YC is doing a first ever Fall batch – applications due by 8/27
ycombinator.com
ycombinator.com
So I went through and applied for the first time, and honestly, I felt like a lot of the questions were very obvious? Could be because I come from a finance / business background vs. a CS background, but I was shocked that people would consider these questions non-obvious.
Hopefully this doesn't come off as arrogant. If it helps, I was rejected from YC, so perhaps I hadn't thought through the questions enough!
Unless you are already well-informed, well-connected, and well-resourced, it seems like a no-brainer.
(1) Education (2) Connections (3) Near-guaranteed seed fundraising
And two of those three you keep even if you don't wind up succeeding.
I think I'll just keep working on my side projects. They'll never be billion dollar ideas, and that's ok...
But in general, yes - VCs give something and it costs something, like almost everything else in life and certainly in business. It's your job as an entrepreneur to decide if that money is "worth it". Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't. In the end, just like borrowing money, it's a tool that you have to decide on as an entrepreneur. It's a big decision, maybe one of the biggest at first, but one of many thousands of decisions you have to make every day.
Yeah! That's totally ok.
But YC's business model is funding companies which will be that big. Otherwise it can't work.
Many other VCs that have survived for that long have a huge IPO under their belt, like Google or Uber. The best in the YC portfolio are probably Stripe, Dropbox, and Coinbase. These are great companies and great exits, but don't support 1000+ $0 failures. They do deliver the goods if your failures have a ~0% return rather than a -100% return.
That is a good thing for you if you want to learn how to grow a company, though, because it is a great sign that YC actually works as an education opportunity.
Am surprised not to see Airbnb on the list tbh.
So I think it's a way better deal than you're representing here.
I would suggest to you that the top YC companies often are the ones who get the least from YC. This is also almost confirmed by the many YouTube videos that YC puts out where they say things along those lines. These companies do everything right while with YC, and they continue to do everything right well past YC (as I understand it, YC is not all that helpful past series C).
> Many of those companies would have been worth plenty without YC.
How would you know this?
Are there many companies that got accepted by YC, turned them down, and got as big as the average YC company?
Counterfactuals like this are famously hard to prove, and even the statistic you want does not prove it.
I don't really want to waste time applying for funding though. I went through a phase where I was spending a lot of time on just trying to get feedback.
Aside from a few friends saying ohh neat, I didn't really get a response. Indie games aren't really billion dollar prospects...
For anyone not in the know about the music industry, "A&R" means:
> Artists and repertoire... It refers to the department of a record company that is in charge of talent scouting and the creative development of recording artists.Yes, and also like book publishers.
- startup school
- hackernews
- safe and other legal docs
- + all the content
Then there's bookface and the internal software.
YC has the greatest business model in the world with (I'm assuming) top returns and seems like it would be so easy for any VC to copy it (write great software and give away useful things to entrepreneurs) and instead, 99% of VCs do Squarespace landing pages instead.
https://www.techstars.com/blog
Don't forget Stanford.
Or was this just supposed to be snarky?
What we know for sure is they don't accept founders that don't fill out the form[1].
[1] with a few exceptions, perhaps.
I vote for P because it's the second letter of Spring and it goes with printemps and primavera.
and then the loop will be: nsfw
The rejection email was quite thoughtful and helpful. I applied twice after that but didn’t get an interview. Fingers crossed for this one.
Why I’m applying?
1. Been a daily reader for HN for the last 10 years. Seen companies going from “Launch HN” to be a hugely successful within years.
2. As I’m not from the US, getting accepted would mean I will have at least warm intros to US VCs and build a good network.
3. Being through the YC school back in 2021, then bootstrapping for a year and a half, then joining another startup as a CTO, I started realizing how good YC advice is. Some people like me had to go through it practically to understand the value of YC videos.
Here is what that means to my ears:
1) I joined as cofounder. Cofounder can and do take whatever title they want. Great!
2) I joined at CTO because there are 500 engineers and it needs an office of the CTO. Let’s not call it a startup, and YC has nothing to offer you. Great!
3) I joined a small startup and they gave me the CTO title. Yikes!
Bad signal. Don’t have much confidence in the CEO after hearing that and I assume the company will fold.
Or if it succeeds—prepare to be fired. No room to hire above you. Even as a VP, a CEO could hire a CTO. But even better if no title inflation at all. No one like a demotion, so if you aren’t perfect then you are gone. And you will take a lot of (now dead) equity with you.
