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

Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

neomindlabs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 441 posts

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#301

Post by vageli »

MattGaiser wrote: post #59
BrentOzar wrote: post #15

Instead of "hit by a bus," I prefer the term "win the lotto." Any member of your team could win a life-changing amount of money in the lottery, inherit it, win a gambling bet, etc. Frame it as a good thing rather than a death or a change of hire - somebody might just flat out retire because they don't financially need your employment anymore.

I see this one as a different problem. If your team members who won the lotto would just give their two weeks and quit, then your company/team has a substantial morale/motivation problem. Such a company is not creating an environment where people enjoy being a part of it.

What would you expect someone who just won the lottery to do? Continue working and not enjoy a vacation, etc? Keeping contact with friends made in the workplace is completely orthogonal to giving notice after winning the lottery, and taking a long vacation.

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#302

Post by Spooky23 »

FartyMcFarter wrote: post #176
benrbray wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Google is willing to pay 200k above market rate to hire an employee from a competitor, chances are part of the "value" of that employee is that they will no longer be working for someone else. Yes, literally speaking, it's "worth it" to Google, or they wouldn't do it. Being so large, Google can throw advertising money on their self-driving car division, no problem. They can take a loss for 5-10 years, no problem.…

> If Google is willing to pay 200k above market rate This is not possible according to the usual definition of "market rate". If Google is willing to pay X, that is the market rate.

The law defines practices that, while they happen in a marketplace, are anti-competitive and thus problematic. It is not anti-competitive to own the gas station next to the airport and charge a premium for gas. It is anti-competitive to buy out surrounding gas stations and close them to extract higher prices, or to conspire with competing stations to coordinate pricing.

Single-firm anticompetitive behavior, as defined by FTC: (https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/anticompetitive-practices)

Single Firm Conduct:

"It is unlawful for a company to monopolize or attempt to monopolize trade, meaning a firm with market power cannot act to maintain or acquire a dominant position by excluding competitors or preventing new entry. It is important to note that it is not illegal for a company to have a monopoly, to charge “high prices,” or to try to achieve a monopoly position by aggressive methods. A company violates the law only if it tries to maintain or acquire a monopoly through unreasonable methods."

Horizontal Conduct:

"It is illegal for businesses to act together in ways that can limit competition, lead to higher prices, or hinder other businesses from entering the market. The FTC challenges unreasonable horizontal restraints of trade. Such agreements may be considered unreasonable when competitors interact to such a degree that they are no longer acting independently, or when collaborating gives competitors the ability to wield market power together. Certain acts are considered so harmful to competition that they are almost always illegal. These include arrangements to fix prices, divide markets, or rig bids."

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#303

Post by shard »

mhaberl wrote: post #226
whatshisface wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Google is willing to pay $200k over your current employer for you, your employer is paying you $200k under your market rate.

You can view this issue from another standpoint. Imagine some market where 10 companies sell bread and it costs $5. And lets assume that the costs are $4 and $1 is profit. Then comes a company that makes its money on selling water and it is doing very well. It comes to a bread market and starts selling bread for $3. The competition is quickly destroyed and the bread prices rise. Edit: as a sibling comment mentioned:…

I believe a better analogy would be that the 11th company comes and is willing to pay higher costs while still selling at the same price. That company gets the best ingredients at that cost, the suppliers prefer to sell to that company, and denies it to the first 10 companies. The 11th company might even raise prices since their product is better. I don't think predatory pricing would apply in this situation.

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#304

Post by reaperducer »

game_the0ry wrote: post #23

I agree with the author's point about using popular tech stacks to alleviate the ramp-up time for new hire productivity, but that is not the optimal solution. The optimal solution is for management to not let high-productivity talent from leaving - increase their comp to whatever offers they might get in the open market. That's how labor economic works - it's a market. Investment bank and management consulting figure…

The optimal solution is for management to not let high-productivity talent from leaving - increase their comp to whatever offers they might get in the open market. That's how labor economic works - it's a market.

Life is not that simple, and cannot be boiled down into "it's a market."

People are messy. They leave companies for all kinds of reasons. They just broke up with someone and want to start a new life. They don't like the weather. The have to take care of an ailing relative. They've picked up a hobby (surfing, hiking, skiing) that is inconvenient where you are, or more important to them than money. Very often they just want a change.

It's common for HN-types to try to reduce everything to a numbers game, but people aren't numbers. They're not strings of attributes that can be quantified by an AI. They're human beings, and human beings will always be unpredictable.

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#305

Post by ghaff »

mcguire wrote: post #282
whatshisface wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Google is willing to pay $200k over your current employer for you, your employer is paying you $200k under your market rate.

