6 ms·

>225k is standard? 100k income per year + 33% for employer taxes, medical/fringe benefits, etc, so 133k. 1.5 years of work at 133k/yr = ~200k payout. I would

by criley2 12y ago

>225k is standard? 100k income per year + 33% for employer taxes, medical/fringe benefits, etc, so 133k. 1.5 years of work at 133k/yr = ~200k payout. I wouldn't call that low since it already hinges on massively inflated salaries due to massively inflated cost of living for developers in hubs. That 100k of buying power in SF would come from about a 55-60k salary in my area. (1) (1) http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=moving+from+San+Francisco+to+Atlanta+salary+%24100k http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=moving+from+San+Francis...

davmre 12y ago
As birdmanjeremy posted below, you have to discount for risk. This year he got $225k, next year he may get nothing. In any case I think you're underestimating the value of benefits provided by large tech companies. Free food, top-end health insurance, maternity/paternity leave, gym memberships, retirement contributions, bonuses, etc. all add up. I've commonly heard the rule of thumb that total cost-to-employer is roughly $2N for an employee making $N in nominal salary. The point about location is reasonable: it's harder to get a six-figure salary doing remote work, which is effectively what this is. Still I think people shouldn't be shocked about the amount of money in play here. Given the risk, it's a good payout but not a great one for someone of his (clearly very high) skill level.
- riskable 12y ago
  The 2x salary average is very misleading. The average for all employees everywhere in the US sure, but it's a sliding scale. The higher your salary the less your employer is paying as a percentage of your income. There's very little difference in overhead between someone making $100k and someone making $150k. The overhead difference will only be a few thousand dollars more for the person making $150k.
  - mturmon 12y ago
    "There's very little difference in overhead between someone making $100k and someone making $150k." Logically, you would think so, but remember that many benefits scale with salary/seniority. Things like retirement plan matching and vacation accrual rate. Also perks like better offices, parking, "training" in attractive destinations.
VieElm 12y ago
> massively inflated salaries Why would you say that's inflated? Engineering is a professional occupation that requires a high degree of skill and education. Much like lawyers, doctors and other forms of professions. Many of the companies that employ software engineers at those salaries are highly profitable. From big names like Google, Oracle, Facebook, Apple and Amazon to smaller companies like FrogCreek, Atlassian, and New Relic. So why would you say they're inflated? Software engineers are employed by companies with real products, that provide real value. Salaries have been at these levels for over a decade now, in fact there was a big dip after 2000 when pay actually was hugely inflated, but within a few years pay rose again to current levels. I'd say when you've been earning a salary long enough at these levels to buy a home and raise a child that it's a stable market rate and not inflated.
- voronoff 12y ago
  With major players having coordinated to suppress wages, it's an even more suspect statement.
- freehunter 12y ago
  They're inflated due to the extremely high cost of living in the areas where these jobs are common: Austin, San Francisco, Seattle, Vancouver. If someone at Google in SF is making $250k, their peer in Ann Arbor, MI (a small city with a Google office) could have the same purchasing power with maybe $80k. If the companies weren't located in SF, the salaries could be a lot lower for the same work, and the employees wouldn't really be making any less even with a lower salary.
  - VieElm 12y ago
    Inflated implies bubble, deflatable. I think it's just the market rate for living in those places. There's no bubble to pop here. Yes, it's true the cost of living are high in these areas, but I don't think that means the wages are inflated. How would you derive a non-inflated base pay eliminating cost of living?
    - JohnBooty 12y ago
josephagoss 12y ago
> massively inflated salaries Is it really fair to say developer salaries around the $200k mark are being inflated? Developers work can have an impact on millions of people, yet we keep expecting all of this work for a $60k salary. I've found that only developers/programmers do this self flagellation, almost all other professions complain about $200k being too low, not too high, and expect more. (Lawyers, Doctors, and even some electrical/mechanical engineers) It's just a shame, as I find it hard finding good work as a programmer as my peers fight for lower and lower salaries. I had a naive hope that this industry would mature and fight for higher salaries, but whenever I see programmers getting paid half that of a Lawyer or Doctor, self flagellation start to come into play. Such as shame for an industry with the most potential to change the world.
justrudd 12y ago
My problem with the Wolfram/Alpha numbers is they aren't realistic. I'm looking at moving to Chicago or Atlanta or somewhere back on the east coast from Seattle. And that Wolfram page shows that a 2 bed room apartment (not house) in Atlanta is $1012. Where? Duluth? Buford? Snellville? Or to the South? If you compare like neighborhoods (Belltown in Seattle to Midtown of Atlanta), rents are usually very close to each other (within a $100 from what I've found). But recruiters are fixated on the "It's so much cheaper".
- criley2 12y ago
  2 bedroom apartment in Atlanta is ridiculously easy to find, especially if you live ITP like 95% of all Atlantans. (ATL Metro population: ~5 million. ATL City population: ~500k). I rented a 1700sq ft, 2 bed room, 2.5 bathroom, 2 story townhouse a 25 minute drive from Downtown Atlanta for $850/mo, and it had some luxury and I could have easily found lower prices than that moving a little further out (longer commute) or lowering the size/luxury.
brianpan 12y ago
You forgot to multiply by the probability of winning. If you have a 1 in 3 chance of winning, the expected payout is only $75k per attempt.

