16 ms·

We do get out of bed for less than $10,000 dollars per day

118 points by jrnkntl 16y ago

tuhin 16y ago
The $10,000 per day was just a metaphor to not actually do things that you feel you don't deserve. Of course a lot of it has to fall in place before you are there to do that. I mean for a man with no job and loads of skills he still needs to work for a while before he is able to claim that. Also a good idea might be to have a constant fallback of some form. A safer job that gives enough time for freelance maybe?
richcollins 16y ago
Wonder what you get from him for 2k eur per day
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- Maro 16y ago
  "... working as a consultant to do technical due diligence. That is M&A jargon for the job of verifying that what a company says it sells and owns is actually true, and that it's all put together in a sound way to limit the risk investors and buyers are exposed to. I do this work for several renowned Venture Capital firms in Europe, and it's the most exciting and interesting work I've ever done."
- roel_v 16y ago
  I'm not sure I'm understanding you correctly - are you really wondering about him specifically, or are you saying that 2k is a lot of money to be paid a day?
- todayiamme 16y ago
  Your money's worth. Seriously, this guy has implemented so many systems and has written so many lines of code that I've lost count. Plus he has awesome business experience ( http://www.jacquesmattheij.com/content/story-behind-wwcom-camaradescom http://www.jacquesmattheij.com/content/story-behind-wwcom-ca... ) and is a pretty great guy to work with. Yet again, the thing is that what he brings to the table isn't just pure coding skills, or business skills, but a combination of both and years of experience. So, what you're actually doing by hiring him for a day is hiring an army of programmers for all the human years he has invested. You know the thing is that when you have been in the market for that long and people are willing to pay you that much for that long. There has to be a lot under the surface.
  - richcollins 16y ago
    That didn't answer my question ;-) Maybe seeing what he's done for other ppl for 2k eur a day would be a good indication.
- csomar 16y ago
  I think he should consider a better design for his website. And take more attention on Topography, since he probably has the money to buy a good theme or a designer.
dools 16y ago
I think JM missed the point of Sebastien's use of the quote. From the original article: "But like my freelancer friend wrote, or like Ms. Evangelista says – if you’ve got the chops, you set your own rates to a large extent. I’m not looking to pick up $80 per month at the expense of other things. More on this in a minute." JM's entire post focuses on his use of the Linda Evangelista quote to illustrate a point about not cheapening your "product" or your "brand" unless it's really worth it. Maybe he didn't read the whole thing. Sebastien's articles give me the shits and I think talk about winning, success, victory and individualism is counter productive but if you're going to criticise it at least get your facts straight.
- crasshopper 16y ago
  Why is it counter productive? Because it makes us losers feel like losers? Or because it == resting on laurels?
  - JoachimSchipper 16y ago
    Because the CEO of BigCo isn't likely to award you a big contract if he gave you two dollars for coffee not five minutes ago. Picking up (advertising) pennies is not without costs.
    - endtime 16y ago
      Can you elaborate upon how that answers crasshopper's question? What you're saying seems like a non sequitur.
      - JoachimSchipper 16y ago
        You're right, I misread. Sorry; a shame it's too late to edit/delete now...
        crasshopper 16y ago
        Your answer made sense. Tim Harford did a piece on why people who refuse to be team players (e.g. take on some extra work that's "beneath" them) end up making more money. I assume you mean a signalling scenario like that.
Bvalmont 16y ago
I should stay in bed with my 3,5k a month it seems It's a good income for 24 year olds in Belgium, though. Most everyone I graduated with has 2k/month. I wouldn't know what to do with 2k a day like JM.
- bad_user 16y ago
  I make 55000 USD per year, but live in a cheap place where 8500 USD per year is considered a good salary. It is all relative.
  - crasshopper 16y ago
    You consider 55000 USD per year low? Geez, I've never made over 20000 USD. 40000 is the median in the U.S. and that includes people at the peak of their careers. Cops, teachers, and social workers don't necessarily make much above that after a lifetime of hard work. Anyone over 40000 should feel proud and/or fortunate.
    - bad_user 16y ago
      In the U.S. it is not uncommon for software developers working as employees to make between 90k and 120k per year. In fact, AFAIK that's THE salary for experienced devs in Silicon Valley; and independent contractors can make much more than that. Indeed cops, teachers, and social workers make much less, but salary is usually a function of how much profit you can produce + a function of supply and demand. The demand right now for capable software engineers is pretty high, even with this economic recession. And the supply is very low - so if you live in the U.S. and are making 20000 USD per year, you're doing something wrong ;-) Heck, that's not enough to pay the rent in San Francisco. Even junior developers coming fresh out of college are making more than 20k. In that light, yes 55k is much lower than I could earn if I were located at the heart of the software industry, but I'm pretty happy and feel fortunate about it anyway; although my target is 120k. So again, if you live in the U.S. 20000 is way low without having extra benefits - like being a co-founder in a startup that will make you rich one day. Even if the projects you're working on are fun, don't sell yourself for pennies. In the long run you'll suffer; not to mention, have you noticed the ageism going on in this industry?
