Ask PG: Isn't it too late, historically speaking, to apply?
Imagine that you have 50 concise filled in forms with 1 minute videos attached, behind each of which are two-three personalities, and you have to choose 1 group who has this unique amalgam of traits which will allow them to devise, build, grow, and run a successful tech company. To what extent your decision will be a product of a well-grounded analysis or at least reasonable hunch and what will be the share of mere chance in it? Is there a limit of this share after which we can be saying that the process is largely arbitrary? Or the original rule that all YC founders read all applications and then find common denominator is no longer in power?
But then OK, you're an applicant and you've been admitted. A class of 80 teams is a hell lot of people. And if you're smart, you applied not only for the money, ties or VCs' attention. When it started YC' tiny team were litereally mentors for the startups hand-crafting and guiding them gradually translating to the would-be startupers their experience, skills and wisdom which you cannot read in a book. Now a crowd of sturtups is baked simultaneously with dozens of YC alumni involved. But honestly speaking, you'd wish to learn in a mild pace from Paul Graham, not from his apprentices. Judging by the figures YC has never been more successful and one can say hence there never been a better moment to join. And maybe you'll indeed make a lot of smart friends, participate in a line of dinners with speakers, get serious VCs' attention and even money. But can you be sure that you'll get everything that Drew Houston got which made Dropbox possible in the old days? And is there a limit of class size and all the surrounding ado after which all this might become pointless?