Sure, but what I can't fathom is why they would pay more to hire a dev in SF or NY when they could easily hire a better dev for the same price from somewhere else. Allowing remote work is a big benefit from the employee perspective, so I can see why they could get away with paying less than certain other employers, especially if they're hiring people from areas with less competition from other high-paying employers...but why would they then throw those savings away by hiring someone from an expensive city and paying them a premium when the whole company is remote anyway?

They claim they want a "geographically diverse team", but without saying what benefit that brings them, that doesn't really explain anything.

> hire a dev in SF or NY when they could easily hire a better dev for the same price from somewhere else.

Hiring is hard. Sure there may be a theoretical "better hire" outside of the Bay Area, but if they have someone in front of them who seems like they would do a great job and wants to work for them, it behooves them to hire that person now, even if it costs more. The cost of not hiring them is probably more, in lost time and productivity.

Maybe as they get bigger and each individual role becomes less critical, they can start to focus their recruiting on areas outside of SF. But right now, given that the founders are in SF, it's probably a lot easier to recruit people here.

They can get a "geographically diverse team" without paying anyone in NYC or SF.

So why all the dishonesty? Let's just write that (or nothing at all). That could be respected.

I suppose that's inarguable, even if by definition.