Ask HN: How was life for a regular dev during the dot com burst?

642 points by kace91 ↗ HN
I'm a youngish developer (28y/o), and the constant recent comments of people predicting a new burst have made me curious about how life changed for developers at the time, and maybe what to expect if such a thing were to happen again.

I've heard stories of rich startup founders losing everything back then, but not much about what happened with the average devs. What was it like, living through those times? Did many people change careers? was there still a thriving industry in less risky tech companies? did salaries drop? I'm basically clueless about the whole thing.

418 comments

[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 282 ms ] thread
Got stuck with a huge tax bill on my stock options when Yahoo went under, took 10 years of brutal back to back contracts to pay it off. The state didn't care that I had nowhere near the opportunities again they just mercilessly hammered me for taxes until I paid it off a couple years ago but took nearly 15 years to pay off the tax debt and meanwhile I could invest in nothing else.
That is awful. If you had more money could you have fought it? Was prison threatened?
The IRS at least for now doesn't throw people in jail because they can't pay. There aren't enough jails and being in jail negatively impacts ability to pay.

Sometimes if the amount is ridiculously out sized compared with ability to pay the IRS will settle for a lower amount.

Notable if the IRS ever filed a lien against you: IRS Form 12277 Application for Withdrawal of Filed Form 668.

That happened because you exercised and didn't sell?

Also, we may be hearing many stories like that after the Bitcoin bubble when IRS goes through the records more carefully. Always remember to take profits the instant you make those profits, put some of that cash aside for yours and IRS's sake. Always.

No, that is nothing like bitcoin. Stock options get exercised at fair market value and you immediately owe taxes on the paper profits, even if you never get a cashout. For example, if your strike is 10 cents and when you finally exercise the FMV of the company is $1 per share, you have 90 cents of profit per share even if the company is still private.

Bitcoin is a commodity, if you buy at $10k and the value drops to $5k, you have straight losses. You don’t owe taxes on paper gains unlike the totally ridiculous and insane situation with stock options. The government blows.

I meant for people that bought low and then traded around the top. If you switched BTC to, say, ETH around the peak - you created taxable income. Even if you've lost almost everything since then.

A buy, full ride up and down to the same level, followed by a sell shouldn't be taxable income.

Golden rule is if you exercise sell enough immediately to pay off the tax burden. If you have a lockout get it written into your contract that you can sell them to another private holder (e.g another employee, investor). It's legitimate for a private company to want a lockout, they don't want external influence in a company but most will allow internal if you get it in contract.
It was rumored that a friend had a $1.5million tax bill on options he had exercised. He apparently held onto his shares riding them down to about about $300K or so in value.

Not sure how he resolved it (whether he negotiated his tax bill down with the IRS or came up with a payment plan).

Isn't this what bankruptcy is for?
Can't file for bankruptcy for taxes due. Nor legal liability (ex. Auto Accident liabilities)
You can’t file for bankruptcy within three years of the tax becoming due, but after that, you can have federal income tax obligations discharged in bankruptcy.

Unrelated to bankruptcy, ou can also file for an offer in compromise, which collapsing option values or an excellent candidate for.

I've seen something similar to this in other responses in this thread, how exactly does one get a big tax bill for your stock options while simultaneously not being able to pay them off? I'm not understanding something about the situation.
I mentioned it in my post.. a lot of financial people recommended taking loans to buy stock options.

Also in some cases especially with public companies they gifted you the options as income. That got marked as income even if the stock then tanked and you couldn't sell the stock for what the gifted value was.

There were various ways to get yourself screwed up.

Taxes on equity and option grants are complex beasts [ISO/NSO/RSU, Conversions between ISOs to NSOs, Income vs. Cap Gains, AMT, 83(b) elections, Exercised vs Non-exercised, Vesting schedules, etc]. Unless you personally understand the nuances in everyone of these cases, you should 100% work with a tax professional (and if you do understand, you are probably a tax professional!).

Here is an earlier discussion on taxes on options: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10020063

From my observations during the time, what your experience as a dev was depended entirely on what sort of company you were working for. If you were working for one of the SV hotshots, then the odds were that you had a rough time of it.

However, most of the devs I knew (including myself) were not, and that set of devs were no more affected by the bubble burst than society at large was.

Around 1992, my friend and I started doing desktop database apps as a side gig while we worked at a consulting firm doing IT. We decided to do this full time. With connections in the music industry, we started doing websites and online stores for some big names like Rolling Stones, Aerosmith, Phish, and others. By then there were about 5-6 of us, working out of my friend's house. We weren't real employees, and only got paid when my friend walked into the room and started handing out $50 bills. Our online stores morphed into an award-winning product for small and medium-sized merchants, that you could pick up for $19.99 at Staples, CompUSA, etc. In 1996 we incorporated, and I was hired as the first official employee/lead programmer. I think I was making about $50K by then; we had grown and moved into a real office. A couple of years later, we had the first single-shopping-cart online mall. I was making $85K. We had almost 70 employees. In 2000, a Canadian company bought us for $45M and I was given another raise to almost $110K, but then things fell apart quickly. The last 6-8 months I was basically paid to drink coffee and sit around. By 2001 we were kaput. My 60,000 stock options, when I could finally do anything with them were worth about $1200, down from an initial value of ~1.8M CAD. I had bought a truck, and had put a downpayment on my house, but that was about it. I flailed around for a few years looking for programming work, and then got the job I have now, doing IT at a local University. I'm making about $50K again :/ It was a lot of work, with (mostly) great people, and for a while we were on top of the world. In some ways you could say we were Amazon before Amazon. If we hadn't gone under, Amazon probably would have bought us. Perchance to dream..
Why don't you try to get more high paying work?
I went through it, and started a company soon after it crashed and then a couple more during the downturn. Ironically a lot of money can be made in downturns if you know where to look and how to approach it.

What I saw and experienced was enterprise devs basically just kept doing what they did. Startup devs that could went into (or back in some cases) to enterprises. Enterprises used it as an opportunity to snag up good devs at a bit of a discount in many cases.

To be fair, true developers were not really negatively affected at least not more so than other professions. One nice side affect I thought was that the crash cleared out most of the people claiming they were developers but had no real experience or talent. Most of my friends and people I worked with were fine and at worst might have gone back to an enterprise gig or in many cases were already there and didn't really miss a beat.

