That’s a little like hearing what Brad Pitt got paid for his last movie and wondering why the producer didn’t instead hire Brad Pitman for scale.
Oh you’ve never heard of Brad Pitman? You’re not familiar with his work? But you are familiar with Brad Pitt’s work, right? After all, he’s an experienced actor and producer with not one, but two, Academy Award nominations and a portfolio full of household names.
Bzzzt. Horrible analogy. Brad Pitt isn't worth what he's worth because of his portfolio full of household names. He commands his rates because he is a household name. People will go see movies just because he's in them. He's not getting paid for talent, experience, or attractiveness. He's getting paid for his personal brand. That brand all but guarantees that the filmmakers will earn a handsome return on their investment.
You, however, are an iPhone app developer. App purchasers have never heard of you. They will not turn out in droves to buy an app just because you worked on it.
He commands his rates because he is a household name. [..] You, however, are an iPhone app developer. App purchasers have never heard of you. They will not turn out in droves to buy an app just because you worked on it.
I think his conclusion is wrong but the analogy is good. It's unnecessary to be literal with the term "household." Most of the world's top scientists, lawyers, and bankers aren't household names, yet they can command extremely high levels of respect and, often, grants or income due to being a "household name" in their field.
I'm not arguing Mike is a "household name" amongst developers - he's not, IMHO - but there's no reason why a "household name" developer couldn't get the Brad Pitt treatment. John Carmack would have his arm bitten off if he were available at $1000/hr. Is Mike Lee the iPhone equivalent of John Carmack? No. If he were? His analogy seems OK to me.
The analogy is good because Brad Pitt's value comes from people value him for other people's opinions. The pull for going to see a movie star come because you believe that his fame has value for itself.
If Mike can just make one employer think that other people want to hire him, he can command these otherwise absurd rates. It's a sort-of mirror world.
Prestige, log-rolling, extended-Ponzi scheme. It's all representation chasing more representation.
Interesting comparison you made too. Because for me, I respect Carmack a hell of a lot more than Mike Lee. And I suspect he's a much better programmer as well. And human being.
You're totally right. I have never met either man in person. I only said I suspected that, based on the personal behavior I've seen expressed in both cases. I've never seen Carmack behave badly. What I read in the Lee post constitutes bad behavior, in my ethical system. YMMV.
I didn't say he was unethical. I said he did something that constitutes what I consider to be bad behavior. Publically announcing one's $1000/hr pay rate to the entire world, and writing a post using the particular language and attitude shown in it. That struck me as bad behavior, applying the same standards I'd expect out of anybody else. Is it like robbing a bank? Heck no. Obnoxious? In my book, yep. And look, I'm clearly not the only one who had the same reaction, as evidenced by what others have said in this article's discussion area.
As long as no bunnies were made to cry during the production of a Tesla Roadster, I'm confident I wouldn't feel conflicted about driving one. :)
I've had a client once tell me that my rate was outrageously high (it was average, but anyway). Since then I have come to the conclusion that basically, it is impossible to have an outrageously high rate. My rate is not the value I assign to a particular task (ie solving the clients problem). My rate is the value I assign to my own time. How can anybody else besides me judge the "fair" value I assign to my own time?
There are exceptions, of course - I guess if I was a surgeon and I would refuse to operate on somebody because they can't afford me, the ethics would be very questionable.
We agree that rates are weird and relativistic. Myself I've seen $50/hour described as too high, and $100 as too low (head explodes), and I've been treated alternately as both overqualified and underqualified for doing some technical thing that I know I could certainly do. Also seen and heard that bidding low will increase the chance of getting a gig as well as decrease the chance (for some clients), and, and, and... It's just crazy inconsistent and relative.
There's also the "all developers are the same, therefore commodity pricing is in effect" phenomenon which is annoying to encounter. And the "just tell me rate, because I know exactly how many hours this will take, and no other factor matters" phenomenon. Crazy stuff.
One good takeaway from the Lee article I had was that if you set a really high rate, even if you scare away a lot of people, all it takes is 1 client to agree to that, billing anywhere from 1 to a few hours in a given month, and you're in the holy "Ramen profitable" zone. Well, able to cover food and shelter anyway. But then you'll have tons of free time and energy leftover for other activities.
