8 ms·

There are a couple, Techstars [http://www.techstars.com http://www.techstars.com] in Seattle is one that comes to mind. Another is iVentures10 in Chicago [htt

There are a couple, Techstars [http://www.techstars.com http://www.techstars.com] in Seattle is one that comes to mind. Another is iVentures10 in Chicago [http://www.iventures10.com http://www.iventures10.com] However, YC still has the brand and the experience with this format.

okeumeni 18y ago
What do you mean by "YC still has the brand"?
- ardell 18y ago
  One of the big advantages of YC is the notoriety associated with being a YC company. Easier introductions to press, investors, and partners. Notice how much coverage YC companies got on TechCrunch this last round? There's a reason, it's because YC does a great job pre-selecting good companies to showcase to press/investors and they've built up a good reputation on that.
  - okeumeni 18y ago
    Do you think YC get good coverage from TechCrunch because YC companies are better than anyone else?
    - ardell 18y ago
      I'd wager that YC companies are statistically more fund-able or exit-able than other similar stage startups out there. They've been through a round of screening, chosen and mentored by successful entrepreneurs who do it for a living--it's certainly a leg up.
      - okeumeni 18y ago
        "They've been through a round of screening, chosen and mentored by successful entrepreneurs who do it for a living", so do TechStars companies and others.
        ardell 18y ago
        Correct. I think we're comparing two different things. I was talking about YC-style seed-stage funding vs other startups. You were talking about YC vs TechStars. Apples and oranges. No disrespect to TechStars, that's just not what I was talking about.
        okeumeni 18y ago
        “You were talking about YC vs TechStars. Apples and oranges.” Ah, That is disrespectful to TechStars they are in the same business and it is exactly what we have been talking about, read the thread again. I’m one founder who has great admiration for YC, but I just don’t think they have the key to startup success. I think this should be clear in all HN readers mind despite the hype around here. Ultimately it will serve the startup world very well that YC get competitors, because no matter their commitment they will not spot all future success.
        anamax 18y ago
        > I just don’t think they have the key to startup success. Nobody said that YC had "the key". They said that YC involvement (1) correlates with startup success and (2) recognized as such. YC is too small a factor in the market to say that lack of YC involvement has any meaning and no one has said that it does.
        noname23012 18y ago
        You must have misread the comment. He said the two different comparisons were apples and oranges, not YC and TechStars.
  - pxlpshr 18y ago
    Which in-turn, is now an idea magnet that pulls the best deal flow from around the world. I don't think they are the only ones that are capable of doing this tho. ycom also seems to be more consumer focused, which is what most of the techblogs cover because it brings eyeballs. consumer exits are often big pay days, but more importantly to me at least — the most fun to work on. B2B is often a drab. lol i think some of these incubators should not forget the enterprise play either. Austin Ventures had A/V Labs awhile back, but I don't recall much about its success.
- incomethax 18y ago
  YC has always had the brand image of turning out good, well trained, companies. I remember a post about it a while back, on how YC was like the "Harvard or Stanford" of the seed stage incubators.
  - okeumeni 18y ago
    I agree that YC being the first to try out this format may give them more experience credit than anyone else. But YC do not control the brand, It does not guarantee success more than it does with let’s say TechStars, if that was the case Google would not be ahead of Yahoo.
    - apsurd 18y ago
      One data point is not enough to dismiss the idea that YC has a better brand name. I would have to agree. Having a better brand name does not mean no other company will ever out do you, it simply means you tend to have a head start out of the gates. Personally, if I had a choice, I'd ally with YC. And I think my perception of them is 90% about the Brand image they present and their track record. That is branding is it not?
      - aaronblohowiak 18y ago
        Press relations.
    - webwright 18y ago
      You're missing the point. Brand in this case means that YC: A) Attracts the best startups. If you're going to gun for one of these, YC is at the top of your list. B) Attracts the best investors. It's in the Valley and historically has actually made some investors a pile of money already. C) Attracts acquisitions. Past performance doesn't not guarantee future returns, however. It'll be a slow change in brand perception, much like an elite school slowly falling out of favor in favor of a newer school.
      - owkaye 18y ago
Raphael 18y ago
It's actually http://techstars.org/ http://techstars.org/, and they operate out of Boulder, CO. Were you thinking of Founders Co-op?