IMHO, if we have a crash this time (versus just a softening market), it will be similar as the need for quality software devs won't disappear. It will take longer to find a position in general and there won't be as much money floating around but decent developers are not going to have a hard time putting food on the table or finding work. Remote work will suffer, pay will suffer and VC dollars will drop dramatically, but the average developer will be fine.

> To be fair, true developers were not really negatively affected at least not more so than other professions.

That was my experience as well, all the weird roles got cut in companies, all the crazy extras removed, but the companies that had working business models kept on trucking and hiring competent developers, and competent developers at unsustainable businesses had no trouble finding new work.

Because at the end of the day, the dotcom crash was about the crazy financial expectations of internet-enabled companies, not a rejection of the internet itself.

Austrian school of economics believes that occasional recessions are useful because they destroy bad ideas (not exclusively bad ideas, but many bad ideas) and therefore free up resources for new ideas. Some of which will be good, some bad.

For a huge example: Madoff was only discovered because of the 2008 crisis. SEC had plenty of evidence against him for years before that, including the fact he did not actually trade! The guy didn't even trade securities and posted consistent double digits returns! The SEC did not investigate. Only when clients started asking for funds has the scheme collapsed.

I that is the SEC for you. At one if the firms I worked at we had an algorithmic trader who did hundreds of thousands of naked shorts (selling short a stock he didn’t own). He always canceled the order, bought shares, or swapped internally but was still a no-no, and he would do this thousands of times a day. He got caught and we put together a report of his activity that required a hand truck to deliver. The SEC took one look at that and made the firm promise to increase their internal oversight and that was it. They didn’t even open any of the boxes.
Naked shorts are still legal if you're a market maker, for example. They're not entirely bad, it's sort of like credit - it's only bad when you fail to deliver. If you do deliver then it's great as it lubricates the system. See "Regulation SHO":

https://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/regsho.htm

Not sure if this was the case at your company, i.e. if they had the permission to do so. If not then I don't know why they didn't prosecute that trader. Most organizations cannot do naked shorts and have to pre-borrow securities.

(comment deleted)

    occasional recessions are useful because they 
    destroy bad ideas (not exclusively bad ideas, 
    but many bad ideas) and therefore free up resources 
    for new ideas. Some of which will be good, some bad.
I feel this was absolutely true for the world of internet applications.

The stuff built in the early dot-com era was typically garbage from a technical standpoint. Heaps and heaps and heaps of spaghetti code written in PHP, Perl, and ASP Classic. You could theoretically write maintainable code in those technologies if you were truly dedicated but this was decidedly not the norm.

Think of literally any basic best practice for writing either the server or client portions of a web application that we might follow in 2019. In, say, 1997 those best practices hadn't been invented yet and even if you traveled back to 1997 in a time machine you couldn't implement some of them since the technology hadn't been invented yet.

From a technical perspective, roughly 2002-2006 was when things started to get really good from a technical standpoint.

- A lot of untalented folks (people calling themselves "developers" but with no real coding ability) were filtered out of the industry.

- A lot of lessons had been learned about how to build this stuff.

- More and more people were getting high-speed internet access.

- The use of AJAX to build responsive client-side applications became a thing, thanks largely to...

- ...Google, who released two absolutely world-shaking web applications in Gmail and Google Maps. These became something of a guiding light in a number of ways. Both from a technical showcase of what could be accomplished with web standards, and a design perspective... it showed a lot of pointy-haired bosses that what people wanted was minimal design and maximum usefulness, not a flashy multimedia experience.

- Other "Web 2.0" tech like RSS matured and enabled LOTS of cool demos (sadly we've moved away from this...)

- Pressure from Firefox forced Microsoft to finally embrace some more web standards and we edged away from the brink of a Microsoft-ruled internet

Dunno. Practices in 1997 and 2002 didn't differ in very appreciable degree, just that piles of crap C++ became piles of crap Java. AJAX was made possible not by Google but by Microsoft's XHR and IE5. RSS never took of in any appreciable commercial way…

I would say the bust had no substantial impact on technology side of thing. Perhaps the pricing became bit more modest, and sure, lots of careers were "filtered out".

Ajax was made technically possible by Microsoft XHR and IE5. It took Gmail and gmaps to bring this to wide attention.
Yes. I remember people (including me) being a bit amazed by the web version of Outlook that first made use of it. Technically MS introduced this functionality in IE5 in 1999, as an ActiveX control.

It was a Microsoft-only thing for a while though, until Mozilla/Safari/Opera implemented their own versions. That took a few years IIRC.

At any rate, Gmail was what made the world really take notice of what AJAX could do.

For the record there where a lot of people that where doing the same thing before the XHR object, they where just using an iframe and polling to get the data which was usually an HTML snippet or XML. They would construct the url for data with JS in the main frame, change the url of the hidden frame to point to a different CGI script, get the data and read it into JS variables. It was just that none of them got the exposure of Gmail or Outlook web. Now in saying that iFrame polling was a huge hack and a major PITA but it worked. IIRC one of the major CGI/Perl chat apps used this hack to update the web chat window.
>I would say the bust had no substantial impact on technology side of thing.

I think that it did, because it focused development efforts of companies that remained in business. Many failed dot-coms should have failed before the bust, but they kept acting like working businesses as long as they had capital available. They diluted markets, absorbed development talent by offering equity and large salaries, and in general distorted the whole industry.

After the bust, the technologies and idea that got attention/effort/built up were the ones with a solid foundation, not the pipe dreams.

One thing I will add too, is if you do go back to the enterprise or at least out of tech, make sure you don't allow yourself to stagnate or miss the upswing. I saw that happen to friends who got salary stuck making half what they would had they joined the broader market during the recovery. Enterprises can rescue you in some instances, but they are not usually great for salary growth outside of a few key places and people.

So I'd only caution people to pay close attention the whole time so you can know when to jump back into the market and to capitalize on that next salary increase.

(comment deleted)
>Ironically a lot of money can be made in downturns if you know where to look and how to approach it.

Can you expand on this? I'm honestly curious about what machinations begin once a company dies or the market sinks.

Start a new company. Lots of talent available and investors look for heads-down new things. Classic Namazu stuff.
Capital's harder to get, but personnel and real estate is cheaper if you get funded. And then while you develop, hopefully the market recovers, and there's cash available for subsequent rounds and with customers to buy your stuff.
And it really depends on who your customers are. The amount of cash available during a recession doesn't change. It just gets more sluggish and people tend to be more reluctant to let it go. But it's there all the same.
I don't know if people tend to be more reluctant to let it go, they just change where it goes. As an example, a company I worked at during the dot.com crash made a lot of bones in regulatory compliance until 9/11...at which point, redundancy and high availability became the money machine.
What is "classic Namazu stuff"? I have never heard that phrase.
It's probably not super common, I just like to use it to describe economic upheaval and opportunity.

