> You will burn bridges and the community of devs is small there, and they talk.

You've hit the nail on the head here and this is my main worry. I've been much more selfish lately (last 3-ish years) and I know I definitely did burn some bridges but I can't make myself care very much -- I am 41 y/o and at one point participating in a one-sided "exchange" of trying to appease while mostly humiliating yourself becomes impossible to swallow (but then again, I recognize I've had both shitty luck and self-selected bad employers due to personal drawbacks that I am still actively fighting with).

> Be willing to dig into some seriously legacy code. "oh we still use sourcesafe and vb5".

One of my strongest selling points as a senior dev is that (a) I don't mind dirty and heavy work at all, and (b) I have an excellent eye for detail, very rarely miss something and (c) I try to leave the code with better readability after I finish my current task on it.

That being said, many companies are too impatient. I've hit the brick wall of "we want somebody who can hit the ground running and we won't provide any training" personally at least 5 times in the last 3 years. And I seriously don't know what to do about that; I certainly can't know all tech stacks and domain expertises on the planet!

And it's flabbergasting how much in denial many companies are about the risk management aspect. I mean they know; they absolutely know what's going on but they concluded that training new hires is a huge business risk (due to most people never staying more than 2 years on a job) so people like myself -- even if senior and very experienced -- have literally 1% chance of getting hired in many such places.

They do have a point and they are mostly acting rationally in this situation; but they could still spare some minimal training so they stand to gain a bit more from the employee that's going to move on maximum 24 months after being hired. One or two months of training isn't that expensive for them I'd think.

> These guys can be cheap. They have a product someone tinkered together years ago. But they do not have enough income to really justify any sort of real work. So they do what they can and usually just farm it out to some consultant group.

I am realistic about that aspect and I accept it. If they wanted to pay top dollar they'd just court somebody who is 45-50 or more for several months and then do their very best to promise them retirement in the company and all the good stuff that a long stay can benefit the person.

I know they want to pay less but I'd aim for having 3-4 such customers, independently, and collect a 120% - 200% of my normal payment combined through such venues. Not always sustainable in terms of mental strain and energy but I've pulled it off successfully even as shortly as 9-10 months ago without being hugely taxed in terms of health.

RE: the consultant group trope, I suppose this is where I fail in terms of marketing. Many companies just can't take a single random person seriously even if he's John Carmack in disguise. I suspect I need to make a fancy consulting website with some fake testimonials and pretty graphics, have a photo in a rented suit and then I'll suddenly be taken seriously. People can be very shallow and easy to manipulate, huh?

I am a bit flippant here but I likely should indeed work on marketing. But how does one strong and senior single programmer advertise themselves as a consultant or, generally, a guy you go to to solve a business problem, and who is not a wage lemming? Got any pointers on that?