This concept of comparing one company to another is interesting. It shows that geography, in this much 'smaller' and better connected world, still creates pract

This concept of comparing one company to another is interesting. It shows that geography, in this much 'smaller' and better connected world, still creates practical divides. Y combinator is not present in Europe, so Seedcamp can enjoy vastly more mind share than maybe its model merits. We wanted to make a service similar to what Zaarly has created. When evaluating whether we wanted to compete, we did not take into account that it may take Zaarly years to get to Europe and we could still enjoy first mover advantage in a massive geography (there are competitors, but we consider them to not 'get it'). Same with Seedcamp - FIVE years and few have really come along to do something better. Seedcamp is the accelerator we aspire to have notice us. Would that change if YC came to Europe/London? Do Seedcamp have a local knowledge/network advantage that would be unshareable? To those comments about zero sum - it is like wanting the FT to report on your news, but having to settle for a financial blog read by only a few thousand. Bigger really is better and that applies broadly to accelerators, start ups and general economies of scale. Brand awareness often requires scale, which comes as a result of time and effort.