So there's this giant catfish in Japanese mythology, the Namazu. It's captive in the ocean, under a giant keystone held down by the daimyojin Kashima. When Kashima gets tired or distracted, he lets off pressure a little, the Namazu wriggles around to get free and that wriggling sets off earthquakes and subsequently, tsunamis.

After an earthquake, there's always a rebuilding and a redistribution of wealth. And after the Edo earthquake of 1855, woodcut prints depicting the namazu and society (namazu-e), money falling from the sky, businessmen vomiting and defecating money, etc. got super popular. (https://www.illustrationchronicles.com/When-Giant-Catfish-Sh...)

Others already mentioned some keys.

But a couple key things change (many more do too these are two I look for), yes capital is harder to come by, or at least requires better fundamentals and connections but the overall market is in a selling mood (e.g. good buying market). So enterprises and healthy businesses are looking for things to buy on the cheap (which is relative to the high of the market), and how to expand cost effectively. There is of course a cool down period that you have to get through before this starts happening.

Enterprises after they snap up their initial FTE roles they need to fill start looking for a lot more consultants to fill project roles versus bringing on more FTE's. This opens up more consulting gigs at pretty favorable pricing usually. You can now hire people to expand a consulting practice because people are less expensive so you can grow when things are "down" for others.

When the air pops out of the system people also get discouraged from the market and run away. A lot of the speculators will back out and so it becomes a more sane environment for a few years. If you are a developer and just work through it as things recover you change jobs a couple of times and you can really jump your salary during the recovery because there is a time when demand becomes super high but supply again is low. This also is again where it is awesome to be a consultant, I kept increasing the rates for my company all through the downturn and people would pay.

Outside of tech a downturn is usually time to capitalize on real estate, rentals and a host of other things. But you have to set yourself up to do this usually a little before things take a full slide into that first year. But if you are relatively debt free and can take some debt on during the down point of the market on real estate you can make a lot of money on the upswing. To be clear, real estate may not crash at the same time or rate, or may not at all. But the demands for rentals vs buying changes as does the buying power of people, so you can leverage those both.

> To be fair, true developers were not really negatively affected at least not more so than other professions.

I did fine in 2009 when I was laid off, getting a job in a month, but hiring can be random and I knew some great people that struggled to find their next role. Some developed issues as a result that raised the bar yet higher. People are crazy and irrational so never take these things personally. Deliver good work and keep acting in good faith to find a place that will treat you well. Smart people don't want to live in contexts of misery.

Yea, I think this is the normal thing that happens to good people that do their work and contribute to the team. And you are so right, don't take it personally because that can eat you up and it was almost never personal.
> To be fair, true developers were not really negatively affected at least not more so than other professions.

My anecdote is the opposite: My father was an engineer at a company that made machines for semiconductor manufacturing.

They had a physical product, customers liked them, they sold each machine at a profit - none of the obvious-with-hindsight folly of companies like Pets.com.

However, when the dot-com bust happened they went out of business anyway. Turns out the collapse of the likes of Pets.com dropped the demand for semiconductors from the point where every wafer manufacturer wanted to expand capacity to the point where no-one wanted to. Boom, no orders. And of course, some investors when they see 'tech stocks' are falling, will sell your stock even if your business is much less speculative than the likes of Pets.com.

There were three lessons I learned:

1. Your business may be nothing like Pets.com and may seem to have strong fundamentals - but if the bottom falls out of tech stocks, you can end up unemployed anyway.

2. When the going gets tough, satellite offices get hit before head office.

3. If you have car/mortgage/credit card payments, you can get insurance that covers the payments if you lose your job. A lot of the time this isn't a good investment - but once the company started laying people off and everyone could see the writing on the wall, people with debt brought gold-plated insurance and were glad they did.

One more note for your first lesson: you might have a hot product that you sell at a product, but your own salespeople can kill you.

Lucent (AT&T spun them off to commercialize things from Bell Labs) had the absolute best product of the late 90s/early 2000: the Ascend MAX DSLAM/modem bank. Before that, an ISP needed T1 phone lines (24 channels) plugged into a CSU plugged into 24 modems plugged into a chassis that would emit serial that would be plugged into a router, along with a server that would do authentication and logging for billing and IP assignment. The Ascend MAX turned all of that into one box: phone connections to ethernet and all services provided and remotely administrated. Insanely great.

The problem was that Lucent's salespeople were very good, and the market for new ISPs was huge -- everybody was starting one or expanding their available markets -- so Lucent started offering financing.

When you finance your house or car, your loan is backed by the asset: the house or car still has some large percentage of the loan value at any given time, even with depreciation.

When you finance your ISP equipment purchase, Lucent assumed that they could always repo the MAX and sell it at a discount to some other growing ISP.

They didn't count on the ISP market collapsing.

Yes, it can definitely be the opposite. And product companies can have the hardest time if their target audience was the bubble companies or those that supported the bubble companies. This is also part of why I think a lot of things are different this time around, although we could still crash, but I personally feel it would be different.

Last time much of the entire market and product was new, e.g. web purchasing was barely in its infancy, companies were building up around that and the web wasn't an integral part of peoples lives, yet. Today, everything we do is around smart devices, the internet etc, so I don't think a collapse like we saw during the dot com boom/bust is likely. But that's just my opinion, could be totally wrong.

(comment deleted)
I was a lucky one I guess. One day we came into work and there was guards at the the door checking IDs. About 1/2 the place got let go that day. We went from having dreams of being millionaires to just being happy we had jobs. I bailed out at some point, but the place is still going, some of the same people are even still there! It was scary as hell to see this place go from 80 people to 100 something and back to 80 in just a year or two.
Life is what you make it. I chose to remain independent for my career. Both 2000 and 2007 came and went and unless someone told me, I wouldn't know we were in a recession or stock market crash.

Perhaps I missed out on a few opportunities but I never really wanted to trade my freedom for the chance of money.

If you have a good network and do quality work, you will be in demand regardless of the market. There will never be a shortage of people that need good, quality work done and are willing to pay for it.

