5 ms·
> $65 per hour was a "good" rate for the Bay Area I'm confused, I thought Toptal workers were remote. Why would your location factor into the rate a client is
by aianus 7y ago
> $65 per hour was a "good" rate for the Bay Area
I'm confused, I thought Toptal workers were remote. Why would your location factor into the rate a client is willing to pay?
FWIW I charged even less than that as a remote contractor and it goes really, really far in countries like Vietnam or Thailand.
- sidlls 7y agoMy location wasn't the issue: I meant that Toptal was insisting companies located in the Bay Area would not want to pay more than about $65/hr (plus Toptal's surcharge). It was laughable, considering I was at that very moment working full-time at a company with a base salary with an hourly rate equivalent that was more than $65/hr, plus I got bonus, stock, and perks/benefits. As far as I was concerned, Toptal wanted contractors who'd bill like the were competing with E-lancers for business, while Toptal was marketing them as "top talent. "You get what you pay for," and while you (for example) might be an exception, "top talent" isn't going to charge bargain-bin prices for their labor.
- aianus 7y ago> "top talent" isn't going to charge bargain-bin prices for their labor Purchasing power differences in the world are insane: $65/h in Vietnam can represent a much more luxurious life than $200/h in San Francisco. In fact, the global top 1% starts at US$35k/year! At $65/h ($130k/year) you'd be able to buy a home outright in about a year, send your kids to snooty private schools, hire a maid and a private driver, etc. in a large part of the world.
- sidlls 7y agoThat doesn't mean much: a top-flight developer in Vietnam isn't going to underprice his or herself to that degree just because it costs a little less. If one can live that good on $65/hr, then $80 or $100 is that much better.