9 ms·
We'll Be Circling Back
- maeon3 14y agoI like getting boilerplate responses from people, it's basically a message to me: You are worth nothing to me and if I can make a profit by throwing you under the bus, I will make no hesitation to do so, and you shouldn't expect me to. It's actually a refreshing whiff of the jungle. Kill, or be killed.
- richardjordan 14y agoThis is brilliant. I often wonder of VCs actually have a secret website where they go on it, select from a half dozen drop boxes of platitudes they want to include, and then out spits a message along these lines. Over the years my inbox has gathered enough of them that I could probably extract most of the patterns.
- wh-uws 14y agoHonestly they probably just keep a word document with a list of them in there. I know I do (textfile of course) for useful shell commands and the like
- fusiongyro 14y agoStartup idea. :)
- dsl 14y agoHave you considered you're doing it wrong? If you asked out 100 girls and they all blew you off, it would be time for some introspection. VCs are just ugly girls with more money.
- orangethirty 14y agoEh, no. I would take a bath, put on some nicer clothes, and set out to find girl 101. while single: mingle()
- sixtypoundhound 14y agoSounds like a perfect application of a context free grammar.
- tbirdz 14y agoHmm... I sense a potential startup idea here.
- Wilya 14y agoSomeone had made something like that for internship reports, when I was in college. Very handy, when you needed a bonus paragraph here and there on "How this experience made me a better person".
- xianshou 14y agoAlso generalizable. Email pattern-mining software, anybody? It would classify patterns within social groups as defined by LinkedIn and Facebook social network topography.
- gfodor 14y agoI have a line in my personal wiki page for invention ideas labelled: "bullshit automation." This is that idea.
- lyime 14y agoClassic.
- Tzunamitom 14y agoVCs, management consultants, business gurus... all the same rubbish. After working in Big 4 management consulting jobs for almost six years, I'm constantly surprised that phrases like "value-add" and "validate a couple of the core assumptions" still have the power to bring me out in a cold sweat. But what is it going to take to end this nonsense? We know we're talking rubbish. Most of us hate these stock business-speak phrases, yet still most of us choose to hide behind them. Clients are partly to blame, but an industry that tries to differentiate itself by the bizarreness of its terminology (thereby fabricating "exclusivity")is more to blame. When are we going to wake up and realise that speaking in plain, simple, understandable English does not make us look stupid and simple. Quite the opposite.
- redschell 14y agoI just try to keep this classic treatise by George Orwell in circulation among my business friends: https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm
- georgeorwell 14y agoThank you! I should really update it for the new millenium, it's just I've been having the strangest out-of-body experience.
- JDGM 14y agoI've always enjoyed that one, especially this part: "One can cure oneself of the not un- formation by memorizing this sentence: A not unblack dog was chasing a not unsmall rabbit across a not ungreen field." It's hilarious, even though I have since decided I don't agree with "curing" the not un- formation. FWIW, my position is that the difference between strict opposite and negation in English means that there is often a subtlety of meaning accurately expressed with a "not un-". It's essentially the English language equivalent of needing ways to express less than, greater than, less than or equal to, and greater than or equal to. I know Orwell was criticising people who misuse it, but he beats his fists a bit too hard for my liking in that essay. Related, I get annoyed when people aggressively attack "I don't disagree" with "then just say I AGREE!". The phrase "I don't disagree" is useful to convey "I might agree, I don't know whether I agree, I don't have an opinion, I agree with some of it and disagree with small details, any or all of these or more, but I'm certainly not disagreeing with you outright at this moment". In a lot of arguments these opinions fail spectacularly, since for the most part a combination of aggression, loudness, and a veneer of logical reasoning tends to win out over uncertainty and an attempt to consider all cases.
- georgeorwell 14y agoI might be misreading this, but it seems like PG is humiliating one of his partners in public. EDIT: Yep, I was misreading this. It wasn't so clear that it was an inside joke. I guess the joke's on me and the stereotypical non-partner VC, ha ha? From Wikipedia: Harjeet Taggar (born June 8, 1985), is a British businessperson and partner at the seed-stage investment firm, Y Combinator. He was formerly funded by Y Combinator and sold his company Auctomatic to Canadian company Live Current Media at age 22. In 2010 he was named as the first new partner at Y Combinator since its founding in 2005, aged 25. In 2011 he was named on the Forbes 30 under 30 list. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harjeet_Taggar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harjeet_Taggar
- kiyoto 14y agoI think the whole thing is in jest.
