14 ms·

Sorry to say but this proves that for someone who actually has to work for a living ie earn money, corporate life is absolutely the correct choice. Even for Mr

Sorry to say but this proves that for someone who actually has to work for a living ie earn money, corporate life is absolutely the correct choice. Even for Mr Lynch these experiments in charity wouldn’t be possible without the nest egg from google (which he acknowledged). To go from net 100k+ to below zero and still be unprofitable after two years is a financial disaster.

gk1 7y ago
It seems OP is perfectly happy creating small sites and products. One can earn perfectly good money from consulting or contracting, but OP chose not to.
tonyedgecombe 7y ago
It's hard starting a business and most people (90%) don't earn anymore than an employee. None the less some of us just aren't cut out for the corporate life. I'd pick poverty over the lack of autonomy, petit politics and meaningless work any day.
- xwdv 7y ago
  What if the poverty was really, REALLY bad? As in soul crushing, no way out, maybe-kill-yourself, type of poverty? I doubt you’d make that switch so easily.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - tonyedgecombe 7y ago
    That's really another question, I have a lot of sympathy for people in that situation but it isn't what we are talking about here.
    - xwdv 7y ago
      I don’t think you understand what poverty is, if you are choosing poverty over “lack of autonomy in the workplace”. Poverty doesn’t liberate you, it restricts you, and not just in the workplace, but in your entire life. Want to go on a trip or eat fancy food? Too bad you can’t, because you don’t have money and you’re broke poor. Want to get a great career? Too bad, you got to work at fast food joint because you can’t afford the education. Want kids? Nope you can’t afford it so keep it in your pants, and women don’t want to get serious with some broke dude anyway. There is no way you’d choose poverty. There is little advantage to being poor in society that punishes being poor.
      - tonyedgecombe 7y ago
        As I said, "I have a lot of sympathy for people in that situation but it isn't what we are talking about here."
  - aguyfromnb 7y ago
    What sort of question is this? Do you think anyone would pick "soul-crushing maybe-kill-yourself poverty" over working at Google? We are talking about programmers here. Unless there are unique circumstances that sort of poverty is off the table.
    - cycloptic 7y ago
      >Do you think anyone would pick "soul-crushing maybe-kill-yourself poverty" over working at Google? I've done this before and I would do it again. I wish I had something profound to add but I don't. Working in a corporate environment is just incredibly grating.
      - xwdv 7y ago
        Is being poor also not incredibly grating?
        hungalopithecus 7y ago
        Yes it is but at least you don't have to pretend like one does in a corporate environment.
        cycloptic 7y ago
        It is. But consider that if your poverty happens because an org shuffle at Google got you fired, the ultimate source of your woes is the same. Also "being poor" is generally not the fault of the poor person. Accepting a job however, is the fault of the employed person.
- chasd00 7y ago
  " I'd pick poverty over the lack of autonomy, petit politics and meaningless work any day." Would you also put your kids in poverty? It's not a simple when you think beyond yourself.
  - Grimm1 7y ago
    I haven't made the choice to have children and so it doesn't apply to me. That is your decision and that class of problem doesn't apply to everyone.
    - thrownblown 7y ago
      Well if you do, know that the $3k/mo saas that took 2 years to build isn't going to put that kid through college but will allow you to be a present and engaged parent to your child for the precious few years before they go to school.
      - wolco 7y ago
        College can be free. Three 3k/mo saases would.
        thrownblown 7y ago
        I wouldn't know... I didn't go...
        wolco 7y ago
        You haven't gone yet? There are great free universities online if you are still interested.