peteforde 16y ago
I generally love JM's postings, but it's clear that he did not actually read much of the article at all. Unfortunately that cheapens the discussion. For what it's worth, I think that Sebastien's reasoning for not having advertising on his site should be summarized, screen printed and dropped propaganda style from airplanes over the financial districts of the world so that when bored fund guys hire us to build web properties, they might be slightly more likely to have a non-advertising business model in mind.
- todayiamme 16y ago
  What Sebastian is advocating is a method of hard bargaining that may or may not lead to brand building. What Jacques is advocating is being careful about not crossing the line between bargaining and delusions about your own market worth. It's a perilous balance to maintain if you're playing this game and falling either way might ruin you.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
  - endtime 16y ago
    Actually, he's not advocating bargaining of any firmness. He's saying that one's personal brand (or dignity, or whatever) should have a minimum price that is not necessarily $0.01. In his case, he's decided that the amount he'd earn with advertising isn't worth the cheapening of his brand it would entail. It's shocking to me how many people commenting here (plus Jacques) totally misunderstood Sebastian's post.
    - todayiamme 16y ago
      It depends on how you read it I guess. This debate I think is based on a perception bias and the failure of language to communicate something like that. I see something. Jacques sees something else. Sebastian sees another paradigm entirely and you see some portion of sebastian's paradigm.
sp4rki 16y ago
I'll gladly take those 2k Eur to provide a day of reading comprehension classes that would help avoid such misunderstandings. :) \ Sebastien's article had little to do with actual money and a lot to do with the implicit value of one's skills, name, and work (and advises not to cheapen your brand with puny advertisements unless it actually makes sense financially). This response had nothing whatsoever to do with anything but the link bait title.
hasenj 16y ago
He read it too literally. The point is not 10k or any magic number. The point is "don't be desperate for money". The point is to view yourself as something valuable. If you have no value for yourself, you'll be happy to get a low pay in exchange for a low-quality service. The more respect you have for yourself, the more people will respect you and the more valuable you become. His counter argument is basically like this (he's B): A: Doing X pays, just look at K (where K is a person) B: No, you can't do X, and don't look at K, he's a special case. A: Duh, he's special because he does X; he wasn't born special. Someone should coin a name for this kind of argument .. As JM himself notes, Linda Evangelista is not that special when it comes to prettiness or friendliness. He should've paused for a second to ponder how she became a brand. (For the record, I have no clue who this Linda girls is). Consider Steve Jobs. He says[1] he does not ship garbage. Why is that? Is it because he's rich and he can afford it? No, it's because this is who he is. He wasn't born rich; he got where he is because he could never ever produce garbage. A simple way to prove this is to consider: if he had shipped garbage through out his career, why would he stop now? Just look at Oracle and Microsoft. [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu0qeb_rJYU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu0qeb_rJYU
- todayiamme 16y ago
  I think that there is a genuine difference between refusing to lower standards for a product and refusing to be price sensitive in respond to the market. What Sebastian is advocating is a bargaining technique so old that my grandfather warns against it. What he's trying to imply is that there's a thin lying between hard bargaining and being insensitive to the realities of the market. Be careful on which side you fall.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
    - deleted 16y ago
      [deleted]
    - todayiamme 16y ago
      note: This is my viewpoint on the entire affair >>> I'm not advocating any bargaining methods. I'm advocating not being desperate, figuring out what your goals are, and I shared some stories that people apparently liked a lot. <<< We're all desperate in some way or another. >>>But as soon as you need money – and people know – you’re hosed<<< What I understood from your post was that you're essentially trying to engage in subterfuge making sure that the other person doesn't know your weaknesses. So, that you can reach your goals. That just makes me... sad. The thing is that yes they are some very, very nasty people out there and no you don't need to advertise how desperate you are, but this playing coy just feels fake to me. This isn't a reflection upon you or casting any judgement on your moral character, but I think that I wouldn't have the stomach to do something like this. It might sound crazy, but if I have to engage in a game to show strength in order to make someone else treat me like an equal. Then perhaps I don't want to be his equal? >>>Indeed, he is. Yes. But in the flunky capacity. This guy didn’t see me as a peer of his, apparently, and he doesn’t treat people underneath him very well.