4 ms·

You don't need luck though, even with no stock appreciation at all you make over $300k a year as a senior engineer at Google. The high salaries you see are most

You don't need luck though, even with no stock appreciation at all you make over $300k a year as a senior engineer at Google. The high salaries you see are mostly without extreme stock value changes.

est31 6y ago
> without extreme stock value changes. That's the point, you don't know whether there will be any. So they are definitely not "as good as cash". Just because they aren't lottery tickets doesn't mean they are equivalent to cash.
- username90 6y ago
  You are much more likely to get fired and lose all your income than for the stock to lose that much value, so the difference in risk between stock and cash is therefore minimal. Edit: Just to clarify, $300k as a senior engineer is without any stock appreciation at all. I made $250k as one step below senior without any stock appreciation at all. My point about significant stock changes is for significant stock changes downwards, meaning if the Google stock somehow lost 50% of their value or something like that.
  - est31 6y ago
    > My point about significant stock changes is for significant stock changes downwards My point was a more holistic view. It's great that there is a 95% chance that your stock RSUs will increase. But if there is a 90% chance that within 3 years it's a 15% increase or more, you should rather use the 15% increased figure for calculation instead. And then the risk is much higher because it's not just stock not going down, but stock not going up as quickly as it did before.
    - username90 6y ago
      But I use the 0% figure, so it is how much the company paid and not how much I get. If you count stock appreciation then a simple senior engineer can make 400-500k or more, but people don't really count that.
      - est31 6y ago
        IDK for me personally that's the metric I'd use when comparing jobs/careers. From your statements alone, it can mean hundreds of thousands of dollars in difference. That's not something to gloss over.
        username90 6y ago
        Right, my point is that if you count it as 0% it is significantly better than money, and even with it at 0% the money is still extremely good.
        est31 6y ago
        Not sure what you mean by that. Anyways, if given the choice, I think I'd prefer GAFAM for the lower burnout risk alone. Comp is definitely more than enough, and likely higher than what you'd get in finance. I'm getting offtopic but if I start a company and it fails and I have a burnout then I feel like I've done a meaningful journey. If on the other hand I join a company where tons of people burn out then I burn out... that's just stupidity :).

You don't need luck though, even with no stock appreciation at all you make over $300k a year as a senior engineer at Google. The high salaries you see are mostly without extreme stock value changes.

est31 6y ago

> without extreme stock value changes. That's the point, you don't know whether there will be any. So they are definitely not "as good as cash". Just because they aren't lottery tickets doesn't mean they are equivalent to cash.

username90 6y ago
You are much more likely to get fired and lose all your income than for the stock to lose that much value, so the difference in risk between stock and cash is therefore minimal. Edit: Just to clarify, $300k as a senior engineer is without any stock appreciation at all. I made $250k as one step below senior without any stock appreciation at all. My point about significant stock changes is for significant stock changes downwards, meaning if the Google stock somehow lost 50% of their value or something like that.
- est31 6y ago
  > My point about significant stock changes is for significant stock changes downwards My point was a more holistic view. It's great that there is a 95% chance that your stock RSUs will increase. But if there is a 90% chance that within 3 years it's a 15% increase or more, you should rather use the 15% increased figure for calculation instead. And then the risk is much higher because it's not just stock not going down, but stock not going up as quickly as it did before.
  - username90 6y ago
    But I use the 0% figure, so it is how much the company paid and not how much I get. If you count stock appreciation then a simple senior engineer can make 400-500k or more, but people don't really count that.
    - est31 6y ago
      IDK for me personally that's the metric I'd use when comparing jobs/careers. From your statements alone, it can mean hundreds of thousands of dollars in difference. That's not something to gloss over.
      - username90 6y ago
        Right, my point is that if you count it as 0% it is significantly better than money, and even with it at 0% the money is still extremely good.
        est31 6y ago
        Not sure what you mean by that. Anyways, if given the choice, I think I'd prefer GAFAM for the lower burnout risk alone. Comp is definitely more than enough, and likely higher than what you'd get in finance. I'm getting offtopic but if I start a company and it fails and I have a burnout then I feel like I've done a meaningful journey. If on the other hand I join a company where tons of people burn out then I burn out... that's just stupidity :).