        BeatLeJuce 7y ago
        Which ones would you recommend? The ones I've seen so far looked like extended bootcamps. Which I guess is fine if you're looking for CS knowledge. But lutise of that, any recommendations?
- Grimm1 7y ago
  Yeah the focus on exclusively money baffles me. Like cool you get to buy a bigger house and go on some nicer vacations. Depending on the big co, they own you. I can't say I'm not working as an employee right now but every time I've been "broke" and free to do whatever project and take on work as I see fit I've been probably 50-70% happier when you factor in stress from shakier income. That said I understand risk tolerances and it not being everyone's cup of tea but saying everyone should be a corporate employee ignores an entire set of priorities people tend to have besides stability and money.
  - criley2 7y ago
    On the flip side, working for yourself means the job never ends. As an employee you can do 8 hours at work, 16 hours for yourself. You can drop a project and pick it up the next day. The client is pissed? You're still making your salary. It's up to management to staff correctly, not up to you to kill yourself overworking for a salary and no overtime. When it's just you, and your entire livelihood depends on sucking up to big fish to get that one payday that will float you for the next few months while you find another big fish, the boundaries between work and home dissolve. You feel a constant stress to get projects done and you even lay awake at night terrified of what happens if your next big fish doesn't materialize. Your performance in any one task decreases because you have to wear every hat. You're a good programmer, but are you a good businessman? Advertiser? Hustler? Lawyer? Can you afford a team? Will do you everything yourself? If you're still a kid, don't have debts, don't own property, don't have a family, don't have any roots, the risk/reward and excitement of this chaotic and generally financially ruinous lifestyle could be good or even make you happy. But for many people, the stress of putting your family, your investments, your retirement and ultimately your future on the line is one of the most unhappy things possible. I don't think there is anything wrong with doing your 8 hours to make a living, and then taking the next 8 hours to enrich your life -- not for profit, but for health. Exercise, learning and growing, cooking and entertaining, starting a family, investing in life and happiness outside of coding... it's just notoriously difficult to do these things as an entrepreneur, and all the "big successes" as a rule (with exceptions) are "16 hour workers", as in, 100% of useful waking hours spent on the job.
    - 7y ago
- untog 7y ago
  > lack of autonomy, petit politics and meaningless work This isn't a given. Plenty of (particularly large) companies will inflict this on you, but it's also very possible to work at a company and have autonomy and do meaningful work.
  - sidlls 7y ago
    I think the odds of having that sort of autonomy in a corporate job are lower than being a successful “lifestyle” business owner. It’s exceptionally rare to find it in the corporate world, where stability, process, and politics are the primary focus of work to deliver the company’s product/service.
JacKTrocinskI 7y ago
Totally agree, would never do what OP has done, I like my job and what I do plus I get paid well.
- tempsy 7y ago
  good for you? for most of history everyone worked for themselves. one could argue the modern day corporate structure is completely unnatural and doesn't fit (most) everyone.
  - JacKTrocinskI 7y ago
    Everything we do as humans is "unnatural" and what really doesn't fit for "most" everyone is earning near nothing for 2 straight years.
    - tempsy 7y ago
      This person is F.I.R.E’d. These are fun projects. He didn’t suggest this was appropriate for anyone but himself
theli0nheart 7y ago