by criley2 12y ago

davmre 12y ago

As birdmanjeremy posted below, you have to discount for risk. This year he got $225k, next year he may get nothing. In any case I think you're underestimating the value of benefits provided by large tech companies. Free food, top-end health insurance, maternity/paternity leave, gym memberships, retirement contributions, bonuses, etc. all add up. I've commonly heard the rule of thumb that total cost-to-employer is roughly $2N for an employee making $N in nominal salary. The point about location is reasonable: it's harder to get a six-figure salary doing remote work, which is effectively what this is. Still I think people shouldn't be shocked about the amount of money in play here. Given the risk, it's a good payout but not a great one for someone of his (clearly very high) skill level.

riskable 12y ago
The 2x salary average is very misleading. The average for all employees everywhere in the US sure, but it's a sliding scale. The higher your salary the less your employer is paying as a percentage of your income. There's very little difference in overhead between someone making $100k and someone making $150k. The overhead difference will only be a few thousand dollars more for the person making $150k.
- mturmon 12y ago
  "There's very little difference in overhead between someone making $100k and someone making $150k." Logically, you would think so, but remember that many benefits scale with salary/seniority. Things like retirement plan matching and vacation accrual rate. Also perks like better offices, parking, "training" in attractive destinations.

VieElm 12y ago

> massively inflated salaries Why would you say that's inflated? Engineering is a professional occupation that requires a high degree of skill and education. Much like lawyers, doctors and other forms of professions. Many of the companies that employ software engineers at those salaries are highly profitable. From big names like Google, Oracle, Facebook, Apple and Amazon to smaller companies like FrogCreek, Atlassian, and New Relic. So why would you say they're inflated? Software engineers are employed by companies with real products, that provide real value. Salaries have been at these levels for over a decade now, in fact there was a big dip after 2000 when pay actually was hugely inflated, but within a few years pay rose again to current levels. I'd say when you've been earning a salary long enough at these levels to buy a home and raise a child that it's a stable market rate and not inflated.

voronoff 12y ago
With major players having coordinated to suppress wages, it's an even more suspect statement.
freehunter 12y ago
They're inflated due to the extremely high cost of living in the areas where these jobs are common: Austin, San Francisco, Seattle, Vancouver. If someone at Google in SF is making $250k, their peer in Ann Arbor, MI (a small city with a Google office) could have the same purchasing power with maybe $80k. If the companies weren't located in SF, the salaries could be a lot lower for the same work, and the employees wouldn't really be making any less even with a lower salary.
- VieElm 12y ago
  Inflated implies bubble, deflatable. I think it's just the market rate for living in those places. There's no bubble to pop here. Yes, it's true the cost of living are high in these areas, but I don't think that means the wages are inflated. How would you derive a non-inflated base pay eliminating cost of living?
  - JohnBooty 12y ago

josephagoss 12y ago

> massively inflated salaries Is it really fair to say developer salaries around the $200k mark are being inflated? Developers work can have an impact on millions of people, yet we keep expecting all of this work for a $60k salary. I've found that only developers/programmers do this self flagellation, almost all other professions complain about $200k being too low, not too high, and expect more. (Lawyers, Doctors, and even some electrical/mechanical engineers) It's just a shame, as I find it hard finding good work as a programmer as my peers fight for lower and lower salaries. I had a naive hope that this industry would mature and fight for higher salaries, but whenever I see programmers getting paid half that of a Lawyer or Doctor, self flagellation start to come into play. Such as shame for an industry with the most potential to change the world.

justrudd 12y ago

My problem with the Wolfram/Alpha numbers is they aren't realistic. I'm looking at moving to Chicago or Atlanta or somewhere back on the east coast from Seattle. And that Wolfram page shows that a 2 bed room apartment (not house) in Atlanta is $1012. Where? Duluth? Buford? Snellville? Or to the South? If you compare like neighborhoods (Belltown in Seattle to Midtown of Atlanta), rents are usually very close to each other (within a $100 from what I've found). But recruiters are fixated on the "It's so much cheaper".

criley2 12y ago
2 bedroom apartment in Atlanta is ridiculously easy to find, especially if you live ITP like 95% of all Atlantans. (ATL Metro population: ~5 million. ATL City population: ~500k). I rented a 1700sq ft, 2 bed room, 2.5 bathroom, 2 story townhouse a 25 minute drive from Downtown Atlanta for $850/mo, and it had some luxury and I could have easily found lower prices than that moving a little further out (longer commute) or lowering the size/luxury.

brianpan 12y ago

You forgot to multiply by the probability of winning. If you have a 1 in 3 chance of winning, the expected payout is only $75k per attempt.