How to you make a transition to this way of working? Is it all about networking?
Backdrop: I was inspired by games and went to CS undergrad with the hopes of becoming a videogame developer and ultimately a designer/director. I started college just as BBS distribution gave way to the World Wide Web; I had to learn HTML in order to distribute my shareware games.

Moonshots: I dropped out of school with only a year left to graduate because the Web development startup I launched with two of my friends was getting out of control. We were charging over $100/hr in the 90s and still having to turn down clients. We worked on amazing projects I can barely remember and made a pile of cash. But we were kids and couldn't get along so we split. I joined another startup that got bought out and put more cash in my pocket which led to me following leadership to yet another startup... that died pretty hard in the Fall of 2001.

Aftermath: Money, parties, travel, and then boom... it was over. Although I had been an irresponsible child with my earnings, I had the good fortune of having some saved some before I was laid off - and I could collect unemployment benefits.

Like everyone else, I couldn't find work anywhere. There was a flash cartoon back then called "Laid off: a day in the life". Good times, good times. I went back to school to finish earning my BS in CS. While in school I tried desperately to get a job in the service industry. I couldn't even land a job waiting tables. Managers told me that they had plenty of people that could work at any time and they didn't want to fuss with people who had school schedules. One manager told me he had over 1,500 applicants at his new restaurant. After having held a Director title in 2001, I ended up starting over again with a fresh degree and a job as a Jr Videogame Programmer in 2003. At least I was working on videogames instead of web! (spoiler, I'm back in web, but that's another story)

I still don't think I've fully come to terms with the unrealistic expectations I developed early in my career. I rose to success quickly because I had a head start in web tech just as the industry around it was taking off. After the crash I had to work hard for things like everyone else which means coming to terms with the realization that I am not as special as I thought I was.

The cartoon if anyone is interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dMFM-Jqji0
This just solved a huge mystery for me.

One of my first managers I had after becoming a developer used to say, "Listen, if you don't get your stuff done, you're going to be having fudge stripes and pringles for breakfast, ok!?" All of us junior devs had no idea what the hell he was talking about.

I always thought, "That doesn't sound too bad to me."

It was actually a reference to this cartoon. Thanks for solving a 10 year old mystery for me!!

For what’s its worth, it beats frickin workin
IIRC, It was the perfect storm. Y2K bug projects were complete, Microsoft had been found guilty of monopolistic practices, the euro conversion projects were winding down or complete. I think Greenspan was raising the fed rates, and taxes were due, so people were selling to pay those. Then 9/11 happened and that was the final nail in the coffin.

This was the first, "learn to code," era that I recall, so there were a lot of not-necessarily computer savvy people in the industry, and they were getting hired. Once things started to slide, companies just stopped hiring as a sort-term strategy, many held layoffs too. Many people were pushed out of the industry for good. I was stuck as a contractor and in-between contracts out of blind luck. I was 4-5 years into a promising career and I couldn't find work for 6 months. I felt absolutely worthless.

Fortunately I knew a guy who was a partner at my previous contracting firm. He just pulled a CIO position in a city 2 hours away and they needed someone to take over their engine (software shop). I had to pick-up and move, but I got a job that paid a lot less than my previous ones.

I survived, partly because I worked hard, like I was scared to lose my job. I still work that way. People take notice and will call you when they switch companies and need to fill a position. Because of this, I haven't had to do a formal / cold interview since the dot bomb.

Another item of note was the acceleration of hardware design and manufacturing moving to China. While it did not directly affect the .com boom, a lot of those individuals that where left in hardware saw their jobs dry up due to all the web companies going bust thus killing a portion of hardware demand and their prospects for their jobs coming back where pretty much nill as when they market recovered that hiring happened in China.
I was at ask.com during the crash. The first bad part for me was the options. I planned on selling them the instant they vested. A week before vesting they were trading in the low hundred dollar range. The day they vested they were in the dollar range, with a strike price of 10 dollars. Thank goodness I didn't exercise them or I'd be stuck in the tax boat. So it was demoralizing, but I still had my salary, and I was young enough for that to be enough.

I weathered three rounds of layoffs and that was pretty harsh too. Every morning we'd check fuckedcompany.com and look for Ask in there. One morning it popped up with a 60% layoff in two days. It was almost exactly right; 16% of staff were laid off. Someone mis-heard the number.

I was in a smaller off-shoot office, so when people were cut they were called into the managers office, and while there security would pack their desk. When they came out of the office the box was just sitting on the floor, right outside the door. By the second round the manager just wouldn't come in that day, and the main office would send some stranger to do it.

At first I rationalized the people who were cut as people who weren't valuable, weren't adding to the bottom line. They were the less technical people, and their jobs were more nebulous, so it was easy to ease any mental pangs. It was a way of coping with something similar to survivor's guilt. Then when I was laid off, well, it was a tough time for me personally. I couldn't help applying the same rationale to myself. I wasn't valuable. I wasn't adding to the bottom line. The company is better off without me.

They gave me a pretty nice severance check. I convinced them to keep me on for another week to document my project. It was actually one of the only cash-positive projects at the company, due to contracts with Visa and Nike. That extra week pushed me into 2 years of tenure, which bumped my severance from two months pay to three.

I did not do anything mature with the money.

Generally the attitude I saw was to hunker down and try to weather the storm. Nobody interviewed because nobody could get recruiters to answer the phone. And nobody wanted their manager to think they were interviewing; that was a great way to be called in first during the next round. And lots of late nights working; gotta show you're still committed, despite everything crumbling around you.

"Hunker down and weather the storm" was exactly how I felt in 2000 and 2008 both. I actually didn't know many tech people that lost jobs, but.... everyone stopped hiring, everyone stopped quitting. Just lay low.
+1 for reminding me about fuckedcompany.com — that was the first thing I read every morning. We didn’t pop up on it but I heard the news of our layoffs on the radio that morning when I was driving in - we were public and it was a pretty big layoff. As for what life was like after, my wife was pitching in midtown NYC on 9/11. It took her a week to drive back home. I knew a lot of founders who for many months kept pitching VC’s after 9/11 like everything was going to turn around the next day. I remember one who was just floored when a VC literally said to him: look, I took this meeting to do you a favor: stop pitching. Seriously. Anyway I don’t think it was until 2005-2006 before I stopped looking over my shoulder for news of layoffs in whatever job I had.
Man alive I lived on that site during those years. If you don't remember or if it was before your time: people anonymously posted internal emails, layoff notices, and so on. Some of them (the Cerner "tick-tock" email comes to mind - though it looks like it appeared on a Yahoo board first) were legendary. And the FC forums...oofah.
yep completely forgot about that dark humor of the period. Thanks guys for the throwback.
I was a young-ish dev at a smallish (200 or so people) company in the Bay Area during the dot-com crash. I came in one day to find that something like 1/3 of the people in the company, seemingly chosen at random, no longer worked there. Those of us who remained were consolidated into one floor instead of the two we had before. My salary and options were not affected, and the (basic by modern standards) free food stayed pretty much the same, though I think WebVan was no longer around to deliver it. I left soon after that, and the company lived on in cockroach mode for years. I think it was eventually acquired, but I haven't paid much attention.

