Live data from Hacker News

Top Hat Raises $22M to Go After Pearson, McGraw-Hill

bloomberg.com

131–140 of 165 posts

Re: Top Hat Raises $22M to Go After Pearson, McGraw-Hill

#131
post #126

I work at Top Hat in the Engineering Department but only joined in the past year. I have heard second hand that things were bad in the past (2+ years ago now) in terms of culture and work/life balance. Things have been great since I've joined and the exec team is VERY interested in what they can do to make things even better. Here are a few of my personal observations, both good and bad: - people most often work 10-6…

The accessibility to executives is something I've noticed even just working on contracts with Top Hat. I am surprised at the level of engagement that your VPs and C-suite execs have with customers. It certainly makes customers feel cared for.

Re: Top Hat Raises $22M to Go After Pearson, McGraw-Hill

#132
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe the CEO made the decision subconsciously and later rationalized the decision

Vast majority of people's decisions are made this way. CEO's are no different. Might be more so if they're moving super-fast managing a startup. So, this possibility should always be considered even if not stated as either the reason or a reason something happened.

The company's been around since 2009 apparently, I'm pretty sure they are no longer a startup, just a regular business that has to survive in the real world and all funding rounds are temporary loans.

Re: Top Hat Raises $22M to Go After Pearson, McGraw-Hill

#133
post #2

As a developer in the Toronto area, I suspect I would be working for Top Hat if their recruiters were better. I've had two or three interactions with them and each time they completely dropped the ball. Extra funding is great, but if they can't hire, they can't use it.

Recruiting is an imperfect endeavor.

That whole "85% personality, 15% skill" saying really applies here.

I've seen great developers get frustrated that they have to talk to a junior HR rep for their first screen and say things that were way over her head, or just flat out rude. (Not saying you were, or intentionally were at any rate.)

HR / Recruiters really piss me off too... I was working at a company as a contractor, helping to build their in-house dev team and transition them away from using contractors. I sent them one of the best devs I knew, and a great guy who had worked on very similar tech stack to boot. He didn't even make it to round 2.

His version: Well, the HR screener was 15 minutes late calling me, then wasted another 10 minutes asking questions about the wrong role -- an accounting role instead of a dev role. About the 4th accounting question in, I realized what was wrong and asked her if she was reading off the right question list. We got if fixed up, but she seemed really embarrassed.

Her version: He wouldn't have been a good fit for our company culture.

Total shame, but what can you do? The screener gets all the power in that situation... we trust her because we hired her, but she's clearly in a position where if she makes a mistake and doesn't want to own up to it... she can just sweep it under the rug. She has a bad day... wants to take it out on a candidate, what are you going to do about it? Her knowledge of tech is 100% limited to what sounds like a good answer relative to other answers other candidates have given her.

Culture fit, and the human side is important... probably a safe bet in most situations that if you can't talk with the bubbly 22 year-old recent college grad, you probably will have communication issues with others too. All you can do is be kind, move on to round 2 and hope you eventually get to talk to someone in your specialty smart enough to know how to actually rate your talent. =P

Re: Top Hat Raises $22M to Go After Pearson, McGraw-Hill

#134
post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vast majority of people's decisions are made this way. CEO's are no different. Might be more so if they're moving super-fast managing a startup. So, this possibility should always be considered even if not stated as either the reason or a reason something happened.

The company's been around since 2009 apparently, I'm pretty sure they are no longer a startup, just a regular business that has to survive in the real world and all funding rounds are temporary loans.

Point still stands but without the rush factor of startups.

Re: Top Hat Raises $22M to Go After Pearson, McGraw-Hill

#135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what are some of the other more interesting companies/startups in Toronto?

Shopify seems interesting. There really are not that many tech companies in Toronto (and that are hiring unless you have 5+ yrs of experience). Either 1. you have very very early stage startups (that expect you to work for free till they get funded), 2. funded startups that have a short runaway and expect you to work like crazy till they get to the next round of funding (during an interview with a fintech startup - i…

As someone who's worked as a Software Developer in Toronto for the past 13+ years, I totally disagree with this assessment.

First off, very few very early stage startups expect you to work for free until you get funded. Exceptions being that you're a co-founder or an unpaid intern that never touches code.

Secondly, while the startups in Toronto are probably less well funded than the ones in the US, not all require you to work for 12+ hours a day while paying you for 8 hours. It looks really shady to set these expectations especially since we have clear laws around overtime pay in Canada (describing such a work situation to friends will raise eyebrows -- definitely not the standard practice, whatever industry you work at).

Lastly, I'd say that any place worth working at (big or small) will be insanely picky about who they hire. Current employer included.

All of the above are from personal first hand experience. Of course I haven't worked for every single tech company in Toronto but I have worked for several (mainly early stage startups).

Re: Top Hat Raises $22M to Go After Pearson, McGraw-Hill

#136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the cost should be pushed onto me instead? I understand the struggles of adjuncts and grad-students as they were most of my friends in Undergrad because I came into school older. But not one of them used Top Hat or a clone equivalent.