- hugs 14y agoYes, you are misreading. Harjeet wrote a clever piece of satire mocking the insincerity of most VCs.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- dangrossman 14y agoThis is mail from Harjeet written as if it's from a VC to a YC partner like himself. Since Harj is not a VC and is part of YC, he wouldn't write Paul a mail like that. It's satire.
- antirez 14y agoBrillant, and there is a common denominator across all this kind of communications: there is no real information, so after some practice it's easy to spot it's just bullshit. Btw this style is not just common to VCs, but also to clueless management.
- rrrrtttt 14y agoHere's what I gleamed from the message: 1. Taggar doesn't want to invest in the company. 2. He wants Graham to keep referring other companies to him. 3. He may want to invest in the company in the future. 4. He introduced the founder to some of his acquaintances (see 2). The writing is pretty much WYSIWYG...
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- antirez 14y agoYes but, what is the value added by the people they want to get involved? Why is too early to invest? Just because there are not already a zillion of users and they are not able to evaluate? Why later it could be interesting? Basically there is just boilerplate to say "no thanks" but no real information. Just a general feeling that they are not able to really evaluate.
- rrrrtttt 14y agoEmail is prone to misunderstanding so you have to be verbose. If I would have gotten a "no thanks" that would have left me guessing "Why?". Possible reasons which are ruled out by this message: 1) I don't trust YC anymore; 2) The guy you referred to me was a jerk; 3) I'm out of the VC business; etc.
- numbsafari 14y agoI don't know the guy, but... consider the power dynamic. PG sends him a sales pitch and the guy pushes back. What's he supposed to do, fall all over himself and say "where do I sign"? No, he says, "yeah, maybe". Wouldn't you do the same if someone came to your door looking to sell you something?
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- jgrahamc 14y agoI'm sure something Bayesian like POPFile could filter that correctly to Trash.
- return0 14y agoTL;DR: No. On a related note, dilbert has a piece about how most management is basically BS: http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/managementsuccessleadership_mostly_bullshit/ http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/managementsuccessleadership_mo...
- ebbv 14y agoI thought that's been the driving idea behind Dilbert for its entire run.
- addlepate 14y agoProbably because I don't live in SV, but, I don't get it. Is this satirizing VC boilerplate, or actual boilerplate? Who knows.
- mikecuesta 14y agoI was totally confused reading through this the first time - it made me roll my eyes at least 5 times. Then I realized it was satirical and my faith in PG was once again restored.
- kevinalexbrown 14y agoI... I hope I'm not ruining it by asking if this is a test to see how the HN comments respond to subtlety? <strike>I suppose that's part of the joke, though like some good jokes it makes me sad. We get upset that VC's respond with boilerplate and knee-jerk, but then we do the same thing.</strike> Update: egh, looks like we're not doing too badly.
- Mahn 14y ago> We get upset that VC's respond with boilerplate Even if it sounds impersonal and lazy, this is just called being polite, most people still prefer an answer of this kind to "lol no, sorry, you suck". And that's why we do it aswell. Perhaps we should work more on make it seem less impersonal, but the message is clear and loud in any case.
- batgaijin 14y agoDude I would take a cut to have someone as a vc who said "lol no, sorry, you suck." I mean jesus christ these are the last people we want patting our egos.
- kyro 14y agoYou're looking for Dave McClure.
- soneca 14y agoNot me, I like people being polite with me. Which doesn't mean these messages couldn't be more informal and direct. But "you suck" is not impersonal, is rude. I have my ego pretty much under control, exagerated compliments won't do any damage here.
- RougeFemme 14y agoAgreed. I would rather rate boilerplate than rate no response at all.
- vu0tran 14y agoHow many users do you have? Do you have traction? Is it viral? Who else has invested in your startup? Did Sequoia pass? Why did Sequoia pass? [Explain how your startup will make 90 billion dollars in the first year] I'm sorry, I've already invested into too many companies, but if you know any other Y Companies, I would love to speak to them.
- kirillzubovsky 14y agoVu, try this: "Hi. What are other companies in your batch we should invest in?" <- seriously, first question. I think our conversation ended shortly thereafter.
