Show HN: Announcing 10x Management

Something isn't sitting right with me about this. Let me explore (my gut may be wrong here)...<p>I agree that it's important for freelance engineers and designers to have some business help. Being a good "creator" doesn't necessarily mean you're good at negotiations, and while its an important skill, there is something nice about being able to focus on doing the work (and doing a good job) vs having to find the clients, negotiate the deals, handle payment, etc. That can be an unwelcome distraction for some people who aren't naturally good at it.<p>But that's why design/development studios exist. Even in a small shop - there's a guy who specs the project, a guy who negotiates the deal, a designer, and a developer (yes, there's often overlap in those roles). You pay a premium for the full-service of those distinct roles.<p>I think what's bothering me here is that these guys are perpetuating the notion that, literally, hiring a "celebrity"/"rock star" engineer/designer ("10xer") is something that folks should be paying a huge premium for. And that if you are that rock star, that you're so awesome that you need talent management (who deserves 15%). The premium here isn't for a support staff to help manage the project - the premium here is to get that celebrity development talent.<p>Not saying this is necessarily a bad thing - maybe it's an innovation that's much needed in the industry. But my gut is that they're spreading the celebrity-worship mentality of the entertainment industry to the software industry, and I'm not confident that's the right move.<p>It works in the entertainment industry because the link is much clearer -- you put Vinny Chase in your movie, it's going to do better than if you put in a no-name actor (all else being equal). Does that same thing work in the software industry?<p>Thoughts?

"10x represents the best freelance programmers and designers"<p>not to be too snooty, but couldn't they get one of their best design freelancers to give their site a bit of a makeover?

I have direct personal experience with 10x and I highly recommend them.<p>I found them to help me with a significant employment/management need.<p>10x focused on finding the best solution and provided ongoing contact and advice through the whole process.<p>I don't get anything by recommending them. I do believe fully in their business and value.

1) More important than deal flow, I could see myself working with something like that if it increased my hourly rate, and if it did so substantially. I am 100% positive that most of the jobs/projects I got into I left money on the table because I didn't want to put too much effort in the negotiation process and just wanted to work on interesting things.<p>So it would be great if something like that managed to work as a market force to push things up. However, these guys would have to be completely transparent, pretty much like we see sport athletes getting their contracts disclosed, all of their "stars" would have each of their signed projects on a billboard, complete with stats and metrics of performance.<p>If it increased my rate by 20%, I wouldn't do it. Promise me that I would be able to live in New York and make $300-$400k/year without having to get into finance, and I could give them 10-20% of it easily.<p>2) Apologies in advance for my blatant stereotyping, but I couldn't help noticing that most if not all names of the guys leading this are Jewish. Coupled with the "Here's your Ari Gold" comment it makes me wonder, why is this such a Jewish-dominated field?

I sense a lot of negativity here. Engineers are not good at dealing with customers. They deal with the customers so engineers don't have to. They have people skills. They are good at dealing with people!<p>Can't you guys understand that?

Oh, no. This doesn't feel right at all. This is giving me entertainment720 vibes.

Odd that there's not a lawyer among the listed leaders. They say they'll bring in lawyers "if necessary." Aren't most agencies for artists or athletes packed with lawyers? If I'm hiring you as my agent, I'd think that at least half your job would be the contract part of it.

Of course there are already talent agents for contracts and have been for years--maybe not so much short-run freelancers but plenty of businesses place contractors for six-month+ terms.<p>Most don't bill themselves as only for the 10xers--and for good reason--your supply of exceptional talent will quickly run out. Few 10xers get paid ten times of a 1Xer. (I bet you'd bill more with 50 1xers than 5 10Xers.) It could be that a boutique agency will get enough traction and recognition to draw enough 10xers to be crazy successful--it will be interesting to watch.<p>But coming from the side of someone looking for good developers I'm all for a little innovation in the recruitment and employment space.

Most people suck at negotiating, and in a field where so much value is provided, there is a lot of value that simply isn't captured by the employee. I think having a management company like this makes a lot of sense assuming that after your fee, you are able to make more than you otherwise would.<p>As far as the website goes though, it needs a ton of work. They should basically take out their life story in the middle and use that for a press release and create a simplified about us page. Overall it really just seems like they threw everything on the page, and while nobody wants to leave anything out, having so much text is very distracting and takes away from your message

I'd like to see this in the UK, i've always said one day i'd start that kind of agency. This is a great idea.

If this was such a good idea, why doesn't it exist for other professions? EG the very best lawyers, accountants etc? Is the supply more contrained for tech people?<p>Also, freelance IT people typically work through several agents. What happens if you find a role yourself, not through these guys? Do you still have to pay them a cut?

