I wouldn't take it; I'd quit and go work somewhere else in the Bay Area. I have enough roots here in California that do a lot more for my quality of life than an extra two bedrooms in my house would. (And a boat? What a maintenance nightmare that would be! If I owned one, I'd pay someone to get rid of it.)

If you are still lying $500k, what’s the point of that move ? Also, network effect doesn’t change. I will never move out of SV/SF as I know I can walk down the street and get another $500k job

> If you are still lying $500k, what’s the point of that move ?

I think you mistyped here. The point of the move is that $500k in San Francisco vs $500k in any other city in the US (except New York) result in substantially different qualities of life. $500k a year income in Miami can get you a mortgage on a 3 bedroom house and a boat.

In SF, you get a mortgage on a 1 bedroom apartment.

The company wouldn't move if it still had to pay 500K.

500K in SF gets you a smaller place and plenty of discretionary income. Companies in other places can often give you a house, but not match the discretionary income.

Why not?

Pay your engineers 500k in a medium cost of living city and you will have the best employee retention of any company once they get used to their quality of life.

You probably won't be able to hire nearly the same quality of engineers. At least not at the same scale.

Yeah, but then I would have to live in Miami.

LOCATION LOCATION LOCATION!

SF is expensive, agreed, but it is not so expensive that you need to pull 500k/year to get a mortgage. That income is enough to mortgage a 2.5M home — well above SF’s median home price— with no downpayment

Atlanta compared to Miami, 500k can buy your 3 bedroom house and a boat on a lake.

> I will never move out of SV/SF as I know I can walk down the street and get another $500k job

This. Those salaries are basically correlative to cost living * demand for resources.