One reason my experience wasn't catastrophic was that I was at an infrastructure company, not a hype-driven one like Pets.com. If/when the current ad bubble bursts, average devs will fare best working at companies several steps removed from the hype. People may not want micro-targeted ads, but they'll still need software.

9/11 truly tanked the economy. Business stopped for a month after that terrible day and it took years to recover. Seeing friends lose their jobs never get easy no matter how many times you say your goodbyes.
9/11 happened in the middle of the recession. It wasn't the cause.
The dotcom bust started in March 2000, almost 18 months before 9/11. 9/11 didn't cause it - but it did destroy the last lingering hopes of a dotcom rebound anytime soon.
I was working at a dotcom, a geocities knockoff, that had recently gone public and had climbed up to around $30/share. I had options that I had already exercised as I was being clever thinking I'd sell them after holding them for a year. But I was still locked out as an employee, and we all watched as the the price dropped over a period of weeks. After a while it was under my exercise price so I lost money. All told it wasn't a lot of options and not a lot of money I lost either. A couple of decades later I sold the position to take the loss and offset other stock gains.

The layoffs happened in two rounds - the first round the severance packages were rumored to be generous. The second round, my round, we got two weeks pay.

This was spring of 2001. People had trouble finding a job, but they were still out there. I got another one for summer of 2001 but they laid me off after three months, and then 9/11 happened ten days later.

After that it was brutal. Up here in Portland, no one was hiring at all. One time a job opening came up and all the applicants were taken to a large conference room where we all took a silent written exam together, with applicant names anonymized to protect against discrimination. I got that offer and rejected it, which completely freaked out the agency recruiter that was representing me. Nike and Intel would occasionally advertise programming contracts for $12/hour - php, perl - and they would be swarmed with applicants. I'd talk to agency recruiters but they kept getting laid off, so it'd be a different one every couple of weeks.

I was taking unemployment, I toyed with a business idea, and I eventually thought I'd try out contracting - I cold-called a prospective client that had a small company, and he brought me on for $25/hour, usually working at his condo with him and ordering pizza together. A few months later - Feb. of 2002 I believe, I got my first more official-ish contract for $55/hour, and I've been in business as a backend architectural contractor/consultant ever since.

Over that period of tim, I found that consulting is kind of a leading indicator of the economy. When times are bad, maybe you can get good gigs at employers that need help but are reluctant to commit to an employee. But if times are just starting to go bad, non-employees can be let go quicker.

Anyways, remember that the dotcom crash got mixed up with the post-9/11 chaos, so the next crash probably won't have the same impact. Also, remember that recessions are cyclical. It gets better by definition. I still believe that 2001 and 2007 were Weird in a way that recessions usually aren't. And a recession might even be good for the younger generation since they tend to clear away people that have jobs but shouldn't, leaving more future openings for the folks that are still hustling and learning.

2002 - I was about to start university studying comp-sci, meanwhile, I was working as a security guard in Toronto at HQ of one of the largest banks in Canada. The majority of guards were laid off software developers that couldn't find a developer position. Some were actively trying to move to trades.
We launched right at the beginning of the end, although we didn’t know it at the time.

Everyone thought they were making tons of money, based on valuations that were only on paper. Kind of like losing $5B and still thinking it’s a valuable company.

I first noticed problems when we repeatedly had potential client me be dark when we showed up for meetings. They were just gone, and no one bothered to Let you know. They had other things to worry about.

We didn’t get to the point where we could exercise options, but some people were badly burned at time time. If you exercised a million dollars worth of options and hold them past the end of they year, you owed taxes. If the shares were now worth zero, you still owed the taxes. This bit the rank and file, who thought they were getting rich, and ended up poorer than before. (IIRC you could carry forward the loss, but that’s no good if that was the only stock you ever got)

We got bought, and had dead end jobs for a while, before they laid us off. Was not too hard to find a job again.

I recommend reading about tulip mania. It’s amazing how similar that was.

I was living in Florida, working for a Boston-based WebDev/ISP consultancy. Smart people, high-flying projects, free snacks, nerf shenanigans, constant hiring, with bonuses for you-name-it. I'd recently gotten a nice bonus for bringing on my good friend as the office's systems administrator.

Business slowed, clients missed payments, people started watching f*d.com, the first round of layoffs came, the execs did a tour and promised all was ok, the second round of layoffs came. We spend a lot of time at Starbucks contemplating plan B.

One day I came in and the laptop wouldn't connect to the network. I stick my head in my friend's office, and say "My laptop won't connect, is there something I should know?" He gets that deer in the headlights look, rushes off to check with the management, and a meeting is convened where the third layoff happens, something I'm part of and he's not (Probable cause for me being out: I didn't play ball on a traveling assignment I didn't want, was OK with the outcome. My friend hung on to the bitter end, and we laugh about it now.) The hardest day was sending back the extra paycheck the company had accidentally sent.

I started looking for jobs, but I started getting calls from friends who heard I was available for a week here, a month there, a six-month thing, etc, etc. I wound up forming an LLC and staying self-employed until decided I needed a nice safe job just before the financial crisis.

>people started watching fd.com

what is fd.com?

It was a chat forum website called fuckedcompany.com. today a similar website is thelayoff.com. there is one subforum per company and everybody spreads rumors about how near is the end at xyz.com and why ...
fuckedcompany.com - it was a site that collated news about all the "dotcom" era companies shutting down.
> sending back the extra paycheck the company had accidentally sent.

Sorry, didn't get it....

There weren't a lot of jobs.

I was at one place through much of the boom, eventually they folded. I was the last employee, part of my job was winding down and archiving the assets. After that, jobs were a bit scarce.

I didn't mind the break, though it was a bit demoralizing. Much like today, if you can create a name for yourself, it's easier to get hired.

