Jono and Taran leaving doesn't surprise me...

[Big Head Tech]

Okay sorry had to do the clickbait. But with Taran departing and now Jono, I think it's a good time to point out why.

 

LMG has been around for about a decade at this point. They have around 60 employees and 3 people are the C-Level. Outside of being on the C-Level the highest out can probably go is a segment or department manager/supervisor.

 

What I think many people don't realize is that now days people don't want to do the same thing forever. They want personal growth, new skills, new roles and responsibilities. Now we know that LMG tried very hard to supply that for everyone. But not everyone is going to become the head of a department.

 

Some people also want to go a different direction. After being a write or editor for years, maybe you want more editorial control of the content. So maybe a startup is a better fit. Maybe you want to create your own content (we've seen that a few times now).

 

One of the pros to LMG has been that they are really big on creativity and growth. But being 60ish employees your growth potential is somewhat limited. Just the nature of the beast. And to be clear we aren't talking about $$$, I'm sure people are getting paid well. I saw $50-60k USD a few years ago for positions and I suspect it's gone up. If I had to guess, their payroll is north of 4M at this point.

 

But I expect to see more OGs leave over the next few years, short of Luke and Nick Light as they are on the board they are less likely to leave. Some may stay, say Brandon and Edzel who I think have families, being comfortable on a long term position is also something you can see as well. I think the younger and less committed people are in their lives, the more likely they would leave for the next opportunity after 3-5 years.

 

I also think LMG is really good at giving people opportunities to grow and learn but I think sometimes it works against them. Like for Taran, he wants to focus on his videos and channels between his extensive editing and on screen work, he now has the tools to focus on his channel. But that goes to show you the compassion LMG has for their employees.

 

So no, nothing is probably happening at LMG. I suspect it's a great place to work and people are treated fine. OG people leave, it just happens and many times it's no fault of the companies. So please don't think LMG is anywhere near dying.

 

[Imbadatnames]

1 hour ago, Big Head Tech said:

Okay sorry had to do the clickbait. But with Taran departing and now Jono, I think it's a good time to point out why.

 

LMG has been around for about a decade at this point. They have around 60 employees and 3 people are the C-Level. Outside of being on the C-Level the highest out can probably go is a segment or department manager/supervisor.

 

What I think many people don't realize is that now days people don't want to do the same thing forever. They want personal growth, new skills, new roles and responsibilities. Now we know that LMG tried very hard to supply that for everyone. But not everyone is going to become the head of a department.

 

Some people also want to go a different direction. After being a write or editor for years, maybe you want more editorial control of the content. So maybe a startup is a better fit. Maybe you want to create your own content (we've seen that a few times now).

 

One of the pros to LMG has been that they are really big on creativity and growth. But being 60ish employees your growth potential is somewhat limited. Just the nature of the beast. And to be clear we aren't talking about $$$, I'm sure people are getting paid well. I saw $50-60k USD a few years ago for positions and I suspect it's gone up. If I had to guess, their payroll is north of 4M at this point.

 

But I expect to see more OGs leave over the next few years, short of Luke and Nick Light as they are on the board they are less likely to leave. Some may stay, say Brandon and Edzel who I think have families, being comfortable on a long term position is also something you can see as well. I think the younger and less committed people are in their lives, the more likely they would leave for the next opportunity after 3-5 years.

 

I also think LMG is really good at giving people opportunities to grow and learn but I think sometimes it works against them. Like for Taran, he wants to focus on his videos and channels between his extensive editing and on screen work, he now has the tools to focus on his channel. But that goes to show you the compassion LMG has for their employees.

 

So no, nothing is probably happening at LMG. I suspect it's a great place to work and people are treated fine. OG people leave, it just happens and many times it's no fault of the companies. So please don't think LMG is anywhere near dying.

 

Or maybe the environment has gotten toxic and people are leaving 

[cmndr]

5 minutes ago, Imbadatnames said:

Or maybe the environment has gotten toxic and people are leaving 

Or people just want to try new things or have an awesome opportunity.

I was sad to leave my job in 2018, I was enjoying what I was doing, felt respected and felt I was experiencing very real professional growth...
But I still took a job offer at Google and the $150,000-200,000/year pay increase.

[Imbadatnames]

Just now, cmndr said:

Or people just want to try new things or have an awesome opportunity.

I was sad to leave my job in 2018, I was enjoying what I was doing, felt respected and felt I was experiencing very real professional growth...
But I still took a job offer at Google and the $150,000-200,000/year pay increase.

But neither are going to get that. A premiere pro only video editor will get nowhere outside of YouTube and Jons field has a fairly low salary cap. If anything their best change wage wise would be at LMG

[cmndr]

2 minutes ago, Imbadatnames said:

But neither are going to get that. A premiere pro only video editor will get nowhere outside of YouTube and Jons field has a fairly low salary cap. If anything their best change wage wise would be at LMG

You'd be surprised.

