Boy. As someone who actually runs a contracting + project agency, that looks to be of an approximately similar size as 10x (at least before this was published), this was lifting-cars-painful to read - not just because they have PR and I don't, but because they (Solomon and Blumberg) _are the inefficiencies they are pretending to eliminate_.

Let's take a few parts of the article:

>>"The three partners have separate roles. Blumberg handles his and Solomon’s eleven remaining music and entertainment clients, and takes care of back-office matters: “Accounting, invoicing, collection, payouts. Everything that’s the bane of most people’s existence.” Guvench vets new talent. Potential clients have to fill out a questionnaire that one programmer compared to “the most complicated dating Web site ever.” Then Guvench and Solomon conduct interviews, to screen for communication skills. (I heard one potential client say, during a meeting in Solomon’s office, “We don’t want people who just write code and drool.”) Guvench also does code reviews—testing Web sites that aspiring clients have built, and reviewing the programs they’ve written."

So...
--Blumberg isn't working on the business at all;
--Solomon's work isn't even described (except "conducting interviews for communication skills").

So there's one person, Guvench, an ex-engineer, who's actually doing the technical vetting - i.e. 100% of the value so far is coming from one guy.

OK, then maybe the others are selling? Nope.

>>"10x technologists are working with a variety of customers: Live Nation, a virtual-reality startup, and an N.B.A. player who has an idea for a social-messaging app. Solomon admitted, however, that this list is somewhat random—it consists mostly of people who found 10x through Google, or whom he or his clients know personally. He has hired a salesman, to pitch 10x to companies."

OK, so you're closing PR-driven leads and your friends in the entertainment business? That's your sales pipeline?

I know a number of agencies with two or three partners running the organization. I don't know a single one of those where there isn't somebody pounding the pavement, hustling, finding clients - and who know the difference between a long-term partner and a sports star with an "idea for a social-messaging app." (We _all_ hear about those.)

The other value they're talking about is in the negotiation process. Hey, I'm totally willing to believe that a many-year entertainment agent is a better negotiator than I am, at least in the first-principles department. But this is not some magic skill in what is generally a well-defined and competitive market, and of course you're better at it when you deeply understand the technology and market, the BATNA for the client, etc. Those of us who actually understand the very small markets that one job description might meet are, in fact, pretty darned good at it too. For that matter, I've never told an engineer that you should work with us because we can get you a better deal than you can get for yourself, and if you're dealing with a client who understands the market (which said NBA player may not), that's pure hokum. (P.S. plenty of people on HN provide that coaching for free all day long.)

It's ok that the author doesn't really understand this market, and so the competitors she mentions aren't really competitors at all - they're all focused on full-time hiring. I guess it's also OK that the New Yorker's fact-checking department didn't discover that there's no such programming language as "THP" - that should be "PHP." (Maybe it's just a typo.)

But to let the reader believe that this approach represents the best this market has to offer - well, I guess that's just really, really great PR. Back to work.

(Added later: I realized I commented on these folks 1.5 years ago at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5527610. I was feeling nicer then? Maybe? It looks like the participant in that HN thread was the partner who's clearly adding value.)