5 ms·

Totally agree. It is always good to tell the truth so that person on another side stops guessing the reason. We got rejected by YC and I am just guessing the

by Jaggu 19y ago

Totally agree. It is always good to tell the truth so that person on another side stops guessing the reason. We got rejected by YC and I am just guessing the reasons. Thinking that all founder aren't ready to move to SV for three months and also few are not ready to leave their full time job...etc... but still it is just guessing game... hey could you tell PG to tell everyone about reason for rejection ;) Few people might not able to digest the reason..but all are not same...many can take that as a advise and that could help in future..

jkush 19y ago
YC can't and shouldn't provide reasons why. They've already said as much. In their case, it's different from Fred Wilson. YC has to say no just twice a year. For Fred Wilson and any other VC, it's an ongoing thing. There's a difference.
- dpapathanasiou 19y ago
  The YC approach to "no" is easier when your only point of contact is a web form anyone can fill out and submit. Most VCs (and I've never met Wilson, but I'm guessing this applies to him) meet people in person, because they've gotten introduced or referred by someone in their network. So in that context, it's tougher to reject people without providing more details.
  - pg 19y ago
    it's tougher to reject people without providing more details As I've explained over and over, the reason we don't provide more details is that there often are no details to provide. Often the sum total of our reaction to an application is "we don't understand this." The main difference between us and Fred Wilson in this respect is that he might evaluate 1 or 2 carefully screened deals a day, while we evaluate several hundred.
    - dpapathanasiou 19y ago
      We are saying the same thing.
    - jsjenkins168 19y ago
      While it might be difficult to give reasons based simply on an application, I'm sure there are valid reasons for an interview rejection. That would be very useful information to know. Although I understand many of the reasons are probably due to simply not being compelled by the founders, which is much more difficult to tell someone than simply that "there are too many competitors". The truth can hurt, but sometimes that is what someone really needs to hear.
    - bootload 19y ago
      "... we don't understand this ..." Is it the lack of communication skills conveying the idea? Or is it something more fundamental along the lines of, "we don't understand this 'foo'"?, Where "foo" is 'idea is too derivative', 'you have no users in mind'... etc?
      - bootload 19y ago
        for a better understanding of the mindset read Matt Maroons, *"Advice for Y Combinator Interviewees" ~ http://mattmaroon.com/?p=283 http://mattmaroon.com/?p=283
edw519 19y ago
What does it cost you to ask? Building a business upon guesses is like building a house upon sand. Find out and turn those guesses into data.
- gscott 19y ago
  That is why you build a prototype, put it out there and get people to tell you what they think.
alaskamiller 19y ago
Sometimes even with the cards right and the stars aligned, people just don't plain like you.

by Jaggu 19y ago

jkush 19y ago

YC can't and shouldn't provide reasons why. They've already said as much. In their case, it's different from Fred Wilson. YC has to say no just twice a year. For Fred Wilson and any other VC, it's an ongoing thing. There's a difference.

dpapathanasiou 19y ago
The YC approach to "no" is easier when your only point of contact is a web form anyone can fill out and submit. Most VCs (and I've never met Wilson, but I'm guessing this applies to him) meet people in person, because they've gotten introduced or referred by someone in their network. So in that context, it's tougher to reject people without providing more details.
- pg 19y ago
  it's tougher to reject people without providing more details As I've explained over and over, the reason we don't provide more details is that there often are no details to provide. Often the sum total of our reaction to an application is "we don't understand this." The main difference between us and Fred Wilson in this respect is that he might evaluate 1 or 2 carefully screened deals a day, while we evaluate several hundred.
  - dpapathanasiou 19y ago
    We are saying the same thing.
  - jsjenkins168 19y ago
    While it might be difficult to give reasons based simply on an application, I'm sure there are valid reasons for an interview rejection. That would be very useful information to know. Although I understand many of the reasons are probably due to simply not being compelled by the founders, which is much more difficult to tell someone than simply that "there are too many competitors". The truth can hurt, but sometimes that is what someone really needs to hear.
  - bootload 19y ago
    "... we don't understand this ..." Is it the lack of communication skills conveying the idea? Or is it something more fundamental along the lines of, "we don't understand this 'foo'"?, Where "foo" is 'idea is too derivative', 'you have no users in mind'... etc?
    - bootload 19y ago
      for a better understanding of the mindset read Matt Maroons, *"Advice for Y Combinator Interviewees" ~ http://mattmaroon.com/?p=283 http://mattmaroon.com/?p=283

edw519 19y ago

What does it cost you to ask? Building a business upon guesses is like building a house upon sand. Find out and turn those guesses into data.

gscott 19y ago
That is why you build a prototype, put it out there and get people to tell you what they think.

alaskamiller 19y ago

Sometimes even with the cards right and the stars aligned, people just don't plain like you.