Hacker News Reader

Comment by syndicatedjelly | Hacker News Reader

So...you're a recruiter, except the applicant pays you instead of the company. And you're less well-connected than a company-paid recruiter. And you're not getting paid by anyone to find candidates for them.

Sorry if that's a bit blunt, but just trying to understand the service you're offering.

View on HN

Also, If you aren't willing yet to pay someone to apply to jobs for you, then you are not the target audience. But let me know if there's anything related you'd pay for. That's how the idea came up for me. I was like "damn I wish I could just pay someone to do this".

For me, the value of a recruiter is that they're well-connected and can help with negotiations. It's icing on the cake that the company is paying them, not me. I would consider paying for this service if you were able to negotiate for me, and then I'd pay a percentage of the negotiated increase to you.

I don't really place much value on someone just applying to jobs for me - that part isn't hard. Now if you could do interviews for me...

That's a great idea. Thank you! I'll take it into account with the next iteration. The interviews part is going to be hard though. I don't know if that's allowed. :-)

I'm a resume submitter with technical knowledge and the applicant pays what they want. I'm okay with you assuming I'm less well-connected BUT it's in my best interest to get you offers. It's in their best interest to get someone offers. That's the big distinction. And no, no one else would be paying me. Maybe that's something to pursue? Who knows. YC talks about doing the manual stuff to validate and to learn and to research. So that's what I'm doing.

You're not being blunt. You're asking questions. That's ok. :-)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com