- whatsup 14y agopot calling kettle black seems more douchey than funny
- crististm 14y ago"grab a coffee and talk " - that rang a bell with something I read this week on TC
- pratikjhaveri 14y agoAwesome! I'm sure there can be a whole series of "typical response emails"....from Management, from large Co to Tiny Co, from girlfriend to ex-bf :) In fact someone should create a Yahoo like auto-memo creator from a few years back for this precise reason.
- phil 14y agoDid you know? Jokes are much funnier after you explain them.
- Arjuna 14y ago"we'd love to grab a coffee" I couldn't help but chuckle at this as Harj even included the concept of "grabbing coffee", which is discussed in "Maker's Schedule, Manager's Schedule" [1]: "Business people in Silicon Valley (and the whole world, for that matter) have speculative meetings all the time. They're effectively free if you're on the manager's schedule. They're so common that there's distinctive language for proposing them: saying that you want to 'grab coffee,' for example. Speculative meetings are terribly costly if you're on the maker's schedule, though. Which puts us in something of a bind. Everyone assumes that, like other investors, we run on the manager's schedule. So they introduce us to someone they think we ought to meet, or send us an email proposing we grab coffee. At this point we have two options, neither of them good: we can meet with them, and lose half a day's work; or we can try to avoid meeting them, and probably offend them." [1] http://paulgraham.com/makersschedule.html http://paulgraham.com/makersschedule.html
- cookiecaper 14y agoNot to veer too far off-topic, but these "speculative meetings" are often (but not always) well worth the schedule disruption, even if it ripples out across several extra "productive" hours. Perhaps for Paul Graham, who has all the VCs in the world scrambling to fund his picks, it's not so important, but for the little people like you and I, the value of a good network is immense. Business is primarily a social thing. It always has been, and is no different today. This is why inferior products can make tons of money.
- mindcrime 14y agoThere's some interesting discussion around this phenomena on this Quora question: http://www.quora.com/Manners-and-Etiquette/How-do-you-politely-turn-down-someone-who-wants-to-grab-coffee-sometime http://www.quora.com/Manners-and-Etiquette/How-do-you-polite... and this follow-up: http://www.quora.com/Manners-and-Etiquette/How-do-you-dodge-being-politely-turned-down-when-you-want-to-grab-coffee-sometime-with-someone-when-you-have-meaningful-things-to-talk-about http://www.quora.com/Manners-and-Etiquette/How-do-you-dodge-... I consider both threads to be worthwhile reads.
- 14y ago
- sriramk 14y agoLet's look at what a VC is trying to accomplish here. - They don't want to invest for reason {X}. Could be as trivial as someone not liking the founder or they could genuinely think they don't know whether the company will do well. - They don't want to tell the founders what they really think. Mostly because they want to hold open the option in case they are proven wrong as often happens. As much as founders say they like honest replies, I've seen so many founders say "VC X said he doesn't want to invest in us because he disagrees with us on {reason}- I'm going to prove that moron so wrong". - They want to help out the founder with a couple of intros so that the founder doesn't feel like he got nothing from them in return. The boilerplate/corporate B.S language? Terrible and everyone could easily do better. But there's no easy to tell someone you don't believe in something they're putting their heart and soul into. YC has the nicest rejection mails of all of VC-land and I've still seen YC-rejects get really angry and make it their life's work to prove pg wrong.
- eric_bullington 14y agoAre you sure these YC-rejects are building their companies just to prove pg wrong? They are probably just pursuing their dream, which is what led them to apply to YC to begin with. If they succeed, proving YC wrong is just a nice side-effect for them (see: http://lightsailenergy.com/ http://lightsailenergy.com/ and others).
- sriramk 14y agoEither way, they hold a hostility towards YC ( or anyone who rejects them) which is what such 'soft letdowns' are trying to mitigate.
- DaniFong 14y agoI think YC is great.
- fgdsfgds 14y agoBeen rejected twice. Although I know is irrational to get angry I would be lying if part of me doesn't want to succeed to shove it on PG's face.
- programnature 14y agoI don't know what's funnier - the link, or the clueless hacker news people!
- sama 14y agoI laughed so hard when I got this email that I actually spit my coffee out.
