5 ms·
"$200k per year" is only conservative if you look at tech jobs in San Francisco. It is an substantial amount of money in the rest of the world.
by callesgg 10y ago
"$200k per year" is only conservative if you look at tech jobs in San Francisco.
It is an substantial amount of money in the rest of the world.
- SwellJoe 10y agoMicrosoft historically pays slightly better than Google and other valley companies. And, the cost of an employee is usually significantly higher than the salary alone. Something like 30%-60% higher, when factoring in benefits, cost of providing offices, stock options, etc. So, $200k is pretty conservative in many tech hubs, not just the valley, particularly when you're talking about people involved in research (who are more likely to have obtained graduate degrees).
- rifung 10y agoWhere are you getting this information from? I got an offer from Microsoft and it definitely wasn't even close to what people who get offers from FB or Google get. Anecdotally, pay I've seen from Google and FB are higher than Microsoft/Amazon, but of course that's not saying much. Still, the first source I can find matches what I've seen: https://blog.step.com/2016/04/08/an-open-source-project-for-tech-salaries/ https://blog.step.com/2016/04/08/an-open-source-project-for-...
- SwellJoe 10y agoMy information may be out of date. My friends who've chosen between Google and Microsoft got better offers from MS; though often ended up going to Google anyway, because they just liked it better. But, it was all several years ago.
- dmead 10y agoGoogle has a consistent reputation for paying a bit lower than other giants.
- hinkley 10y agoYou realize you're comparing job offers in the most expensive city in the western hemisphere to offers in Seattle, right?
- rifung 10y agoI was only strictly considering pay because that's what the post/comment thread was about. Also, Google and Facebook have offices in Seattle, and from what I understand the pay between their HQ and Seattle offices are the same.
- dekhn 10y agoit's worth more in seattle because there is no state income tax!
- sitkack 10y agoSoon to be the second most expensive city.
- seanmcdirmid 10y agoMicrosoft pays well, but this is the first time I've heard them paying better than google. When I was at MS, there were always complaints about losing potential hires to Google over much higher salaries.
- home_boi 10y agoAnd free food. Can't forget about the free food.
- int_19h 10y agoComparing MS salaries in Redmond to Google salaries in Mountain View is rather apples and oranges. Cost of living is different (esp. once you start shopping for houses), state taxes are drastically different etc. Now, Google also has an office in Kirkland. That would be an interesting place to compare. But it's also not particularly large.
- siculars 10y agoI don't appreciate the "cost of living" salary differential excuse, and let me tell you why... Ask yourself, does Microsoft charge me less for Windows or Office if I live in, say, Kansas? No, they don't.
- int_19h 10y agoWhy would that matter in the slightest when you're actually shopping for a job? Either the pay is more (in terms of quality of life it translates to while residing where you need to live to commute), or not.
- valleyer 10y agoRelatively little of your money is spent on those kinds of things though. If you're like most people, most of your money goes to taxes, a place to live, and food. Those are location-dependent.