of pay for developers in a lot of the "big" areas. (SF, Silicon Valley, NYC) I've personally heard of friends (fresh college grads) getting offers anywhere from $70k to $150k.

Fresh college grads getting $150k? I find that incredibly hard to believe.

Re: Show HN: Our alternative to recruiter spam

#114

Post by bitsweet »

ig1 wrote: post #111

I used to run a software developer job board startup for several years and I came the the conclusion that what the market needs is a better way of reaching passive job seekers. While I think this approach is along the right lines, the big problem is that it's incredibly hard to get passive job seekers to sign-up, so mostly you'll get active job seekers signing up and then you'll essentially just be another curated jo…

I agree, thats why we built this more around someone's expectations and goals and less about their history (though that is important too). That way we can be more focused on high quality discovery, lowering the barrier to "keeping your finger on the pulse of the market in your expertise".

Re: Show HN: Our alternative to recruiter spam

#115

Post by veritas9 »

DavidAdams wrote: post #96

I'm currently hiring developers, and I also hate recruiters, for the reasons you outline. I was interested to learn about your flat $25K fee in the comments here, and I can tell you that I'd be unlikely to pay it. I have other ways to find developers that aren't so expensive. If I'd bothered to sign up after reading "It's free to get started" then learned later about the hefty fee, I'd be disappointed at best. Since…

We just launched HackerX, where we bring 50 great developers and put them in a room with 15 awesome companies.

Absolutely no placement fees, no BS, give us a try :)

www.hackerx.org

Re: Show HN: Our alternative to recruiter spam

#117

Post by freyfogle »

ig1 wrote: post #111

I used to run a software developer job board startup for several years and I came the the conclusion that what the market needs is a better way of reaching passive job seekers. While I think this approach is along the right lines, the big problem is that it's incredibly hard to get passive job seekers to sign-up, so mostly you'll get active job seekers signing up and then you'll essentially just be another curated jo…

> I think your key to success will be if you can figure out someway of getting lots of passive job seekers to signup.

If you want people to do something there is way that often, but not always, works: pay them.

Why not share the fee you charge the companies with the people on the list? Obviously there are issues to be worked out to stop people from gaming the system, they need to be legitimate candidates, but I'm suspect there is a way. Basically it's the same as cashback on credit cards - they charge the merchant and share some of that with the consumer.

Just some food for thought

Re: Show HN: Our alternative to recruiter spam

#118

Post by mlarratt »

Lewisham wrote: post #106
3825 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>the overheard to hiring Did you mean overhead? Moreover, it seems like you don't validate your form input at all. (Sorry about the entry. My email address is not really aa.)

Validating email addresses via anything but verification links are a road to hell.

True, but it's not a bad idea to check for an @ in the string as a sanity check, in case the user has accidentally put their username/password/other in the field.

Re: Show HN: Our alternative to recruiter spam

#119

Post by devspace9 »

bitsweet wrote: post #103
clebio wrote: post #101

Sorry, but what part of 'Stay anonymous ... 100% Private & confidential - Learn your market value without your current employer ever knowing' involves me giving you my name, current employer, current title, and email address in step 2? That's just down-right cognitive dissonance. The landing page doesn't give me enough assurance, but to get any more details, I have to click through. Or do you expect a curious candida…

It is anonymous to the point that others don't know you are on Pitchbox. Your name isn't shared with anyone until you are matched with a company and you like the pitch and agree to sharing it. It would be just to hard to send you personally relevant pitches without a little background information to incorporate in our matchmaking.

Don't you already have sufficient numbers of potential candidates at your other venture (coderwall.com)? Coderwall and PitchBox are both owned by Appdillo. Why not make it clear that both sites are related? The relationship is buried in the TOS on both sites.

Your TOS states: "For example, we ask visitors who sign up for a wall at trypitchbox.com to provide a username, email address, location and links to their GitHub, Twitter, and StackOverflow accounts." Since Appdillo owns coderwall and PitchBox, and coderwall already has a lot of information about developers, is there any manual or automated privacy bleedthrough?

Re: Show HN: Our alternative to recruiter spam

#120

Post by ig1 »

freyfogle wrote: post #117
ig1 wrote: post #111

I used to run a software developer job board startup for several years and I came the the conclusion that what the market needs is a better way of reaching passive job seekers. While I think this approach is along the right lines, the big problem is that it's incredibly hard to get passive job seekers to sign-up, so mostly you'll get active job seekers signing up and then you'll essentially just be another curated jo…

> I think your key to success will be if you can figure out someway of getting lots of passive job seekers to signup. If you want people to do something there is way that often, but not always, works: pay them. Why not share the fee you charge the companies with the people on the list? Obviously there are issues to be worked out to stop people from gaming the system, they need to be legitimate candidates, but I'm sus…

You want to incentivize the best developers, not those who want (a relatively small amount of) money. By replacing intrinsic incentive with monetary incentive it may end up making the situation worse.

Someone might happily sign-up to a mailing list for interesting jobs based on the inherent incentive, but offer that person $10 to do the same and they'll think "my time is worth more than $10" and just walk away.

You'll almost certainly better off just putting that same amount of money into traditional marketing channels.

Post reply on HN