> Sorry to say but this proves that for someone who actually has to work for a living ie earn money, corporate life is absolutely the correct choice. Not really. This just proves that corporate life isn't the most profitable option for the OP. You just can't make sweeping statements like this based on a single anecdote. I'll offer this to other "corporate" folk out there. I was self-employed since late 2010 until I recently (last month) joined a mid-stage startup. During my last year of self-employment I took home ~$400k in cash, and lots more in early-stage stock, and worked maybe 15-20 hours per week. There are very few corporate jobs that would even come close to that balance of take-home pay and work-life balance.
- liveoneggs 7y ago
  how did you get early stage stock being self employed?
  - theli0nheart 7y ago
    Most of my consulting work was with early-stage startups. I would ofter offer a fixed cash cap (say, $50k) at an hourly rate, and any work beyond that would accrue towards a SAFE. Less risk for the founder, gave me incentive to finish the bulk of the work within the cap, but also didn't punish me if I didn't.
    - liveoneggs 7y ago
      neat
    - dbancajas 7y ago
      what was your hourly rate on consulting?
      - theli0nheart 7y ago
        $300 / hour.
    - redisman 7y ago
chrisseaton 7y ago
Right - the vast majority of people even in tech need to buy their children shoes and put food on the family table and those things are going to be very hard without a stable corporate income.
neogodless 7y ago
I think the correct lesson is a little different. First, if you do rake in corporate money, and don't spend it all, you'll have a nest egg which gives you so much more choice in how you live the rest of your life. Second, if you don't have a nest egg - yeah you can't just gamble that you'll build software-as-a-service and instantly be making enough money to live. As he said, people assumed he'd use freelance to make up the difference. He didn't, but it is an option. Now freelance/contracting can be nearly as corporate as a full-time office job, and it isn't as stable an income, but it can pay really well. For many software engineers three months of full-time contracting could pay for a year's worth of expenses. (Assuming you make choices that align with that goal.) This would let you spend a great deal more time focusing on your business goals, and give you some freedom to fail some of the time.
s_y_n_t_a_x 7y ago
It's not always about the money. It's about the happiness. If it doesn't work out, it's not like he lost the knowledge, he can still easily get a job anywhere. Probably even a bump from the startup experience.
tempsy 7y ago
If you have the savings then why not? There is probably not a better time in history than to check out from being a corporate drone, assuming you have the savings. The stock index returned 30% last year...a $1M nest egg returned $300K in a year. I don't know what his savings looks like but I assume most of it is invested and wasn't included in these numbers.
- bognition 7y ago
  The returns in 2019 were exceptionally good. There’s little reason to assume 2020 will be as good. With everything going on this year: Brexit, US elections, impeachment, corona virus, etc... it’s entirely possible this years returns could be negative.
  - tempsy 7y ago
    Sure, I mean it doesn't sound like his plan was to live off his investment income, but it certainly has been possible. My point is that when you get to the point where your savings is high enough your money works for you at a level that makes it possible to live off of alone. If the S&P is looking flat then you could rollover some of it to a high dividend REIT that pays 10-15% too.
    - aguyfromnb 7y ago
      >If the S&P is looking flat then you could rollover some of it to a high dividend REIT that pays 10-15% too. You know the business cycle is peaking when people think you can easily throw their money into some investment paying 15%...no problem! Can you explain how a public investment - any public investment - can continuously generate those kinds of returns without taking on massive amounts of risk?
      - tempsy 7y ago
        It’s called a REIT. The dividend is rental income for real estate developers. Let me guess...you thought 2013 was the top?
BlueTemplar 7y ago
