Sorry for the snarky tone, but it should be evident by now that the real shortage is for "highly talented souls willing to work for peanuts"--which is kind of oxymoronic. People want to hire "highly talented" and smart individuals, but expect them to be dumb enough to sell themselves short?
The startup offers I've seen in the bay area for SWE a couple years out of school are pretty high, $150k - $185k which is pretty good cash comp from a startup.
Higher than that is probably not a realistic expectation for most startups that are not flush with cash. They'd probably be happy to pay it or more for John Carmack, but you're probably not John Carmack.
Not everyone is good at being an investor, but it's not entirely luck, there is skill in determining what companies are good and what companies are not.
For the same reason it's easier to hire an actor in LA.
I agree that is pretty good for a Bay Area startup, but it is far below the total compensation a FAANG company offers today.
After several years, the RSUs at a FAANG could pay out more every year than the salary, and they are immediately sellable on the open market. Startup options are likely to be worthless.
This is why startups have a hard time hiring. A lot of engineers would rather work for FAANG or similar large companies, where they will make a lot more money with much less risk.
OP seemed to suggest that startups have trouble hiring because they don't pay enough and I think that's not entirely true from what I've seen. They don't pay more than FAANG which is expected, but they're not underpaying for that trade-off.
I do agree though that FAANG salaries have gotten extreme so it's a harder opportunity cost than it used to be. If you can swing $350k at Netflix or $200-400k+ total comp at the others and you work there for 5-10 years that's basically a small startup exit. I think it used to be less dramatic.
I think the misery of the technical interview process is actually the thing that limits mobility most. Some of my extremely capable friends (that do work at FAANGs) don't optimize on moving around or income as much as they could because the process is so painful and anxiety inducing.
> Higher than that is probably not a realistic expectation for most startups that are not flush with cash.
Then isn't this an admission that there is no talent shortage? Again, that just means there is a shortage of talents who are willing to take the offer and work for $150k.
If you imagine there is only one employable tech worker, it'd be strange to claim that there is no shortage because you can hire away the one worker for a 20million dollar salary (or whatever the highest salary is to outbid all of the others).
> We can't find anyone worth interviewing right now
How can both statements be simultaneously true.
1: The definition also includes the fact that employers are more reluctant to lower wages than they are to increase them, all else equal.
Why not post a link to your job?