4 ms·

My understanding is that Techstars is a "franchise model" of sorts. So Techstars Chicago, as described in the post, could be quite different from another city's

by malanj 12y ago

My understanding is that Techstars is a "franchise model" of sorts. So Techstars Chicago, as described in the post, could be quite different from another city's Techstars? If anyone on HN have been through any Techstars programme and are prepared to comment on the experience that'll be super valuable.

balls187 12y ago
TS 2013 Seattle. Easily one of the best things I've ever done. I'm not sure how to compare it to other Cities, but it was certainly a benefit to our company. Edit to add: The 3 month program was broken up roughly into three chunks: 1. Achieving Product Market Fit 2. Product Development 3. Fund Raising Depending on the stage of your company, you spent more or less time in each of these phases. We were relatively mature from a product market fit standpoint, so we focused our time between Product Development, Signing Customers, and Fund Raising. Add the TechStars network, the "prestige" of being in TechStars, and what essentially amounts to a 3-month pass to ask for help from businesses, and it felt like it was a great experience.
mrkurt 12y ago
Yes, that's accurate. Techstars Chicago is an incubator called Excelerate that joined the "network". I think they're all run similarly, but Excelerate didn't magically become a premium accelerator by slapping the Techstars label on.
- joelrunyon 12y ago
  Excellerate was close to #3 or #4 incubator (depending on how you count) in the country before joining the TechStars crew.
  - tptacek 12y ago
    How do you count this? What's the rationale for saying that Excellerate was the next-best incubator after YC and 500s?
    - seats 12y ago
      I don't know the methodology of the research but here is the coverage - http://tech.co/top-startup-accelerators-ranked-2012-08 http://tech.co/top-startup-accelerators-ranked-2012-08
    - andrew_r_cross 12y ago
      Forbes put together an analysis in 2012 (the last year Excelerate was still Excelerate) based on companies' exit price or price of most recent round. Excelerate came in No. 6. http://www.forbes.com/sites/tomiogeron/2012/04/30/top-tech-incubators-as-ranked-by-forbes-y-combinator-tops-with-7-billion-in-value/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/tomiogeron/2012/04/30/top-tech-i...
jhdavids8 12y ago
TS 2014 NYC We found the program immensely valuable. The network you get connected to is almost worth it alone. The actual 3 month program is what you make it really. You get connected to amazing mentors, are expected to meet weekly milestones, and are offered the chance to hear many talks from prominent investors/entrepreneurs. How you decide you and your team act on these opportunities is where the value can be relative and vary per team. Some teams don't like the structure, some do, and some just keep their head down for the 3 months and pay little attention to who comes in the Techstars office door. This person's critique of the program seems a bit off to me. As other commenters stated, his math is off on the equity calculations (we just finished our first raise and certainly didn't give up anywhere close to 50% of the company). Getting upset because a couple of people couldn't provide a detailed, helpful answer very specific to your startup after hearing a 10 minute pitch about it is a bit too critical, in my opinion. And I wouldn't read much in the request to sign the paperwork by Monday. It was likely oversight, and personally, if I needed time, I'd have told them that instead of interpreting it as some sketchy sales tactic and getting upset. That said, the program isn't for everyone, and it can of course be improved, so maybe they made the right decision in the end. I just don't think they had enough evidence (or at least interpreted that evidence fairly enough) to ever know at this point.

by malanj 12y ago

balls187 12y ago

TS 2013 Seattle. Easily one of the best things I've ever done. I'm not sure how to compare it to other Cities, but it was certainly a benefit to our company. Edit to add: The 3 month program was broken up roughly into three chunks: 1. Achieving Product Market Fit 2. Product Development 3. Fund Raising Depending on the stage of your company, you spent more or less time in each of these phases. We were relatively mature from a product market fit standpoint, so we focused our time between Product Development, Signing Customers, and Fund Raising. Add the TechStars network, the "prestige" of being in TechStars, and what essentially amounts to a 3-month pass to ask for help from businesses, and it felt like it was a great experience.

mrkurt 12y ago

Yes, that's accurate. Techstars Chicago is an incubator called Excelerate that joined the "network". I think they're all run similarly, but Excelerate didn't magically become a premium accelerator by slapping the Techstars label on.

joelrunyon 12y ago
Excellerate was close to #3 or #4 incubator (depending on how you count) in the country before joining the TechStars crew.
- tptacek 12y ago
  How do you count this? What's the rationale for saying that Excellerate was the next-best incubator after YC and 500s?
  - seats 12y ago
    I don't know the methodology of the research but here is the coverage - http://tech.co/top-startup-accelerators-ranked-2012-08 http://tech.co/top-startup-accelerators-ranked-2012-08
  - andrew_r_cross 12y ago
    Forbes put together an analysis in 2012 (the last year Excelerate was still Excelerate) based on companies' exit price or price of most recent round. Excelerate came in No. 6. http://www.forbes.com/sites/tomiogeron/2012/04/30/top-tech-incubators-as-ranked-by-forbes-y-combinator-tops-with-7-billion-in-value/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/tomiogeron/2012/04/30/top-tech-i...

jhdavids8 12y ago

TS 2014 NYC We found the program immensely valuable. The network you get connected to is almost worth it alone. The actual 3 month program is what you make it really. You get connected to amazing mentors, are expected to meet weekly milestones, and are offered the chance to hear many talks from prominent investors/entrepreneurs. How you decide you and your team act on these opportunities is where the value can be relative and vary per team. Some teams don't like the structure, some do, and some just keep their head down for the 3 months and pay little attention to who comes in the Techstars office door. This person's critique of the program seems a bit off to me. As other commenters stated, his math is off on the equity calculations (we just finished our first raise and certainly didn't give up anywhere close to 50% of the company). Getting upset because a couple of people couldn't provide a detailed, helpful answer very specific to your startup after hearing a 10 minute pitch about it is a bit too critical, in my opinion. And I wouldn't read much in the request to sign the paperwork by Monday. It was likely oversight, and personally, if I needed time, I'd have told them that instead of interpreting it as some sketchy sales tactic and getting upset. That said, the program isn't for everyone, and it can of course be improved, so maybe they made the right decision in the end. I just don't think they had enough evidence (or at least interpreted that evidence fairly enough) to ever know at this point.