And yet, losing money for the first 2-3 years is AFAIK typical for new companies (especially those with 1-2 employees).
steve76 7y ago
Life's bad! Bullies win! People always say yes! --- --- --- --- --- --- Friends and family die in poverty! Help someone only to get left behind! Pursue knowledge just to study to the job interview! --- --- --- --- --- --- Flock to corporate HQ! Earn $1 just to spend $2! All from a glorified credit card! --- --- --- --- --- --- $10 a gallon gasoline! $10,000 a month rent! Bailouts! Bailouts! Bailouts! --- --- --- --- --- --- ... ... ... all I got in return was some crummy Pepsi halftime show. You own the problems of other people and if you don't fix it now it's only going to get worse. And you have to really fix it, not just give it lip service. Get a security clearance, and you find out the REALLY bad stuff that goes on, like everything is a front for the police and a lot more people die horribly than you would believe. It's a fierce competition up top. The highest stakes imaginable. Death everywhere. Stay alive by any means. People you thought were friends turn brutal overnight, and I fault no one for abstaining. Carroll Shelby died wanting to make young people enthusiastic about cars again. He turned around and asked them to give up $40,000. He, and all of us, would have been better off sourcing parts from them. The best thing for business today is to be a job maker. Not to spike opioid sales. Not to win at zero sum politics. Not to game the courts with people made for the law. Just bundle work, ie customers, along with the product. Don't fire anyone. Really what is it you are evangelizing? Being a dick to everyone? :( Isn't it easier to sell "Life should be fun and people should be happy." :) Not that difficult either. I open up VS Code, I have customers. Real earnings. How difficult is that?
bdcravens 7y ago
The other choice is to not focus 100% on products, but rather, consult and work on your products on the side, and dial back the consulting as your products attain viability.
NKCSS 7y ago
Nah, but it's hard to launch a successfull product; if it wasn't, everyone would be doing it. I'm doing contracting work for multiple different customers, long-term project, and I generate 100-200k of revenue on a yearly basis from that. That leaves me with slightly higher salary than if I'd work for a boss, but I have tonnes, and tonnes more freedom and time for my kids. It's just not possible to scale that past 300k/yr, because there's only so much time you can sell. Once you have a product, you can scale it through the roof, since a digital product, if set up well, has negligible costs, will allow you to earn way more, but only if you find something that people want bad enough to pay for and a large enough group to pay for it. Loads and loads of people have the skills required to build a product, but not a lot have the right idea and marketing to go along with it to make it a success.
- dbancajas 7y ago
  how many customers per year? and how do you deal with insurance?
  - NKCSS 7y ago
    Around 10 customers. I have recently gotten a liability because a client demanded it, didn’t have any before.
- jlevers 7y ago
  While I generally agree with you that products can scale much higher than consulting income-wise, when you say it's impossible to scale what you're doing past 300k/year due to time constraints...why not charge more for your time? If you have more people asking you to do work for them than you have time for, I'd think that clients would be willing to pay more in order to make it onto your schedule.
- ianmcgowan 7y ago
  Wait, why do you think "it's just not possible to scale that past 300k/yr"? I have at least one counter-example ;-) In general, the way it's worked for me is if I have multiple potential new gigs, I ask for more money. When the next gig comes along, that's my new baseline. Over the last 6 years that's helped moved the hourly rate to a number I wouldn't have asked for upfront. I hate to say no to customers too, so sometimes end up working 60-70 hour weeks in bursts. It's worth it though, because when things get quiet, I can go snowboarding for a week without asking a boss for permission...

