5 ms·

Slightly annoyed. seems wrong to me--or at least, needs an explanation, i.e. in what sense does he find it annoying. The JK Rowling analogy doesn't make it cle

by wensing 17y ago

Slightly annoyed. seems wrong to me--or at least, needs an explanation, i.e. in what sense does he find it annoying. The JK Rowling analogy doesn't make it clear either. See also: http://twitter.com/msuster/status/8502845427 http://twitter.com/msuster/status/8502845427

idlewords 17y ago
It's especially baffling given that YC claims its real value is not the financial investment (which is just a stipend to keep people fed and housed), but rather the chance to rub shoulders with titans of entrepreneurship, receive sage advice from avuncular mentors, and get shopped around to VC. None of these stated benefits are things you can just copy, so it's not clear what the griping is about.
- byrneseyeview 17y ago
  If they copy the style but not the substance, it makes things worse for YC and for entrepreneurs. And they can coast on YC's good PR.
  - idlewords 17y ago
    How on earth does this make sense? YC operates on a similar model to an American residential college - young people apply and attend to get access to high-quality teachers/mentors and with the expectation that participating in the program will improve their career prospects. This model is based entirely on reputation and there is no way in which opening a competing institution makes things worse for applicants. People will apply to multiple programs and select the one they consider highest value. Institutions will compete with each other to attract the best applicants.
    - byrneseyeview 17y ago
      I'm not sure that's true. I have heard far more about the value of "college" in general than about the value of specific colleges. Companies like the University of Phoenix exist to exploit this assumption. Schools sell education plus connections plus guidance plus a diploma; the diploma is the most tangible thing they sell, so if you just sell the diploma you can cut your costs significantly. YC invests reputation and guidance and connections and money; someone who buys the same stake in exchange for nothing but money is obviously reducing the value--and valuation--of the company they buy into. It's the entrepreneur's decision, and there are some good seed funding programs out there (Techstars has some great portfolio companies). But in many cases, the other programs are using seed companies' generally good reputation (thanks to YC) to make less valuable investments in the same group of companies.
tptacek 17y ago
I was amused by the insinuation that you could "plagiarize" a business model.
- pg 17y ago
  I wasn't implying plagiarism, just that such a novel would be copying JK Rowling's premise. Though as a matter of fact, many of them do copy chunks of our site.
  - Coax 17y ago
    Paul, do you fault every entrepreneur that takes a novel business model/approach and tries to improve upon it or extend it? If not, can you explain what is special about this situation? By way of comparison, do you fault Burger King and Wendy's for taking McDonald's idea?
    - pg 17y ago
      Depends how much they add. Like most people, I think, I don't have a high opinion of things that could be described as knockoffs. E.g. http://money.cnn.com/2007/10/02/technology/kopy_kat_kids.biz2/index.htm http://money.cnn.com/2007/10/02/technology/kopy_kat_kids.biz... Whereas if the idea is significantly transformed, it starts to be a new idea. If someone started a YC-style operation for funding films, I'd think that was cool. In fact I've suggested it to several people.
      - Coax 17y ago
        Fair enough, but since there's a geographic element to startup accelerators, can't their addition merely be porting the concept to another geography? If I visit SF and go to a great a great Hawaiian-Italian fusion restaurant (I random example), I don't think the proprietor would blame me of plagiarism if I started a Hawaiian-Italian joint in Boston. Further, I see important differences between YC and competing accelerators. YC doesn't provide office space; TechStars and DreamIt do. I'm not sure which approach is better, but I do think it's a non-trivial difference.

by wensing 17y ago

idlewords 17y ago

It's especially baffling given that YC claims its real value is not the financial investment (which is just a stipend to keep people fed and housed), but rather the chance to rub shoulders with titans of entrepreneurship, receive sage advice from avuncular mentors, and get shopped around to VC. None of these stated benefits are things you can just copy, so it's not clear what the griping is about.

byrneseyeview 17y ago
If they copy the style but not the substance, it makes things worse for YC and for entrepreneurs. And they can coast on YC's good PR.
- idlewords 17y ago
  How on earth does this make sense? YC operates on a similar model to an American residential college - young people apply and attend to get access to high-quality teachers/mentors and with the expectation that participating in the program will improve their career prospects. This model is based entirely on reputation and there is no way in which opening a competing institution makes things worse for applicants. People will apply to multiple programs and select the one they consider highest value. Institutions will compete with each other to attract the best applicants.
  - byrneseyeview 17y ago
    I'm not sure that's true. I have heard far more about the value of "college" in general than about the value of specific colleges. Companies like the University of Phoenix exist to exploit this assumption. Schools sell education plus connections plus guidance plus a diploma; the diploma is the most tangible thing they sell, so if you just sell the diploma you can cut your costs significantly. YC invests reputation and guidance and connections and money; someone who buys the same stake in exchange for nothing but money is obviously reducing the value--and valuation--of the company they buy into. It's the entrepreneur's decision, and there are some good seed funding programs out there (Techstars has some great portfolio companies). But in many cases, the other programs are using seed companies' generally good reputation (thanks to YC) to make less valuable investments in the same group of companies.

tptacek 17y ago

I was amused by the insinuation that you could "plagiarize" a business model.

pg 17y ago
I wasn't implying plagiarism, just that such a novel would be copying JK Rowling's premise. Though as a matter of fact, many of them do copy chunks of our site.
- Coax 17y ago
  Paul, do you fault every entrepreneur that takes a novel business model/approach and tries to improve upon it or extend it? If not, can you explain what is special about this situation? By way of comparison, do you fault Burger King and Wendy's for taking McDonald's idea?
  - pg 17y ago
    Depends how much they add. Like most people, I think, I don't have a high opinion of things that could be described as knockoffs. E.g. http://money.cnn.com/2007/10/02/technology/kopy_kat_kids.biz2/index.htm http://money.cnn.com/2007/10/02/technology/kopy_kat_kids.biz... Whereas if the idea is significantly transformed, it starts to be a new idea. If someone started a YC-style operation for funding films, I'd think that was cool. In fact I've suggested it to several people.
    - Coax 17y ago
      Fair enough, but since there's a geographic element to startup accelerators, can't their addition merely be porting the concept to another geography? If I visit SF and go to a great a great Hawaiian-Italian fusion restaurant (I random example), I don't think the proprietor would blame me of plagiarism if I started a Hawaiian-Italian joint in Boston. Further, I see important differences between YC and competing accelerators. YC doesn't provide office space; TechStars and DreamIt do. I'm not sure which approach is better, but I do think it's a non-trivial difference.