Yes, I think YC is almost always worth it. Even as a founder who has raised VC and exited previously I found it to be worthwhile.
The optimum path for all startups is to either bootstrap entirely or bootstrap up until the Series A where your negotiation position is the strongest because you know your unit economics and can demonstrate clear product-market fit.
Of course many startups may simply not be able to bootstrap. But equally there are many startups who could but choose the YC/VC track because of cargo culting, naivety or ignorance of all of the issues that it comes with e.g. dilution and the low percentage of startups making it to Series-A.
I would argue that most founders instead of emulating Stripe, Airbnb etc should look to florists, bakeries, ecommerce sites etc and learn the fundamentals for growing a business in a cost-effective and sustainable way. And then decide after they have a successful lifestyle business whether YC/VC will take them to the next level.
I think it might help to remember the investment strategy VC firms have. No matter how you structure a startup, it is more likely than not to fail; that's what companies do. The winners in an investment portfolio have to pay for the losers, which mean the winners have to pay big. And funds themselves have lifespans; for several reasons, they need to reach an answer on investments within a set timespan.
I think not raising money at all is a great strategy, and when it's viable, it's probably always superior. But if you're going to raise at all, slogging it out on pure sweat equity isn't a great way to build up credibility for an A-round. It might have been in 1999, but I don't think it is now; now, I think if you want to raise an A-round, the happy path is to raise a syndicated seed round first, and clearing the way for that seed round is probably one of the 3 biggest things you get out of YC.
I was suggesting you were judging the likely 2022-2025 funding environment based on 2011-2022 (March). I think startups will be better served, where they can, to bootstrap for the next two years than making plans that require funding to get started.
Reasonable men may differ but you have been at this for a while and experienced the dotcom boom, the meltdown, 2008, and the post 2011 boom.
VC funded is more likely to hit a 1B exit
Depends on goals….
And yes I chose bootstrap.
There have only been a few VC backed companies that had billion dollar exits...only a few dozen that have even had profitable exits...which is about the same number of VC backed companies that have actually achieved profitability (but there is little overlap between these two groups)
Bootstrapped companies are more likely to survive, and thrive, than VC-backed companies. You just don't here about them much because they've got realistic business plans, and that's not sexy to read about.
You can bootstrap until Series A at which point you can decide what direction to go. Either a successful lifestyle business or a bigger VC backed business. But you can't choose if you take YC/Seed.
And you are more likely as a founder to acquire life changing wealth with a lifestyle business than a VC one.