gk1 7y ago

It seems OP is perfectly happy creating small sites and products. One can earn perfectly good money from consulting or contracting, but OP chose not to.

tonyedgecombe 7y ago

It's hard starting a business and most people (90%) don't earn anymore than an employee. None the less some of us just aren't cut out for the corporate life. I'd pick poverty over the lack of autonomy, petit politics and meaningless work any day.

xwdv 7y ago
What if the poverty was really, REALLY bad? As in soul crushing, no way out, maybe-kill-yourself, type of poverty? I doubt you’d make that switch so easily.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- tonyedgecombe 7y ago
  That's really another question, I have a lot of sympathy for people in that situation but it isn't what we are talking about here.
  - xwdv 7y ago
    I don’t think you understand what poverty is, if you are choosing poverty over “lack of autonomy in the workplace”. Poverty doesn’t liberate you, it restricts you, and not just in the workplace, but in your entire life. Want to go on a trip or eat fancy food? Too bad you can’t, because you don’t have money and you’re broke poor. Want to get a great career? Too bad, you got to work at fast food joint because you can’t afford the education. Want kids? Nope you can’t afford it so keep it in your pants, and women don’t want to get serious with some broke dude anyway. There is no way you’d choose poverty. There is little advantage to being poor in society that punishes being poor.
    - tonyedgecombe 7y ago
      As I said, "I have a lot of sympathy for people in that situation but it isn't what we are talking about here."
- aguyfromnb 7y ago
  What sort of question is this? Do you think anyone would pick "soul-crushing maybe-kill-yourself poverty" over working at Google? We are talking about programmers here. Unless there are unique circumstances that sort of poverty is off the table.
  - cycloptic 7y ago
    >Do you think anyone would pick "soul-crushing maybe-kill-yourself poverty" over working at Google? I've done this before and I would do it again. I wish I had something profound to add but I don't. Working in a corporate environment is just incredibly grating.
    - xwdv 7y ago
      Is being poor also not incredibly grating?
      - hungalopithecus 7y ago
        Yes it is but at least you don't have to pretend like one does in a corporate environment.
      - cycloptic 7y ago
        It is. But consider that if your poverty happens because an org shuffle at Google got you fired, the ultimate source of your woes is the same. Also "being poor" is generally not the fault of the poor person. Accepting a job however, is the fault of the employed person.
chasd00 7y ago
" I'd pick poverty over the lack of autonomy, petit politics and meaningless work any day." Would you also put your kids in poverty? It's not a simple when you think beyond yourself.
- Grimm1 7y ago
  I haven't made the choice to have children and so it doesn't apply to me. That is your decision and that class of problem doesn't apply to everyone.
  - thrownblown 7y ago
    Well if you do, know that the $3k/mo saas that took 2 years to build isn't going to put that kid through college but will allow you to be a present and engaged parent to your child for the precious few years before they go to school.
    - wolco 7y ago
      College can be free. Three 3k/mo saases would.
      - thrownblown 7y ago
        I wouldn't know... I didn't go...
        wolco 7y ago
        You haven't gone yet? There are great free universities online if you are still interested.
        BeatLeJuce 7y ago
        Which ones would you recommend? The ones I've seen so far looked like extended bootcamps. Which I guess is fine if you're looking for CS knowledge. But lutise of that, any recommendations?
Grimm1 7y ago
Yeah the focus on exclusively money baffles me. Like cool you get to buy a bigger house and go on some nicer vacations. Depending on the big co, they own you. I can't say I'm not working as an employee right now but every time I've been "broke" and free to do whatever project and take on work as I see fit I've been probably 50-70% happier when you factor in stress from shakier income. That said I understand risk tolerances and it not being everyone's cup of tea but saying everyone should be a corporate employee ignores an entire set of priorities people tend to have besides stability and money.
- criley2 7y ago
  On the flip side, working for yourself means the job never ends. As an employee you can do 8 hours at work, 16 hours for yourself. You can drop a project and pick it up the next day. The client is pissed? You're still making your salary. It's up to management to staff correctly, not up to you to kill yourself overworking for a salary and no overtime. When it's just you, and your entire livelihood depends on sucking up to big fish to get that one payday that will float you for the next few months while you find another big fish, the boundaries between work and home dissolve. You feel a constant stress to get projects done and you even lay awake at night terrified of what happens if your next big fish doesn't materialize. Your performance in any one task decreases because you have to wear every hat. You're a good programmer, but are you a good businessman? Advertiser? Hustler? Lawyer? Can you afford a team? Will do you everything yourself? If you're still a kid, don't have debts, don't own property, don't have a family, don't have any roots, the risk/reward and excitement of this chaotic and generally financially ruinous lifestyle could be good or even make you happy. But for many people, the stress of putting your family, your investments, your retirement and ultimately your future on the line is one of the most unhappy things possible. I don't think there is anything wrong with doing your 8 hours to make a living, and then taking the next 8 hours to enrich your life -- not for profit, but for health. Exercise, learning and growing, cooking and entertaining, starting a family, investing in life and happiness outside of coding... it's just notoriously difficult to do these things as an entrepreneur, and all the "big successes" as a rule (with exceptions) are "16 hour workers", as in, 100% of useful waking hours spent on the job.
  - 7y ago
untog 7y ago
> lack of autonomy, petit politics and meaningless work This isn't a given. Plenty of (particularly large) companies will inflict this on you, but it's also very possible to work at a company and have autonomy and do meaningful work.
- sidlls 7y ago
  I think the odds of having that sort of autonomy in a corporate job are lower than being a successful “lifestyle” business owner. It’s exceptionally rare to find it in the corporate world, where stability, process, and politics are the primary focus of work to deliver the company’s product/service.