I guess YC would teach you these things…
But also, some of these things seem like secret knowledge, but shouldn’t be.
A hired CTO at a startup is often really a tech lead. Not always. Better to use a vague “head of xyz” in such cases. Vague and easily transformed.
You see second and third time founders do that.
Title inflation is fun and cheaper than cash. But not really transferable.
For example, I had a friend, which was a founder CTO and a team of 15 and wanted to be a director at Facebook.
I asked him how he would deal with leveling questions for other managers and their engineers. His company hadn’t implemented ladders yet (no need at that size) and had no idea what I was talking about.
What are leveling questions and ladders?
and then how do you hire / fire / promote / retain those people?
when you're working at the VP and CTO level of a big org that's something you think about.
especially when you're transitioning from a small startup where everyone's title is made up, to a 100-300+ body org with real structure and organization.
A leveling question is a promotion question: you believe that you deserve to be at a different level and this a different pay range.
A additional wrinkle: When a company initially does leveling, there is a lot of jockeying for the right one, and not everyone may quite fit (a lower level than your salary implies).
Related - what can you expect in terms of credits if you're not part of YC? Whether going solo/bootstrapping or another incubator?
Also, those same credit deals are offered to most "serious" startups, including those with backing from any VC.
AWS gives $100k ($400k for AI).
GCP gives $200k ($350k for AI).
Azure gives $150k.
They'll happily give out six figures in exchange for making millions.
To follow up, in practice these credits are available for any VC-backed startup. (This is a business decision... they know you have financial means + appetite to spend big in the future.)
There are some credits available to any new startup, but much less.
Do I still get the 375k$ and if so, how many shares do they get for it or is it included in the 7% already? Or do I only get 125k$ initially for 7% and the 375k$ later when there is a next round?
I am a noob in the startup world, but this feels like YC could be abused to get "easy money" while in reality the founders never intend to scale the company beyond that / hope for organic growth.
Can someone explain, please? Thank you!
The strongest argument for YC is how few alums speak out against it. Almost all of the negative comments come from people who haven't done the program.
I think YC has merit, but I'm just going to push back on this particular logic:
1. The set of people who've done X is already selected for people who were willing to do X in the first place.
2. In business, burning bridges with an influential network in which you have an in... forfeits some advantage, and probably invites a lot of downside.
(On #2, an occasional person might decide it's a matter of principle, or, less-principled, do the math and decide they can get more individual brand mileage out of saying something provocatively negative. But that seems unlikely and rare. Related dynamics we've seen might help our intuition: how Hollywood almost universally shielded abusers for so long, and how it's very rare for a student wronged by a prestigious alma mater university to go public about it.)
So I think there are stronger arguments for YC.
Claiming that all human opinions are fake and based on self-interest is a very cynical view. Besides you could apply the same logic to big tech companies, or elite universities, or whatever, but there are plenty of Xooglers who say the company went to shit, or Harvard grads who say they regret the student debt.
Are you sure this is the case? Might it be that alums who speak out against YC suffer repercussions?
I praise 90% of what YC does. But I also call them out on their mistakes. https://x.com/garrytan blocks me, which is, I'm sad to report, the smallest of the repercussions they've taken against me.
I love YC, but they need to grow some thicker skin and quit hiding in their Silicon Valley bubble.
YC = YCensornator.
Don't give me the B.S. about "HN != YC". We all know that's mostly untrue.
I’m not sure, it’s a feeling I got after I tried applying. Their rejection response was quite short.
Very interesting. So unless it’s purely software and the $current bandwagon, then it’s out? Better not to try then. As an engineer, all my ideas involve hardware and robotics too. Sure, software is there, but it’s definitely not the only thing.
1. If you sell dev tools or sell to startups, YC gives you a great captive market in your peer group. They are also highly motivated to make "you scratch my back, I scratch yours deals."
2. If you have no connections to VC or a spotty resume, but your team is highly motivated, YC gives you those connections and overcomes the resume.
3. If you don't care that much about your success in this particular company but want to be a serial founder, being ex-YC is good.
4. If you are not self-motivated, it may be your only hope of developing the habits you need.
Otherwise, ~10% for $500k is probably a bad deal, especially for an AI company or a company with any traction at all.
Applied late once to YC with an idea (not a great one) and got rejected, probably because of solo founding.
For most likely a pre-seed company surely it's pretty good?
