4 ms·
Lot's of companies do that, but the UK is kind of a strange place to choose to do that. If you want cheap, go hire a team of 10,000 engineers in Penang (I'm lo
by slivym 8y ago
Lot's of companies do that, but the UK is kind of a strange place to choose to do that. If you want cheap, go hire a team of 10,000 engineers in Penang (I'm looking at you Intel). If you want expensive, choose silicon valley. If you want 2nd tier, take a look at Canada. You can choose the UK, but why? Their time zone means you'll never be able to meet with them at the same time as your Malaysian and Californian offices. They're cheap - but no where near as cheap as the far east. And they've got a metric shit tonne of employment rights, which most US companies not only don't want the cost of, but also disagree with ideologically.
- Balero 8y agoThe timezone, whilst often being a negative, can also be a positive. If you need a service that is always up and supported, having three teams (GMT-8, GMT, GMT+8) is one of the best ways to do this. This puts the UK in the perfect place for a company needing this based in California. Also there is a good overlap for companies based on the east coast to do hand over, which I believe is common in finance.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- justincormack 8y agoThe employment rights in the UK are minor compared to most of the rest of Europe, and while you cant fire at will, it is easy to get get people out if you want to.
- noir_lord 8y agoTech multinationals are almost by definition 24/7 operations. The UK for an American tech company is a large stable country within 1-2 hours of the timezone of the largest single market in the world and has a shared language and culture. If you want to sell into Europe then Britain made sense...until the fuckwits voted for leave (yeah I'm bitter, they fucked over everyone my age and under).
- samdoidge 8y ago> If you want to sell into Europe then Britain made sense...until the fuckwits voted for leave (yeah I'm bitter, they fucked over everyone my age and under). I think this is where the 'Remoaner' labels come from.
- Lio 8y agoYou're right but 48% of us thought it was a terrible idea at the time and still haven't heard a good reason for leaving that doesn't involve vague patriotic ramblings. Plus on top of that many of the pro-leave arguments have proved to be outright lies already ...and we still haven't even left yet.
- samdoidge 8y agoIf you're genuinely interested, Jacob Rees Mogg has articulated many good reasons for leaving [1]. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUKjTPPcOdQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUKjTPPcOdQ
- walshemj 8y ago48% who voted and don't for get many British citizens where denied a vote in a breathtakingly example of gerrymandering that would make a Sothern democrat blush. oh and the Gross Incompetence of David Cameron in how they wrote the goddam question.
- QasimK 8y agoTyranny of the majority. And a tiny tiny majority at that, perhaps just statistical variation.
- njarboe 8y agoI found it strange that such a big decision was allowed to happen without a super-majority of some type. Why not have another vote and switch back, and then another? And I heard, but did not research, that technically the vote was not really binding in any case.
- walshemj 8y agoGood education and fully native speakers of English and a society that keeps "engineers and scientists" in their place so cheap also you save a lot on not having to provide heath care.