4 ms·

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 neve

• 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.