Actually, if you're being pressured, a better response is, "If you need an answer now, it's going to have to be 'no', so I hope you can adjust your schedule so

Actually, if you're being pressured, a better response is, "If you need an answer now, it's going to have to be 'no', so I hope you can adjust your schedule so we can consider your offer more fully." Exploding offers are unfortunate and a significant negative data point about the behavior of the organization but they are not the only data point. The above answer will defuse the threat and give you the upper hand in the negotiation so you can make the right decision for your team, whether it's 'yes' or 'no'. This is helpful for exploding offers in any circumstance - jobs, M&A, etc. As a side note, while short-horizon offers are terrible, it is reasonable to have some expiration date. Techstars Seattle, for example, has 10 slots and while they might be able to add an extra one or two, logistics don't allow for the kind of flexibility that YC has[1]. I believe there's a good way for an accelerator to handle this ethically: 1) Tell applicants when the decision date is when they apply (so they can plan accordingly) rather than surprising it on them as a negotiating tactic 2) Provide all relevant information when they apply, so they can consider the possibilities in advance, versus (for example) springing restrictions, valuations, or fees on them when they get the offer 3) Allowing enough time between the acceptance and the notification for the team to make a good decision - a week seems reasonable. YC's behavior is exemplary here; their model and position in the industry lets them be super-flexible. Other programs may not have the ability to be quite as flexible but that doesn't mean they're unethical if they're thoughtful about their implementation. [1] My understanding as a mentor for the program - I don't have inside knowledge