4 ms·

As to your first question, YC will likely be entirely unaffected because the money is the least valuable aspect of joining the program. An ICO doesn’t bring the

by mvid 9y ago

As to your first question, YC will likely be entirely unaffected because the money is the least valuable aspect of joining the program. An ICO doesn’t bring the notoriety and community you get from YC. As to your second question, it far more broad and open ended, but there doesn’t seem to be any reason to believe ICOs will bring financial equality to the world. Ability to invest hasn’t been the hurdle stopping wealth redistribution. If anything, this will likely result in more currency control by government, which in turn means more currency control by the global rich.

bsvalley 9y ago
How about Demo day at the end of the YC program? When startups pitch their ideas on stage to a selected crowd of wealthy investors. I think it’s one of the main benefits of joining such a program. If I were to apply I’d mention the network as being the main reasons why but let’s honest, how does YC make millions of dollars since money isn’t what it’s all about? I do see the network value, but do you really need to join a prestigious MBA to start a business? For example, Ethereum raised 3700 BTC in the first 12 hours of their ICO with just a basic HTML page. In order to invest in a startup (at least in the US), you need to meet the accredited investor standards. Less than 3% of US households qualify. You need to earn $200,000/year for the last 2 years. That’s where I see ICO’s as a way to give everyone a chance. I just realized I should have added more details to my original question ;)
- mvid 9y ago
  You don't need to have an MBA, and you don't need to join YC. Given that, most people who don't have an association with a prestige organization will fail. More than the "most" who will fail even with the association. Major, serious funding rounds would be picky with who they take money from anyway. If accredited investor laws were removed in the USA, competent round seekers would still be looking for people who have the most money, the most industry connection, the most advisory capability. Taking money from every Jack and Jill both doesn't include all of that secondary value, but can be a net negative because you now have people involved at an early stage that are a distraction, and have invested what is likely a larger stake of their personal wealth in your venture, which will have their incentives (safe return, stable financial outlook) not aligning with yours (spend to grow, take risks). ICOs so far have just been an end run around regulation, and we saw an immediate return of all of the dark practices that the regulations are in place for. It democratizes investment for the general population the same way Las Vegas does.

by mvid 9y ago

bsvalley 9y ago

How about Demo day at the end of the YC program? When startups pitch their ideas on stage to a selected crowd of wealthy investors. I think it’s one of the main benefits of joining such a program. If I were to apply I’d mention the network as being the main reasons why but let’s honest, how does YC make millions of dollars since money isn’t what it’s all about? I do see the network value, but do you really need to join a prestigious MBA to start a business? For example, Ethereum raised 3700 BTC in the first 12 hours of their ICO with just a basic HTML page. In order to invest in a startup (at least in the US), you need to meet the accredited investor standards. Less than 3% of US households qualify. You need to earn $200,000/year for the last 2 years. That’s where I see ICO’s as a way to give everyone a chance. I just realized I should have added more details to my original question ;)

mvid 9y ago
You don't need to have an MBA, and you don't need to join YC. Given that, most people who don't have an association with a prestige organization will fail. More than the "most" who will fail even with the association. Major, serious funding rounds would be picky with who they take money from anyway. If accredited investor laws were removed in the USA, competent round seekers would still be looking for people who have the most money, the most industry connection, the most advisory capability. Taking money from every Jack and Jill both doesn't include all of that secondary value, but can be a net negative because you now have people involved at an early stage that are a distraction, and have invested what is likely a larger stake of their personal wealth in your venture, which will have their incentives (safe return, stable financial outlook) not aligning with yours (spend to grow, take risks). ICOs so far have just been an end run around regulation, and we saw an immediate return of all of the dark practices that the regulations are in place for. It democratizes investment for the general population the same way Las Vegas does.