It was a rough point in time. In the dot com boom, people who could rub two lines of visual basic (for applications) were getting jobs. If you did not like your job, you could make a phone call and have a few offers waiting for you by the end of the day. Glorious stock options at promising startups after fleecing larger companies in panics about y2k and missing the boom. The parties and travel...

We were joking about the pets.com of the world - buying pet food, selling it at a loss, and trying to make up for it in volume. At least we had a business model that made money, a foosball table, and actual personal offices for each developer. When the stock market tanked... everything just shut down. People stopped buying or investing - and anything that assumed growth, for the most part, died. Starbucks with long, long queue lanes were empty.

As some companies died, there were opportunistic shops that were looking for solid talent. As they sold off our little shop of ten people, I ended up getting an offer and then being one of the folks left behind to turn the server room lights off. I had negotiated a start date a few months into the future, and very thankfully, they honored the offer. Things got worse. There were several more bits of belt tightening - we had a 25% round of layoffs later as the impacts of a bad economy really hit home. I did well/got lucky - but while the first round cleared out a lot of 'charlatans', I saw many solid people go on that black Friday

Salaries dropped - or at least stopped growing for most senior people. The rise of off-shore came and the realities of global economies eventually settled in. Large swaths of people turned their back on development... and here we are today, where it can be tricky to find solid folks again. The Wheel of Time turns, and Ages come and pass, leaving memories that become legend. Legend fades to myth, and even myth is long forgotten when the Age that gave it birth comes again.

(comment deleted)
> In the dot com boom, people who could rub two lines of visual basic (for applications) were getting jobs. If you did not like your job, you could make a phone call and have a few offers waiting for you by the end of the day.

Yea, that doesn't sound anything like today!

/sarcasm

There was no “grinding leetcode” in the late 90s...
What were SWE interviews and interview prep like back in late 90s/early 00s?
(comment deleted)
UK experience. Turn up, usually do some sort of coding or skill test - which was mostly on paper and consisted of about half an hour or so worth of questions. Starting with a few gifts like an obvious error, or "explain encapsulation", through to 2 or 3 bastards that were probably the current department's idea of funny. 30min - 1.5 hr interview, usually with a quick wander round the department or building. Not uncommon to get an offer as we wrap up. No prep - just know the company you apply to, and know your stuff.

A few were still just interview with no test. Some would have a second round - mostly corporates, which were mostly a repeat of round one but with someone else. In that era I can remember just one whiteboard interview, which also required a surprise presentation. I passed, but didn't want to proceed. The interview put me right off them. :)

On the interviewing side it was actually depressingly common to have one or two turn up and hard fail the easy gifts, and completely fail to explain encapsulation, or know what a constructor was etc. There were quite a few trying to wing it with a couple of years C++ or Java on the CV when they maybe sort-of knew a bit of C and fancied a bit of the absurd y2k and dot com money that TV kept on about.

Oh wow, you built a product in 3 months that makes 1mm/year, you know Perl, sql and JavaScript, you’ve built 30 websites, you’ve run 3 successful businesses, you’ve built a framework to build web apps quickly? When can you start?
The cargo cult of the day were the Microsoft style logic puzzles, "how many telephone poles are there in Seattle" and that sort of thing.
I didn't expect a reference to the Wheel of Time.
> people who could rub two lines of visual basic (for applications) were getting jobs

If one can put two sensible lines of VBA that solves a particular problem (e.g. in Excel or whatever context), I believe such person has enough knowledge to not to be unemployable, even today. We are not talking about mid/high six figures - there are plenty of jobs in-between.

I graduated from college right amidst the bubble bursting, and it was brutal. Fresh college grads and junior developers were competing with displaced veterans for entry-level positions. ~1 year prior I had been offered $120k/yr to drop out of school and move to Pittsburgh to take a job. I decided to stay in school to finish my degree instead, and by the time I did the bottom of the market had fallen out and I was unemployed for 7 months and finally landed my first professional software development job in Washington State for less than half the salary of the job I'd previously declined.

I thankfully had my CAD/CAM background & contracting to fallback on while hunting for those 7 months, but it was enormously demotivating & disenfranchising. I was within a couple weeks of just abandoning a career in software entirely and going back to what I knew permanently.

I expect it all worked out in the end, as I'm now CEO of a startup doing a thing I'm really interested in and have successfully raised money to fund it along side our early revenue. But, it was still immensely crappy at the time and shocking to see just how extreme the pendulum can swing in terms of available jobs, pay scales, etc.

Did you look into the history of the Pittsburgh company? My guess is you did the right thing, in a year you could have been in a strange city looking for a job with no degree.
I did. It eventually folded, but the people I knew that worked there managed to go into some pretty impressive gigs. One ended up as a VP at Apple on the iTunes Music Store side of things, if I recall correctly.

It's hard to say how things would have worked out otherwise, but I'm not living on that git branch in the repository of life, and I fear what it would take to resolve the merge conflicts, so I just chug away on the feature branch I'm currently on until the whole lot of it is deprecated. There are two nascent forks running around here that I think show promise.

My experience was very similar- I was working on my resume the morning of 9/11 at the start of my senior year. My friends and I all boasted about how we would refuse to even entertain any offers below 75k prior and several had already secured offers at the end of their summer internships.

The bottom fell out of the market, and though I had two summers an intern under my belt, there were hordes of devs with 1-2 years experience in specific stacks I was competing against. Most offers that were secured were rescinded.

I was somewhat fortunate- I did not plan on going back to the place I interned at, but facing no other prospects I reached out and they offered me a job- for literally 37k. I swallowed my pride and took it- it was a small consulting firm, close to my house, and they had just scored a new project for a major sports organization.

I kept looking on the side in hopes to get a better offer, but got literally zero bites on it. After one year there (and my boss tried to get me excited about a 3,000 but 10% raise) I got my first actual response to a submitted resume for a place that seemed terrible. The month after that I got a second call, that didn't work out. The month after that a third callback- and they made an offer on the spot- for 55k. I was over the moon- it was at least a living wage, and working in finance for a group that was working on what would later be called high frequency trading.

Things picked up from there, but I didn't hit that 75k mark for another year or so.

