5 ms·

What salary do you expect? The startup offers I've seen in the bay area for SWE a couple years out of school are pretty high, $150k - $185k which is pretty goo

What salary do you expect? The startup offers I've seen in the bay area for SWE a couple years out of school are pretty high, $150k - $185k which is pretty good cash comp from a startup. Higher than that is probably not a realistic expectation for most startups that are not flush with cash. They'd probably be happy to pay it or more for John Carmack, but you're probably not John Carmack.

freehunter 7y ago
If you’re a cash strapped startup that can’t afford to pay competitive SV wages, maybe you shouldn’t be in SV. There are plenty of cheaper places around the country with world class engineering schools to hire from and far lower cost of living. Madison WI and Pittsburgh PA come to mind.
- rak00n 7y ago
  It doesn't work that way. Silicon Valley is flooded with wanna-bes. So even if you're cash strapped you can still hire. Madison WI isn't. For the same reason it's easier to hire an actor in LA.
twblalock 7y ago
> The startup offers I've seen in the bay area for SWE a couple years out of school are pretty high, $150k - $185k which is pretty good cash comp from a startup. I agree that is pretty good for a Bay Area startup, but it is far below the total compensation a FAANG company offers today. After several years, the RSUs at a FAANG could pay out more every year than the salary, and they are immediately sellable on the open market. Startup options are likely to be worthless. This is why startups have a hard time hiring. A lot of engineers would rather work for FAANG or similar large companies, where they will make a lot more money with much less risk.
- fossuser 7y ago
  Yeah, but I think startups are a different bet - either on comp (betting on equity) or on learning (more access to building a company). OP seemed to suggest that startups have trouble hiring because they don't pay enough and I think that's not entirely true from what I've seen. They don't pay more than FAANG which is expected, but they're not underpaying for that trade-off. I do agree though that FAANG salaries have gotten extreme so it's a harder opportunity cost than it used to be. If you can swing $350k at Netflix or $200-400k+ total comp at the others and you work there for 5-10 years that's basically a small startup exit. I think it used to be less dramatic. I think the misery of the technical interview process is actually the thing that limits mobility most. Some of my extremely capable friends (that do work at FAANGs) don't optimize on moving around or income as much as they could because the process is so painful and anxiety inducing.
  - twblalock 7y ago
    The salary difference definitely used to be less dramatic. It is now at least a $100k difference in annual total comp, and it can be more than a $200k difference in some cases.
thanhhaimai 7y ago
This should give the rough idea, although it might be on the lower ends, since people with higher compensation tend to avoid attracting attention. https://www.levels.fyi/ https://www.levels.fyi/ > Higher than that is probably not a realistic expectation for most startups that are not flush with cash. Then isn't this an admission that there is no talent shortage? Again, that just means there is a shortage of talents who are willing to take the offer and work for $150k.
- fossuser 7y ago
  I mean by that definition sure, but you can kind of take that to any extreme right? Ultimately it's always in a context of a shortage at some price point. If you imagine there is only one employable tech worker, it'd be strange to claim that there is no shortage because you can hire away the one worker for a 20million dollar salary (or whatever the highest salary is to outbid all of the others).
ericd 7y ago
If they can't match FAANG's salary+totally liquid stock grant compensation (generally $300k+/yr for a seniorish engineer), which most startups can't, they need to offer more equity. I've seen way too many startups offering sub 1% to their first employee, despite asking them to take a large pay cut. It's absurd.
sys_64738 7y ago
Most startups shouldn't as they're lousy ideas doomed to fail. For anybody who hasn't done a startup you find 99% fail and the other 1% with a genuine exit strategy sure won't share the wealth with non-investors. That rules out employees who get some 'shares' at the promised IPO and forgo a decent salary in lieu of making the megabucks from IPO. It won't happen to you but if it does well done for being damn lucky.
- fossuser 7y ago
  If you're choosing to work at a startup you're basically an investor, but you're gambling your time instead of your capital (sort of - time is an opportunity cost of capital you could be making elsewhere). Not everyone is good at being an investor, but it's not entirely luck, there is skill in determining what companies are good and what companies are not.

