6 ms·

YC only helps ~3% of the startups that request help and now they're discouraging people from seeking help elsewhere. There's gotta be a better way of handling

by staunch 11y ago

YC only helps ~3% of the startups that request help and now they're discouraging people from seeking help elsewhere. There's gotta be a better way of handling this.

Alex3917 11y ago
They're not discouraging people from seeking help elsewhere, they're just saying that going through any accelerator starts the clock on your company.
- krschultz 11y ago
  What happens if you apply to YC and another accelerator and need to respond to the other accelerator while you are waiting to hear back from YC?
  - _sentient 11y ago
    Good accelerators don't make exploding offers. People who make exploding offers are not just bad, they're also acutely aware of that fact, thus the manufactured scarcity.
    - beambot 11y ago
      I don't know. I think a reasonable person could construe the YC statement [1] as manufactured scarcity too, even if YC makes the statement for sound reasons. It could be construed as a pre-exploding offer (or threat). Not that I agree with that interpretation; I think YC's viewpoint makes a lot of sense -- especially if it is a proven negative indicator of success. [1] "If you apply to other accelerators, then we'll be more critical of you."
      - _sentient 11y ago
        I think it's clear that's not the intention here. The message is basically "the clock starts ticking with funding, so expect to meet a higher bar". This is similar to the notion that a startup can "sell the dream" up until the point where they have revenue, after which they're no longer selling dreams, they're selling the trend.
  - RickHull 11y ago
    > What happens if ... Make a decision, and then make the most of that decision. Sam is not saying it's bad to do other accelerators. However, for very natural reasons, graduates of other accelerators have more expected of them. Likewise, I doubt YC would accept their own graduates for another round.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
danieltillett 11y ago
Yes stop worrying about YC and get on with building your business.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- mikeryan 11y ago
  I think this sounds great in a hand wavy way but most folks don't have unlimited time and funds to do this and need to raise money in order to build their business So worrying about YC / other accelerator /angel funding is not mutually exclusive of "building your business"
  - danieltillett 11y ago
    Well as someone who has built a (moderately) successful startup without any outside funding or acceleration I have a different perspective on this. While I do think YC provides a lot of value to their alumni, people can get fixated on the process of raising funds and not building their business. Build a great business making real money and you won’t need funding.
    - mikeryan 11y ago
      Look I run a (moderately) successful services firm that's been completely bootstrapped as well ;-) I totally get it, but for every github and Atlassian there's also a Facebook and Snapchat or a hardware startup (wish I could think of one now...) where outside funding is essential.
      - danieltillett 11y ago
        I think the key here is don’t try and build a Snapchat or Facebook unless you are an insider. Build a business that works first and once you have the experience, skill, and most importantly contacts, then build a VC-only business if you really want to.
  - 11y ago
geofft 11y ago
Better for whom? Sure, YC wants more startups in general, but that's because they want a better pool of candidates to invest in, and secondarily because it legitimizes doing a startup instead of joining a big company or academia or something else. If they're at capacity, it's not particularly relevant to them if startups they can't fund manage to exist or not, as long as the prospect of doing a startup remains attractive (which doesn't seem at risk, and arguably is also at risk from too many failed startups).
paul 11y ago
I agree. This is part of the reason that we are making more of our advice freely available online (e.g. http://startupclass.samaltman.com/ http://startupclass.samaltman.com/ and http://playbook.samaltman.com/ http://playbook.samaltman.com/). The problem with a bad accelerator is that they can actually harm your company with bad advice and unnecessary distractions.
- danieltillett 11y ago
  Paul when you are building a startup are there any necessary distractions (HN excluded). You really should name and shame the bad accelerators. I know no one likes to be negative, but if there are accelerators out there messing up companies and leading founders astray then it would be best to make this information public. You will take some heat for doing this, but you guys should be able to handle it.
  - paul 11y ago
    There are hundreds of accelerators with more appearing all of the time (plus significant management turnover in many of the programs). Evaluating them all would be a full-time job for several people. I'd rather put that effort into finding more ways to help more startups.
    - danieltillett 11y ago
      I would hope the fact that a problem is hard is not a reason to not do it :) More seriously, it depends on how serious the bad accelerator problem is and you guys are one of the few that have the data on this. If it is a minor problem then I agree there are better ways to help, but if it is a major problem then it needs to be addressed.
      - tptacek 11y ago
        Wouldn't it be super weird for the leading accelerator to start formally rating its competitors? There's a difference between having good data and being in a position to help people by publishing it.
ProAm 11y ago
Sort of reminds me of the late night talk shows in America. They frequently said, "if you're going to do Leno, you can't go on Letterman, if you do you're never invited back" and vice-versa* * = Unless you are an A-list celebrity (or Unicorn) in which case we'll take you no matter what.
- smileysteve 11y ago
  I think that you're stretching for that. There are a number reason to suspect that a second accelerator will be less effective that the first: * You already got advice * You already built a minimum viable product * You already got feedback on that product * You already networked with people who would lead to the next round, growth, etc * You already spent money on marketing Unless you've pivoted, what is Y-Combinator (or any second accelerator) going to be able do to help you other than introducing you to another set of investors (that if you chose your first accelerator wisely you might be somewhat connected to Other than that, there's the cap table that they explicitly mention, 3-8% of a seed stage company is less attractive if there is another 3-8% player involved. Similarly, an A round (that they help you get) is less attractive if 12-16% of the company is already in un-dilutable preferred shares.
  - ProAm 11y ago
    The immediate reason is the possibility that 1 of those 5 was poor advice from the last accelerator. For instance: * Great advice, solid mvp, good feedback, solid networking but the money you spend on marketing was too little, and done horribly. All this product needs it a good marketing plan and it abruptly begins to hockey stick and gain velocity? I think the real reason is dilution and/or wanting an 'industry first dibs' on any potentially valuable start up. At least if they see any promise in the product.
nostrademons 11y ago
I don't think they're discouraging people from seeking help elsewhere so much as saying that if you get help elsewhere, don't also expect help from YC unless your numbers are really, really good. In other words, if you're going to go with another accelerator, commit to that program and decide that you're going to build a real business off it. It worked for both SendGrid and Digital Ocean. Don't expect that you'll be able to bounce between programs and accept help from everyone, because if you need that much help, it starts looking like you really don't have your shit together as a founder.
sama 11y ago
We don't want to do that; however, I think sometimes when people think they're getting help they're actually getting hurt. One of our goals is to release as much advice as we can for free for anyone.
- rachellaw 11y ago
  one of the key reasons why people join accelerators is for network and connections though, not just advice. Without that conversations, that sounding board, all that written advice just makes another investopedia/venturehacks guidebook. Most startup founders already do the google legwork and required readings. It's great, but not the main reason why people would apply for YC.

