Please place your pithy comments here. (And yes, my app was rejected. Or rather, since HN funds teams and not ideas, I personally was rejected for a second time compared to the other teams that submitted)
Isn't it obvious? Presumably if you cared enough to apply, you care enough to hear why you didn't get in.
It's the opinion of one (smart) group of people who are judging your idea against everybody else that applied.
It's worth something, but your customers' opinions are worth more. Go get those!
No feedback is not really helpful to anyone. All anyone knows is they were rejected for potentially arbitrary reasons.
- Strong team (10 years friendship, history of working on interesting projects together)
- Proven determination (6+ tough years working on startups, willingness to travel from Australia just for the interview)
- Good primary idea + several other solid ideas (our primary idea wasn't a new concept at all, but a new, niche angle on a very established concept)
If you didn't get picked, it's because you didn't convey these qualities well enough. All you can do to get yourself there eventually (either into YC or to startup success some other way) is to keep persisting.
The key attributes YC looks for are smart & determined. You need to prove that you have these qualities, or if you don't, you need to develop them.
We emailed a few YC alum to review our application last month, and they all said we were a great team. One loved the idea, one liked it, and one had no clue about the market (wasn't familiar with Facebook and quizzes). Our idea targets young people (12-25 yrs). Which leads to my thinking, that because they're unfamiliar with it (YC partners too old, would never do facebook quizzes), they brushed it off? One other issue is that they prefer built out products with users. We only had a working demo and proof of concept samples.
Either that or all the other teams were more spectacular. Which bothers me, cause I've been looking people up on twitter who say they got interviews, and their products seem mediocre.
But I'm still frustrated, its just not making sense in my brain and I'm trying to figure out where I went wrong. YC does make mistakes, maybe my rejection is simply one of those mistakes. Or maybe the idea does suck. I'd love to know which, lol.
(If you don't want to post it publicly, I will read it and give my feedback, but I don't have much experience in this area myself.)
I bet you 90% of the YC rejects feel this way. I mean, really, what makes you think you're different from anyone else?
The point isn't that you're the same. The point is that you have you consider that everyone is putting their best foot forward and has the confidence in themselves and their idea to try out for this program.
Maybe they didn't get it... but then I'd say that's more your fault than theirs. You have to be able to convey your idea as easily and simply as possible.
Also, I'm not blaming YC for not getting the idea. I know it has to be clear and concise. I worked pretty hard to make it clear, which is why I solicited the help of 3 YC alumni in reviewing the application.
Think about it. Let's say they said, "Your team was too weak." What's the result of that going to be? It's going to be ugly and messy.
What if they said, "Your idea is too weak." Then you'd probably email PG yourself on why your idea is not weak with the following proof why. Same goes if he said there's no market for it.
Basically anything they say can result in a lot of backlash and the blame game when maybe the reason was that it was a little bit of everything.
I like to learn and improve from my mistakes and failures. If he said those things, sure I'd try to refute them and convince him. But eventually I'd look at the criticisms in a more critical manner. I'm not above anyone's feedback or advice.
Probably the same thing that makes you want to start a startup in the first place.
Also bear in mind that they're looking for ideas that have the potential to be hugely profitable and/or world-changing. Without knowing anything more about it, when I hear 'Facebook quizzes' my immediate reaction is that it's a little limited on that front.
But if, as you say, it's an idea whose potential might be hard for people unfamiliar with this type of product to understand, then you need to come up with a way of demonstrating it.
So get to work :)
Did you validate your ideas somehow? Maybe some surveys or examples of existing similar apps being successful? Any prototypes?
It is easy to say YC partners didn't get your idea - but it was your job to demonstrate that it holds real value.
"It's not you, it's someone else." :)
I found my "no interview for you" email in my G-Mail spam folder a few minutes ago (try a search for "in:spam ycombinator.com").
While I'm a little bit disappointed not to get an interview logistically this wouldn't have been the best time in my life so I'm not too down about it. (I think that's realism rather than justificiation. :) )
All the best to everyone whether you got an interview or not. And, like everyone else says keep going. My plans for world domination will continue just at a slower pace. :)
Oh, BTW, I'm possibly going to be in the Bay Area sometime in July/August anyway and would be keen to meet up with YC/HN people then (I'm in New Zealand currently).
P.S. In case you're wondering, I haven't heard if the team of Bright Bunnies got an interview independent of me. :D Don't forget to check out the blooper reel if you missed it and need a laugh: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0ouOkNeBS4
Getting a team together is no easy task, it requires discipline amongst other things. YC has been pretty vocal about favoring teams than individuals. Put a solid team together and people will notice, not just YC.
Sorry if my comment came out as harsh. there's no sugar coating it.
I already know I don't have a team. I already know the YC deadline. I already know that time stands still for nobody.
Is it better not to apply at all? Did YC say they wouldn't fund any single-founder teams at all?
Do you make do with what you have and move forward, or keep trying to find a founder instead of trying to find a business model? At some point you have to make a decision and run with it, and I'm happy with applying solo.