okeumeni 18y ago

What do you mean by "YC still has the brand"?

ardell 18y ago
One of the big advantages of YC is the notoriety associated with being a YC company. Easier introductions to press, investors, and partners. Notice how much coverage YC companies got on TechCrunch this last round? There's a reason, it's because YC does a great job pre-selecting good companies to showcase to press/investors and they've built up a good reputation on that.
- okeumeni 18y ago
  Do you think YC get good coverage from TechCrunch because YC companies are better than anyone else?
  - ardell 18y ago
    I'd wager that YC companies are statistically more fund-able or exit-able than other similar stage startups out there. They've been through a round of screening, chosen and mentored by successful entrepreneurs who do it for a living--it's certainly a leg up.
    - okeumeni 18y ago
      "They've been through a round of screening, chosen and mentored by successful entrepreneurs who do it for a living", so do TechStars companies and others.
      - ardell 18y ago
        Correct. I think we're comparing two different things. I was talking about YC-style seed-stage funding vs other startups. You were talking about YC vs TechStars. Apples and oranges. No disrespect to TechStars, that's just not what I was talking about.
        okeumeni 18y ago
        “You were talking about YC vs TechStars. Apples and oranges.” Ah, That is disrespectful to TechStars they are in the same business and it is exactly what we have been talking about, read the thread again. I’m one founder who has great admiration for YC, but I just don’t think they have the key to startup success. I think this should be clear in all HN readers mind despite the hype around here. Ultimately it will serve the startup world very well that YC get competitors, because no matter their commitment they will not spot all future success.
        anamax 18y ago
        > I just don’t think they have the key to startup success. Nobody said that YC had "the key". They said that YC involvement (1) correlates with startup success and (2) recognized as such. YC is too small a factor in the market to say that lack of YC involvement has any meaning and no one has said that it does.
        noname23012 18y ago
        You must have misread the comment. He said the two different comparisons were apples and oranges, not YC and TechStars.
- pxlpshr 18y ago
  Which in-turn, is now an idea magnet that pulls the best deal flow from around the world. I don't think they are the only ones that are capable of doing this tho. ycom also seems to be more consumer focused, which is what most of the techblogs cover because it brings eyeballs. consumer exits are often big pay days, but more importantly to me at least — the most fun to work on. B2B is often a drab. lol i think some of these incubators should not forget the enterprise play either. Austin Ventures had A/V Labs awhile back, but I don't recall much about its success.
incomethax 18y ago
YC has always had the brand image of turning out good, well trained, companies. I remember a post about it a while back, on how YC was like the "Harvard or Stanford" of the seed stage incubators.
- okeumeni 18y ago
  I agree that YC being the first to try out this format may give them more experience credit than anyone else. But YC do not control the brand, It does not guarantee success more than it does with let’s say TechStars, if that was the case Google would not be ahead of Yahoo.
  - apsurd 18y ago
    One data point is not enough to dismiss the idea that YC has a better brand name. I would have to agree. Having a better brand name does not mean no other company will ever out do you, it simply means you tend to have a head start out of the gates. Personally, if I had a choice, I'd ally with YC. And I think my perception of them is 90% about the Brand image they present and their track record. That is branding is it not?
    - aaronblohowiak 18y ago
      Press relations.
  - webwright 18y ago
    You're missing the point. Brand in this case means that YC: A) Attracts the best startups. If you're going to gun for one of these, YC is at the top of your list. B) Attracts the best investors. It's in the Valley and historically has actually made some investors a pile of money already. C) Attracts acquisitions. Past performance doesn't not guarantee future returns, however. It'll be a slow change in brand perception, much like an elite school slowly falling out of favor in favor of a newer school.
    - owkaye 18y ago

Raphael 18y ago

It's actually http://techstars.org/ http://techstars.org/, and they operate out of Boulder, CO. Were you thinking of Founders Co-op?