There's a handful of places that will legitimately pay 2-3x the going rate for a given role. Working FOR youtube would probably 2-3x your pay vs working for a successful youtuber for example. Same job. Though you have to put up with trust fund kiddies from Harvard and Columbia.

Heck I know someone who is basically at the top of his field (basically RAN all the technicals for a very narrow niche but well respected in that world) who just jumped to Meta despite basically being his own boss and having a cushy life with a reasonable 6 figure salary.

[Imbadatnames]

1 minute ago, cmndr said:

You'd be surprised.

There's a handful of places that will legitimately pay 2-3x the going rate for a given role. Working FOR youtube would probably 2-3x your pay vs working for a successful youtuber for example. Same job. Though you have to put up with trust fund kiddies from Harvard and Columbia.

Not gonna happen, if you want to make good money you have to be able to use avid 

1 minute ago, cmndr said:

Heck I know someone who is basically at the top of his field (basically RAN all the technicals for a very narrow niche but well respected in that world) who just jumped to Meta despite basically being his own boss and having a cushy life with a reasonable 6 figure salary.

And what field was that? 

[Unedited_Mind]

When a forum is used as a discussion place to talk about your favorite soap opera.

[cmndr]

9 minutes ago, Imbadatnames said:

Not gonna happen, if you want to make good money you have to be able to use avid

So speaking to Google/alphabet specifically, they actually don't test for specific technologies in most cases. They will ensure that you're an absolute master at something related though...

When I interviewed at Facebook and Amazon recently I also got the feeling that they were somewhat similar in that regard. Apple seems to care a bit more about specialization though. Can't speak to Netflix but yeah, I've interviewed at the bulk of the FAANGs.

9 minutes ago, Imbadatnames said:

And what field was that? 

Not going into the specifics because I don't think he's announced it yet (I don't see it on LinkedIn) and his departure will probably destroy the product he worked on...
Let's just say you need to know general software engineering, firmware engineering, iOS/Android/Windows development PLUS have deep knowledge of electrical engineering and one specific area of physics. It's pretty hard to find someone who checks all of those boxes.
 

[Imbadatnames]

58 minutes ago, cmndr said:

So speaking to Google/alphabet specifically, they actually don't test for specific technologies in most cases. They will ensure that you're an absolute master at something related though...

Shame Taran does video editing and is heavily Adobe based where most professional studios outside of YouTube uses Avid and FCPC. If you can’t use the programs they’re not gonna wait for you to get up to speed on them when there’s literally thousands of people who are already at that level. 

58 minutes ago, cmndr said:

When I interviewed at Facebook and Amazon recently I also got the feeling that they were somewhat similar in that regard. Apple seems to care a bit more about specialization though. Can't speak to Netflix but yeah, I've interviewed at the bulk of the FAANGs.

Not going into the specifics because I don't think he's announced it yet (I don't see it on LinkedIn) and his departure will probably destroy the product he worked on...
Let's just say you need to know general software engineering, firmware engineering, iOS/Android/Windows development PLUS have deep knowledge of electrical engineering and one specific area of physics. It's pretty hard to find someone who checks all of those boxes.
 

Sure sure, not gonna believe anything you say if you’re being that vauge. 

[cmndr]

7 minutes ago, Imbadatnames said:

Shame Taran does video editing and is heavily Adobe based where most professional studios outside of YouTube uses Avid and FCPC. If you can’t use the programs they’re not gonna wait for you to get up to speed on them when there’s literally thousands of people who are already at that level. 

Sure sure, not gonna believe anything you say if you’re being that vauge. 

Exact software doesn't matter at (some but not all) big companies that will just assume you're brilliant and will pick up something new in the span of 1-3 months and be proficient. If there's 50 different skills that make someone good at a job, overindexing on specific software or coding languages is a good way to have a lower talent work force.

 

So just for laughs levels.fyi

Software engineer at Google (L5) at age 25 (definitely above average in terms of promotions, you start at L3) can conceivably make 350k a year. Pick any other random company and that 25 year old would "only" make 90-150k a year.

I'm not mentioning a specific person's name on the internet. There's no reason to disrespect him and to violate his privacy.

[Imbadatnames]

3 hours ago, cmndr said:

Exact software doesn't matter at (some but not all) big companies that will just assume you're brilliant and will pick up something new in the span of 1-3 months and be proficient. If there's 50 different skills that make someone good at a job, overindexing on specific software or coding languages is a good way to have a lower talent work force.

Kinda does, especially when there’s people who are already as good or better with experience with the software. You’re assuming people can get up to the same speed on different software. 