<<< Yes, in some practical scenarios you have to do it, and to be honest I do a variation of this everyday, but that doesn't mean I create a repetoire of tactics and add this long list of techniques to manipulate with another list on how to avoid being manipulated in order to get what I want. I just don't want my life to amount to that, and well professionally I would rather not engage in something like that. If I meet someone like that then I would rather keep my distance than have a relationship. If they want the product. Sure buy it, but I won't play this game. What I'm trying to say is that if I am desperate for money. Then I'm desperate for money. I won't turn that down, just to show someone that I'm worthy of something more. If I am then I'll get there. If not then I'll work harder to get there. I think this was what Jacques was trying to convey. People pay for how good you are. Not how good at poker you are. As that is really short term. Unless you have that genuine thing (in the case of the model a brand) no matter how you pitch it the money will evaporate. That's the most important piece of the puzzle in my opinion. Generating value. That aside, I just want to say that this is not an invitation for someone to screw me over. I won't play such games with them, but neither am I a fool.
jister 16y ago
You miss the point of the article. "Don't be desperate for money" is the main point of the article. And for me, I don't think it's appropriate to mention that I earn 2,000 Euros / day.
juniortp 16y ago
I cant believe this particular post made the homepage. it is a stupid response to a wonderful post (the original 10k post)
macca321 16y ago
Is he trying to being ironic by saying his fee is 2k? Its pretty much the same as Eva Evangelista's gambit.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
Symbiont 16y ago
If you ignore the references to Sebastian in JM's post and pay attention only to the subject, it is clear that they're talking about different things.
switch 16y ago
For someone who usually writes very smart posts this is one strange post. On one hand developers complain that they don't get paid enough and don't get treated well. On the other hand, they refuse to consider the possibility that perhaps not getting out of bed for less than $10,000 a day is exactly what developers ought to do. If you look at the cumulative worth companies like Microsoft and Google and VMWare built up and break it down to the founders and first 10 developers - it'd be a lot more than $10,000 per day.
nyellin 16y ago
Is it just me, or is Jacques still reading and replying to articles that reach the HN homepage? Did Jacques replace commenting on HN with writing blog posts?
- icey 16y ago
  Commenting with a blog post instead of in the comments seems to be a new trend around here.
  - stcredzero 16y ago
    Actually, it's encouraged in the etiquette and advice pages of HN.
    - icey 16y ago
      I never said there was anything wrong with it. I just said it was a new trend.
      - stcredzero 16y ago
        I never said you said. I just think it's amusing that following the advice is now a new trend.
csomar 16y ago
Linda Evangelista is a brand unto herself. That's why she's worth the big bucks, not because she's a good looking girl (I know prettier ones!) and not because she's that great to work with. It's simply because she moves product. Most of us provide a service, we are not 'brands'. I actually see no difference. If I'm offering a service, then I need to brand myself. This is no different than products we sell, or buy. The Author, jacquesmattheij, himself has a brand. He should be popular in his field, so that he can touch 2K euro / day. He has got skills in IT. Linda has got skills in promoting products. It's not her beauty what makes a difference. He actually mentioned that, though. So, she's not 'that girl'. She's someone that made it and become able to sell products. She has got her own marketing strategies and that works. She has got skills, same for the Author. They are just approaching different fields.
c0nsilience 16y ago
Everyone is missing the point. The $10,000/day post might have been about not being desperate for money, but this new post misinterpreted the first one. I understand the importance of valuing yourself and your talents, but where do you draw the line? Pretty soon you'll be telling yourself you're worth too much for the paltry offer a client is giving for a project, and the client will pass it onto an equally capable developer who's willing to do the job. I have a friend who was getting paid $55/hour, which might not sound like a lot to freelance Flash devs, but he was working 50-60hrs per week in the client's office (in California, he was getting paid overtime for hours in excess of 40 per week). This was in late 2008 and early 2009 when the economy took a huge dive and unemployment rates were climbing. He called me one day during lunch and said, "This is bullshit. I should be making more money. I need to be making at least $120k with benefits." Wow. Fast forward a few weeks later and he actually finds that $120k job (they actually offered $125k and he took it) and so I congratulate him. I'm shocked, but happy for him, anyway. Eight weeks into the job he tells me he hates it, he's having to supervise incompetent developers and the company has absolutely no direction. He needs to be at a place where he feels like his work isn't going to waste. OK. He quit. It's 2011 now and we're nearing spring, so it has been two years since he has had a stable job. He has taken a few freelance gigs here and there, usually one to two week projects, but has gone months at a time with no work. Oh, but he's had plenty of job offers, and plenty in the $80-90k range, too. But after having had a taste of the six-figure income, and believing that that is his actual worth - and it very well may be - he has declined them. My point is this: don't be a fool. Someone just as talented, if not more talented, is always willing to take the job for less than what you're asking. Draw your bottom line, but don't be stupid about it, either.