That still seems like an curious criterion with which to judge someone's humanity. Gary Vaynerchuk, DHH, Zed Shaw, and a lot of the people admired by many HNers are very self-aggrandizing.
Sidenote: It seems that people like this have to deal with a trough on their way up where a lot of judgment gets thrown their way for their outgoing manner. If they hit it big, though, that seems to be quickly forgotten and everyone loves them. We've seen it with all of the above. Those who fail to cross the trough, end up forgotten.
Writing things on the Internet is part of human behavior.
What a person says reveals aspects of who they are. The Internet is not some special place that is exempt from all normal expectations of conduct that otherwise hold in meatspace. Just as simply being part of a business enterprise does not exempt one from being judged as a human based on your behavior.
Also note I said "suspect" not "knew for certain" or anything as extreme or decisive as that. Important distinction, and one I chose intentionally when picking that word. :P :)
Brad Pitt earns what he does because of the amount of money his movies bring in. If Mike Lee can bring in enough monies for his clients to recoup his exorbitant hourly rate, more power to him.
He should definitely tone down the ego and rhetoric a bit though.
If you are marketing to business people, it seems to be best to puff yourself up as much as possible. they eat that shit up, as far as I can tell. I bet his massive ego gets him some work.
When marketing to technical people, the opposite seems to be the case. In my experience, it's best to say "Oh, I'm nothing" and then proceed to show or do something pretty cool. Adding in a few words like 'perhaps' or "I believe" can make your message come across much more positively when dealing with the technically focused, and can do the opposite when dealing with the business focused.
(note, while "I think" or "some people believe" adds a touch of humility, "In my experience" can go either way. It can imply that you feel you have a great deal more experience in this area than the other people in the room, adding to confidence/arrogance, but it can also imply that what works for you might not work for others, making you seem less confrontational.)
This is one of the things I find interesting about hacker news; it seems to be populated by people who are halfway between those two worldviews.
Perhaps because the post is off putting to readers and makes the guy come across like an asshole? Do not be an asshole is one of the first lessons of social interaction. It's a shame some people confuse confidence with being an asshole.
Secondly, one need not be in a better position to make value judgements. I don't necessarily need to have ever played a game of basketball to tell you that Steve Nash is a better free throw shooter than Dennis Rodman. Just like I can tell you that being an asshole may discourage potential clients (i.e. readers).
If you think it's just me that feels this way, I invite you to read the rest of the comments in this thread.
Furthermore, I never qualified my statements to be indicative of what I like or what would work globally.
The analogy may not be exactly right, but your explanation also went off on a tangent. It is not the app purchasers who matter here -- it is the people who want to make apps (or finance the making of apps if you will). Just like the movie producers who will pay top-dollar for actors/directors/etc. if they are proven to make a product (the movie) that is successful (like he has been according to what he says).
By claiming that he is charging a ridiculous per-hour rate, he is actually adding to this "stardom" :-).
Would having "From the developer of Tap Tap Revenge and Delicious Monster" help sell additional copies on the App Store? Would it help get blog coverage within the tightly nit mac elites?
They might turn out in droves because he offered a $30,000 dollar prize for solving a puzzle in his app "Puzzlloto". Which has been pulled from the app store...
But... he's a household name for some reason, right?
There was some original core non-meta reason he became famous.
I suspect the reason had to do with some combination of the following: women find him attractive, men admire him and/or want to be as cool as him, PLUS arguably he's actually a pretty decent actor given the right role/script.
Oh you’ve never heard of Brad Pitman? You’re not familiar with his work? But you are familiar with Brad Pitt’s work, right? After all, he’s an experienced actor and producer with not one, but two, Academy Award nominations and a portfolio full of household names.
Bzzzt. Horrible analogy. Brad Pitt isn't worth what he's worth because of his portfolio full of household names. He commands his rates because he is a household name. People will go see movies just because he's in them. He's not getting paid for talent, experience, or attractiveness. He's getting paid for his personal brand. That brand all but guarantees that the filmmakers will earn a handsome return on their investment.
You, however, are an iPhone app developer. App purchasers have never heard of you. They will not turn out in droves to buy an app just because you worked on it.