Hacker News Reader

Comment by __loam | Hacker News Reader

Putting inexperienced kids with good credentials who are amenable to listening to a board in charge of these things is part of the yc business model.

View on HN

YC is looking for people who have high agency and can back their own judgement. All the most successful founders fit this profile.

In fairness young people can have high agency, back their own judgements, and have grit, perseverance, et al. and still lack experience and be more easily influenced by perceived mentors than they might be a decade later in their career paths.

With no disrespect to YC, of course.

Sure but the founders who will generate the greatest returns for investors are the ones who won’t be pushed around by boards. Facebook’s board advised Mark Zuckerberg to take Yahoo’s $1B offer in 2006 [1]. He was 22 years old. He refused, and Meta is now valued at nearly $2T. That’s the kind of founder that the most ambitious startup investors are looking for.

[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/an-ugly-truth-mark-zuckerber...

Sure but one example is a point in the cloud of all responses, granted the cloud tips toward a particular part of a large multi variate space.

Unless ... your point is that all YC founders are homogeneous interchangeable cyborgs? ( surely not ).

We’re discussing the cynical assertion that YC is looking for founders who will be compliant and subservient to boards. I’m just pointing out that if there is any defining quality in the kinds of founders that an investor like YC is looking for, it’s that they are not compliant and subservient to anyone, including or especially boards :)

When pg and others talk about the qualities they look for in founders, they use terms like “formidable” and “force of nature”.

As someone who has worked with many boards and execs, I cannot tell how wrong this way of looking at the world is.

Execs universally love working with people who maximize proactivity and strong opinions. The opposite of what you think.

Yes we know execs are going to drink as much kool-aid as they need to to join this group of people and they'll probably love the process, especially when they're getting sweetheart liquidity deals earlier than everyone else at these firms.

I'm not really concerned with that. I'm more interested in the aggregate effect of putting a significant amount of the industry in the hands of a few ignorant twenty somethings and the small group of wealthy people from the bay area who are on all these boards. That is a frightening level of power concentrated in the hands of a small and anti-democratic structure.

> Execs universally love working with people who maximize proactivity and strong opinions.

Only if they share the same strong opinions.

I hear, "You're the expert, we're paying you a lot, tell us what to do" often!

But what if what to do isn't what they want to do…

YC doesn't take board seats.

edit: removed snarky attack

> You don't know what you're talking about.

Please don’t comment like this on HN. Your point would carry more weight without the snarky personal attack.

Noted.

Many thanks!

a "board" presumably like a "medical school acceptance board" and not a corpo board

Just 7% ownership while being one of the most important pipelines for early investment opportunities in the valley, which has extensive relationships with the people who will be on the boards. Additionally, YC might not take board seats, but its ceo certainly does.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com