JacKTrocinskI 7y ago

Totally agree, would never do what OP has done, I like my job and what I do plus I get paid well.

tempsy 7y ago
good for you? for most of history everyone worked for themselves. one could argue the modern day corporate structure is completely unnatural and doesn't fit (most) everyone.
- JacKTrocinskI 7y ago
  Everything we do as humans is "unnatural" and what really doesn't fit for "most" everyone is earning near nothing for 2 straight years.
  - tempsy 7y ago
    This person is F.I.R.E’d. These are fun projects. He didn’t suggest this was appropriate for anyone but himself

theli0nheart 7y ago

> Sorry to say but this proves that for someone who actually has to work for a living ie earn money, corporate life is absolutely the correct choice. Not really. This just proves that corporate life isn't the most profitable option for the OP. You just can't make sweeping statements like this based on a single anecdote. I'll offer this to other "corporate" folk out there. I was self-employed since late 2010 until I recently (last month) joined a mid-stage startup. During my last year of self-employment I took home ~$400k in cash, and lots more in early-stage stock, and worked maybe 15-20 hours per week. There are very few corporate jobs that would even come close to that balance of take-home pay and work-life balance.

liveoneggs 7y ago
how did you get early stage stock being self employed?
- theli0nheart 7y ago
  Most of my consulting work was with early-stage startups. I would ofter offer a fixed cash cap (say, $50k) at an hourly rate, and any work beyond that would accrue towards a SAFE. Less risk for the founder, gave me incentive to finish the bulk of the work within the cap, but also didn't punish me if I didn't.
  - liveoneggs 7y ago
    neat
  - dbancajas 7y ago
    what was your hourly rate on consulting?
    - theli0nheart 7y ago
      $300 / hour.
  - redisman 7y ago

chrisseaton 7y ago

Right - the vast majority of people even in tech need to buy their children shoes and put food on the family table and those things are going to be very hard without a stable corporate income.

neogodless 7y ago

I think the correct lesson is a little different. First, if you do rake in corporate money, and don't spend it all, you'll have a nest egg which gives you so much more choice in how you live the rest of your life. Second, if you don't have a nest egg - yeah you can't just gamble that you'll build software-as-a-service and instantly be making enough money to live. As he said, people assumed he'd use freelance to make up the difference. He didn't, but it is an option. Now freelance/contracting can be nearly as corporate as a full-time office job, and it isn't as stable an income, but it can pay really well. For many software engineers three months of full-time contracting could pay for a year's worth of expenses. (Assuming you make choices that align with that goal.) This would let you spend a great deal more time focusing on your business goals, and give you some freedom to fail some of the time.

s_y_n_t_a_x 7y ago

It's not always about the money. It's about the happiness. If it doesn't work out, it's not like he lost the knowledge, he can still easily get a job anywhere. Probably even a bump from the startup experience.

tempsy 7y ago

If you have the savings then why not? There is probably not a better time in history than to check out from being a corporate drone, assuming you have the savings. The stock index returned 30% last year...a $1M nest egg returned $300K in a year. I don't know what his savings looks like but I assume most of it is invested and wasn't included in these numbers.

bognition 7y ago
The returns in 2019 were exceptionally good. There’s little reason to assume 2020 will be as good. With everything going on this year: Brexit, US elections, impeachment, corona virus, etc... it’s entirely possible this years returns could be negative.
- tempsy 7y ago
  Sure, I mean it doesn't sound like his plan was to live off his investment income, but it certainly has been possible. My point is that when you get to the point where your savings is high enough your money works for you at a level that makes it possible to live off of alone. If the S&P is looking flat then you could rollover some of it to a high dividend REIT that pays 10-15% too.
  - aguyfromnb 7y ago
    >If the S&P is looking flat then you could rollover some of it to a high dividend REIT that pays 10-15% too. You know the business cycle is peaking when people think you can easily throw their money into some investment paying 15%...no problem! Can you explain how a public investment - any public investment - can continuously generate those kinds of returns without taking on massive amounts of risk?
    - tempsy 7y ago
      It’s called a REIT. The dividend is rental income for real estate developers. Let me guess...you thought 2013 was the top?