I'm a tech strategist with an agent that is not 10X, and I am a very happy guy.<p>Ted Pearlman at Us Is Two (<a href="http://usistwo.com" rel="nofollow">http://usistwo.com</a>) was referred to me by a former business partner. He was scouring North America looking for someone with legitimate CTO instincts to advise a client on an ongoing basis. Their business (health and nutrition) aligned with my interests and their location (two minutes from my house) aligned with the stars. I met the client and they were nice, interesting people with a profitable business. It's been an exceptionally good relationship; fun and lucrative for them and me.<p>Ted and I became friends and now we work together often. I'm effective at pitching what I do and selling consulting (I started and co-ran Unspace for 8 years) but it's not what I enjoy doing. However, the real reason I'm excited to work with him is that no matter how good I am at keeping my pipeline full, there's no way that it's better than being recommended by a third party who is paying a fee to find someone with my skills.<p>Ted authored The Pudding Manifesto (<a href="http://puddingmanifesto.org/" rel="nofollow">http://puddingmanifesto.org/</a>) and in my experience he puts his money where his mouth is. He sends an invoice up front and says, "don't pay this unless the person I introduce to you is as good as I say they are". You'll have to ask him what percentage of people end up paying.<p>As for developers uncomfortable with comparisons to celebrity culture and folks that complain about average developers getting left behind... this really isn't about any of that, or at least it doesn't have to be. Ted exhausts huge amounts of energy making genuine connections between people, often at his own expense. He's a hustler with a heart of gold, and has his client's best interest in mind far more often than a lot of the folks HN-types are so eager to take investment money from.<p>If you have any questions that I haven't answered, please feel free to ask. Moreover, I encourage you to set up a time to speak with Ted: <a href="http://usistwo.com/contact" rel="nofollow">http://usistwo.com/contact</a>

I really like the emphasis on quality of talent. In my experience, too many recruitment agencies (the incumbents) are heavily focused on volume and optimize around their own compensation structure.<p>If 10x can stay focused only on genuine talent, giving the talent a steady flow of well-paying work from businesses that can't afford to have someone under-deliver, that seems like a win/win/win to me, and I'm sure they'll do well.

There's no question that great people working together w/ clarity and harmony can do amazing things. But selling yourself as a 10x anything to someone you don't know isn't very useful. A "10x" developer working for a "10x" boss with different priorities &#38; values is not going to end well.

This 10x elitism is total bull. I'm sure the top programmers are 10x better than the worst, but there's a vast spectrum in between. The 10x notion implies that there's the worst, the good, the better, then a massive chasm, the up on the mountaintop there are "the 10xers". I'm not buying it.

I laid out something similar here on HN last summer and Atlay (of 10x) was one of the first to comment. (<a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4555165" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4555165</a>) As a longtime tech recruiter, what I find most valuable about the model is that it is much more geared towards helping tech pros focus on what they do best (code) and not have to worry about what they tend to do worst (handle the business side of their work, negotiate, etc.). I haven't switched my business into an agency model at this point as I think there are still a few kinks to be worked out.<p>Here is some recruiter-speak (what we are trained to say) that might make sense to some of the contractors out there or at least sound familiar. If you are working with a recruiter and you ask for $125/hr, and you feel that is a very fair market rate for the work you will be doing, and the recruiter is able to get the client to pay say $130/hr, chances are you won't care because you are getting your 125 and the recruiter is making almost nothing. So let's now say that the recruiter is an excellent negotiator and gets $150 - should you (as the coder) get more because the recruiter was able to negotiate a higher rate? At what point should the recruiter be rewarded for doing a good job negotiating? If the recruiter is getting $250 total and you are only at $125, surely you will feel slighted - but if $125 is the market rate for that skill, should the recruiter not be rewarded for the ability to negotiate and get a higher rate? I could argue both sides of this.<p>One way to alleviate part of this problem is to essentially split the difference. If you come to me asking for 125, let's say my standard cut is 10% (which is low, but this is just an example) - and anything I get above that 10% we split. So at 137.5, you are at 125 and I'm at 12.5 (10%). If I get the client up to 150, I get my 12.50 (10% of your 125) + 1/2 of the additional 12.50 (150-137.5) for a total of 18.75, while you get 131.25. This way the recruiter is rewarded for getting a higher rate, and the coder doesn't feel like a victim.<p>Unfortunately, most recruiters won't reveal the bill rate (paid by the company) to the coder or the coder's rate to the company, so all sides are in the dark except the middleman.<p>Almost all recruiting models are quite imperfect and have some really disturbing incentives for the recruiters (<a href="http://jobtipsforgeeks.com/2012/09/17/disrupt/" rel="nofollow">http://jobtipsforgeeks.com/2012/09/17/disrupt/</a>). Transparency between all parties is something I am offering my candidates so they can use their best judgment as to whether my advice is clouded by a higher fee with one company over another. Transparency is the real key to solving many of the problems in the industry.<p>The agent model seems to be the right track, and hopefully we'll get it right some day.

Pop goes the bubble.

Does 10x take 10% of whatever the client makes?

Grant Cardone in the Cardone Zone

Please stop with the '10x' bullshit. Using this term makes you sound like immature children.