- accountoftheday 14y agoHow do other founders deal with non-committal VC nonsense? I feel like only taking targeted meetings where social capital gets spent on introductions to avoid this takes too much serendipity out of the equation.
- kyro 14y agoMy only issue with this email is that he used the subject "we" when mentioning grabbing a coffee. The current accepted standard of phrasing in business circles eliminates the subject and would read "would love to grab a coffee". Would love to hear your thoughts on this space.
- yogo 14y agoIs that really an accepted standard? I have to go out on a limb here and ask if that's even a proper sentence? Who/what is the subject? It certainly helps to know who you would be having coffee with.
- harshreality 14y agoThe subject is implied and purposely left out to avoid emphasis. It's not an ultra-formal construction, but it would be a stretch to call it incorrect grammar. You know who you'd be having coffee with. The sender of the email. :)
- pyrocrasty 14y agoJust as much of a stretch to call it proper grammar, though ;-) (Yes, that sentence was even less proper.)
- brian_cloutier 14y agoIt will always be a stretch, because there is no such thing as proper grammar.
- fratis 14y agoThe subject is an implied first person. (i.e., "I" or "we.") I see this kind of omission as a way for cowards to avoid explicitly standing behind their request, both to diminish their own disappointment if the recipient says no or ignores them and to mitigate the chance that the recipient perceives their note as 'needy.' Just my 2¢.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- OnyeaboAduba 14y agoThis reminds me of the fearsome chapter in Launch Pad where Paul Graham is telling the founders of Science Exchange that VCs use any excuse when they dont like you as a reason not to fund in their case circumvention in this case "strategic issues and proof points". Which leads into another Paul Graham quote "Listen to the answer ,dont listen to the reason" Also the investor couldnt have been more obvious with the fact that the real reason he emailed Paul was that he wants to get his claws in YC on a deeper level " keep em coming" "on a seperate note we feel we could be doing more to help YC companies" on a seperate note? really? Paul is a veteran at the VC game so trying to bait and switch him with all the "we loved him and where impressed but" nonsense is crazy to me. But its one of his partners so it might be just a simulation of the dozens of emails he gets like this on a daily basis
- quintin 14y agoHi X, It’s been wonderful talking to you. We are pretty amazed by your team’s ___ chops and xxx. We talked about the opportunity briefly during our meeting and would like to see a more fuller team and strategy around the product before getting into a deeper relationship. Congrats on an incredible product and let me know if we would be any help to you along the way. If you get it
- graycat 14y agoYes, it was a brilliant parody, send up, etc. of standard venture partner communications, especially when they are loquacious but really saying "No". The main point is, they are keeping hidden what they are really thinking. Right: They like the project and the founder, the connection with "real world" problems, etc. All total BS. They want more "proof points" -- mostly BS. What they don't want to do is what the founder had to do -- deeply evaluate the promise of the project now. What they really want to see they didn't mention but is in one word, significant and rapidly growing 'traction'. What's going on? The venture partner is working for his limited partners, and they think much like traditional private equity investors or just commercial bankers. So, the limited partners really want their venture partners to make financial investments only in measurable financial assets. The limited partners would greatly prefer there to be audited financial statements, but in a pinch they will let their venture partners settle for a surrogate measure, 'traction', from, say, Comscore or some such. If a venture partner is especially curious, then they may want to try the app or Web site. Why? Mostly to keep up their "deep domain knowledge" but otherwise to evaluate how millions of users might like the app or Web site. If such an evaluation looks good beyond belief, then they might make a seed investment. That's just how the venture capital business works. Is this narrow focus on 'traction' and essentially ignoring everything else working? At least on average, over the past 10 years or so, apparently not. Or as in a recent post at AVC.COM, on average, the venture capital ROI figures have been significantly less good than an index fund. The fundamental gap is 'planning': Can we plan a project, execute essentially the plan, and with high batting average get the intended results of the plan or at least significantly high ROI? That's the fundamental challenge. And mostly in venture capital, the answer is "No". That is, the industry does not take such planning seriously. Is all such planning so hopeless? No: Quite broadly in our economy and technology, we can plan and then execute the plan with reasonably high batting average. Even for projects that appear to be highly technical, original, and 'innovative', there can be some good early evidence of the good or bad prospects of the project. Project selection is important, and there are means of selecting good projects with reasonably good batting averages, averages much higher than in venture capital. But back to the limited partners: They still want to think like private equity people or just commercial bankers. They just do. And, instead of changing, they will pick venture firms more carefully or just invest less in the 'venture capital asset class'. But just now for the most interesting part of venture capital investing, 'information technology' based mostly on just software, the venture capital 'business model' is under attack: The reason is the recent and astounding ratios of price and performance for computer hardware and communications bandwidth and also the powerful infrastructure software available at least initially essentially for free. So, for a startup based on software, computing, and the Internet, the path to the coveted 'traction' is just one or a few guys living cheaply and typing quickly. Then, with such low 'burn rate', once they get the traction, and especially if their traction is growing very rapidly, they stand to be nicely profitable already or soon and, thus, no longer in great need of equity investment and likely reluctant to sign the usual term sheet and subordinate themselves to a Board controlled by venture partners. So far this threat to venture capital has not a lot of examples and maybe no examples of really big wins, e.g., another Facebook, but the threat is coming like an 80,000 pound 18 wheel truck at 80 MPH just 50 feet away.