BlueTemplar 7y ago

And yet, losing money for the first 2-3 years is AFAIK typical for new companies (especially those with 1-2 employees).

steve76 7y ago

Life's bad! Bullies win! People always say yes! --- --- --- --- --- --- Friends and family die in poverty! Help someone only to get left behind! Pursue knowledge just to study to the job interview! --- --- --- --- --- --- Flock to corporate HQ! Earn $1 just to spend $2! All from a glorified credit card! --- --- --- --- --- --- $10 a gallon gasoline! $10,000 a month rent! Bailouts! Bailouts! Bailouts! --- --- --- --- --- --- ... ... ... all I got in return was some crummy Pepsi halftime show. You own the problems of other people and if you don't fix it now it's only going to get worse. And you have to really fix it, not just give it lip service. Get a security clearance, and you find out the REALLY bad stuff that goes on, like everything is a front for the police and a lot more people die horribly than you would believe. It's a fierce competition up top. The highest stakes imaginable. Death everywhere. Stay alive by any means. People you thought were friends turn brutal overnight, and I fault no one for abstaining. Carroll Shelby died wanting to make young people enthusiastic about cars again. He turned around and asked them to give up $40,000. He, and all of us, would have been better off sourcing parts from them. The best thing for business today is to be a job maker. Not to spike opioid sales. Not to win at zero sum politics. Not to game the courts with people made for the law. Just bundle work, ie customers, along with the product. Don't fire anyone. Really what is it you are evangelizing? Being a dick to everyone? :( Isn't it easier to sell "Life should be fun and people should be happy." :) Not that difficult either. I open up VS Code, I have customers. Real earnings. How difficult is that?

bdcravens 7y ago

The other choice is to not focus 100% on products, but rather, consult and work on your products on the side, and dial back the consulting as your products attain viability.

NKCSS 7y ago

Nah, but it's hard to launch a successfull product; if it wasn't, everyone would be doing it. I'm doing contracting work for multiple different customers, long-term project, and I generate 100-200k of revenue on a yearly basis from that. That leaves me with slightly higher salary than if I'd work for a boss, but I have tonnes, and tonnes more freedom and time for my kids. It's just not possible to scale that past 300k/yr, because there's only so much time you can sell. Once you have a product, you can scale it through the roof, since a digital product, if set up well, has negligible costs, will allow you to earn way more, but only if you find something that people want bad enough to pay for and a large enough group to pay for it. Loads and loads of people have the skills required to build a product, but not a lot have the right idea and marketing to go along with it to make it a success.

dbancajas 7y ago
how many customers per year? and how do you deal with insurance?
- NKCSS 7y ago
  Around 10 customers. I have recently gotten a liability because a client demanded it, didn’t have any before.
jlevers 7y ago
While I generally agree with you that products can scale much higher than consulting income-wise, when you say it's impossible to scale what you're doing past 300k/year due to time constraints...why not charge more for your time? If you have more people asking you to do work for them than you have time for, I'd think that clients would be willing to pay more in order to make it onto your schedule.
ianmcgowan 7y ago
Wait, why do you think "it's just not possible to scale that past 300k/yr"? I have at least one counter-example ;-) In general, the way it's worked for me is if I have multiple potential new gigs, I ask for more money. When the next gig comes along, that's my new baseline. Over the last 6 years that's helped moved the hourly rate to a number I wouldn't have asked for upfront. I hate to say no to customers too, so sometimes end up working 60-70 hour weeks in bursts. It's worth it though, because when things get quiet, I can go snowboarding for a week without asking a boss for permission...