Boeing! Microsoft!
Everybody knows that the continued strong job growth brought to our region by Boeing and Microsoft will keep housing prices from falling, right? I mean, there's nothing but roses and rainbows in the future for both of these companies...
...except of course the fact that Boeing's fancy new plane is being delayed at least six months (word has it that the problems are more serious than they're letting on in the media), and Microsoft's fancy new OS is so popular that they've extended XP's "life" by six months and are back-porting features from Vista to XP.
Also, has anyone seen any actual evidence to show that the average new hire at either of these companies is making anywhere near enough to buy a house around here at today's prices?
I'd love to see one of the real estate blogs or the local papers try to mount a serious defense of the "Boeing! Microsoft!" argument for continued price gains.
...except of course the fact that Boeing's fancy new plane is being delayed at least six months (word has it that the problems are more serious than they're letting on in the media), and Microsoft's fancy new OS is so popular that they've extended XP's "life" by six months and are back-porting features from Vista to XP.
Also, has anyone seen any actual evidence to show that the average new hire at either of these companies is making anywhere near enough to buy a house around here at today's prices?
I'd love to see one of the real estate blogs or the local papers try to mount a serious defense of the "Boeing! Microsoft!" argument for continued price gains.
Comments
As far as salaries go, unless I am severely underpaid there is absolutely no way a single income new employee could afford anything but the lowliest condo at today's prices without suicide financing. I've had nearly 5 years of raises and such and I can't. Microsoft has never been a big salary company, and now global wage competiton and H1Bs are also keeping salaries down.
I do not know how accurate this info is:
PayScale
..
In my experience, I would say that is an accurate graph. Either Microsoft or Boeing probably pays somewhere in that range. My hunch is a starting salary in either company is probably in the $60,000 range for technical work. And most workers with some experience (at least 5 years) are probably making between $70,000 and $90,000.
Doing my quick back of the envelope math...$80,000 * 6 = $480,000. Yep, it checks out. One highly paid worker in a household can buy a median SFH at the historically average 6x their annual salary. Wait...what? 3x is considered affordable?
So the result is any household with two software developers can probably afford the average house just fine. Except for on the east side where all these hypothetical two MS employee households live.
That means June must join Ward Cleaver at the software factory and Wally and The Beaver become latch key kids.
I dont think that info is correct (atleast for microsoft). SDE with 5-7 yrs experience will make 90-110k (Not counting bonuses)
SDE <> Microsoft
There are a lot of testers, technical writers, program managers, product managers, marketers, admins, etc. that work at Microsoft as well. YMMV as to whether they make more or less than Devs (and as to how many are now contracted), but my money is on that a good SDE makes more than most of those other jobs, esp. among the rank and file variety. Microsoft is a software company, but everything from the colors on the product packaging to making sure an icon doesn't offend some guy on the other side of the planet is someone's job as well.
The idea of the Microsoft Millionaire still resonates with people, but since 2000 they haven't been minting them quite like they used to. The good old days of stock option grants and soaring MSFT stock are squarely in the rear view mirror. Hell, even IBM stock is outperforming MSFT these days.
I was hired about a year ago as an SDE (software design engineer) fresh from college with a Master's in CS (a Master's doesn't get you any more than a Bachelor's BTW). My starting pay was in the mid 70's and my first raise was dismal at less than 3%. At that rate I'll be able to afford a house when I get hit by a truck and die (and my insurance pays out).
Posting non anonymous because I don't work there any more.
Unless it's changed in the last 5 years...Your first raise always sucks because they have a quota of "not good" raises they have to give out and it's kind of tradition that the new guy takes one for the team. It's kind of a tacit admission that the review system is flawed in as much as someone has to get the smaller raise, even if everyone is doing a great job.
It's like the corporate version of hazing the new guy.
http://www.payscale.com/research/US/City=Seattle/Salary/by_Employer
Historically both Microsoft and Amazon have delivered a big chunk of their pay via equity (stock options), so median salaries didn't match total compensation that well. Similarly a lot of Boeing jobs offer pensions, which can actually be extraordinarily valuable in the long run. However it's not good practice to base your monthly mortgage payment on stock options that may or may not be worth anything, nor the future value of your pension. Stock options do however make a great source of a down payment--if you exercise them at the right time. You'll find Microsoft and Amazon option-aires in homes all over the nicer parts of Seattle (Montlake, Wallingford, Greenlake), but I'd guess almost none of them could afford those houses on their salary alone.
Boeing employees in Washington state, courtesy of Boeing.com and the wayback machine
1997 97,724
1998 103,420
1999 96,510
2000 79,900
2001 78,200
2002 61,900
2003 54,096
2004 55,209
2005 62,103
2006 68,002
2007 68,570
http://www.boeing.com/employment/employment_table.html
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/m ... cation=rss
Apparently these numbers don't include contractors.
Mr. Bill Gates salary probably skewed the average upward a bit.
Poor Gates isn't going to be able to supersize his value meal! Really though, all things considered Gates and Ballmer aren't paid that much compared to other people at their level.
An interesting metric would be the average salary of new hires since those are the guys who are going to be driving the housing market more than long time employees.
http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/micr ... blog_last3
Bill Gates' compensation wasn't listed for the year because of a change in securities rules. Previously, the executives included in the proxy were the CEO and the four highest-paid executives, based on salary and bonus.
Now, companies must include the CEO, the CFO and the three other highest-paid executives, based not just on salary and bonus, but also including equity compensation, such as stock awards. Gates doesn't receive equity compensation, so his overall compensation was less than the three named executives: Kevin Johnson, Jeff Raikes and Kevin Turner.
I used to work at Boeing and know several people working on the 787 (and other busy programs) and they are working severe OT. Two of them are bringing home an additional $1000 per month since they are working 12 hr shifts. Ironically the Boeing delay might pump more money into the local economy (stock price aside).
What? Bill Gates gets paid less than $1,000,000 and this *lowers* the average pay at MSFT? So if we removed Bill from the equation (say we fire him or something), the average salary at MS would go up? Correct?
I'm no finance guru (pun intended) but that doesn't make sense to me.
According to the internets via wikipedia Billg made $966,667
^ Year 2006 compensation: salary $616,667, bonus $350,000. From Microsoft's Proxy Statement
for the math challenged, he does indeed raise the average comp at Microsoft. I think Finance must have assumed <$1mm meant $0