Y Combinator S12 Demo Day Batch 1
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
I don't think I see where you're coming from, actually. Do you object to YC investing in 9gag because:
It won't be a successful investment, aka make money for its investors
OR: It might be a successful investment, but if so it's only because they bamboozled someone. It won't ever make much money, though someone might acquire it (or it might IPO).
OR: It will be a successful investment, but it's trash as a product.
OR: It will be a successful investment, and it's OK as a product for some people, but it's not innovative enough
OR: something else? You mention a lot of things, but what's the core reason you object?
Or more closely: It might be a successful investment, but I think it's trash as a product and it's not innovative. I am not convinced it will make money legitimately. I'm not saying anyone will get bamboozled, but I could see a momentum-fueled, top-arc sale that makes someone some money at the expense of someone else being left holding yesterdays news.
Also, the part about "you see where I'm coming from" was strictly relating to Facebook being a massively successful product, yet horrible for stock holders... considering the stock is basically in the toilet. In the "make money for investors" category, Facebook is hardly a success.
2) It's pretty clear how 9gag makes money: paid placements. Unlike reddit it doesn't appear to have a strong anti-commercial taboo. If it can grow big enough, it will make money. Remember: Facebook is already quite profitable (by the billions!) just not profitable enough to justify at $100 billion valuation yet. So this objection makes no sense to me.
3) Facebook was a HUGE success from the point of view of pretty much every investor except people who bought for the "pop" right after the IPO. Every VC investor in Facebook did great. Maybe they IPO'd above their true value, but it's still a $40 billion company. That's larger than 99.99% of all companies that get started. So I really don't get where you're coming from here at all.
[1] Specifically, it is image-only, presents the images inline, and uses Facebook likes and comments instead of native ones.
ok. we can can disagree. I never intended to convince you of anything. have I failed? lol
Given reddit's success, YC certainly has historical data to know that this type of business can be successful.
BufferBox solves a real pain point for me (to the point I was thinking about setting up something similar here in Uruguay, but I don't have the cash).
And Double would be great for everybody who can't afford to travel constantly for meetings (both time AND money), though face-to-face meetings aren't going away anytime soon (too much off-band communication, relationship building, etc..).
Deleted comment
For starters any startup that pens itself as "A Pinterest for..." or "A Reddit for..." I wonder what is going through the minds of any investor or person who thinks these are legitimate ideas for websites trying to mirror the success of other sites by doing nothing new.
One of the startups that almost didn't make it into YC, "Bufferbox" is probably the best startup by far YC have opted to support. As for the others, most will fail because they're nothing exciting.
(I don't know if there are grounds for a trademark infringement nastygram from Eventbrite, given they're in the same space.)