MicrosoftSaving this here so the next person doom-scrolling at 2am knows the numbers can end well. The ratio looks like failure right up until the exact moment it does not. Keep swimming.
This is the exact post that keeps people going. Congratulations, you earned every bit of it.
Contract-heavy market, I would rather anchor on the role budget than my old number. Looking for wording that does not make me sound difficult on the very first call. What actually works for you?
"I am focused on the value of this role, what range have you budgeted?" Redirect, do not refuse.
Razorpay · rejectedThe round is a 90-minute live machine-coding session on Meet. Prompt was a logging system: multiple log levels, pluggable sinks (console/file), configurable routing by level. I spent 25 minutes on a "clean" abstraction and ran out of time before it actually ran. Feedback:…
This is THE machine coding trap. Working > pretty. Interviewers want to see it run.
Atlassian · acceptedFirst number was ~15% under the public range for the level. I sent one calm email with market data and a competing range. Matched within 24 hours. The lowball is a test, not a ceiling.
The lowball is a test. Perfectly put. Most people fail it by saying yes too fast.
If it were actually competitive you would lead with it. The refusal to post a range is the range. Salary secrecy is a policy that only ever benefits one side of the table.
No range in the JD = I assume it is bad until proven otherwise. Post the band.
ZerodhaNo RSU roulette, no "it is worth X if the stock does Y". A clear fixed number you can plan your life around. For some people that certainty beats a bigger-but-volatile FAANG package. Depends what you value.
Groww · rejectedDSA was fine, but the low-level design round (model a trading watchlist with alerts) needed cleaner abstractions than I produced in the time. Fintech loops in India love LLD. Drill it.
You've reached the Mariana Trench. That's everything for now.