> Otherwise, ~10% for $500k is probably a bad deal, especially for an AI company or a company with any traction at all.
So it seems.
Yes. In general there are hidden details but what those specifically are, I can't tell you.
I can speak freely since I was expelled from YC.
# Background
I did YC twice, in 2008 and 2009. YC invested ~$15,000 in both startups. I don't keep a close eye on it, but I think nowadays they give you 33.3333x as much money.
My first startup we shut down. I didn't know what I was doing. My co-founder was smarter and went on to do multiple successful companies, I think a couple funded by YC.
My second company got acqui-hired by Microsoft in 2014. YC got $0 since it was only 3 people and YC was our only investor and it wasn't worth it to do a stock acquisition, especially since the Seahawks had just won the Superbowl and the Microsoft Biz Dev folks were in a good mood.
I felt relieved I could at least "pay back" YC, but PG was aghast when I emailed him that: "You don't have to pay back YC. I'd be horrified if I thought you were even thinking about that. We expect to lose money on most of our investments. The small number of big hits compensate-- more than compensate. So don't worry about us at all. Just go work on interesting things. Good luck, --pg"
Ignore how he dresses, the guy is a class act.
# As to the Hidden Details
There's a lot of secrets with YC.
Back in the early days when I was just one of the first HackerNews users, I logged into the site and saw I had "One New Message". WTF?
HN did not have a messaging system.
Or so I thought.
In fact, HN had a secret messaging system that PG used to communicate with promising hackers.
From that point on I was a guest in YC's secret hotel, but never got invited up to the Penthouse.
YC has a lot of hidden tools. I am now on the shittier version of HackerNews that the public has access to (since I got expelled). There's a cooler version with extra features that you get access to if you're in the club.
YC has secret ratings and reviews of all investors worldwide; a huge thing called "Bookface" with all sorts of helpful tools for startups, etc.
They don't really share anything about their returns. They are not like Warren Buffet, who writes a detailed letter explaining the returns each year.
Knowledge is compartmentalized a lot of knowledge between partners, batches, LPs, favorite startups, et cetera.
Now, there are legitimate reasons for doing this.
First, it's obviously a huge competitive advantage, and IMO these tools and this information is likely worth far more than the $500K they give your startup.
Second, YC/their portfolio is _constantly_ under attack from forces all over the world. That's what happens when you are the GOAT and fund so many Unicorns. People all over the world come after you and your portfolio companies. Tom Brady is a hero in Boston and Tampa but the most vile villain in 94% of cities with NFL teams. You get paid the big bucks not to enjoy the love, but to endure the hate.
Anyway, so what specifically are the hidden details? I don't know. Like I said I was never invited up to the Penthouse. But I do know they are more than comfortable to keep secrets. Secrecy does not seem to bother them.
Don't take my word for it. Here's JL: "Some of the most useful things I've learned about startups over the years are also things I'd never share publicly." [0]
If they are holding back "the most useful things", what are they giving us? Why should we trust them?
[0] https://foundersatwork.posthaven.com/the-sound-of-silence
P.S. I love YC and highly recommend it. I give them sht because I've always given them sht, because I always want them to be improving.
Or is the purpose of YC to seed fund to create a blossoming privately-owned product?
I look at a software company like McNeel or Dassault that outlasts dozens of IPOS... from what I see of YC, I don't get the vibe these are even comparable.
1. People will steal some of your good ideas. I interviewed with YC back in 2021 where I discussed some unique marketing strategy that had not yet been done in my space. Very suspiciously, I was rejected, yet some large YC companies working in adjacent spaces immediately started implementing that exact specific idea over the next few months. It's possible that was a coincidence, but the timing was very suspect, especially since I was explicitly told during the interview "you have good ideas, but a large team could do this better". And so I'm pretty sure they stole my ideas and gave them to larger teams on the YC portfolio. Beware!
2. It's just a massive distraction if you can actually go it alone. Sam Altman famously said earlier this year, it's only a matter of time before there is a billion dollar company run by a single person with AI. I used to say that back in 2021 even before ChatGPT was released. For many types of SaaS companies which could effectively just be a single person, there is no need for funding, networking, or anything else except writing code and talking to customers. Everything else is just a distraction. YC advice is free on the internet. Vinod Khosla said many investors bring negative value to the companies they invest it.
