4 ms·
It feels to me like YC's name-drop doesn't have a purpose beyond just attention/view grabbing, despite there being a few nuggets of solid reasoning sprinkled th
by islewis 2y ago
It feels to me like YC's name-drop doesn't have a purpose beyond just attention/view grabbing, despite there being a few nuggets of solid reasoning sprinkled throughout the post.
> That’s 1.25%. To be fair, that’s actually quite impressive, but let’s say you have the stamina and willpower to go through YC three times in your lifetime. You’d need approximately 26 lifetimes to hit the jackpot!
This isn't the least bit unique to YC, it's just the cold reality of any high-growth startup.
If OP had framed this as "Moonshot Startup vs Lifestyle Business" it would have felt more like a good faith argument. Even "Do you have the risk tolerance to be a founder" would have worked. But basing a thread titled "Why you shouldn't apply to YC" off an illformed assumption of the readers risk tolerance is naive at best (and likely malicious given OP is selling competing services).
- Pedro_Ribeiro 2y agoAlso that sentence on "you need to go through YC three times in your lifetime, so you need 26 lifetimes" is absurd. I got a migraine trying to understand his line of reasoning.
- romafirst3 2y agoThe reasoning is a bit reductive, it makes sense if you think of success as binary (you become a billionaire or you don’t, which in fairness is what yc and many VC firms push). Obviously you can fail to become a billionaire and make some non life changing amount of money and even make what to a lot of people is life changing, but for this outcome (which is still uncommon) you would be better off not trying to become a billionaire.