
Google Making Extraordinary Counteroffers To Stop Flow Of Employees To Facebook - daviday
http://techcrunch.com/2010/09/01/google-making-extraordinary-counteroffers-to-stop-flow-of-employees-to-facebook/
======
sumeetjain
_"Facebook is quietly telling people, never in writing, that there’s no reason
their stock won’t hit $100 billion in total valuation over the next couple of
years. No guarantees, yadda yadda, but hey if you get 1/10 of 1%, that’s $100
million in stock."_

Am I missing something, or is expecting "1/10 of 1%" equity insane? I've never
heard of a mid-level developer getting that at a company of Facebook's size.

~~~
ecuzzillo
Well, maybe they're expecting 1/100 of 1% or less, which would still net them
several million, which is a lot more than Google's counteroffer.

~~~
jw84
No guarantees.

~~~
forensic
it's a facebook IPO... i would take the gamble...

------
narkee
Wow, mid-level developers pull $150k?

Everything I had read previously stated that Google salaries were nothing
special compared to industry averages, and it was the perks and culture that
differentiated them

But there's no way $150k is average for a mid-range developer.

~~~
larsberg
Even back in ~2005, "Seattle area compensation" was ~90k for folks just out of
college, if you managed to get to mid-range it was around 120k, and then
around 175k at senior IC levels. And, at the mid-range the eligible bonus
amount jumped to around 50% yearly, and at the higher levels to > 100% of
base.

These numbers were slightly higher than Google's at the time, but GOOG was
still playing the "our stock options are worth more than their stock grants"
line. In any case, ~150k for mid-range is certainly believable.

That said, realize that mid-range in pure software companies making Big Stuff
is a little different. Most startup-level CTOs and Fortune 100-level
"Architect" types came in at the bottom of mid-range, just due to not having
worked at scope.

At the time, Apple had the lowest pay for comparable grades of any of the
firms we researched in our Seattle-area recruiting. Of course, those stock
packages have probably made up for things -- if they didn't just flip them at
vest for cash immediately, like most employees do!

Also, if you think 150k is high, you should chat with folks doing software
development in the finance industry. It's honestly a bit overboard, but the
companies do what they have to in order to make sure that offers from
Facebook, etc. aren't at all tempting.

~~~
joe_the_user
I suspect what's called "area compensation" is towards the higher end of what
the average developer can expect.

My _rather vague impression_ is that the people who are considered good enough
that a recruiter has to hire them will get the 80-100k while for the rest its
more like 60-80K.

Correct me if I'm wrong - please, I'm curious really...

Edit: Google in particular is a large company by now. At the start, I would
assume they'd pay premium for developers but over time I'd assume they'd aim
to pay least possible for the people who met their standards.

------
maukdaddy

      no reason their stock won’t hit $100 billion in total valuation over the next couple of years.
    

That's got to be a joke.

~~~
pchristensen
Why? If Facebook finds a monetization engine for its huge userbase, $100B
isn't out of the question. They're already making $1B/yr from ads.

~~~
maukdaddy
Google has a $146b market cap. Google brought in 23 BILLION in revenue last
year.

You think FB is making 23 billion? I don't.

~~~
hugh3
Hmm, let's see. Facebook claims to have an active userbase of 500 million
people. If they can find a way to show $46 worth of ads to every one of 'em
every year, they can make $23 billion.

It does sound a little high, but not as insane as it initially might.

------
aresant
Arrington seems to be suggesting that FB is telling recruits "that there’s no
reason their stock won’t hit $100 billion in total valuation".

If that is the case, and that's coming from any sort of person in a leadership
or HR position, isn't that seriously afoul of SEC rules?

~~~
chollida1
> isn't that seriously afoul of SEC rules?

Which rules?? Public traded companies often give out something called
guidance, which tells investors what range they think their profits and
revenues, and by extension, stock price will be in the coming quarters.

------
kloncks
I wonder why Apple's different.

From what I read, their average salaries are much lower but their loyalty is
much higher. Besides, you don't hear of _too_ many Apple employees quickly
leaving for other places, at least not as much as Facebook/Google.

Why?

~~~
orangecat
My vague impression is that working at Apple gives you more prestige with the
general public than Google or Facebook. Google has a geeky (well, even
geekier) aura, and people don't like Facebook like they like Apple.

~~~
whakojacko
I buy that, but Ive never understood why any half-decent engineer would care
about what the _public_ thinks of his/her company.

~~~
pohl
Are you suggesting that half-decent (or better) engineers are too socially
inept and have any use for signaling social value to the opposite sex?

~~~
strlen
First, suppose Google has value 'x' in terms of signaling to the opposite sex,
Apple has value 'y'. The x is already high, as Google has the reputation of a)
paying well (whether justified or not) b) hiring the smartest. Women _are_
attracted to intelligence. Now suppose Apple does have a cool factor, there's
only an x - y difference in signaling.

You spend majority of your waking hours at work, so the perceived margin has
to be _very high_ to justify taking a less satisfying job, but which has
higher signaling potential.

For a perceived margin to be high either a) the actual margin is high b) the
person has to perceive \epsilon of social status _much higher_ than \epsilon
of job satisfaction. Generally, the people who value social status are almost
by definition not going to work hard enough to become "half-decent (or better)
engineers".

This also ignores the fact that most adults are either _already_ in long term
relationships or are celibate (voluntarily or involuntarily). "Looking for a
girlfriend/boyfriend" is a temporary state, unless you're _really_ interested
in the dating game as a hobby which likely means less time for other hobbies
e.g., hacking.

In my case, I'm in a long term relationship, having met my girlfriend while
working in a nameless start-up doing email security (hardly "sexy", but plenty
of technical challenges that I'd never see where I to work on "yet another
app"). She could care less what the name of the company I work for is anyway.

So we're left with several logically valid conclusions:

* Apple hires worse engineers: people who are too interested in status to devote time to studies, people who are more interested in "playing the dating game" rather than fulfilling their passion. Typing this on a MacBook Pro, I see no evidence of this.

* Marginal signaling is _really_ a lot better at Apple than Google. I can't see any evidence of that. Both are household names. Google has a reputation for hiring best, Apple has a reputation for building quality products (implying, hiring best).

* The quality of work is roughly equivalent at Apple and Google and decisions are often made by factors such as one offering work that the other doesn't, etc... People love working for both and only a minority is leaving either to work on "hotter" but less technically challenging applications.

I'll leave judgment for the reader, but something (perhaps _reason_?) is
telling me latter is the case.

------
brown9-2
I thought Facebook famously has/has a relatively small engineering staff -
~300 people - are they trying to rapidly expand this?

~~~
_delirium
Their Facebook Factsheet (<http://www.facebook.com/press/info.php?factsheet>)
says they have "1400+" employees, though it doesn't break it down into job
descriptions.

------
known
Isn't competition catching up for FB <http://www.madina.com/>

------
known
Never take a counteroffer. It is not a win-win proposition.

------
chailatte
What's Facebook's profit this year? Any guestimates?

------
AlexBlom
Umm...Can somebody get me a job at Google right..... now?

~~~
studer
I think you're supposed to start here:

<http://www.google.com/jobs>

