Yaw, I wouldn't ever call YC an angel round. Whether you call it an angel round or a seed round, I don't quite understand how the investors control the agenda.

Yaw, I wouldn't ever call YC an angel round. Whether you call it an angel round or a seed round, I don't quite understand how the investors control the agenda. My experience (which at this point is fairly intimate) with sub-$1m rounds is that you generally give up 20-30% of your company and no board seats. In the rare event that an investor takes a board seat, you can generally argue for the board should reflect the cap table and there will be 2 co-founders on the board and 1 investor. Of course, all things are different and some investors can be predatory. Now, when you get into big Series A/B country, I think things change. Board seats start flying around and the founders can lose control. But in the first round of mid-low hundred thousands? Not that I've usually seen. Prior to funding (an interesting point) I haven't seen any influence whatsoever. We've marched to the beat of our own drum, clearly explained the vision we have for the company, and taken advice/feedback when we agreed with it. I HAVE heard of investors saying stuff like, "I'll invest IF you go in the direction that I want".