4 ms·
I agree on the point of questioning it's true profitability figure. If it was profiting @ 75K a year, thats half a designer, half a marketer and half a program
by brador 15y ago
I agree on the point of questioning it's true profitability figure.
If it was profiting @ 75K a year, thats half a designer, half a marketer and half a programmer for a year. Hire them in, and let them do what they like with it for 6 months. Get interns and let them have a play with it if you want to give some kids a chance.
It's usually a bad idea to shut down a profit center, unless it truly is unsustainable. @75K this was doing well and IMO should not have been shut down.
- sunahsuh 15y agoCut those employee time figures by half -- FT employees cost a company about twice as much as the base salary. And even then, your designer and marketer figures are way low, even in a city like Philadelphia.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- rhizome 15y agoYou're valuing a designer, marketer and programmer at $50K/yr each?
- brador 15y agoAt this level, yes. Go for 0 years experience but lots of passion and a basic skill set. Give them a shot on it. You don't want pros for a project like this, they're better used elsewhere, just a small team to keep the lights on and try to grow it. My usual strategy works well here: Hire in @min wage, with a huge bonus linked to new subs.
- wicknicks 15y agoYou probably need someone experienced to semi-supervise the project. A bunch of newbies might end up exploring more than being efficient and productive.
- VBprogrammer 15y agoI know what you are saying, and I strongly agree. But in comparison to chopping $75k off of you're bottom line then I think you are going to struggle to find a way to be less efficient. Depending on the size of the company it might just make a great graduate / junior dev recruitment program. Take them on with a probationary period and watch how well they do with the sideline gig. If they turn the code to spaghetti within months then you probably don't want them working on the core business. The last one through the mill becomes supervisor for the next one. The only potential issue with this strategy is damaging the brand name of the consulting company. I'm not entirely convinced that this is really an issue.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- ahoyhere 15y agoYour (hypothetical) plan involves: 1. Destroying all profit 2. Increasing real costs -- not just salary & payroll costs, which is of course usually 2x the actual paper salary, but also oversight and managerial overhead 3. Adding more team members strictly as an experiment So, there goes the profit, plus you've had to go thru the immense hassle of hiring, and your team's just grown (with greatly added complexity), you don't have or plan to deploy the resources to effectively onboard & manage the new team members, and you hope that it'll somehow turn out well in the end? Just wanted to fully think that out for you.
- rhizome 15y agoSo, like a 100th Monkey strategy?