3 ms·
#1 is irrelevant or even slightly negative from YC perspective, because mostly it reduces pool of companies and founders available to YC itself. #2 is a good o
by dennisgorelik 14y ago
#1 is irrelevant or even slightly negative from YC perspective, because mostly it reduces pool of companies and founders available to YC itself.
#2 is a good observation though:
Because multiple founders could be potentially split - it makes it less risky for VC to invest. Therefore it's easier to get VC funding for multi-founder startup.
Which is a competitive advantage over single-founder startups.
From YC perspective making access to VC capital easier (by going multi-founder) is even more important, because "deals with VCs" is one of the core services that YC provides to startups.