- klinquist 14y agoIf that's boilerplate, I think he should be <he/she> :)
- samiur1204 14y agoHi Craig, Thanks for your post and sending ⟨link⟩ our way, we really appreciate it and always enjoy reading about We'll Be Circling Back. Keep 'em coming! We loved We'll Be Circling Back and are impressed by both it's background and the statement it makes. It's exciting to see entrepreneurs tackling "real-world" problems in important areas, which aligns well with our hacker interests. However it's currently a little early for us to make a comment here. We'd like to see We'll Be Circling Back show a few more proof points and validate a couple of the core assumptions underlying the post. We've offered to introduce it to a few hackers, within our network, who we think could really analyze it and shape some of the strategic issues it'll face in the coming months. We plan on keeping in close touch and will be circling back once it's at a more appropriate stage for commenting. On a separate note, I feel like we could be doing more to help Hacker News posters. We're in awe of what you've built over there at the Hacker News posting and we'd love to grab a coffee and talk more about how we could be helpful to both the posts and you. Best, Samiur
- andymoe 14y agoSo funny. The hilarious thing is some VCs actually talk like that in person too! Even when they are really just trying to say "Hey, computer guy, stand in line at the A&TT store for 125 bucks and hour and get me that new iPhone for me."
- will_brown 14y agoThis is really funny, because it is not far off from the "boilerplate" responses YC sends out to rejected YC applicants. >We're sorry to say we couldn't accept your late application for funding. Please don't take it personally. The chances of a late application being accepted are much lower than for an application submitted by the deadline. If you want to apply again for the summer 2013 cycle, the application form will probably be online within a few weeks. Unfortunately we can't give you individual feedback about your application. This page explains why: http://ycombinator.com/whynot.html http://ycombinator.com/whynot.html Another reason you shouldn't take this personally is that we know we make lots of mistakes. We have good statistical evidence that we fail to interview a significant number of startups that we'd accept if we did. We're trying to get better at this, but it's practically certain that groups we rejected will go on to create successful startups. If you do, we'd appreciate it if you'd send us an email telling us about it; we want to learn from our mistakes. Remove "We should grab coffee" to "apply again" and "We'll be Circling Back" to "if We rejected you and you become successful, email us about it". In the case of the VC if I raise funding from another VC and you rejected me do you think I would let them "circle back around"?; or in the case of YC you think if my start-up becomes a billion dollar success I am really going to waste my time explaining to YC in an email where they went wrong rejecting me?
- daniel-cussen 14y agoHaving read that and two college rejection letters, I'd say they went as far as they could in an email that was ostensibly a reply-to-all.
- ajju 14y agoOn the brighter side for VCs, they can just link to this article from now on instead of typing out a 4-paragraph reply.
