3 ms·
Sure, and then there's all the private companies backed by non-venture capital, and the profitable ones running on revenue.
by OJFord 2y ago
Sure, and then there's all the private companies backed by non-venture capital, and the profitable ones running on revenue.
- scarface_74 2y agoYou don’t find too many profitable “lifestyle companies” in tech.
- mattgreenrocks 2y agoYou stated that there aren't many profitable lifestyle companies. And the insinuation put forth is that they are very rare to the point of almost nonexistent. This comes off as rather reductionist and absolute to me; tech is a massive industry, do you know every sector within and adjacent to tech to have reached this conclusion?
- scarface_74 2y agoNo. But I do know statistics. The largest employees in tech are the public companies that we have all heard of. The next largest segment are VC funded companies with the smallest segment by far being the “lifestyle companies”. Do an exercise, go to any job board and put in filters to match the types of jobs you are qualified for. How many of those do you think are going to be profitable, private, lifestyle companies?
- tomnipotent 2y agoI would put money on all of big tech and all public companies combined not employing more than 30% of professional programmers. At least in the US only 15% work at a large company (500+).
- alistairSH 2y agoThere are plenty of mid-size tech companies that are both not-public and not-lifestyle. My employer is one of them. Several thousand employees, global reach, and owned by PE (Blackstone and Vista).
- OJFord 2y agoI didn't say anything about '"lifestyle companies" [sic]'. I don't even think we were talking just about 'tech'?
- carlosjobim 2y agoThose are the companies he meant by "public companies", ie publicly traded not government owned.
- OJFord 2y agoI don't think by 'public companies' they meant 'private companies', no.