The cost will continue to be passed on to you until there is a robust discussion about the financing model and the working conditions in academia. If any change is going to happen it's going to come through student effort; despite their protestations the position of the unions and the professors is to preserve the status quo . Back then we'd call this "revolutionary consciousness". The goals of the students will also…

I'm sorry you're so jaded, but how is textbook/online pricing not relevant to the financing model? There's no need to dismiss that avenue of conversation.

Re: Top Hat Raises $22M to Go After Pearson, McGraw-Hill

#137
post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it bother you that the majority of student see mandatory subscriptions to all of these services as a giant ripoff? I mean, you could save every student maybe 600 a year if the university purposely used books that are one edition out of date. That's the same as lowering tuition around 5% at most places. Would this really affect the quality of education in any meaningful way? "Strategic partnership" sounds like an…

I'm not involved in the curriculum development side of things, so I don't have much input into that. And prior to the implementation of Top Hat, our students had all been using physical "clickers" to respond to in-class questions. However, Top Hat implemented a program where the students could trade in their old clicker and get a 5 year Top Hat subscription. Plus a "Lifetime" Top Hat subscription is cheaper than buyi…

The problem with these lifetime subscriptions is that you never know if you're going to actually use them. Textbook prices are definitely a problem, but it's usually much easier to rent or resell textbooks than the equivalent of software.

You also don't buy textbooks until you actually need them. I know many students who have felt pressured into "saving money" on "all 4 years!" plans only to find they don't need a product most terms or they stay and extra semester/term/year and need to spend even more than they were planning.

Re: Top Hat Raises $22M to Go After Pearson, McGraw-Hill

#138

I teach biology at a community college and most of the services listed in that article wouldn't improve my courses. I've already switched three of my four courses over to open textbooks, which students can download for free or purchase for the cost of printing. I use Openstax for these. https://openstax.org/subjects For the online learning software, I've also dumped the publisher products and switched to the free spa…

Check out https://cogenteducation.com/products when you have a chance. We make interactive case studies for biology that go much further than any textbook, digital or otherwise. We have a free trial: https://cogenteducation.com/trial full disclosure: I'm a developer there

> I think most of my colleagues will be moved over to open educational resources within fifteen years, and I'm not sure there's long-term profit to be made in this market.

Sounds like he's looking for a free solution, not trialware.

Re: Top Hat Raises $22M to Go After Pearson, McGraw-Hill

#139
post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of Canadians have this attitude too. A very close friend of mine works for OPG (via a contractor). OPG and his contractor both have agreed to give him 2 weeks paid time off, and ~ 1 week of sick time off. However, taking time off ensures that you WILL get laid off (reasons would be made up ofc) during the next quarter. This basically forces everyone to not take time off (and work during vacations - my friend wo…

> OPG and his contractor both have agreed to give him 2 weeks paid time off, and ~ 1 week of sick time off. > However, taking time off ensures that you WILL get laid off (reasons would be made up ofc) during the next quarter. That's pretty bad though I wonder if it's actually illegal. In the USA most employment is "at will" so companies can fire you for anything or nothing. I'm not sure where taking vacation/sick day…

> That's pretty bad though I wonder if it's actually illegal. In the USA most employment is "at will" so companies can fire you for anything or nothing. I'm not sure where taking vacation/sick days counts from a labor law perspective but I wouldn't be surprised if it was within the rights of the company to fire employees who use them.

It might be illegal in Canada (not 100% sure) but a group of ex-employees that have been fired are suing the company.

> You see this a lot in the finance world as well. Nobody takes vacation during the year and piles it on at the end of the year when things are "change freezese". It's pretty silly.

This would still be understandable (as you'd expect people to take vacations at year end) - However he was indirectly told to forfeit his vacation completely (which in my opinion is scummy if not illegal).

> So how rampant is this though? If it's prevalent throughout Canada then it sounds like a symptom of a jobs gap. If most employers can be picky about picking employees who will skip vacations (again ignoring how stupid this sounds), then I'd argue there aren't many choices for employees to begin with.

I've personally seen it happen in Ontario (don't know if it happens in other provinces) but I don't think it's any different in other provinces either. In my opinion, it's a combination of:

1. fewer jobs

2. employers willing to sit tight till they get their "right" and submissive employee (because you can see thousands of job openings every single day and take it from me - I've applied to 100s of them but I have a feeling they are just fake - as in, companies post them to show growth/scale etc. but don't really hire - for example, Index Exchange and IBM both have a few positions open for which a friend got interviewed and passed on as he was not a culture fit - 10 months later....still unfilled)

3. most employees don't mind it in the slightest - or those who do, have already done what's necessary and move into better positions (or I'm hanging out with some some weird folks).

I've seen very few people who are really passionate about their job / stuff they build / improving etc. - for most, it's all about making enough $, and having enough to sustain your daily life PERIOD (and the cycle continues). You are considered crazy if you try to break this or don't like this routine.

Re: Top Hat Raises $22M to Go After Pearson, McGraw-Hill

#140
quote from email:

I know you recently saw a demo of Top Hat in action, and I want to personally make sure you are aware of a brand new promotion we're running!

To further enhance your lecture experience, we are now providing iPad Airs to professors using Top Hat with a total of 75 students or more this upcoming Spring or Summer term.

If this sounds like it's up your alley, simply click the button below!

Happy teaching,

Post reply on HN