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

Please Poach Me

pleasepoach.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 126 posts

Re: Please Poach Me

#111

Post by tgrass »

tchock23 wrote: post #97
Maro wrote: post #85

Some feedback: 1. About the name: Non-native speakers may not know what "poach" means. I've lived in California for four years in the past and I was confused. 2. The cartoon fox looks like it's about to steal my mouse. It looks like you're trying to sell me lockpicking tools... 3. I think you should better explain what recruiters get out of this versus what LinkedIn offers. 4. Your landing page is really two landing…

Just curious about your fourth point above... Why do you think two landing pages would be better? I've seen this approach used on a number of other sites that are seemingly successful, and am debating the single landing page approach for a project of mine, so I would be interested to hear the pros and cons.

I support dual landing pages generally when serving two networks.

A grocery store leads distributors in through the back and consumers through the front. They have different needs and if you want to maximize your short introductory moment, it benefits you to tailor the experience.

Re: Please Poach Me

#112

Post by wpietri »

absconditus wrote: post #31
ImprovedSilence wrote: post #10

I like the idea, +1 for originality. Just some thoughts though: Not that I have much experience from the employer standpoint, but the fact that I have to keep paying (even if it's $50) each time, will always leave a constant reminder that I'm spending money. That, coupled with the fact that I'm not sure what quality of candidates you'll be showing me (and I KNOW how bad headhunters can be trying to cram someone where…

$50 is really nothing for recruiting.

Agreed. But even though I'm recruiting developers right now, I didn't sign up. The value prop is unclear. I'd happily pay $50 to contact a solid candidate, but from the way they describe it I feel like I'll be paying $50 to see a list of 10 people I probably don't care about.

Re: Please Poach Me

#113

Post by angelbob »

vidarh wrote: post #91
lpolovets wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very true. However, the impression I've gotten from recruiters emailing me is that most of them are just sending uncustomized emails to a lot of people who match some keywords. If that is the case, then contacting 100 people instead of to 25 people means an extra hour of work. I don't think it's worth paying $5/contact to avoid something that takes so little time.

Conversely most e-mails from recruiters get ignored. I'd be far more likely to take an e-mail that I know someone had to pay to get to me seriously, on the assumption it'd likely be better targeted.

That might be an argument for premium job sites like TheLadders advertised as ($100k+ jobs). It seems like they've backed off on that branding, though. So maybe that doesn't work out well in practice?

Re: Please Poach Me

#114

Post by mittermayr »

Peroni wrote: post #110
mittermayr wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i'd love for you to check out my company and concept. i'd really love to hear your thoughts.

Glad to. It will have to wait until I get home this evening however as my archaic work machine runs IE8 and you don't appear to support it (don't blame you!).

i worked for MS for a while and learned how many people are actually stuck with older browsers (office versions and OS versions) due to work/IT processes taking longer than consumer upgrades... well, sorry about that :)

there's a feature currently not visible on the site, but i'd be happy to demo it, it allows instant-searching our profiles, as a recruiter...

Re: Please Poach Me

#115

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

munin wrote: post #53

if you work for a small company (10-200), displaying the company name basically destroys any anonymity. why display your current company name?

Really. I can't think of single time when knowing where a candidate is/was working influenced me or any other interviewer on my team. It simply doesn't matter.

OK, there were a few times when we said in a debrief "how did someone so clueless ever get hired at XXX" but that's hardly a positive influence :-)

Re: Please Poach Me

#116

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

sdfjkl wrote: post #95

If I wanted to look for a job anonymously, the last thing I'd want to do would be to sign in with my LinkedIn profile. I'd probably rather make an extra email account somewhere and use that. It seems way to easy to implement a third column to this offer: Companies! Find out which of your rat bastard employees is about to abandon ship for only $50 (per month). Get email notifications as soon as one of your employees l…

Honestly, I'd like to know how often this actually happens.

Most employers with half a brain know that they will lose employees if a better offer comes along. Most of them also realize that at any given time, people are exploring their options. They also realize that the vast majority of them will stay put and won't leave without signalling in some way and it's really not a productive use of time scanning the web trying to figure out who might quit next.

I've worked for some pretty stupid people and even they wouldn't bother doing this.

Re: Please Poach Me

#117

Post by absconditus »

wpietri wrote: post #112
absconditus wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$50 is really nothing for recruiting.

Agreed. But even though I'm recruiting developers right now, I didn't sign up. The value prop is unclear. I'd happily pay $50 to contact a solid candidate, but from the way they describe it I feel like I'll be paying $50 to see a list of 10 people I probably don't care about.

I agree that the service is questionable. It is not clear that candidates will really be screened very well.

Re: Please Poach Me

#118

Post by leif »

angelbob wrote: post #73
kloncks wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got a call from a recruiter recently. Turns out he thinks I'll be a great candidate to be the new CEO of some algorithmic trading/financial services company in New York City...given my decades of experience in the field. MBA required. I'm a 21-year-old who just took a leave of absence to concentrate on Kout.me ; how is it that I'm even a target of these people yet?

They're desperate, and they get paid a lot if everything goes well. They could carefully screen each person for exact suitability, throw out bad matches and bring in only a few good ones. Or they could throw huge numbers of resumes and see if any stick. If the recruiter doesn't have excellent technical judgement (few do), the approaches basically pay the same.

What I don't understand is: why don't the recruiters that do carefully screen people just wipe out those that don't? Are there enough companies that are too clueless to hire a good one that the bad ones still get enough results to keep doing it?

Re: Please Poach Me

#119

Post by leif »

nl wrote: post #65
jonknee wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LinkedIn likes to brag about how it's reasonably priced... Just $18 per resume. "The cost to obtain a qualified resume on LinkedIn was less than CareerBuilder; $18.33 per resume versus $175.50." http://talent.linkedin.com/blog/index.php/2009/12/cost-per-r... I don't think pricing is going to be the problem here.

That's not comparable at all. Or rather it is, but it makes LinkedIn look exactly the same price, with a bigger candidate pool. The $18 per resume there is after human screening removed the bad resumes. Pleasepoachme charges $10 per match - and as far as I can see all they do is a text match on the requirements. In the post you linked to, he had to review 39 LinkedIn resumes to get 11 qualified candidates. Based on t…

With pleasepoach.me, it seems that choosing 11 candidates means paying $550 (but you get to look at 110 candidates). Am I wrong?

Re: Please Poach Me

#120

Post by Michael_K »

angryasian wrote: post #39
theli0nheart wrote: post #2

We built this with the hope that people will find the jobs they truly want. Let us know what your thoughts are. Most importantly, have fun with it ;)

how is this helping finding jobs that I'd want ? Wouldn't I just apply to the companies I'm interested, that are posting on job boards ?

It is, but only from the perspective of a passive seeker. As a passive seeker, you are not under time pressure to find another opportunity immediately. Receiving 1-5 offers a week that you digest in addition to you actively looking at job boards of companies you really want to land (Google, Square, FB, Twitter, Dropbox...) makes a great combination.
Post reply on HN