Hacker News Reader

Comment by jacobian | Hacker News Reader

Y'know, I think that most of the time what looks like a coincidence is, in fact, a coincidence.

YC lists about 70 startups, and TechStars about 20. I think with that many companies coincidence is more or less guaranteed -- a sort of weird permutation on the birthday paradox. Or, put another way, there's 1400 "pairs" of startups between these two first, and 3 coincidences. Hardly damning evidence in my book.

Further, the startups in question seem like fairly obvious given the current tech climate. Geolocation is an increasingly big deal these days, as is local, high-quality food. And who doesn't want better comments on their blogs?

Remember: all else being equal, the simplest explanation is probably correct.

View on HN

I believe both Foodoro/Foodzie and Disqus/IntenseDebate are coincidences, at least at the level of the idea. Loopt/Brightkite I don't know about.

If anyone saw the applications we get, they'd be more inclined to assume coincidence as the default explanation. It's not unusual to get 5 applications proposing basically the same idea.

Incidentally, we've funded 118 startups, not 70. The FAQ only lists the ones that are launched.

I'm extremely sorry if this blog post came across as rude; it was just one of those passing observations I thought I'd document.

What I wanted to highlight is - there are several seed stage venture funds around now, and one must be a tad careful lest they disclose to too many entities.

I did edit the title as one member found it inflammatory and called it linkbait.

Not so much rude as irresponsible. The more serious the accusation, the more evidence you ought to have before making it.

Other YC-like organizations have done various moderately dubious things over the years, but there's no evidence any of them have done anything so serious as stealing applicants' ideas.

But it wasn't an accusation at all.

I've written clearly that both venture funds under discussion are too big to bother about a team that goes to another fund.

The fact that these companies are similar and graduated at similar times from their respective funds prompted me to think about confidentiality irrespective of what really transpired between them.

My stream of thought led me wonder how disclosure to an irresponsible fund (there are hundreds of funds all over the world now and you might have a black sheep - i'm sure you could allow me that assumption) might mean that a startup will have a clone to contend with when it graduates,and felt like sharing my thoughts.

I'm not trying to implicate anyone (I could never gather the evidence for it, and even if I managed to, it would be an exercise in futility) and quite obviously none of these companies owe anyone explanations - they're quite wonderful. In fact over the course of compiling the article, I've read a fair bit about them and appreciate the effort each has put in into identifying differentiators and competing with a rival/rivals.

Someone once wrote that, "in the narrow sense of the word, that startup ideas are worthless". However, we all seem to agree that "stealing" ideas would be sort of a shady thing to do, which indicates they do have some value. I still think that "narrow sense" needs more exposition.

   one must be a tad careful lest they disclose to too many entities

The more people you talk to about your idea, the better it gets. Open discussion is a great product design tool. There are good cases for secrets and taking care.

But I'm afraid your comment will reinforce a bad idea in many who read it. A better mantra, though not exactly true either, is "your idea isn't worth anything".

That's an extremely interesting point and makes for good debate.

And I'll surprise you by saying I subscribe to the school of thought that believes ideas are cheap. I honestly do.

However, over time, i'm assuming you develop an ability to subject your idea to fairly rigorous evaluation based on experience; and confidentiality might then mean much more to you.

It's really amazing though, the feedback and the varied points of view.

I must compile a list of disclaimers to be prepended to the article. 'Don't be naive about your idea' definitely will be one of them!

People that seek funding from early stage investors (and get rejected) probably don't have that much experience. They'll benefit just from the interview process, as it will hone the idea.

The more people you talk to about your idea, the better it gets.

Completely agree, I think I've discussed my idea/startup with many people, I don't think I've been secretive with it at all. In my case though it's not so easy to steal - as it actually requires serious effort to implement and it's not a one winner takes all kind of market.

But I've found discussing my idea with many people has helped mould what was a concept into a series of hurdles, which has made it clearer in my mind what I need to do.

This has also helped me come up with several possibilities for shortcuts to get it to market earlier.

I personally think that unless you're trailblazing something very new or producing something that can be easily copied, you probably shouldn't be trying to keep quiet about it.

That's just my opinion though.

EDIT - just an addendum.

If you are going to discuss your idea with people, I find its best to NOT talk it over with your friends. The bias usually leans towards you getting overly positive feedback. Good for the ego, bad for the idea process.... you may end up wasting your time (which is your most valuable asset) on something not worthwhile.

And of course, coincidence or not... does it really matter? I don't think anyone with a straight face could accuse TechStars or YC of actually stealing ideas at the investor level, but if an enterprising entrepreneur sees a good idea put into action at one, thinks he or she can do it better and pitches it to the other, so what? From a consumer standpoint, competition is good. (Actually, it's good from an entrepreneurial standpoint as well.)

Anyway, I think likely these are coincidence more than anything. A good rule of thumb: If you have a good idea, someone else has it as well. Right now. And they're working on it, too.

Anecdote: My biz partner and I started work on what we think is a great idea beginning of last December almost immediately after a late-night brainstorming session on IM. By mid-January we'd identified two similar competitors that had launched in the past couple of months. By February we found another that seems similar (but is unlaunched). And two weeks ago a fourth competitor came out of nowhere and launched.

All that means is that other people think our idea is good, too. We think that's probably a good sign (and so hope to launch in the next couple of weeks).

> Remember: all else being equal, the simplest explanation is probably correct.

Occam's Razor.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com