118 points by jrnkntl 16y ago

tuhin 16y ago

The $10,000 per day was just a metaphor to not actually do things that you feel you don't deserve. Of course a lot of it has to fall in place before you are there to do that. I mean for a man with no job and loads of skills he still needs to work for a while before he is able to claim that. Also a good idea might be to have a constant fallback of some form. A safer job that gives enough time for freelance maybe?

richcollins 16y ago

Wonder what you get from him for 2k eur per day

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
Maro 16y ago
"... working as a consultant to do technical due diligence. That is M&A jargon for the job of verifying that what a company says it sells and owns is actually true, and that it's all put together in a sound way to limit the risk investors and buyers are exposed to. I do this work for several renowned Venture Capital firms in Europe, and it's the most exciting and interesting work I've ever done."
roel_v 16y ago
I'm not sure I'm understanding you correctly - are you really wondering about him specifically, or are you saying that 2k is a lot of money to be paid a day?
todayiamme 16y ago
Your money's worth. Seriously, this guy has implemented so many systems and has written so many lines of code that I've lost count. Plus he has awesome business experience ( http://www.jacquesmattheij.com/content/story-behind-wwcom-camaradescom http://www.jacquesmattheij.com/content/story-behind-wwcom-ca... ) and is a pretty great guy to work with. Yet again, the thing is that what he brings to the table isn't just pure coding skills, or business skills, but a combination of both and years of experience. So, what you're actually doing by hiring him for a day is hiring an army of programmers for all the human years he has invested. You know the thing is that when you have been in the market for that long and people are willing to pay you that much for that long. There has to be a lot under the surface.
- richcollins 16y ago
  That didn't answer my question ;-) Maybe seeing what he's done for other ppl for 2k eur a day would be a good indication.
csomar 16y ago
I think he should consider a better design for his website. And take more attention on Topography, since he probably has the money to buy a good theme or a designer.

