3 ms·

Yes, US tech salaries are rather crazy. But at the scale they operate at, it is also relatively easy to justify such salaries. For example, just last month, I

by sharpy 5y ago

Yes, US tech salaries are rather crazy. But at the scale they operate at, it is also relatively easy to justify such salaries. For example, just last month, I saved the company more than a million a year of cloud costs by doing 1 week of cost optimizations for just one of our services. I will create many times that in new revenues/cost savings in the remaining 2 months of the year. My total comp for year? Barely over half a million. So I'd say they are getting a good value.

jiggawatts 5y ago
To be blunt: so what? I just saved $500K per annum for a customer, after working on the most critical part of a merger between two 10K-user organisations, and I get less then half that. It's not like it's impossible to get someone that knows how to optimise infrastructure or do complex projects for less than a decent chunk of a million dollars a year! Like other people have commented, they're often making just tens of thousands in Europe, despite having comparable education, experience, and English language skills...
- Infinitesimus 5y ago
  There are also people who do the thing you do who likely make much more. Just as there are folks who did what GP did and make much less. If $$ is what you optimize for, you can probably find the top 1% of compensation for businesses in your field and work there. For a lot of office workers, there are firms that value their skills and firms that do not. Remember that the comp numbers for Bay Area tech salaries are legit the top 1% globally or some very small percentage. Consider the difference between an comp "analyst" at a local bank and an "analyst" at an extremely profitable hedge fund. It's just money in the end and if you make enough to be happy, then the rest doesn't matter. If you want to compete for the top < 10% of compensation locally/globally in your field, then things have to change and it comes at some cost.
- da39a3ee 5y ago
  It sort of sounds like you're resentful of the american engineer making $500k that you're replying to. But maybe the resent should be directed towards the executives and finance people in europe who make huge salaries just because that's the tradition.

by sharpy 5y ago

jiggawatts 5y ago

To be blunt: so what? I just saved $500K per annum for a customer, after working on the most critical part of a merger between two 10K-user organisations, and I get less then half that. It's not like it's impossible to get someone that knows how to optimise infrastructure or do complex projects for less than a decent chunk of a million dollars a year! Like other people have commented, they're often making just tens of thousands in Europe, despite having comparable education, experience, and English language skills...

Infinitesimus 5y ago
There are also people who do the thing you do who likely make much more. Just as there are folks who did what GP did and make much less. If $$ is what you optimize for, you can probably find the top 1% of compensation for businesses in your field and work there. For a lot of office workers, there are firms that value their skills and firms that do not. Remember that the comp numbers for Bay Area tech salaries are legit the top 1% globally or some very small percentage. Consider the difference between an comp "analyst" at a local bank and an "analyst" at an extremely profitable hedge fund. It's just money in the end and if you make enough to be happy, then the rest doesn't matter. If you want to compete for the top < 10% of compensation locally/globally in your field, then things have to change and it comes at some cost.
da39a3ee 5y ago
It sort of sounds like you're resentful of the american engineer making $500k that you're replying to. But maybe the resent should be directed towards the executives and finance people in europe who make huge salaries just because that's the tradition.