- bjornsing 14y agoReminds me of that parody of a VC guy telling siri to "clear out my inbox with wishy-washy responses to everything": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WZA0TATcEI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WZA0TATcEI. This is what he means by wishy-washy reponses. :)
- edw519 14y agoFrom: edw519 To: Paul Graham Hi Paul, Thanks for your note and sending ?investor? our way, we really appreciate it and always enjoy meeting with YC followers. Keep 'em coming! We loved ?investor? and are impressed by both his pedigree and the portfolio he has assembled thus far. It's exciting to see investors seeking "real-world" opportunities in important areas, which aligns well with our long-tail world view. However it's currently a little early for us to get sidetracked here. We'd like to see ?investor? show a few more exits and demonstrate a more complete core understanding of our market. We've offered to introduce him to a few value-add founders within our network, who we think could really help him work through and grasp some of the technological issues fundamental to achieving a product/market fit in our industry. We plan on keeping in close touch and will be iterating back once he's at a more appropriate point to deserve equity from those who have worked so hard. On a separate note, I feel like we could be doing more to help YC groupies. We're amazed at what people want to throw money at and we'd love to grab a coffee and talk more about how we could help investors better understand the opportunities we've poured so much of our hearts and souls into. Best, edw519
- samiur1204 14y agoI got in just 27 minutes before you: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5371322 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5371322 ;P
- userulluipeste 14y agoTHIS is a "brilliant piece of entrepreneur boilerplate". +1
- wamatt 14y agoSo it's obviously satire, and I'm a huge PG/YC supporter, although consider this: PG (through the voice of another YC faithful) is in a way attacking the "dullard VC", lampooning them for being formulaic and unimaginative. But, in a sense he too is using subtlety to obfuscate the real message and the reader is left to fill in the blanks. It's probably meant in good humor, but usually there is a little truth and sore feelings behind these sort of jests. Now maybe the VC's are arrogant or whatever, although this does seem like tit-for-tat in my book. I'll go out on a limb here and say I don't think YC-style is going to "take over" and obliterate the traditional VC model, nor do I believe traditional VC's should dismiss YC-style investing as chump-change or unimportant.
- contango 14y agoYou know, I don't actually find this offensive, and it ranks fairly low on the comedic value scale for me. He is essentially saying "I'm not interested right now, but I might be in the future. I don't want to tell you why. I respect you and wish to be polite and leave the door open to future discussion" Sure, the message is padded out and business bullshitty/flowery (depending on your POV), but it doesn't give me the willies..
- jholman 14y agoFor those in various sub-threads arguing that this is simply polite, what's wrong with the following email? ------------- Hi Paul, Thanks for your note and sending ⟨startup⟩ our way, we really appreciate it and always enjoy meeting with YC founders. Keep 'em coming! I see a lot of promise there, but it's not enough for us yet. We've offered to introduce ⟨founder⟩ to a few useful contacts. As always, we value Y Combinator, and we appreciate this and future opportunities to invest, and to help YC companies. Our calendar is always open for coffee or whatever. --jholman ------------- It's half the length. But it's still polite, appreciative, etc. I guess it depends on what the sender thinks of the recipient, with respect to narcissism and self-importance, and what kind of sucking up is predicted to be effective. When I read plausible sucking-up, I feel gratified. When I read implausible sucking-up, I feel manipulated.
- JDGM 14y agoI like this. I live in a country where exaggerated politeness is deeply ingrained, and redundant over-explanation common. I've been here long enough that it's rubbed off on me to where the original spoof message didn't really ring any alarm bells. Your rewrite is natural English without the BS. The only change I would make if I wrote it myself would be taking out "or whatever". I blame the fashion for that word to be used on its own disrespectfully - my brain often reads it as the British "wha'ever", or the US "whatEVVVVAAAARRRR".
- petegrif 14y agoHaha.
- petegrif 14y agoDear Paul and Harj irony falls on deaf ears.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- hoodoof 14y agoIs this a joke?
- danbmil99 14y agoThis is what billionares do for fun?
- HNLogInShit 14y agoThis doesn't make sense: He starts by saying he sent a message to YC partners and then got this response: "I feel like we could be doing more to help YC companies. We're in awe of what you've built over there at the Y" What is "over there at the Y" supposed to mean? He said he sent the message TO the YC people.
- smountcastle 14y agoAfter looking through the comments I'm surprised there's no speculation on the promising startup that PG reached out to the YC partners about. Any ideas?
- DanielBMarkham 14y agoThere are a zillion things I do not understand about startups. But one thing I know: never use investors. You're better off trading the next Facebook for an 8-figure startup and just not putting yourself through any of it.
- Hitchhiker 14y agoLet me know if we can be of any " other " help.
- tyang 14y agoVery helpful, thanks.