dools 16y ago

I think JM missed the point of Sebastien's use of the quote. From the original article: "But like my freelancer friend wrote, or like Ms. Evangelista says – if you’ve got the chops, you set your own rates to a large extent. I’m not looking to pick up $80 per month at the expense of other things. More on this in a minute." JM's entire post focuses on his use of the Linda Evangelista quote to illustrate a point about not cheapening your "product" or your "brand" unless it's really worth it. Maybe he didn't read the whole thing. Sebastien's articles give me the shits and I think talk about winning, success, victory and individualism is counter productive but if you're going to criticise it at least get your facts straight.

crasshopper 16y ago
Why is it counter productive? Because it makes us losers feel like losers? Or because it == resting on laurels?
- JoachimSchipper 16y ago
  Because the CEO of BigCo isn't likely to award you a big contract if he gave you two dollars for coffee not five minutes ago. Picking up (advertising) pennies is not without costs.
  - endtime 16y ago
    Can you elaborate upon how that answers crasshopper's question? What you're saying seems like a non sequitur.
    - JoachimSchipper 16y ago
      You're right, I misread. Sorry; a shame it's too late to edit/delete now...
      - crasshopper 16y ago
        Your answer made sense. Tim Harford did a piece on why people who refuse to be team players (e.g. take on some extra work that's "beneath" them) end up making more money. I assume you mean a signalling scenario like that.

Bvalmont 16y ago

I should stay in bed with my 3,5k a month it seems It's a good income for 24 year olds in Belgium, though. Most everyone I graduated with has 2k/month. I wouldn't know what to do with 2k a day like JM.

bad_user 16y ago
I make 55000 USD per year, but live in a cheap place where 8500 USD per year is considered a good salary. It is all relative.
- crasshopper 16y ago
  You consider 55000 USD per year low? Geez, I've never made over 20000 USD. 40000 is the median in the U.S. and that includes people at the peak of their careers. Cops, teachers, and social workers don't necessarily make much above that after a lifetime of hard work. Anyone over 40000 should feel proud and/or fortunate.
  - bad_user 16y ago
    In the U.S. it is not uncommon for software developers working as employees to make between 90k and 120k per year. In fact, AFAIK that's THE salary for experienced devs in Silicon Valley; and independent contractors can make much more than that. Indeed cops, teachers, and social workers make much less, but salary is usually a function of how much profit you can produce + a function of supply and demand. The demand right now for capable software engineers is pretty high, even with this economic recession. And the supply is very low - so if you live in the U.S. and are making 20000 USD per year, you're doing something wrong ;-) Heck, that's not enough to pay the rent in San Francisco. Even junior developers coming fresh out of college are making more than 20k. In that light, yes 55k is much lower than I could earn if I were located at the heart of the software industry, but I'm pretty happy and feel fortunate about it anyway; although my target is 120k. So again, if you live in the U.S. 20000 is way low without having extra benefits - like being a co-founder in a startup that will make you rich one day. Even if the projects you're working on are fun, don't sell yourself for pennies. In the long run you'll suffer; not to mention, have you noticed the ageism going on in this industry?

peteforde 16y ago

I generally love JM's postings, but it's clear that he did not actually read much of the article at all. Unfortunately that cheapens the discussion. For what it's worth, I think that Sebastien's reasoning for not having advertising on his site should be summarized, screen printed and dropped propaganda style from airplanes over the financial districts of the world so that when bored fund guys hire us to build web properties, they might be slightly more likely to have a non-advertising business model in mind.

todayiamme 16y ago
What Sebastian is advocating is a method of hard bargaining that may or may not lead to brand building. What Jacques is advocating is being careful about not crossing the line between bargaining and delusions about your own market worth. It's a perilous balance to maintain if you're playing this game and falling either way might ruin you.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- endtime 16y ago
  Actually, he's not advocating bargaining of any firmness. He's saying that one's personal brand (or dignity, or whatever) should have a minimum price that is not necessarily $0.01. In his case, he's decided that the amount he'd earn with advertising isn't worth the cheapening of his brand it would entail. It's shocking to me how many people commenting here (plus Jacques) totally misunderstood Sebastian's post.
  - todayiamme 16y ago
    It depends on how you read it I guess. This debate I think is based on a perception bias and the failure of language to communicate something like that. I see something. Jacques sees something else. Sebastian sees another paradigm entirely and you see some portion of sebastian's paradigm.