by staunch 11y ago

YC only helps ~3% of the startups that request help and now they're discouraging people from seeking help elsewhere. There's gotta be a better way of handling this.

Alex3917 11y ago

They're not discouraging people from seeking help elsewhere, they're just saying that going through any accelerator starts the clock on your company.

krschultz 11y ago
What happens if you apply to YC and another accelerator and need to respond to the other accelerator while you are waiting to hear back from YC?
- _sentient 11y ago
  Good accelerators don't make exploding offers. People who make exploding offers are not just bad, they're also acutely aware of that fact, thus the manufactured scarcity.
  - beambot 11y ago
    I don't know. I think a reasonable person could construe the YC statement [1] as manufactured scarcity too, even if YC makes the statement for sound reasons. It could be construed as a pre-exploding offer (or threat). Not that I agree with that interpretation; I think YC's viewpoint makes a lot of sense -- especially if it is a proven negative indicator of success. [1] "If you apply to other accelerators, then we'll be more critical of you."
    - _sentient 11y ago
      I think it's clear that's not the intention here. The message is basically "the clock starts ticking with funding, so expect to meet a higher bar". This is similar to the notion that a startup can "sell the dream" up until the point where they have revenue, after which they're no longer selling dreams, they're selling the trend.
- RickHull 11y ago
  > What happens if ... Make a decision, and then make the most of that decision. Sam is not saying it's bad to do other accelerators. However, for very natural reasons, graduates of other accelerators have more expected of them. Likewise, I doubt YC would accept their own graduates for another round.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]

danieltillett 11y ago

Yes stop worrying about YC and get on with building your business.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
mikeryan 11y ago
I think this sounds great in a hand wavy way but most folks don't have unlimited time and funds to do this and need to raise money in order to build their business So worrying about YC / other accelerator /angel funding is not mutually exclusive of "building your business"
- danieltillett 11y ago
  Well as someone who has built a (moderately) successful startup without any outside funding or acceleration I have a different perspective on this. While I do think YC provides a lot of value to their alumni, people can get fixated on the process of raising funds and not building their business. Build a great business making real money and you won’t need funding.
  - mikeryan 11y ago
    Look I run a (moderately) successful services firm that's been completely bootstrapped as well ;-) I totally get it, but for every github and Atlassian there's also a Facebook and Snapchat or a hardware startup (wish I could think of one now...) where outside funding is essential.
    - danieltillett 11y ago
      I think the key here is don’t try and build a Snapchat or Facebook unless you are an insider. Build a business that works first and once you have the experience, skill, and most importantly contacts, then build a VC-only business if you really want to.
- 11y ago