3 hours ago, cmndr said:

 

So just for laughs levels.fyi

Software engineer at Google (L5) at age 25 (definitely above average in terms of promotions, you start at L3) can conceivably make 350k a year. Pick any other random company and that 25 year old would "only" make 90-150k a year.

I'm not mentioning a specific person's name on the internet. There's no reason to disrespect him and to violate his privacy.

That’s not top of the field… that’s lower level management. 

[Middcore]

5 hours ago, cmndr said:

Or people just want to try new things or have an awesome opportunity.

 

It's not worth engaging with people like this, dude. 

[Heliian]

I've seen people walk from way better positions for way less money.  

 

Happens all the time, some people can't sit still.  I used to be like that, going on 9 years with current employer but would pull the pin for a better offer at this point. 

[Avocado Diaboli]

@Imbadatnames In my experience, employers rarely give a damn about what specific tools you know if you can demonstrate proficiency with some type of industry standard tool. They use knowledge of those tools to gauge how well you understand the fundamentals of what you're aiming for, not to see if you know all the keyboard shortcuts. So if you're looking for an editor, you use that experience to test if they know how to achieve certain desired outcomes. Not how fast they can navigate any give tool. If you know one piece of industry specific software, it's usually a breeze to become fairly competent with a different software in the same sector. In fact, it's expected of you to be able to.

 

If you're a game dev for example with tons of experience in a universal game engine like Unreal, you're expected to be able to pick up the workflow in a proprietary in-house engine if you get hired at a company that uses one. So no, you don't need to have demonstrable experience with Media Composer or Final Cut Pro if you want to be an editor. You need to demonstrate that you know how editing works on a fundamental level. The software is just the middleman, they don't hire you for your knowledge about that.

[BlueChinchillaEatingDorito]

10 hours ago, Imbadatnames said:

Or maybe the environment has gotten toxic and people are leaving 

So just like the Scuderia.

[cmndr]

7 hours ago, Imbadatnames said:

Kinda does, especially when there’s people who are already as good or better with experience with the software. You’re assuming people can get up to the same speed on different software.

If you hang around smart people you tend to view "learn relatively simple software over the span of 3 months" as kind of trivial.

Over the course of a normal career it's kind of expected that you pick up 3-4 new things each year. Learning ONE software application REALLY isn't a big deal unless the person in question has very little talent.

So yeah a job description might read "Knows technology A or B" instead of "knows technology A" since it's usually smarter to hire for talent and potential than experience. It's not that hard to cram a "3 month" udacity course in a week.

Besides, half the time a company will have their own proprietary workflow anyway so you'd have to re-learn most of your job anyway.
 

7 hours ago, Imbadatnames said:

That’s not top of the field… that’s lower level management. 

L5 usually has 0 direct reports so that's not exactly management. Maybe you'll host an intern.

You can be a "top of the field" IC without having direct reports.

 

Top of the field usually means you're able to learn quickly and do better quality work (and chose the right work to prioritize) than 90% of people in roles similar to yours with similar levels of experience.

[Imbadatnames]

5 hours ago, BlueChinchillaEatingDorito said:

So just like the Scuderia.

Just their 4D race tactics, can’t lose a race when you don’t have a team anyone

[Imbadatnames]

5 hours ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

@Imbadatnames In my experience, employers rarely give a damn about what specific tools you know if you can demonstrate proficiency with some type of industry standard tool. They use knowledge of those tools to gauge how well you understand the fundamentals of what you're aiming for, not to see if you know all the keyboard shortcuts. So if you're looking for an editor, you use that experience to test if they know how to achieve certain desired outcomes. Not how fast they can navigate any give tool. If you know one piece of industry specific software, it's usually a breeze to become fairly competent with a different software in the same sector. In fact, it's expected of you to be able to.

Depends, some software is fairly similar across a field. Some isn’t. For example 3D printing slicers, from the basement versions of Cura for cheap printers up to your industry leading GrabCad and Eiger, all pretty much the same. CAD designing software on the other hand is completely different platform to platform. Just because someone is proficient with Shapr3D has no bearing on their ability with solidworks. 

5 hours ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

 

If you're a game dev for example with tons of experience in a universal game engine like Unreal, you're expected to be able to pick up the workflow in a proprietary in-house engine if you get hired at a company that uses one. So no, you don't need to have demonstrable experience with Media Composer or Final Cut Pro if you want to be an editor. You need to demonstrate that you know how editing works on a fundamental level. The software is just the middleman, they don't hire you for your knowledge about that.

The issue is that video editing isn’t a field short on labour and if someone who already knows Avid for example is applying for the job they will get it. Studio production is about uptime and they cannot have downtime while waiting for someone to get up to speed with software. 