sp4rki 16y ago

I'll gladly take those 2k Eur to provide a day of reading comprehension classes that would help avoid such misunderstandings. :) \ Sebastien's article had little to do with actual money and a lot to do with the implicit value of one's skills, name, and work (and advises not to cheapen your brand with puny advertisements unless it actually makes sense financially). This response had nothing whatsoever to do with anything but the link bait title.

hasenj 16y ago

He read it too literally. The point is not 10k or any magic number. The point is "don't be desperate for money". The point is to view yourself as something valuable. If you have no value for yourself, you'll be happy to get a low pay in exchange for a low-quality service. The more respect you have for yourself, the more people will respect you and the more valuable you become. His counter argument is basically like this (he's B): A: Doing X pays, just look at K (where K is a person) B: No, you can't do X, and don't look at K, he's a special case. A: Duh, he's special because he does X; he wasn't born special. Someone should coin a name for this kind of argument .. As JM himself notes, Linda Evangelista is not that special when it comes to prettiness or friendliness. He should've paused for a second to ponder how she became a brand. (For the record, I have no clue who this Linda girls is). Consider Steve Jobs. He says[1] he does not ship garbage. Why is that? Is it because he's rich and he can afford it? No, it's because this is who he is. He wasn't born rich; he got where he is because he could never ever produce garbage. A simple way to prove this is to consider: if he had shipped garbage through out his career, why would he stop now? Just look at Oracle and Microsoft. [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu0qeb_rJYU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu0qeb_rJYU

todayiamme 16y ago
I think that there is a genuine difference between refusing to lower standards for a product and refusing to be price sensitive in respond to the market. What Sebastian is advocating is a bargaining technique so old that my grandfather warns against it. What he's trying to imply is that there's a thin lying between hard bargaining and being insensitive to the realities of the market. Be careful on which side you fall.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
  - todayiamme 16y ago
    note: This is my viewpoint on the entire affair >>> I'm not advocating any bargaining methods. I'm advocating not being desperate, figuring out what your goals are, and I shared some stories that people apparently liked a lot. <<< We're all desperate in some way or another. >>>But as soon as you need money – and people know – you’re hosed<<< What I understood from your post was that you're essentially trying to engage in subterfuge making sure that the other person doesn't know your weaknesses. So, that you can reach your goals. That just makes me... sad. The thing is that yes they are some very, very nasty people out there and no you don't need to advertise how desperate you are, but this playing coy just feels fake to me. This isn't a reflection upon you or casting any judgement on your moral character, but I think that I wouldn't have the stomach to do something like this. It might sound crazy, but if I have to engage in a game to show strength in order to make someone else treat me like an equal. Then perhaps I don't want to be his equal? >>>Indeed, he is. Yes. But in the flunky capacity. This guy didn’t see me as a peer of his, apparently, and he doesn’t treat people underneath him very well.<<< Yes, in some practical scenarios you have to do it, and to be honest I do a variation of this everyday, but that doesn't mean I create a repetoire of tactics and add this long list of techniques to manipulate with another list on how to avoid being manipulated in order to get what I want. I just don't want my life to amount to that, and well professionally I would rather not engage in something like that. If I meet someone like that then I would rather keep my distance than have a relationship. If they want the product. Sure buy it, but I won't play this game. What I'm trying to say is that if I am desperate for money. Then I'm desperate for money. I won't turn that down, just to show someone that I'm worthy of something more. If I am then I'll get there. If not then I'll work harder to get there. I think this was what Jacques was trying to convey. People pay for how good you are. Not how good at poker you are. As that is really short term. Unless you have that genuine thing (in the case of the model a brand) no matter how you pitch it the money will evaporate. That's the most important piece of the puzzle in my opinion. Generating value. That aside, I just want to say that this is not an invitation for someone to screw me over. I won't play such games with them, but neither am I a fool.

