4 ms·
This is definitely an artifact of your data focusing on startups. These numbers are shockingly low for the larger or established companies. I also think focusi
by tedivm 9y ago
This is definitely an artifact of your data focusing on startups. These numbers are shockingly low for the larger or established companies.
I also think focusing on base salary may have been an easier choice but it is really doesn't paint an accurate picture. Between bonuses and stock I've had years where my base salary was roughly half of my overall compensation.
- didnotinfact 9y agoYep. I don't know why anyone would even get out of bed for these numbers. Between base, bonus, and stock a senior engineer at a large, profitable company (Apple, Facebook, Google, Amazon, Microsoft, etc) in the Bay Area will be grossing over $400k. The startups are offering similar base salaries, no bonuses, and 1/1000th or less share of a company that in all likelihood is worthless or, at best, illiquid. That's really backwards. If a startup wanted me to trade my shares that are as good as cash for shares that are essentially lottery tickets, they need to bring a _higher_ base salary, not a lower one. I guess startups only recruit the irrational?
- monaghanboy 9y ago>I guess startups only recruit the irrational? There are plenty of rational and not necessarily fiscal reasons why someone would prefer to work at a startup than at BigCo.
- kmonsen 9y agoThere are, but compensation is probably not one of them.