Y Combinator Looks for Outliers | Hacker News Reader

Y Combinator Looks for Outliers

ginzametrics.com

115 pointsrgrieselhuber26 comments

I find this "where you went to school" concept to be the most contentious aspect of YC selection. I'd be interested to see some numbers on how many YC founders are from the "top-tier" schools vs. other places. Maybe that should be the next data point for YCPages.info; I certainly don't want to run the numbers myself.

I wouldn't say I'm embarrassed by where I went to school, but I certainly don't like to tell anyone about it.

I think many people feel the same.

My advice: if you think you lack in some areas of the application, you need to make up for it in others. For example, if you didn't go to a top-tier school, you might make up for that by having some projects that have traction.

My co-founder and I came from Arizona State University (we also dropped out).

ASU is probably not even ranked in the top 40 for engineering or computer science however Y Combinator judged us correctly. (I hope!)

It's what you've accomplished and your personality that likely makes the difference. For example, you can come from MIT but if you're not committed to building a company and it shows in your attitude you will likely not be accepted.

I wouldn't be surprised if the statistics showed people are from more top-tier schools. People in Y Combinator are probably extremely competitive, intelligent, and/or ambitious people. Why wouldn't they strive to go to the best schools?

Don't worry, where you went to school doesn't matter at all. I asked pg the same question: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1995879

Turns out a significant majority of YC founders(80% or so) didn't go to top tier schools.

I don't think saying 80% or so of YC founders didn't go to top-tier schools means schools don't matter- I haven't seen the data on the applicant pool which is obviously relevant to this, but to me it seems like if 20% are coming from top-tier schools that's a much higher % than the pool of say, HNers that went to top-tier schools.

Of course this could simply be because the applicant pool has 20% applicants coming from top-tier schools and there is no bias in who is picked, but just saying that "80% or so didn't go to top tier schools" doesn't mean much without context.

And of course, in theory those that went to top tier schools should make better candidates, but that doesn't necessarily mean they have an advantage in the interview process because they went to a top tier school, rather that person is just more likely to be a motivated/intelligent individual.

(All generalizations up for debate, of course- merely pointing out that the 80% figure isn't exactly solid evidence for the point).

Our team had a college dropout, someone who went to a pretty weak liberal arts collect (me), and someone who went to a good state school.

I find this "where you went to school" concept to be the most contentious aspect of YC selection.

It shouldn't be contentious because it doesn't matter. It's nothing like as important as the answer to the "most impressive thing you've built or achieved" question. When I'm reading through applications, the school a founder went to barely registers. I'm more interested in whether they've clearly explained what they're doing and whether they seem determined enough to pull it off.

Given the increasing number of applications you have to look at, wouldn't it make sense to omit questions whose answers barely register?

Where you went to school is only a problem if you are determined to make it a problem for yourself.

It is also worth mentioning that Techstars, besides 500 startups, is also a good program. Don't kid yourself though: they are all as picky (if not more) as YC. And as rmorrison said[1]: If you think you need YC to succeed, then you won't (and shouldn't) be accepted

[1]http://blog.rmorrison.org/advice-for-yc-applicants-on-the-fe...

'If you think you need YC to succeed, then you won't (and shouldn't) be accepted'. This is very well put. I think to improve the chances of successfully creating something, keeping these in mind may help: 1. You should not believe that your circumstances are different even when it really is. Otherwise it becomes an excuse while the converse will help you push the limits. 2. You try to create something not because you want to be well-known or rich but rather you want to improve something (for yourself, etc.) or you believe there is no other better way to spend you time. You'll be less disappointed and more driven.

I would love to know how you supported 2 kids on a YC budget? Thats the biggest reason I don't apply. I have one kid on the way and must without a doubt provide for that kid.

At Tipjoy, we raised a "friends & family" round at the same time as YC. My mom lived with us during YC to help out with our 8 month old.

Little known fact, actually.

My co-founder had two kids -- he moved his family into a cheap rental in Nebraska while we did YC out here. He ate into his savings. We put stuff on credit cards. We had to be hyperfocused on early revenue. It was stressful as hell for him (and no picnic for me, either), but it worked out in the end.

The thing is, we were so driven to build a company that we had to find a way to make it work. At that point I couldn't imagine working for someone else (and neither could he) so we were willing to make big bets.

(Incidentally, with the StartFund money, things should be much easier for YC Founders who have families.)

It sounds like our situation was similar to Seeing Interactive. We had some personal savings, we lived in a cramped apt. in Mountain View, had a little revenue early on.

I've been selling Ginzametrics months before it was even ready, just to make sure people were going to even pay for it, which turned out to be a good thing.

Great write-up. Small edits:

So, the point is, sometimes it’s going to suck and sometimes it’s going to be awesome

edited: So, the point is, this second it’s going to suck and the next second it’s going to be awesome

They want to know who else is in and will often drag entrepreneurs along for weeks waiting to make a decision, simply because they are waiting for everybody else.

edited: They want to know who else is in and will often drag entrepreneurs along for months waiting to make a decision, simply because they are waiting for everybody else.

Thanks.:-) Was in a rush before a meeting. Will update later.

It doesn’t even matter if you don’t have a co-founder.

Any additional thoughts on this? "You really, really, really should get a co-founder" seems to be the standard response, but I'd really, really like to hear that it isn't an accept-or-reject issue.

The point is that it's not the thing that matters.

In the interview, if you hear that you didn't get in and the fact that you're single a founder is one of the reasons, then there is empirically another, additional reason because there are single founders in every batch.

Glad to hear that, thanks.

Being myself a summer applicant sans co-founder, it's important to differentiate between having a co-founder and wanting a co-founder. If you didn't want a co-founder, that would probably be an issue (it's way too risky to put the entire load of a start-up on one person). But not being able to find a suitable co-founder is another story. It's not something to rush into just so you can say you have one.

Also, sometimes you might know someone who would be the best co-founder, but they just aren't in a position to be a co- founder (family, other commitments etc). But, you can still have them assist as mentors. I think a strong single founder with a good group of mentors could be as good as 2 founders. Also, at a later stage, that mentor might find themselves in a position to join the venture.

as i tend to see it: life is half chance. you toss a coin, it comes out heads half the time, tails the other half. all you can do is enjoy what you're doing and know you'll have a terrific story at the end.

The gist of this article seems to be you should not worry, just apply, which I kind of agree. If you are having second thoughts, here is a slight nudge. Even if you fail, I believe each time you apply for some funding, filling in the application forms pushes you to think more and challenges your ideas, which inevitable leads to improvement or even discovery of new areas to work on.

Great article, it helped a lot!

Great advice, thanks for posting. Good to know they consider sole-founders. I know its rare and probably getting more rare considering the talent pool of applicants out there.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com