Hey! I’m the author. Biotech is not as well comp’ed, especially when you compare years of experience. For context, senior (Director, VP) levels make low to mid 200s, PhDs with work experience make mid 100s, and straight out of grad school make 80-120s

This doesn’t take into account equity, which most bio hires have zero context for and are easily taken advantage of when negotiating. I give equity packages in line with tech standards, but I could have cut them by 3-5X and still been competitive with the standard bio co.

unrelated, but I browsed your company website and think the idea is brilliant (especially after reading this: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/acel.12737, which confirmed my initial speculation).

tier-1 biotech in the bay area (genentech, gilead, etc) pays less than tier-1 tech (google, facebook, etc), but that's mainly because FAAMG pay such absurdly high base salaries.

The difference is less profound for tech folks at biotech companies than it is for biotech people. Certainly when I worked at a biotech startup for a year, after leaving FAAMG, I was able to negotiate the same base salary, but base salary is only a part of total comp...

At least in the bay area the gap is enormous - and biotech is not known for paying poorly!

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Are you saying biotech is better paid in the bay area?

No he is saying the other one is overpaid