4 ms·

Engineering salaries at Silicon Valley startups

12 points by lukedeering 14y ago

quanticle 14y ago
For those of you entranced by the top-line numbers here, you have to also remember that the cost of living in San Francisco (especially with regards to housing) is also extremely high. For example, according to Wolfram|Alpha a $95,000 salary in Seattle is worth $137,000 in San Francisco [1]. 1: https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%2495%2C000+salary+in+Seattle+moving+to+San+Francisco https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%2495%2C000+salary+in+...
- pmorici 14y ago
  This is something I've always wondered about. If, as an example, you were moving from Seattle to SF and you told prospective employers you were looking for a salary of 137k from a prior salary of 95k based on cost of living data do you have any hope of landing a job with that expectation? I'd be interested in hearing the experiences of anyone who has made a move like that and if they felt their increase in salary was on par, above, or below the change in cost of living.
  - prostoalex 14y ago
    I've made the move from Washington to Bay Area, and the salary reflected cost of living. Was a big company, with salary bands, and all. You should consider it for your specific case. You also don't have to live in San Francisco as long as the office is close to public transportation.
  - quanticle 14y ago
    I don't know about San Francisco, since that's a bit of an extreme case, but when I moved from Minneapolis to Seattle, I made sure to account for the cost of living increase when evaluating the offer I got.
StavrosK 14y ago
Hum, suddenly, the $80/hr I charge as a remote freelancer seems low...
paulgb 14y ago
I really dislike the trends I'm seeing in infographics. It's information porn with no substance. - The sources are very vague, there's no way to verify anything for yourself. - There's no indication of statistical significance - Visualizations are not accurate, such as the "salary by experience" graph which even by visual inspection is not to scale. - The connected line graph from "C" to "Other" under salary by company stage is meaningless and misleading - The visualizations are for the sake of visualization, not for clarity. See "Average # of companies competing" section
prostoalex 14y ago
Riviera typically places people for senior positions - their business model is to charge a retainer percentage (25-30%) salary for a placed candidate, so it's not economically viable for them to deal with five-digit salaries at the low-end.
michaelochurch 14y ago
This looks like Small Data. Here's why: <5 years work experience: T20 school => $102,500 non-T20 => $123,300 ... which seems to be counterintuitive, with more prestigious schools correlating to lower salaries, but stranger things have happened. 5+ years of experience: T20 school => $128,500 non-T20 school => $123,100 In other words, the people from non-T20 schools stagnate as they cross the 5-year mark, while the T20 students improve considerably. That makes no sense, because the effect of a T20 degree is highest early in one's career.
- pmorici 14y ago
  I have three theories. 1. They are taking jobs at very early stage start-ups or starting their own companies as that culture seems to be more prevalent at many of the top schools. On the other hand your typical university is much more focused on the traditional get a job at mega corp scenario. 2. In my limited experience working with recently graduated interns I've found that the ones from "top schools" tend to be worse. They seem to have a chip on their shoulder that certain things are beneath them, give up easier, and are hyper sensitive to feedback. Students from more normal schools seem to have much less mental baggage in those regards. 3. The info graphic is BS and however they collected their numbers was flawed.
  - michaelochurch 14y ago
    I think these are all quite possible. I'm not as negative as you are on top-school students. My experience is that Harvard/MIT programmers and quants are no worse or better than anyone else. Now, Harvard/MIT PM peoples... different story. Programming kills that entitlement mentality because the compiler does not give a shit who you are. Bossing people around reinforces it. After a few years, though, the effects of whatever school the person went to are pretty much gone. What I think you are encountering is that, at a given level, the Ivy students who ended up there are going to be worse than the state-school kids who got to that same place. The best Harvard students are not going to be interested in a 0.02% equity slice of a mediocre startup, because they have the connections to be, if not Founders, VPs at least. Speaking of equity, I'll add a 4th likely element: 4. Salary in startups has a relatively thin band: currently, about $110-150k in SV and $90-130k in New York. The real variation is in equity, titles, and glory if the thing succeeds.
cartagenam4 14y ago
I'm in the wrong field..
herval 14y ago
C# and Flex being in the top 4 "high demand" technologies is mind blowing. Flash on 6th is also quite surprising...
- nicw 14y ago
  This is probably more prevalent at mega-corps than startups - and those mega-corps are hiring more programmers than startups, adding skew. Breaking down the "high demand" technologies by investments (Round A, Round B...) would likely bear different results.
joonix 14y ago
What's the point of talking about salaries at startups? I don't understand why you would give priority to a salary figure at a startup. It's largely illusory. The startup could shutdown 2 weeks from now and nobody will pay you anything. If you're just after a high salary, join an established corporation. If you're after equity, or working on cutting edge stuff, join a startup.
mvkel 14y ago
This is like using the average rent prices in Manhattan to represent the average rent prices of New York State. The median prices would be much more interesting.

