Hacker News Reader

Comment by greatpostman | Hacker News Reader

Wonder if this is related to the current down turn in risk assets and the venture capital blow up

I find it almost impossible to not see them as related. Take a look at [0]. Long-term this could be a good decision, I believe early-stage investing really is different to late-stage investment, but of course the moment to make this decision makes it evident there are other factors at play that influence this.

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35114009

Changes of this sort cannot happen in a very short amount of time. The timing was coincidental.

I have made changes with other C-level employees in under 30m which had more than 30m of impact.

Can you explain how that would not be the case here? Not understanding how this timing is “coincidental”, it doesn’t appear to be that way at all.

The timing does make that almost impossible! But if you want the actual connected edge in the directed graph I believe it's https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32637686.

Hmm, that does make sense. The other comment here said that this kind of change is almost impossible to happen is such as short amount of time, which makes sense. Maybe they were already planning for a change in strategy by the new CEO, and this just happened to be an appropriate time to get done with the change already.

edit: Oh well the other commenter was the new CEO LOL, not used to reading usernames. I guess that adds a bit of bias but I believe it's a true statement.

It's not, this is about making YC awesome for early stage founders right at the beginning.

YC does early stage well. Spreading out focus and capital over other stages takes energy away from this.

Other firms already have a good grasp of late stage and it'd be a battle for YC to improve over this.

Maybe YC can return to late stage later when the environment changes.

It's not—my understanding is that it's been in the works for quite a bit longer than that.

I don't think the timing is random considering the climate. I have a feeling these seventeen will land softly compared to 99.9% of those caught up in recent layoffs.

"current down turn in risk assets" is almost as wonderful a phrase as "17 team members were impacted". The fact is that SIVB shares are now worth $0, and that many VCs and LPs were surely holding those can't be a total coincidence with today's "changes".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com