It’s funny to hear stories like this, because I didn’t begin my career as a software dev and 37k would have seemed like incredible money to me fresh out of college in ‘06. My first job, I was making 21k and I felt pretty ok about it. I’m making an order of magnitude more now, but I’m grateful for learning how to be happy on a 21k salary. Literally everything over that feels like excess that I could do without if need be. Makes it easy to choose the work that I actually want to do, too.
That must have been in a LCOL area... 37k was not enough to move out of my parents house comfortably... 55k was, at least I could live with roommates and still save a bit- I was in NYC though.
I went from being a hotshot who had multiple offers all the time with sign up bonuses to somebody who could send out 100 resumes and not get a single response and once I got a response I was offered much less than I was used to. It was very depressing but also educational. It took me quite a while (probably too long) to accept this new reality. I feel the same may happen to a lot of Startup guys who make big money in their 20s now.

Not all success is your own making. Often you are just riding a wave that takes you up but will also take you down if you are not careful.

> It was very depressing but also educational.

Indeed. When 2008 hit, it was reminiscent of what ~2002 felt like, except instead of tech it was basically happening to everyone. In that way I felt more prepared to deal with the new crisis because I'd learned from the old one.

What did you learn?
Several things:

- Any news about a "recovery" has nothing to do with the reality you are likely facing.

- The worst of it is in the long-tail, not necessarily the initial shock.

- The change in the market from, "We can grow our way out of anything!" to, "Quick! Circle the wagons and lay low." happens a lot more suddenly than you expect, but there are also warning signs.

- You're super valuable and totally super employable right up until the moment that you're not, and in the wrong place at the wrong time you have no control and almost no influence over changing that, so be prepared to weather it or jump ship.

- Super high software developer salaries seem somehow correlated to VC-pumping, and when the market fundamentals kick in, you're likely to find yourself facing steep cuts, so live like you're a mechanical engineer, not a lottery winner.

- Value the team not the employer, you might meet them again elsewhere, while the employer might fire you at the first crisis.
I was so lucky to be in university from 2007 to 2011. When I got out, things were cooling down again...
I guess I was an 'average dev' at that time. I was developing applications for a company that sold software to banks. Around 2000 I was into client/server computing, working with VB, C++ and Tuxedo for a transaction monitor.

I never really felt the bubble burst. Maybe raises were slower for a while, but I don't remember it. Mostly a non-event.

This thread is scaring me.

Question on exercising and such. I have all exercised options, but not all vested, been here about 2 years, so half vested. Didn't pay taxes at exercise because there was no difference between exercise price and market price.

What happens taxwise if my company goes under? Don't I only owe taxes if I sell vested options?

My understanding here is that you wouldn't owe taxes if you sold exercised options (at loss or even) because you would make no gains. You may even be able to write off some taxes?

I'm not exactly sure what happened with people who go bust. My guess is they could have had the type of options where you don't pay taxes up front, and then they weren't able to pay when it was finally time.

Like you, I would love to hear more about this.

Unlike the normal situation where you pay taxes when you sell an asset, with options when you acquire them any difference between the strike price and their value at acquisition is a taxable amount. If your acquisition occurs when you cannot sell because the shares are not publicly tradeable or because you are subject to a rule not allowing sales then in the time between when you acquire and when you could sell the stock can become worthless. This worthlessness has no effect on your tax bill which is finalized at the point of acquisition.
Yes, this is my understanding as well. You owe a lot of taxes initially (that you to pay to even exercise) and then you wouldn't pay AGAIN if the company goes bust.

That would, of course, suck, but you wouldn't "owe more" if the company goes bust. It would just be what you already paid now being worth less than what you paid for it.

I guess I don't understand the point being made with that in mind. If you took out a loan to exercise the options (don't do that), then that would be a big problem.

Honestly speak to an accountant - there are so many different ways you can get shafted on Tax for Options / Employee stock grants / Capital Gains.
If you exercised at market price then there's no tax liability. The shares are yours now; your exercise price is your cost basis, and you pay capital gains taxes when you sell on the difference between sale price and exercise price.

The situation that caught lots of employees in the dot-com bubble is that they exercised stock options where the market price at time of exercise was a lot more than the strike price (which means an income tax liability for the difference), but then there was a lockup and they weren't able to sell the stock until after it had dropped significantly. As a result, they had tax bills that were higher than the market value of the stocks they owned.

I had several friends and coworkers end up in this situation. Lucky for me, I started late enough that my options were underwater before my first year cliff and stayed that way...
I thought I understood this but the lockup that everyone in this discussion is alluding to has surprised me. Should the tax man not count the price of the security on the day the lockup ends as the strike price? Otherwise, any time you get discounted options with a lockup, it appears you should assume the options will go to zero and budget the tax accordingly. Or am I missing something?
The tax code counts the price at the time of exercise, not at the time the lockup ends. (A lockup is a contractual obligation not to sell the shares: you still own them, you just can't sell them.) The logic, I guess, is that there are other types of property (eg. real estate, private company shares, collectibles) that you may not be able to sell on a liquid market, but they are still items of value that you've received, and you should still be taxed on them at the time of receipt.

You could argue about the morality and rationality of this decision: some people would say it's both wrong and somewhat unfeasible to levy taxes that people have no way of paying. But that's the law for now. There are other scenarios that can get people into this situation as well: cryptocurrency transactions, property taxes, wealth taxes in general. Indeed, one reason we have Prop 13 in California is because seniors were being forced out of their homes because they couldn't pay the taxes, but that brought with it a whole bunch of other undesirable economic distortions.

From the employee POV, your best options are usually to either a.) file an 83(b) election as soon as you receive the stock options, indicating that you'd like to be taxed on their current fair market value (which is usually zero at the time you receive them, because most strike prices are set at the current market price) and have all future gains taxed as capital gains with a cost basis set at the time of the 83(b) election, or b.) don't exercise your shares until you're ready to sell them.

> I have all exercised options, but not all vested, been here about 2 years, so half vested. Didn't pay taxes at exercise because there was no difference between exercise price and market price.

Early exercise with a 83b election?

You will be fine.

The tax problem happens like this:

1. Your option strike price is $0.01/sh

2. The current price as set by the board (or the stock market if public) is $10/sh

3. You exercise 2000000 shares

4. You write a check to your company 2000000 sh * $0.01/sh = $20000

The fair market value (as determined in step #2) is 2,000,000 sh * $10/sh = $20,000,000

The IRS says "wait a minute you only paid $20,000 for something that is worth $20,000,000".

The difference $20,000,000 - $20,000 = $19,980,000 was a 'gift' that requires taxes to be paid.

Now lets do the 83b election with early exercise. In that case the FMV == the strike price on the options. The difference is $0 You are paying FMV and there is no 'gift'.