I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. YET, if you want to go through the YC route, I think finding a cofounder would be more important than finding a business model.
They are not mutually exclusive. And yes, the cofounder is more important.
Today's the deadline and you have a beta product and no cofounder. Do you apply or not? More seriously than this YC stuff, do you stop working on a business idea and execution because you don't have a cofounder? Or do you continue forward, constantly looking for a chance to find one?
EDIT: I see you've edited your comment to include a YET. At this point, seems like you are the one imposing a false choice here: the YC route and all other ways. There are many options and paths and most of them don't require you to pick one or the other.
(Frankly, I have qualms working with anyone who still uses hotmail... haha jk.)
Personally I would want to have the highest probability of being accepted when/if I ever apply to YC. Frankly speaking, I don't have the time to wait around for another term if I got rejected. I would dramatically shift my product/process or pitch.
YC is not a late stage venture fund who brings cash to the table. These guys are making a big bet by validating your idea/business. A rejection from YC should make you rethink your business/people/idea.
If you only try things you think have a high probability of success, then you're probably not going to embark on being an entrepreneur period. The percentages of success are very low.
Applying to YC was fairly easy and didn't take much time. There's really only upside to it. The only downside is your ego when you're rejected and the remote chance that your idea/startup would be undervalued.
I also disagree with your final notion that YC is THE yardstick for success. If you read their "whynot" post, it's obvious they go through very many applications and really your idea could be skimmed and rejected quite easily. Also, the companies that have come out of YC haven't ALL been successful (no discredit to those that have been).
Lastly, at such an early stage I think entrepreneurs are always thinking through changes in business/people/idea. That's just the nature of the beast whether YC accepted you or not.
I met with MTV the other day, they can't wait to use my service. And they're just one of the awesome companies that are very excited about what I'm doing ... YC is a missed opportunity but it's just one of many you can find or make for yourself.
disagree. it should push you to get market validation so that you don't rely on investors to determine whether you go forward with your business. instead, you decide whether to go forward and how to change by relying on input from paying customers.
I don't know this person's particular case but it's possible that he made significant progress on his idea between submissions.
What I'm really saying is that just because applying is so quick and easy, it should not be taken lightly. In fact I think the application process should be made a lot more difficult to attract a higher concentration.
Am I the only one feeling like this? I hold Pg and his team to a high regard. A No from him is different than any other No. So of course I would want the highest probability of acceptance when I send my pitch.
What it requires is people to take time to think their plans through very carefully and summarise them effectively. If you have this summary in your head at all times then the important part of applying will always be easy; any additional requirements would just be makework.
I also respect PG and YC crew but I don't take a "no" as being so definitive as you do, I guess. There could be many reasons as he states in whynot. Maybe you don't have the right team. Maybe they couldn't see the vision in your answers. Maybe they didn't see the market.
All 3 of those maybes are subject to change imo. In between applications, your team could've changed. The vision might have become more clear with new news from the industry. Perhaps the market is becoming more apparent due to players entering the market.
I think the "one and done" attitude is more likely to be detrimental. Just because you try more than once doesn't mean you're doing it lightly.
OTOH, if you're saying that those who think they _need_ YC for their startups to be successful should strap on some plums, then 100% agreed. ;)
for both of those subgroups of people, it makes a lot of sense.
ironically, you can only get into ycombinator if you went to stanford or other top university. hahaha... this will get refuted big time by the one or two cases where it is not true; but I'm sure it is largely true.
wow. im very cynical this evening. I shall spare you all my wrath and go to sleep now. I better go to sleep soon or I will have more enemies than Jason C pretty soon...
zzz...
1. How many questions did YC ask your team?
2. How many views did you get on your video?
3. How many unique visits to your prototype from YC?
4. How many hours before the rejection email did they last visit your site?
Ours:
1. 2 questions
2. 3 or 4 video views
3. 3 prototype visits I think
4. 2.5 hours
Somehow I'm kind of relieved that I got rejected, as the real fund raising process is kind of distracting the building of the product and business. I sort of used the YC deadline as an external event to set milestone for finishing up the website, which was mostly done now.
Don't skimp on the video next time... Its the one external thing PG says he'll (definately) look at. If they like your vid, they'll probably visit your site. I put links on the vid page to my site, I'd have to check my logs to see if they clicked them from there.
1) 0 ; 2) at least 3 ; 3) 3 (we think) ; 4) unclear
2. 7 views
3. we didn't send them a prototype
4. no idea
Anyways, I wanted to sell this to MS / Google, or make it bootstrapped and keep the profits myself. Only thing that kind of got me a little too hopeful is seeing a question from Rtm. Well, other ways it is then.
I'd love to meet up with other YC rejects who are looking for a support group-- I mean people to share ideas with. :)
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1191553
I'm located in SF. I'm sure there are lots of bright people also looking to partner with others to form a great team.
Maybe do a "Ask HN: How can I improve my team, business model, etc." and we can all crowd-source improve your idea so that another angel group would be interested in investing.