freehunter 7y ago

If you’re a cash strapped startup that can’t afford to pay competitive SV wages, maybe you shouldn’t be in SV. There are plenty of cheaper places around the country with world class engineering schools to hire from and far lower cost of living. Madison WI and Pittsburgh PA come to mind.

rak00n 7y ago
It doesn't work that way. Silicon Valley is flooded with wanna-bes. So even if you're cash strapped you can still hire. Madison WI isn't. For the same reason it's easier to hire an actor in LA.

twblalock 7y ago

> The startup offers I've seen in the bay area for SWE a couple years out of school are pretty high, $150k - $185k which is pretty good cash comp from a startup. I agree that is pretty good for a Bay Area startup, but it is far below the total compensation a FAANG company offers today. After several years, the RSUs at a FAANG could pay out more every year than the salary, and they are immediately sellable on the open market. Startup options are likely to be worthless. This is why startups have a hard time hiring. A lot of engineers would rather work for FAANG or similar large companies, where they will make a lot more money with much less risk.

fossuser 7y ago
Yeah, but I think startups are a different bet - either on comp (betting on equity) or on learning (more access to building a company). OP seemed to suggest that startups have trouble hiring because they don't pay enough and I think that's not entirely true from what I've seen. They don't pay more than FAANG which is expected, but they're not underpaying for that trade-off. I do agree though that FAANG salaries have gotten extreme so it's a harder opportunity cost than it used to be. If you can swing $350k at Netflix or $200-400k+ total comp at the others and you work there for 5-10 years that's basically a small startup exit. I think it used to be less dramatic. I think the misery of the technical interview process is actually the thing that limits mobility most. Some of my extremely capable friends (that do work at FAANGs) don't optimize on moving around or income as much as they could because the process is so painful and anxiety inducing.
- twblalock 7y ago
  The salary difference definitely used to be less dramatic. It is now at least a $100k difference in annual total comp, and it can be more than a $200k difference in some cases.

thanhhaimai 7y ago

This should give the rough idea, although it might be on the lower ends, since people with higher compensation tend to avoid attracting attention. https://www.levels.fyi/ https://www.levels.fyi/ > Higher than that is probably not a realistic expectation for most startups that are not flush with cash. Then isn't this an admission that there is no talent shortage? Again, that just means there is a shortage of talents who are willing to take the offer and work for $150k.

fossuser 7y ago
I mean by that definition sure, but you can kind of take that to any extreme right? Ultimately it's always in a context of a shortage at some price point. If you imagine there is only one employable tech worker, it'd be strange to claim that there is no shortage because you can hire away the one worker for a 20million dollar salary (or whatever the highest salary is to outbid all of the others).

ericd 7y ago

If they can't match FAANG's salary+totally liquid stock grant compensation (generally $300k+/yr for a seniorish engineer), which most startups can't, they need to offer more equity. I've seen way too many startups offering sub 1% to their first employee, despite asking them to take a large pay cut. It's absurd.

sys_64738 7y ago

Most startups shouldn't as they're lousy ideas doomed to fail. For anybody who hasn't done a startup you find 99% fail and the other 1% with a genuine exit strategy sure won't share the wealth with non-investors. That rules out employees who get some 'shares' at the promised IPO and forgo a decent salary in lieu of making the megabucks from IPO. It won't happen to you but if it does well done for being damn lucky.

fossuser 7y ago
If you're choosing to work at a startup you're basically an investor, but you're gambling your time instead of your capital (sort of - time is an opportunity cost of capital you could be making elsewhere). Not everyone is good at being an investor, but it's not entirely luck, there is skill in determining what companies are good and what companies are not.