Thank you! The 83b situation is the one I'm in. Appreciate it, sorry for the late response.
You only pay tax on the profit of exercised options
Did you file 83b election when exercising at market price? If yes, you already paid the taxes (which were $0). If not, there may be taxable income at vesting periods. Talk to tax professional. I'm certainly not one.
An 83b election is to be issued at the time of grant, not the time of exercise.
(comment deleted)
I took a 5% pay cut at an incredibly boring bank. But I wasn't unemployed at all. My dotcom job was nothing amazing. They teased an IPO but never got within a mile of it. My salary ($65k?) felt like a fortune at 22 years old but wasn't astronomical.
I was ~1.5 years out of college and at a small dot-com with a niche SaaS at the time. I distinctly remember 9/11 and the chill that came over our office that day. That passed in time, but our economic prospects never recovered. I used to hit the gym in the mornings and then work ~10am-7pm and I distinctly remember the day ~9 months later when the VP of engineering called me on my cell while I was finishing up my workout and asked when I would be in the office. He said to come straight to his office when I got in. About 85% of the company was laid off that day and I was among the "lucky" ones who was not.

What followed was almost straight out of the Silicon Valley sitcom. Management know our existing product was a dead-end, but with 85% of the company laid off, our remaining VC funds gave us a decent runway, so they decided to pivot to ... something. That is, the entire company (about ~15 of us) would sit around in the boardroom and try to come up with new product ideas. Needless to say, that went precisely nowhere.

The CEO was pushed out fairly shortly after that and I had been brought in through his network. My layoff came about ~6 months later in the second round of layoffs which constituted only me. Thanks to the VP of engineering going to bat for me, I did get 3 months of severance. I spent 9 months looking for another job and finally found one in fintech in NYC which turned out the be, to this day, one of the best jobs of my career. I also met my now-wife and many of my best friends there. That time was both the most traumatic experience of my working career and the best thing to happen to me at the same time. I know it was much harder on many other people, but it turned out for the best for me.

> found one in fintech in NYC

I'm interested in hearing which, if you care to share.

Well, it was nearly 20 years ago and with SoX and all the other regulations, the fintech industry now is essentially unrecognizable from what it was then. I worked for a bulge-bracket investment bank whose business today is dramatically different and a hedge fund that is no longer solvent. The reason it was good for me was that I was an inexperienced developer and I got to work with much more talented developers in an environment where results mattered. I learned a lot and became a lot better myself.
Did the company manage to IPO before it tanked?
No. And, thankfully, I had not early-exercised any of my options, either.
I know of one company that actually managed to pull off the pivot thing!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TippingPoint

They switched from an internet appliance (kind of like an early Chromebook) to smart deep packet inspection firewalls. Not a ton in common between those except that they both require hardware to be built.

If I remember right, local lore was that they pulled it off partly by realizing early that they needed to change direction and being well-funded enough that they had enough cash to start over.

Here's another example of a successful pivot:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18063362

Posting anon.

In 2009, the startup where I was working was hitting the skids, and our investors (correctly) were not willing to back us. We all kept grinding for a month or two in honorable futility, but after a while, my bank account depleted and I had to go.

To make various ends meet and to keep my mental health during the wind down however, I took up some contract work that I found through various friends in the SF startup scene. One company that I really liked and did some small stuff for was Burbn, which was a mobile-only location check-in that was hinged around taking photos of your location.

Missing my friends in NYC (I made a lot of friends in SF, but my inner circle were my college buddies from CMU; I went to tech and they went finance, sigh), I decided to leave SF to head to NYC and get a fresh start.

As I was leaving, I wanted to tie up a few loose ends, so I emailed my contact at Burbn and said I was likely to be unavailable for any more work, but that I liked the project and hoped for the best for him. He responded and said that he was near funding on a small pivot, and that if I was interested, there might be a full-time role available. I declined - I was mentally done with SF and the startup scene (Larry Chiang, 111 Minna, the rise of FB spam-crap like RockYou, etc.) as it was then.

That person was Kevin Systrom; that pivot was Instagram.

Novell was a successful pivot. Novell started as a hardware company, with a proprietary computer based on the 68000. That bombed, so the pivot was to NetWare. That dominated PC networking for about 15 years.
I went through something very similar at a startup around 2010 (layoffs, new runway because of layoffs, random pivots trying to find anything to work)... so I guess some things never change!
I graduated from college and entered the industry just post-bust (early 2002.) I went to work for a company that had, 6 months prior, laid everyone off and decided to pivot with the remaining VC cash. I think it took them 3 or 4 months to figure out what the new company would be. That strategy wound up being successful for them (us, I guess...)
I finished high-school in 2001 and started working straight away (before college, I continued working part time during my studies). Being cheap was probably a big part of why I got and kept that first job for 4 years! I was paid a little above minimum wage.
I started about a year before you. I went into embedded rtos stuff. At the time it was comparable to the beat SV offers and by the time SV recovered enough to start offering double or perhaps triple embedded rates, I had learned i actually liked it an felt the amount of domain specific knowledge i had aquired was a good investment. I'm not sure that was the case, but at 40 having never changed jobs from that original corporation, I think I at least got stability and fun work out of it.
> it turned out for the best for me

Survivorship bias. What could have happened is that you spend 12 months looking for another job, nothing, you lose your house, end up on street, take some minimum wage job, never comment on HN. We don't get to see stories like that.

The stories we see is where it did turn out good. That's the commonality: you must step out of the comfort zone for something good to happen. However something good does not happen to everyone 100% of time.

Bias entails the misrepresentation of a population, but "for me" implies that the population consists of only himself, so the term bias is nonsensical in this context.
What value does a comment like this add? The question asks for the perspective of someone during the dot com bust and this was his.
"for me" is the key part of the sentence you quoted. If he had said "for everyone" then yes that would have been survivorship bias, but he did not.

Though if you are trying to point out the fact that we might get a skew towards success stories in this thread because those who actually made a success of the dot com crash are more likely to post about it then those who failed then I would probably agree with you.

9/11 was well after the dot-com crash. It didn't help, though.
the crash was not a singular event, 9/11 was at the tail end of it but it was crashing for a good 2 years or so from 2000-2002/3 (look at a graph of the NASDAQ from the 90s till today).
Yep. I worked for a small company that had been struggling through the dot-com slowdown. But 9/11 was basically the precipitating event for its final tailspin. I was laid off a week or two later and it continued to spiral down over the next 6-12 months.