3. The Silicon Valley groupthink bubble. I laugh at some of the nonsense that comes out of SV, but it doesn't matter to them because there is so much money sloshing around SV that as long as you can attract money by playing their high school popularity contest, you are validated. No matter if there is no substance to your idea. YC companies should count their actual revenue as not including money that comes from other YC companies because it is suspicious if your “product” only matters to people with VC money to splurge. For me, the ultimate test of a good idea is if people are willing to give you their OWN hard-earned money.
4. I, personally, don't do well under intense competition and social pressure. My best ideas and most productive spurts of my life have been when I don't feel pressure to grow, but I work out of a sense of enjoyment in the craft and wanting to solve people's problems that I care about. I have a feeling that YC is one intense pressure cooker, and I'd most likely die there.
With such a surprise short deadline, we're not on the same continent at the moment. Is there any stigma attached to doing the application video remotely on eg. Zoom?
I always assumed that being together to record the video was just better.
AI thing is almost over for now. Need to hop on the next thing. Unfortunately, I have no clue what it could be.
How long did you think cryptocurrency would last, and how come it's still going?
Maybe 2% actual proper evaluation?
Applied twice in the past. Got 1 interview and 2 rejections. But, this is the best traction I've ever had so I hope third time's the charm.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jOYX2pgTZk
When I came across their twitter post about this, I was a bit taken aback. I think it is AI, but I can't tell that easily. I've seen Dalton and Michael videos so the facial expressions and cadence are off, but maybe I'm just seeing things? Anyway, no judgement on the use of AI or anything, just wondering if I'm correct.
EDIT:
A thing trained on all the YC applications, the posts about success and failure with a success recommender/dark-pattern/gap-areas/ideas-previously-not-possible-till-AI etc would be a really interesting data to query.
And have it spit out the recommendations for parody based on all the techno-babble encapsulated.
For Fun & Profit.
Funny thing is, I didn’t even want to hear back - I just like to fill out the application as a writing exercise, to help me get a snapshot of my own thinking around what I’m building.
I guess it’s stressful reading all those applications, but why respond if all you have to say is “I don’t believe you”? Silence will do just fine; I’m aware that people don’t believe me - it’s called a startup, right?
(Anyways, nbd, apologies for the tangential rant, love the website)
You admittedly wasted their time with an unserious application "as a writing exercise," and you're upset because they actually took it seriously and took the time to properly respond to it with honesty instead of giving you a cookie-cutter rejection?
That’s not what he said.
The response was about 2 sentences long.
Then maybe their response was spot on. You’re already making revenue. Get back to it.
Maybe you’re making it loud and clear you’re not a good fit for the program.
> I didn’t even want to hear back - I just like to fill out the application as a writing exercise, to help me get a snapshot of my own thinking around what I’m building.
When someone submits an application to YC, asking to be considered, do you think it's reasonable for YC to expect that submission to be in good faith -- that the person would like to pursue next steps if YC is interested?
Do you think they sensed that your application wasn't a genuine application, and that affected their response?
> got a less-than-thoughtful response bordering on personally insulting (“TL;DR - why don’t you go back to your day job?”)
Is that a literal quote of something someone responded to you, or is it an interpretation of the gist of the response?
Maybe YC will use an llm to write nice letters to make people feel better. Couldn’t hurt. Well, actually… might need proofreading!
The fact that you got a specific message indicates that someone at YC saw potential in your application and was hoping to help you improve it. The subtext of those messages is "help us get to yes".
In my experience they would never say things like "why don't you go back to your day job" or "I don't believe you" or anything in that ballpark. That's just not the culture of how YC treats founders—quite the opposite. Besides that, insulting applicants would obviously go against YC's own interests.
I appreciate the insider perspective; my faith in YC was exactly why I was so dumbfounded. Me and my cofounder spent quite a bit of time speculating, and wrote a substantial, thoughtful response. Ignored and rejected.
I wanna make clear again that I’m not bitter about this, it was just odd. And counterproductive.
I think that's quite rude and disrespectful in itself. People do actually need to read that, and think about it, and then maybe provide feedback on it.
Of course applying conveys no obligation to follow through and you can always change your mind, but if you never intend to do so, then you shouldn't be applying.
Kind of a shit time to be away from family or school. Lots of stuff happens between September and December.
I've been gobsmacked with how many amazing things people are doing.
I'm working on mine, but way too far away for this round.
Note to the submitter, HN FAQ says:
> Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize.
Wait....
All I can glean from this is that joining a YC Batch gives you access to a time machine.