jister 16y ago

You miss the point of the article. "Don't be desperate for money" is the main point of the article. And for me, I don't think it's appropriate to mention that I earn 2,000 Euros / day.

juniortp 16y ago

I cant believe this particular post made the homepage. it is a stupid response to a wonderful post (the original 10k post)

macca321 16y ago

Is he trying to being ironic by saying his fee is 2k? Its pretty much the same as Eva Evangelista's gambit.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

Symbiont 16y ago

If you ignore the references to Sebastian in JM's post and pay attention only to the subject, it is clear that they're talking about different things.

switch 16y ago

For someone who usually writes very smart posts this is one strange post. On one hand developers complain that they don't get paid enough and don't get treated well. On the other hand, they refuse to consider the possibility that perhaps not getting out of bed for less than $10,000 a day is exactly what developers ought to do. If you look at the cumulative worth companies like Microsoft and Google and VMWare built up and break it down to the founders and first 10 developers - it'd be a lot more than $10,000 per day.

nyellin 16y ago

Is it just me, or is Jacques still reading and replying to articles that reach the HN homepage? Did Jacques replace commenting on HN with writing blog posts?

icey 16y ago
Commenting with a blog post instead of in the comments seems to be a new trend around here.
- stcredzero 16y ago
  Actually, it's encouraged in the etiquette and advice pages of HN.
  - icey 16y ago
    I never said there was anything wrong with it. I just said it was a new trend.
    - stcredzero 16y ago
      I never said you said. I just think it's amusing that following the advice is now a new trend.

csomar 16y ago

Linda Evangelista is a brand unto herself. That's why she's worth the big bucks, not because she's a good looking girl (I know prettier ones!) and not because she's that great to work with. It's simply because she moves product. Most of us provide a service, we are not 'brands'. I actually see no difference. If I'm offering a service, then I need to brand myself. This is no different than products we sell, or buy. The Author, jacquesmattheij, himself has a brand. He should be popular in his field, so that he can touch 2K euro / day. He has got skills in IT. Linda has got skills in promoting products. It's not her beauty what makes a difference. He actually mentioned that, though. So, she's not 'that girl'. She's someone that made it and become able to sell products. She has got her own marketing strategies and that works. She has got skills, same for the Author. They are just approaching different fields.

c0nsilience 16y ago

Everyone is missing the point. The $10,000/day post might have been about not being desperate for money, but this new post misinterpreted the first one. I understand the importance of valuing yourself and your talents, but where do you draw the line? Pretty soon you'll be telling yourself you're worth too much for the paltry offer a client is giving for a project, and the client will pass it onto an equally capable developer who's willing to do the job. I have a friend who was getting paid $55/hour, which might not sound like a lot to freelance Flash devs, but he was working 50-60hrs per week in the client's office (in California, he was getting paid overtime for hours in excess of 40 per week). This was in late 2008 and early 2009 when the economy took a huge dive and unemployment rates were climbing. He called me one day during lunch and said, "This is bullshit. I should be making more money. I need to be making at least $120k with benefits." Wow. Fast forward a few weeks later and he actually finds that $120k job (they actually offered $125k and he took it) and so I congratulate him. I'm shocked, but happy for him, anyway. Eight weeks into the job he tells me he hates it, he's having to supervise incompetent developers and the company has absolutely no direction. He needs to be at a place where he feels like his work isn't going to waste. OK. He quit. It's 2011 now and we're nearing spring, so it has been two years since he has had a stable job. He has taken a few freelance gigs here and there, usually one to two week projects, but has gone months at a time with no work. Oh, but he's had plenty of job offers, and plenty in the $80-90k range, too. But after having had a taste of the six-figure income, and believing that that is his actual worth - and it very well may be - he has declined them. My point is this: don't be a fool. Someone just as talented, if not more talented, is always willing to take the job for less than what you're asking. Draw your bottom line, but don't be stupid about it, either.