YC's take on Solo Founders?(See below.)

> I’ve built the MVP, validated the problem, and am close to securing mid- and large-sized B2B customers.

Take a bigger step back - if you are this far along, why do you need YC?

Paul Graham from "The 18 mistakes that kill startups": #1 Single Founder

  Have you ever noticed how few successful startups were founded by just one person? Even companies you think of as having one founder, like Oracle, usually turn out to have more. It seems unlikely this is a coincidence.

  What's wrong with having one founder? To start with, it's a vote of no confidence. It probably means the founder couldn't talk any of his friends into starting the company with him. That's pretty alarming, because his friends are the ones who know him best.

  But even if the founder's friends were all wrong and the company is a good bet, he's still at a disadvantage. Starting a startup is too hard for one person. Even if you could do all the work yourself, you need colleagues to brainstorm with, to talk you out of stupid decisions, and to cheer you up when things go wrong.

  The last one might be the most important. The low points in a startup are so low that few could bear them alone. When you have multiple founders, esprit de corps binds them together in a way that seems to violate conservation laws. Each thinks "I can't let my friends down." This is one of the most powerful forces in human nature, and it's missing when there's just one founder.

From: https://paulgraham.com/startupmistakes.html

Edit: also he writes in "What we look for in founders":

  5. Friendship

  Empirically it seems to be hard to start a startup with just one founder. Most of the big successes have two or three. And the relationship between the founders has to be strong. They must genuinely like one another, and work well together. Startups do to the relationship between the founders what a dog does to a sock: if it can be pulled apart, it will be.

I was wondering the same thing recently and noticed PG recently replied to a post about more startups being founded by Solo Founders as "marketing".

I've always had the impression they are very cautious about it.

https://x.com/paulg/status/1876000096732733791

This is not a trend. It's just Carta marketing people trying to cultivate a new market.

There have always been a huge number of bootstrapped, single-founder companies. What matters is how common they are among the most successful companies, not how common they are overall.

What do you think would be a good way for solo founders to stand out from the crowd? I understand their points are valid, and I believe mine are too. It feels like both YC and solo founders could be missing out on great win-win opportunities. How can solo founders compensate for the lack of a co-founder to balance things out?

I understand it’s more challenging, and we likely need to demonstrate more at the company level compared to startups with co-founders to get accepted into YC. But there has to be a way to overcome the negative perception of not having a co-founder. Any thoughts on what that might be?

I think they want traction from solo founders so if I were you I would apply. Maybe say you are not against finding a cofounder if it comes to that.

The most famous example I know of is Dropbox. They invested in him without a co-founder but he found one before starting YC.

Hopefully others who actually know can shed more light.

Thanks. I am not against having a co-founder, I would love to have a co-founder, as long as they are the right person.

i’d worry more about getting your application read, you ever go through a folder with 18,000 resumes in it? you fog out after like 3. recommendations are the answer to this

This! Yes, I hired in the past with some positions having close to 1k applications. That's exactly why I am trying to understand their point on this. I am pretty much doing what I would expect from an applicant myself.