"The problem is that it’s all about the money; it creates emphasis on Y Combinator startups to quickly exit or IPO." This sentence makes no logical sense, quic

"The problem is that it’s all about the money; it creates emphasis on Y Combinator startups to quickly exit or IPO." This sentence makes no logical sense, quick exits and IPO's are the antithesis of one another - there has to be an emphasis on one or the other, not both. It's based on a false premise anyway, the Start Fund has had no impact on how founders choose to run their companies. Since she's talking about investor incentives, I presume she thinks there's an emphasis on IPOs. If this were true, it'd directly contradict her argument, I struggle to think of any world changing companies that didn't IPO. "organizations like Y Combinator attempt to marginalize, commoditize or manufacture a process that is inherently risky." I'm not sure how we marginalize the process. Perhaps she should have asked some YC founders whether we've ever presented the startup process as anything other than the brutal, risky slog that it is.