But rejection is rejection. I wouldn't try to sugar it up too much. Reality is a good teacher.
I used to be a freelance writer. You pitch people, they reject you. When asking girls out, you ask them, they reject you. If you're a salesman, you make friends and offer people help, they reject you.
Nothing wrong with being rejected. In fact, it should be a point of pride. Life is a numbers game. You have X rejections to get through to get where you are going. You got rejected. Now you have X-1. The faster you can crank the decrement loop the faster you'll reach your destination (assuming you are learning each time through the loop, of course!)
You're in a conference. The keynote speaker says something cool. You go to tweet it to your friends -- but it's longer than 140 characters. So you key it into your iPad on my app and choose to share it with your FaceBook and MySpace Friends. Over on FB and MySpace, the longer quote appears and has a link back to my web app where the quote is stored.
You're reading a political or science article. About half-way down, the author makes a really cool point -- all the ideas seem to be coming together and this text just jumps off the page. You highlight the paragraph and enter it into my app, choosing also to share it on Twitter and FB.
You're looking for something pithy to tweet or put on your FB status. You visit my app and read the latest quotes from sources all over the world, sorted and ranked especially according to your tastes. Choosing the one you like the most, you upvote it, make a comment, and choose to automatically email it and post to your status updates.
You're looking for the best of the web today. Visiting my app, quotes from much longer articles and speeches are listed, customized to your tastes. Finding one that looks especially interesting, you click the link and go to the longer article, spending 10 or 20 minutes reading the full text.
Your friend hears something incredible at a news event. He quotes the speaker, links to the video, and notifies you by using my app. You visit his quote on my app, make some comments, and vote it up. Soon you and your friend have made several comments -- other people have also joined in. Your conversation about this quote is saved for you to return to when you like.
Finally, you're reading a book on your Kindle or other device. You find a particularly interesting passage. Quickly you copy it out, tag and save it, perhaps also choosing to share it on your status update. Later on, when you are not at your e-book reader, you can visit the web site and view your quotes -- along with the comments from your social network and other folks who share your same interest.
Does that describe it well enough?
2) Better content preference learning system
I still don't know why anyone would use this when you can do all this using existing microblog services like Twitter, Posterous, or Tumblr and it's obviously already exists in social networks like Facebook and Buzz (status updates with comments).
1) Message length
2) Content preference learning system
3) Niche product
I think there could be room for single-use publishing ("I want to store and share something easily, but not make a habit of it like a blog"), but I don't think saving quotes and inspiration in the way you've described will take you places.
After all, the entire point is to have a solution to start with, which might just be a personal itch, then pivot the more you interact with customers.
The pivot is key. You and I or a hundred other folks could debate for hours the merits or drawbacks of a particular solution. The key thing here is that there is a direction that is very clear, yet also very changeable. Customer development is much more important than initial vision, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't have an initial vision.
EDIT: One of the interesting things I found looking for a partner was dealing with folks and initial visions. Either nobody could agree on one, in which case nothing could get started, or potential partners were so attached to a particular vision that it was going to impeded the required later pivot. It's hard to be motivated about something you know is wrong (to some degree)
Next you'll tell me the tag line isn't descriptive enough. Fair enough, but it goes to show that these show-and-tell startup games have a lot of room for subjective opinions.
Describing a startup using usage scenarios is not uncommon. Peter had a problem with the old description. I felt that usage scenarios would explain the most with the least amount of fuzziness, so that's how I edited it.
Don't let it get you down though.
I'm going to do an ask HN on the biggest success that YC missed out on by rejecting them, it's interesting to see who made it in spite of being rejected.
Edit: Ok, it's up: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1191566
His conclusion was that while it's fine to feel bad, you shouldn't ever feel meta-bad about it.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1192204
Of course, I'll happily continue bootstrapping, iterating designs with potential customers, and building a market. Y Combinator is just an awesome way to accelerate parts of the process, not a sole gatekeeper of the startup world.
Having said that, I am reminded of a quote from William Jennings Bryan, who told the story of a man getting kicked out a bar for the third time. The man picks himself up off the street, brushes himself off, and says "I'm beginning to think those fellows don't want me in there" (wink)
The main problem is getting distracted with funding, not finding it. I can always self-fund. People come to me to ask for help with making teams perform a lot faster. Hopefully I've built up a bit of a good reputation and that makes my phone ring. The problem is -- getting involved with other teams takes time and energy away from my own team and startup.
I'm going back home tonight so I can get back to work finally and just stop meeting people. I find something really daunting about talking to a group of people but fortunately most have been young, technical, and immediately seen value in my platform.
Another reason you shouldn't take this personally is that we know we make lots of mistakes. It's alarming how often the last group to make it over the threshold for interviews ends up being one that we fund. That means there are surely other good groups that fall just below the threshold and that we miss even interviewing.
http://ycombinator.com/whynot.html
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.
Y Combinator Staff
Are you crazy???