3 ms·

One thing that i never see addressed concretely for me is this: assuming I dont want to raise capital unless i really really really really have to, assuming im

One thing that i never see addressed concretely for me is this: assuming I dont want to raise capital unless i really really really really have to, assuming im doing not b2c, assuming I actually am friends with a number of people who've done YC, etc etc then why YC? Unnuanced advocacy makes me nervous (and thats all I typically hear). Every single time in my life where I have taken unnuanced, uncaveated remarks on face value, it has blown up in my face. There are many fine businesses that have been certainly enabled by YC, and many that have not been. Is YC suitable for businesses whose risks have been shifted to be strictly of the "can technology of this caliber actually exist?" sort, rather than "explore the business premise, do an MVP for the tech" sort? (admittedly, one challenge with sophisticated tech is educating folks about it!). I guess I'm asking for nuance in why. If you can't give me nuance on that, why should I trust your advice on anything more complex? [edit: to be clear, if someone convinced me, i'd totally apply to YC, just not sure if it makes sense for me]

paul 13y ago
It would be easier to answer your question if you provided more concrete examples. The only businesses I can think of that are strictly "can technology of this caliber actually exist?" are ones that likely violate the laws of thermodynamics :) There are certainly business for which YC is not a good fit though, and we generally screen them out at the application stage. In fact, most businesses aren't a good match for YC, as we are only looking for high-growth potential startups of the sort described in http://paulgraham.com/growth.html http://paulgraham.com/growth.html
- carterschonwald 13y ago
  How do we measure growth? Its a bit opaque (at least to me) how to evaluate the growth of an early early stage organizations where paying customers would likely be in finance, biotech, and governmental/university RnD. I agree its a bit more manageable to evaluate in b2c /b2smb / b2b cases. I guess its also for me, I've seen so many well publicized, brilliant technologically sophisticated analytical tools startups fail over the past two years, i'm just leery of how i've seen quantitative products "grow fast" too early. But seriously, how does one evaluate technology that (when positioned well) becomes a substrate for core product strategy for other organizations and entire technological ecosystems? This is a question I hope to know the answer to this spring :)
  - prawn 13y ago
    How many contracts do you have signed? How many customers are you contacting and what feedback are you getting? There would be ways to evaluate progress.
    - carterschonwald 13y ago
      indeed, but bloody hell is the sales cycle for mega enterprise and government slow! :) Also I wasn't asking about how YC stuff gets evaluated, but trying to understand what concrete specific concrete explicit reasons I should apply! I have applied to YC in the past, but in the past I also knew nothing of business, was a younger idiot and had dumb ideas! :)
larrys 13y ago
"then why YC?" This stood out in the post: "If I could only pitch you one reason why Y Combinator is worth it, it would be the people." Exactly. And along the same lines the reason that I always give for why it's good to go to a "known" grade a institution (say a top business school if that is your major) is not necessarily for the education but because of the people that surround you and raise the experience level. In other words a higher degree of non slackers and people who are serious just like you are. Of course they exist everywhere. But there are generally more of them at the top schools. And likewise there are more of them in YC. (And if you read some of my other comments you will see that I'm not a fanboy by any means but this benefit stands out clearly to me..) And this doesn't even have to do with whether those people became life long friends or associates or not (although that is icing on the cake for sure). It has to do with the immersive experience in being in that type of group.
- carterschonwald 13y ago
  I appreciate the remark, that said Speaking as a person whose gone to some of those schools.... That doesn't make me feel excited. While I learned a lot in those envs, they were toxic and homogeneous in many ways. Also I'm deep enough in some OSS ecosystems these days that I already have the pleasure of being the (in my mind) slacker in a community of amazing technologists. Heterogeneity and brilliant folks who are wildly different from me, who I can still communicate with, are how I thrive. Variety is good for the brain! I'm not in any way suggesting YC isn't great for most folks. I'm pretty weird, being an general extrovert and a deep technologist in the same day is a really odd combo. Both as a help and hinderence

paul 13y ago

It would be easier to answer your question if you provided more concrete examples. The only businesses I can think of that are strictly "can technology of this caliber actually exist?" are ones that likely violate the laws of thermodynamics :) There are certainly business for which YC is not a good fit though, and we generally screen them out at the application stage. In fact, most businesses aren't a good match for YC, as we are only looking for high-growth potential startups of the sort described in http://paulgraham.com/growth.html http://paulgraham.com/growth.html

carterschonwald 13y ago
How do we measure growth? Its a bit opaque (at least to me) how to evaluate the growth of an early early stage organizations where paying customers would likely be in finance, biotech, and governmental/university RnD. I agree its a bit more manageable to evaluate in b2c /b2smb / b2b cases. I guess its also for me, I've seen so many well publicized, brilliant technologically sophisticated analytical tools startups fail over the past two years, i'm just leery of how i've seen quantitative products "grow fast" too early. But seriously, how does one evaluate technology that (when positioned well) becomes a substrate for core product strategy for other organizations and entire technological ecosystems? This is a question I hope to know the answer to this spring :)
- prawn 13y ago
  How many contracts do you have signed? How many customers are you contacting and what feedback are you getting? There would be ways to evaluate progress.
  - carterschonwald 13y ago
    indeed, but bloody hell is the sales cycle for mega enterprise and government slow! :) Also I wasn't asking about how YC stuff gets evaluated, but trying to understand what concrete specific concrete explicit reasons I should apply! I have applied to YC in the past, but in the past I also knew nothing of business, was a younger idiot and had dumb ideas! :)

larrys 13y ago

"then why YC?" This stood out in the post: "If I could only pitch you one reason why Y Combinator is worth it, it would be the people." Exactly. And along the same lines the reason that I always give for why it's good to go to a "known" grade a institution (say a top business school if that is your major) is not necessarily for the education but because of the people that surround you and raise the experience level. In other words a higher degree of non slackers and people who are serious just like you are. Of course they exist everywhere. But there are generally more of them at the top schools. And likewise there are more of them in YC. (And if you read some of my other comments you will see that I'm not a fanboy by any means but this benefit stands out clearly to me..) And this doesn't even have to do with whether those people became life long friends or associates or not (although that is icing on the cake for sure). It has to do with the immersive experience in being in that type of group.

carterschonwald 13y ago
I appreciate the remark, that said Speaking as a person whose gone to some of those schools.... That doesn't make me feel excited. While I learned a lot in those envs, they were toxic and homogeneous in many ways. Also I'm deep enough in some OSS ecosystems these days that I already have the pleasure of being the (in my mind) slacker in a community of amazing technologists. Heterogeneity and brilliant folks who are wildly different from me, who I can still communicate with, are how I thrive. Variety is good for the brain! I'm not in any way suggesting YC isn't great for most folks. I'm pretty weird, being an general extrovert and a deep technologist in the same day is a really odd combo. Both as a help and hinderence