> If you can't hire people at a given wage, raise the wage. Or whine online about the lack of employees.
THANK YOU.
They simply aren't paying enough.
If they pay the same as everyone else, they don't stand out. And they require MORE work than other jobs with the same salary.
If the absolute level of remuneration isn't high enough, people with the necessary skills will just do their OWN startup.
They have to pay enough that the surety of the wage OUTWEIGHS the possibility of striking it rich, for people who could do their own startups.
This is pretty easy to see -- take the founders, and ask them if they'd switch to someone else's company for what they are offering new employees.
Or, ask them if they'd switch their OWN compensation package with whoever it is they are trying to hire.
No, THEY won't work for that little, even on their own baby. So why would anyone else?
Average wage = Average worker
It basically comes down to greed. If they MUST have rock star ninjas, but they REFUSE to pay for it, they aren't serious about succeeding.
If they CAN'T pay for it, then they need to raise money so that they can. If they can't raise money, they aren't any more stable than anyone else's random startup. Why bother working for them at all?
Better to combine salaries to get ONE expert than two or three or four middling employees.
Really the problem is there's too much glorification of FOUNDERS. We see time and time again that they don't have the skills needed to do whatever it is the company is supposed to do, so it's usually the early employees who do it. People think it's their god-given right as a "Founder" with a capital "F" to be king of the hill and get the lion's share of everything, and command an army of peons (who actually do the vast majority of the work) who are obligated to fulfill the "F"ounder's aspirations.
ViaWeb started with the people they needed. It's a lot easier to hire for the non-critical positions.
You listed nothing of interest to the typical startup programmer.
Having a bunch of ways to travel doesn't do any good for people who are spending most of their time holed up in one spot. They won't be flying all over the place.
Night life? Have you MET many geeks? Plus that would cut into work hours.
Drop-off laundry? That means I have to take it somewhere. I'd rather have washer/dryer in the apt., then I don't have to lug it anywhere. Who cares about folding.
A diverse and interesting population -- very few of whom work in or understand startups. You don't have time to socialize anyway, and if you did, listening to people talk about finance or fashion is not "interesting".
Incredible food... This can be had in ANY major city. But nobody in a startup wants a 3 month waiting list to get into NY's trendiest new spot, so none of that stuff matters at all.
Culture... again, staring at a computer all day.
Parks? Yeah, like they don't have that anywhere else.
Not compelling in the least.
Look at Google's perks to get an idea of what developers want. Basically: get everything else out of the way so I can develop! Get rid of interruptions and distractions and extraneous TRAVEL -- I don't want to spend my time carting my jiggly fat physical body from place to place so that I can physically do the same thing in another place.
It's the same for ANY discipline. Olympic swimmers have the same deal -- eat, sleep, train. Being "well-rounded" is essentially training for social skills.
THANK YOU.
They simply aren't paying enough.
If they pay the same as everyone else, they don't stand out. And they require MORE work than other jobs with the same salary.
If the absolute level of remuneration isn't high enough, people with the necessary skills will just do their OWN startup.
They have to pay enough that the surety of the wage OUTWEIGHS the possibility of striking it rich, for people who could do their own startups.
This is pretty easy to see -- take the founders, and ask them if they'd switch to someone else's company for what they are offering new employees.
Or, ask them if they'd switch their OWN compensation package with whoever it is they are trying to hire.
No, THEY won't work for that little, even on their own baby. So why would anyone else?
Average wage = Average worker
It basically comes down to greed. If they MUST have rock star ninjas, but they REFUSE to pay for it, they aren't serious about succeeding.
If they CAN'T pay for it, then they need to raise money so that they can. If they can't raise money, they aren't any more stable than anyone else's random startup. Why bother working for them at all?
Better to combine salaries to get ONE expert than two or three or four middling employees.
Really the problem is there's too much glorification of FOUNDERS. We see time and time again that they don't have the skills needed to do whatever it is the company is supposed to do, so it's usually the early employees who do it. People think it's their god-given right as a "Founder" with a capital "F" to be king of the hill and get the lion's share of everything, and command an army of peons (who actually do the vast majority of the work) who are obligated to fulfill the "F"ounder's aspirations.
ViaWeb started with the people they needed. It's a lot easier to hire for the non-critical positions.