3 ms·
Is the justification for paying 6x more that those companies presume there's greater than a 6x increase in output due to network effects? I honestly haven't see
by andrewstuart2 6y ago
Is the justification for paying 6x more that those companies presume there's greater than a 6x increase in output due to network effects? I honestly haven't seen anybody try to justify the expenses over just trying to hire for the same qualities, but more dispersed.
- ffggvv 6y agotheyre actually that much better IMO. the bay area has unbelievable talent.
- andrewstuart2 6y agoIsn't that because the companies that attract that talent and pay those salaries are there, though? I don't doubt you, but also there's nothing about the geography of the SF bay that gives people more talent. The only reason I can think that a company wouldn't start elsewhere, or decide to move to save on costs while hiring the same talent level (who presumably wouldn't mind lower TCO) is the network value of existing bay area talent.
- ffggvv 6y agoid say yes. and companies that want to compete with them do have to pay competitive wages. regardless of location. IE snapchat pays more than FANG despite being in LA, where wages are generally lower for tech companies, because they want to compete with FANG. Same with some companies in seattle etc.