12 points by lukedeering 14y ago

For those of you entranced by the top-line numbers here, you have to also remember that the cost of living in San Francisco (especially with regards to housing) is also extremely high. For example, according to Wolfram|Alpha a $95,000 salary in Seattle is worth $137,000 in San Francisco [1]. 1: https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%2495%2C000+salary+in+Seattle+moving+to+San+Francisco https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%2495%2C000+salary+in+...

pmorici 14y ago
This is something I've always wondered about. If, as an example, you were moving from Seattle to SF and you told prospective employers you were looking for a salary of 137k from a prior salary of 95k based on cost of living data do you have any hope of landing a job with that expectation? I'd be interested in hearing the experiences of anyone who has made a move like that and if they felt their increase in salary was on par, above, or below the change in cost of living.
- prostoalex 14y ago
  I've made the move from Washington to Bay Area, and the salary reflected cost of living. Was a big company, with salary bands, and all. You should consider it for your specific case. You also don't have to live in San Francisco as long as the office is close to public transportation.
- quanticle 14y ago
  I don't know about San Francisco, since that's a bit of an extreme case, but when I moved from Minneapolis to Seattle, I made sure to account for the cost of living increase when evaluating the offer I got.

StavrosK 14y ago

Hum, suddenly, the $80/hr I charge as a remote freelancer seems low...

paulgb 14y ago

I really dislike the trends I'm seeing in infographics. It's information porn with no substance. - The sources are very vague, there's no way to verify anything for yourself. - There's no indication of statistical significance - Visualizations are not accurate, such as the "salary by experience" graph which even by visual inspection is not to scale. - The connected line graph from "C" to "Other" under salary by company stage is meaningless and misleading - The visualizations are for the sake of visualization, not for clarity. See "Average # of companies competing" section

prostoalex 14y ago

Riviera typically places people for senior positions - their business model is to charge a retainer percentage (25-30%) salary for a placed candidate, so it's not economically viable for them to deal with five-digit salaries at the low-end.

michaelochurch 14y ago

This looks like Small Data. Here's why: <5 years work experience: T20 school => $102,500 non-T20 => $123,300 ... which seems to be counterintuitive, with more prestigious schools correlating to lower salaries, but stranger things have happened. 5+ years of experience: T20 school => $128,500 non-T20 school => $123,100 In other words, the people from non-T20 schools stagnate as they cross the 5-year mark, while the T20 students improve considerably. That makes no sense, because the effect of a T20 degree is highest early in one's career.

pmorici 14y ago
I have three theories. 1. They are taking jobs at very early stage start-ups or starting their own companies as that culture seems to be more prevalent at many of the top schools. On the other hand your typical university is much more focused on the traditional get a job at mega corp scenario. 2. In my limited experience working with recently graduated interns I've found that the ones from "top schools" tend to be worse. They seem to have a chip on their shoulder that certain things are beneath them, give up easier, and are hyper sensitive to feedback. Students from more normal schools seem to have much less mental baggage in those regards. 3. The info graphic is BS and however they collected their numbers was flawed.
- michaelochurch 14y ago
  I think these are all quite possible. I'm not as negative as you are on top-school students. My experience is that Harvard/MIT programmers and quants are no worse or better than anyone else. Now, Harvard/MIT PM peoples... different story. Programming kills that entitlement mentality because the compiler does not give a shit who you are. Bossing people around reinforces it. After a few years, though, the effects of whatever school the person went to are pretty much gone. What I think you are encountering is that, at a given level, the Ivy students who ended up there are going to be worse than the state-school kids who got to that same place. The best Harvard students are not going to be interested in a 0.02% equity slice of a mediocre startup, because they have the connections to be, if not Founders, VPs at least. Speaking of equity, I'll add a 4th likely element: 4. Salary in startups has a relatively thin band: currently, about $110-150k in SV and $90-130k in New York. The real variation is in equity, titles, and glory if the thing succeeds.

cartagenam4 14y ago

I'm in the wrong field..

herval 14y ago

C# and Flex being in the top 4 "high demand" technologies is mind blowing. Flash on 6th is also quite surprising...

nicw 14y ago
This is probably more prevalent at mega-corps than startups - and those mega-corps are hiring more programmers than startups, adding skew. Breaking down the "high demand" technologies by investments (Round A, Round B...) would likely bear different results.

joonix 14y ago

What's the point of talking about salaries at startups? I don't understand why you would give priority to a salary figure at a startup. It's largely illusory. The startup could shutdown 2 weeks from now and nobody will pay you anything. If you're just after a high salary, join an established corporation. If you're after equity, or working on cutting edge stuff, join a startup.

mvkel 14y ago

This is like using the average rent prices in Manhattan to represent the average rent prices of New York State. The median prices would be much more interesting.