If SV consultants charge more than $225/hr then nobody should hire them. I'm on a team of damn good full-stack developers and the most senior ones (10-15 years) bill out around $150/hr. I guarantee you we're better than most SV consultants at what we do (though we are a small team). I'm in the US, but not SV, so that must make the difference, but people are really stupid to be over-paying by "way more" than 50% for quality that I guarantee is no better than average.
There are consultants in the midwest charging $225/hr. The price that a consulting company can demand is only tangentially determined by the quality of the developers they have.
The people actually hiring these consultants usually don't care much about the skills of the individual developers. They're concerned mainly about resolving the issues that led them to hire those consultants in the first place. These often include things like:
1. Timeline. Can this consultant start work immediately? Do they have expertise in my tech stack, my industry, my regulatory environment, my particular business problem?
2. Politics. Does this consultant have sufficient reputation that I can use it as leverage in my internal business politics? Can this consultant navigate my company's business politics in order to further my business agenda? Can they produce the strategic documents/guidance to help me support my business goals?
3. Flexibility. Will this consultant work under terms that work for me? Will they put a consultant on a plane Monday? Or will they work remote? Are they willing to adjust the contract to meet a level of risk I find acceptable?
The process of choosing a consultant is mostly a business transaction between business professionals. The director of ACME's marketing department is typically in no position to evaluate the resumes of the proposed consulting development team. They're interested in getting their project done on time and on budget while minimizing risk. They're not stupid, they just have a wildly broader set of concerns than code quality.
