3 ms·
This isn't right - though my initial comment wasn't quite right either, it seems. YC has had limited partners since 2014 [1], and at least some of the 7% equit
by tomhoward 6y ago
This isn't right - though my initial comment wasn't quite right either, it seems.
YC has had limited partners since 2014 [1], and at least some of the 7% equity is allocated to that LP fund, though it's not clear how much. For a few years before that much of the $150K was provided by outside VCs.
This must be the case, as YC's operations (number of companies funded) has been growing rapidly since well before their standout companies reached liquidity (though I heard somewhere they've sold some stock privately earlier to fund growth).
The whole ~7% was owned by YC itself back in the first few years when YC was just a vehicle for the original four partners to invest in startups efficiently, and they only invested about $20K per startup. But that ended in about 2012 when new investors came in and the deal changed from ~$20K to $150K.
Sure, they're still hugely successful! But it's just not a simple case of all those 7% stakes (less dilution) of every YC-funded company ever sitting in the ownership of a single YC entity.
[1] https://techcrunch.com/2014/04/22/yc-ends-venture-partnership-ycvc-in-favor-of-raising-from-lps-will-now-invest-120k-for-seven-percent-of-startup-equity/ https://techcrunch.com/2014/04/22/yc-ends-venture-partnershi...
- andy_ppp 6y agoThanks for the clear and detailed information. I doubt they need the outside investment right now but I guess historically it was a great way to scale.
- tomhoward 6y agoCheers. FWIW it's not about "need" as much as it's about leverage. They'll keep asking "how much faster can we grow if we take in this much more funding from outsiders?" There is such a thing as too fast too, which they've found before, so it's about finding the right balance.