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

Downsides to working at a tech giant

blog.garrytan.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 583 posts

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#381

Post by akhilcacharya »

georgeburdell wrote: post #212
keithwhor wrote: post #90

The pessimism in this thread really bothers me. I’ve read anecdotes on entrepreneurship being on the decline, but it pains me to read so many negative takes on startups. We’re actively training our young people to avoid taking risks, and it’s going to fuck us — especially if some of those young people have the ambition be early employees at, say, a startup that takes on climate change in a big way. Look — the fact th…

FAANG pay has gone through the roof while startup pay has not. I am not a software engineer, but I still work in a field rife with startups. I don’t even work at a FAANG, but I do work for the industry leader in my field and I’m making a safe $250k annually after 5 years. I have gotten a few startup offers just to test the waters and I’m generally being offered $175k + $50k-$100k in stock options. Sounds OK if you ex…

$250k is new grad salary these days.

It's also why I'm so sad all the time!

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#382

Post by TuringNYC »

Dear @garry - Thanks for your article. I'm curious if you could comment on VC-driven "founder salaries" for startups. I've seen some fair setups and some very unfair setups.

I can appreciate this from the VC's perspective, they want the founder to be working to grow equity worth, not just to draw salary.

But I can also see how sub-market "founder salaries" would bias startup ownership towards either those with extreme risk appetites or towards those with family safety nets and wealth. How do you approach founder salaries?

Also, when judging founder salaries (knowing full well that will bias towards a small set of the population) how do you determine the comparable (e.g., Is it FAANG? Is it based on YoE as an Engineer? School? Degree?) Is this something that just is necessarily biased in favour of <25yos?

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#383

Post by seem_2211 »

georgeburdell wrote: post #212
keithwhor wrote: post #90

The pessimism in this thread really bothers me. I’ve read anecdotes on entrepreneurship being on the decline, but it pains me to read so many negative takes on startups. We’re actively training our young people to avoid taking risks, and it’s going to fuck us — especially if some of those young people have the ambition be early employees at, say, a startup that takes on climate change in a big way. Look — the fact th…

FAANG pay has gone through the roof while startup pay has not. I am not a software engineer, but I still work in a field rife with startups. I don’t even work at a FAANG, but I do work for the industry leader in my field and I’m making a safe $250k annually after 5 years. I have gotten a few startup offers just to test the waters and I’m generally being offered $175k + $50k-$100k in stock options. Sounds OK if you ex…

I think you've hit the nail on the head as to what's causing this.

1: FAANG companies have had a great decade in terms of stock prices which means employee options are enormous in terms of dollar value (even if salaries aren't huge on their own necessarily).

2: VCs are pumping much more money into the ecosystem, which destroys the equity play for employees. When companies are raising $100m Series C rounds, it changes the cap table in a brutal way. Cap tables ultimately add up to 100% which means someone has to be diluted.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#385

Post by dang »

pm90 wrote: post #256
keithwhor wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason I haven’t responded to the math changing is because it’s Christmastime and I’m spending time with family. Some of the responses to my post require a much more thoughtful answer than I can muster while at the gym between meeting family members. Be patient. I’ll respond to the other post if you wait.

This is a terrible comment. "Be patient" is a non-response. You made a comment, and got a very good response as to why your comment is missing nuances that might be the real reason for a change that you're attributing to something else. Especially in a forum like this one with no notifications, Be Patient is basically saying STFU.

"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#386

Post by seem_2211 »

I think the equity situation is bad, and only going to get worse. FAANG stocks have been on an absolute tear and VC firms have got more money to deploy than ever before.

If I were to bet on it, I think we'll see the tech industry move to a model that mirrors the financial world, with fixed year end bonuses, and no equity opportunities. That's what this thread is basically advocating for, even though right now it means working at Google and getting options.

$1b+ Venture Funds and employees getting generous equity grants don't match. I don't think VC is going away as an asset class anytime soon, and I don't think fund sizes will be dramatically (3-5x) smaller.

If anything, I'd say it's probably for the best for the average person working in tech. Most startup options aren't worth anything, and are highly illiquid.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#387

Post by sjg007 »

timboisvert wrote: post #65

If you have a family or you have a chronic illness, working at a big company -- at least in the US -- generally means better health benefits. I'd wager that health insurance alone is the most compelling reason why many people choose big companies over startups.

I mean if this is true we'd expect to see more startups out of Europe, Australia, New Zealand and the UK. Maybe the stats bear that out I dunno. I do know that the ACA has been credited by lots of folks as the reason they were able to start a company.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#388

Post by senordevnyc »

stoicShell wrote: post #211
senordevnyc wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You just can't use statistics when they say "95% fail", otherwise you just don't do startups, ever. With that mindset, joining an established company is more likely to "succeed" for you and maximize serenity. Actually, you certainly can do that. Most people do. And depending on what you're optimizing for, it seems pretty rational to me. Another stat for you: most entrepreneurs fail "about twice" before making it, i.e…

As I see it, if it comes down to such criteria to decide which path you'll take — i.e. you're in tech for the money — then it makes no sense to dabble in startups. Statistics clearly don't lie in this regard. What I meant however was a bit meta: those who are deeply cut for entrepreneurship and startups are not motivated by money first or even at all; they thus don't and shouldn't care about statistics aiming at maxi…

those who are deeply cut for entrepreneurship and startups are not motivated by money first or even at all

From working with many, many founders, this isn’t my experience at all.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#389

Post by Crash0v3rid3 »

malisper wrote: post #370
marcyb5st wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Googler here. I'm not sure when you interviewed or your friends worked at Google, but nowadays managers undergo some training (I can't tell you how thorough that is, because I didn't do it yet). Also, right now, I believe the norm is to have managers and TLs as separate positions, even in small teams (like mine, 5 people in total).

Over half of them worked for Google within the past two years. This is across New York, San Francisco, and Mountain View. One of them said they had a friend that wanted to become a manager and they were made a manager just like that.

This can't be true.

I just went through a 2 day required training as a new manager. This is required training that has to be done within the first 6 months of you becoming a manager.

This has been a requirement for many years.

Source: I'm a googler

Edit: just to add, the same training is required for TLMs. The moment you get a direct report the training becomes mandatory. I suspect there must be some miscommunication from the folks you spoke with.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#390

Post by christiansakai »

keithwhor wrote: post #219
yowlingcat wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the pessimism in this thread bothers you, imagine how much your woefully out of touch survivorship bias and bothers everyone else in this thread? One of the top comments that responds to your post tells you that the math changed. This is true. The fact that neither you nor Garry talk about the concrete specifics of this means that you're either unaware of it, or worse, intentionally sweeping over it. You really th…

The reason I haven’t responded to the math changing is because it’s Christmastime and I’m spending time with family. Some of the responses to my post require a much more thoughtful answer than I can muster while at the gym between meeting family members. Be patient. I’ll respond to the other post if you wait.

Please do. I honestly want to hear. I am debating whether to join a startup again for my next job or just crank Leetcode and go FAANG and stay for the rest of my life there.
Post reply on HN