[Avocado Diaboli]

50 minutes ago, Imbadatnames said:

Depends, some software is fairly similar across a field. Some isn’t. For example 3D printing slicers, from the basement versions of Cura for cheap printers up to your industry leading GrabCad and Eiger, all pretty much the same. CAD designing software on the other hand is completely different platform to platform. Just because someone is proficient with Shapr3D has no bearing on their ability with solidworks. 

You missed the entire point I was making. Of course the software isn't identical, but it's not about the software, it's about the fundamentals of the work itself you're doing. Just because not every CAD software works exactly alike doesn't mean an experienced CAD designer will not get a job where they have to learn a new type of software if their theoretical knowledge of how to get stuff done in CAD is rooted in a solid understanding of CAD design principles. Never mind that you had to reach quite hard there, since video editing software is largely identical, since they've all been streamlined to a point where there aren't a ton of different paradigms that lend themselves to an efficient workflow. The same way how for example digital audio workstations basically all work the same way and someone who's worked with one of them can fire up a new one and have a pretty good understanding of most of the stuff in front of them.

 

How do I know that? I've done it multiple times, across multiple pieces of software and disciplines. I started 3D modelling in Cinema 4D and when I started working with Blender or Zbrush, it was pretty seamless. I started making music in Cubase and when I looked at Reaper, FL Studio and even Reason, I had no trouble getting into the swing of things. The same way I've used plenty of video editing software that all basically operates the same. There aren't any massive schisms here that somehow would preclude someone experienced from getting up to speed fairly quickly.

 

50 minutes ago, Imbadatnames said:

The issue is that video editing isn’t a field short on labour and if someone who already knows Avid for example is applying for the job they will get it. Studio production is about uptime and they cannot have downtime while waiting for someone to get up to speed with software. 

This is basically a non-argument that is also applicable to literally every industry everywhere. And you keep acting as if Premiere Pro is some kind of small niche product that nobody uses and that's somehow not on the same level as Media Composer or Final Cut Pro. They're all industry standards, all used at the largest scale productions.

[Imbadatnames]

4 hours ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

You missed the entire point I was making. Of course the software isn't identical, but it's not about the software, it's about the fundamentals of the work itself you're doing. Just because not every CAD software works exactly alike doesn't mean an experienced CAD designer will not get a job where they have to learn a new type of software if their theoretical knowledge of how to get stuff done in CAD is rooted in a solid understanding of CAD design principles. Never mind that you had to reach quite hard there, since video editing software is largely identical, since they've all been streamlined to a point where there aren't a ton of different paradigms that lend themselves to an efficient workflow. The same way how for example digital audio workstations basically all work the same way and someone who's worked with one of them can fire up a new one and have a pretty good understanding of most of the stuff in front of them.

It actually varies a lot and takes a while to get up to speed, Ontop of that there literally courses and quads for some software. 

4 hours ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

 

How do I know that? I've done it multiple times, across multiple pieces of software and disciplines. I started 3D modelling in Cinema 4D and when I started working with Blender or Zbrush, it was pretty seamless. I started making music in Cubase and when I looked at Reaper, FL Studio and even Reason, I had no trouble getting into the swing of things. The same way I've used plenty of video editing software that all basically operates the same. There aren't any massive schisms here that somehow would preclude someone experienced from getting up to speed fairly quickly.

 

This is basically a non-argument that is also applicable to literally every industry everywhere. And you keep acting as if Premiere Pro is some kind of small niche product that nobody uses and that's somehow not on the same level as Media Composer or Final Cut Pro. They're all industry standards, all used at the largest scale productions.

It kinda is niche dude, Avid is the industry standard, FCPC is second then FCP then Adobe. Actual studios don’t like it because it’s not reliable. You can’t have more than one industry standard that’s not how a standard works. You can’t have say two set of standard conditions in chemistry for example are 298K, 1atm and 1mol solutions. There’s not two versions 

[Avocado Diaboli]

6 hours ago, Imbadatnames said:

It kinda is niche dude, Avid is the industry standard, FCPC is second then FCP then Adobe. Actual studios don’t like it because it’s not reliable. You can’t have more than one industry standard that’s not how a standard works. You can’t have say two set of standard conditions in chemistry for example are 298K, 1atm and 1mol solutions. There’s not two versions 

This is patently nonsense. Of course there are multiple pieces of software that can be industry standards simultaneously. This is like arguing "there is only one industry standard programming language". Why are you even trying to entertain this notion to begin with? What experience do you have in any of the fields discussed here? Because it seems to me like you've heard somewhere that "Avid is the provider of industry standard software like Media Composer, Pro Tools and Sibelius" and concluded that those are the only tools that ever get used and that's what you keep evangelizing for some reason.