Beware: NET-A-PORTER

[James Laver]

On 9 Dec 2011, at 12:12, Zbigniew Łukasiak <zzbbyy at gmail.com> wrote:

> He is providing a useful service for us all at his own expense (by
> risking being marked by other potential employers) - why complain?

Because while he may think he is, he isn't. Net-a-porter were pretty on the ball when I interviewed for a contract position there and while the OP's story is a bit depressing, it's basic economics. NAP have a gigantic dev team in london and all the management structure is in place to deal with it. They'd want to recreate this in the states which mean doubling up of a lot of managerial jobs, plus there'd inevitably be costs involved in harmonising with the UK team. When the structure is already in place and can be easily scaled to more people, why bother spending all of that cash in a way that wouldn't benefit them as much when they could just deal with it in London?

I don't necessarily think it's a nice fact that economics works this way but it's a fact and we have to work within the constraints we have in life. I've been screwed much harder than the OP in the past for economic reasons and it does at least help focus the mind.

Disclaimer: I formerly consulted for net-a-porter.

/j