geofft 11y ago

Better for whom? Sure, YC wants more startups in general, but that's because they want a better pool of candidates to invest in, and secondarily because it legitimizes doing a startup instead of joining a big company or academia or something else. If they're at capacity, it's not particularly relevant to them if startups they can't fund manage to exist or not, as long as the prospect of doing a startup remains attractive (which doesn't seem at risk, and arguably is also at risk from too many failed startups).

paul 11y ago

I agree. This is part of the reason that we are making more of our advice freely available online (e.g. http://startupclass.samaltman.com/ http://startupclass.samaltman.com/ and http://playbook.samaltman.com/ http://playbook.samaltman.com/). The problem with a bad accelerator is that they can actually harm your company with bad advice and unnecessary distractions.

danieltillett 11y ago
Paul when you are building a startup are there any necessary distractions (HN excluded). You really should name and shame the bad accelerators. I know no one likes to be negative, but if there are accelerators out there messing up companies and leading founders astray then it would be best to make this information public. You will take some heat for doing this, but you guys should be able to handle it.
- paul 11y ago
  There are hundreds of accelerators with more appearing all of the time (plus significant management turnover in many of the programs). Evaluating them all would be a full-time job for several people. I'd rather put that effort into finding more ways to help more startups.
  - danieltillett 11y ago
    I would hope the fact that a problem is hard is not a reason to not do it :) More seriously, it depends on how serious the bad accelerator problem is and you guys are one of the few that have the data on this. If it is a minor problem then I agree there are better ways to help, but if it is a major problem then it needs to be addressed.
    - tptacek 11y ago
      Wouldn't it be super weird for the leading accelerator to start formally rating its competitors? There's a difference between having good data and being in a position to help people by publishing it.

ProAm 11y ago

Sort of reminds me of the late night talk shows in America. They frequently said, "if you're going to do Leno, you can't go on Letterman, if you do you're never invited back" and vice-versa* * = Unless you are an A-list celebrity (or Unicorn) in which case we'll take you no matter what.

smileysteve 11y ago
I think that you're stretching for that. There are a number reason to suspect that a second accelerator will be less effective that the first: * You already got advice * You already built a minimum viable product * You already got feedback on that product * You already networked with people who would lead to the next round, growth, etc * You already spent money on marketing Unless you've pivoted, what is Y-Combinator (or any second accelerator) going to be able do to help you other than introducing you to another set of investors (that if you chose your first accelerator wisely you might be somewhat connected to Other than that, there's the cap table that they explicitly mention, 3-8% of a seed stage company is less attractive if there is another 3-8% player involved. Similarly, an A round (that they help you get) is less attractive if 12-16% of the company is already in un-dilutable preferred shares.
- ProAm 11y ago
  The immediate reason is the possibility that 1 of those 5 was poor advice from the last accelerator. For instance: * Great advice, solid mvp, good feedback, solid networking but the money you spend on marketing was too little, and done horribly. All this product needs it a good marketing plan and it abruptly begins to hockey stick and gain velocity? I think the real reason is dilution and/or wanting an 'industry first dibs' on any potentially valuable start up. At least if they see any promise in the product.

nostrademons 11y ago

I don't think they're discouraging people from seeking help elsewhere so much as saying that if you get help elsewhere, don't also expect help from YC unless your numbers are really, really good. In other words, if you're going to go with another accelerator, commit to that program and decide that you're going to build a real business off it. It worked for both SendGrid and Digital Ocean. Don't expect that you'll be able to bounce between programs and accept help from everyone, because if you need that much help, it starts looking like you really don't have your shit together as a founder.

sama 11y ago

We don't want to do that; however, I think sometimes when people think they're getting help they're actually getting hurt. One of our goals is to release as much advice as we can for free for anyone.

rachellaw 11y ago
one of the key reasons why people join accelerators is for network and connections though, not just advice. Without that conversations, that sounding board, all that written advice just makes another investopedia/venturehacks guidebook. Most startup founders already do the google legwork and required readings. It's great, but not the main reason why people would apply for YC.