[GrinningFool]

> My line of reasoning was that if he didn't have relevant > domain experience why wouldn't get paid not much more than > a new grad?

Presumably because you're paying him for his ability to apply his broader knowledge and experience to this domain; he is not coming to the table with the same limited set of tools as the new graduate. He will be up to speed more quickly, and his solutions will tend to be more comprehensive because of his wider perspective.

If the interviewing company isn't looking for that, then the offer reflects their present needs -- not the candidate's capabilities. I could see how that's insulting, since that's a whole lot of wasted time.

> I've always enjoyed talking with them about how software development used to be back in the day. From your words I see that you value their knowledge of things past, but I don't see anything about enjoying the discussion of current/future development with them. Is that not something that you value as much, or that you find in some way lacking? Or something that you haven't explored because of age?

[manfredo]

How much more productive is a developer with 20 years experience working on something [s]he has no direct domain knowledge about vs. one with 2-3 years? Probably not enough to justify a very substantial salary difference.

Re: enjoying talking about current development. I do enjoy that as well, but that's not specifix to age or experience. The sane discussions can be had with less experienced people. Older developers uniquely offer those experiences.