LinkedIn shares drop 40%, erasing $10B of company's value

Re:LinkedIn shares drop 40%, erasing $10B of company's value by Swizec on Friday February 05, 2016 @07:25PM (#11045802)

Closer to 45% really. But it's still cheaper than paying less rent and owning a car. Not having any dependents is also pretty handy in keeping money piling around instead of spending it.

We also save a lot (and are healthier and save time) by cooking at home instead of going out to eat.

So, really, we get to both live in downtown SF, and travel pretty much whenever we feel like it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:LinkedIn shares drop 40%, erasing $10B of company's value by toomuchtodo on Saturday February 06, 2016 @11:54PM (#11051680)

What's your reason for living in SF and still traveling frequently? Access to work in SF?

I ask because I'm a remote worker for an SF startup, home base in a low cost of living area, but I travel frequently as well (but the home was purchased somewhere where the house is paid in full already and the monthly upkeep is ~$500/month).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:LinkedIn shares drop 40%, erasing $10B of company's value by Swizec on Sunday February 07, 2016 @03:24PM (#11054629)

Access to work is about the same as remote with social network in SF.

Two reasons why I choose to stay here: 1) building said network so I can go back to proper nomading easier, and 2) access to the startup lottery; nobody gives shares/options to remote workers and/or independent consultants/freelancers

Lottery is a nice potential upside with next to zero downside as an engineer

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:LinkedIn shares drop 40%, erasing $10B of company's value by toomuchtodo on Sunday February 07, 2016 @11:51PM (#11056396)

> nobody gives shares/options to remote workers

I received equity as part of my remote worker compensation (my entire team is remote though).

[ Parent | on HN ]