Let's say your value to most employers is $100k---this is the amount of money you make for them balanced against the amount you want in order to work for them. Then the Goog enters the picture and is willing to add another $200k premium to that, in order to prevent you from working for that employer. This isn't sustainable; you're still you and your direct value to Goog is only $100k. The additional amount represents…

Of course it's probably also possible for it to be that you're uniquely valuable to Google in the context of their other people, infrastructure, and strategy. Especially as people acquire specialized skills and experience, they can be worth a lot more to some companies than others.

This is true of everyone of course. Even a more or less commodity junior Javascript developer isn't worth much more than their generalized ability to do random tasks to a company that doesn't do any software development.

But some people have a skillset and track record that is very valuable to some companies but that would make it hard to be hired at most.

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#306

Post by [deleted] »

ISL wrote: post #194
nhumrich wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The correlary is that McDonalds could offer free burgers for a year, they have enough money to handle the cost. They could do it just so that other business cant stay affloat. This doesn't mean that the market price of a McDonalds burger is $0

It does if McDonalds decides that it wishes to dump burgers. The ask price would fall to $0. The market will correct very quickly, as competitors will immediately head over to McDonalds to purchase $\infty$ burgers at $0, killing MCD dead in seconds. The moment McDonalds applies a purchase limit (Free burgers! Limit 5 per customer), the burgers have non-zero cost, as they require a person's time in order to purchase.…

[deleted]

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#307

Post by biztos »

benrbray wrote: post #153
sjburt wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really fail to see the distinction. If someone is willing to pay 600k for something, then the value of that thing on the market is 600k. That is what a market is.

If Google is willing to pay 200k above market rate to hire an employee from a competitor, chances are part of the "value" of that employee is that they will no longer be working for someone else. Yes, literally speaking, it's "worth it" to Google, or they wouldn't do it. Being so large, Google can throw advertising money on their self-driving car division, no problem. They can take a loss for 5-10 years, no problem.…

If I hire Brad Pitt to be in my (post-pandemic) summer blockbuster film, part of the value he adds is that he is not simultaneously in your summer blockbuster film, and so people who really want to watch Brad Pitt will choose my film over yours.

I don't think what you're describing is anti-competitive behavior, rather it's omni-competitive. Pretty much all the money Google throws at anything is "advertising money" but if they are really trying to make self-driving cars, what's wrong with that?

Should my Brad Pitt Summer Blockbuster profits not be able to bankroll my Teletubbies Christmas Special?

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#308

Post by RobRivera »

sjburt wrote: post #129
thomascgalvin wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The reality is that the employee was being taken advantage of by the employer and received an offer more closely aligned with their actual value. In the vast majority of cases, I agree. If someone is working at CompuTech for $100K per year, and gets an offer from TechuComp for $110K per year, that's market forces working in favor of the developer. This is a good thing. But there is the possibility for entities the…

I really fail to see the distinction. If someone is willing to pay 600k for something, then the value of that thing on the market is 600k. That is what a market is.

Correct, if I place a market order for 100 shares I expect to pay a premium for current national best bid price. Same thing here - it's the price you pay for taking liquidity from an illiquid market (the labor market)

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#309

Post by paulgb »

JackFr wrote: post #265
paulgb wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the companies had a contractual agreement that their recruiting agency would block each other's employees from applying, that sounds like a non-poaching agreement of the sort that Apple and Google were fined hundreds of millions for.

I'm pretty sure they weren't fined. I believe they were sued and settled with no admission of wrongdoing.

Ah, you're right, I was mixing up the DOJ action (not involving a fine) circa 2010 with a later civil suit [1]. In any case, it cost them hundreds of millions.

1. https://venturebeat.com/2014/05/23/4-tech-companies-are-payi... (adding to the confusion, Venture Beat incorrectly calls it a fine)

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#310

Post by msla »

benrbray wrote: post #188
FartyMcFarter wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If Google is willing to pay 200k above market rate This is not possible according to the usual definition of "market rate". If Google is willing to pay X, that is the market rate.

I disagree with your definition of "market rate", but let's suppose you're right: Do you not see it as a problem that Google alone decides the cost of entry to an entire market?

> Do you not see it as a problem that Google alone decides the cost of entry to an entire market?

This puts Google in the position of being a monopsony for the labor of programmers; that is, they're the only or primary buyer of that commodity. Part of antitrust laws is preventing that, so, yes, there is a problem if a monopsony arises, but Google isn't in that position anyway because jobs aren't completely interchangeable the same way programmers aren't completely interchangeable. For example, companies can compete on the basis of not being Google, which attracts some people. Companies can compete on the basis of being based in some other geographic location, or having other things to work on, or having a different mix of salary and benefits.

Google offering the highest salary doesn't mean they automatically get everyone. It means they get people who want the highest salary to do what Google's interested in as opposed to wanting to work on some kinds of technology Google isn't pursuing.

Post reply on HN