Differences between Y Combinator and Seedcamp
madmotive.co.uk
madmotive.co.uk
Anyway, I thoroughly agree.
From my perspective, running a startup based in London that's been entirely bootstrapped, I'd be more interested in applying for Y-Combinator than Seedcamp. Even though we already have premises and 1 staff member, and a product virtually finished, I think we'd get miles more value for our 5-6% from YC.
There seems to be this notion in the UK that raising money and starting a business is a reality TV show. I'm subscribed to a mailing list where someone has come up with "Pitch to Win":
http://www.meetup.com/startup-fasttrack/calendar/10723535/
Defies belief. While this sort of attitude is floating around, I'm just not sure how to approach the whole funding problem in the UK.
We haven't approached any investors here yet (although we have been approached), and I am feeling like I'm going to have to look to the other side of the Atlantic to find the kind of people that I'd like to work with.
A couple of clarifications:
I'm not sure I'd say I'm someone who has been particularly close to Seedcamp. I've not personally taken part in any of their activities beyond networking events that happen around Seedcamp week. I am a keen observer though.
I don't see BootCycle, the 'vested interest' you mention, as being direct competition to Seedcamp. BootCycle is simply a peer support group for a small collection of pre-revenue and pre-investment startups that meets every week. BootCycle takes no equity in the startups and provides no funding. We do think some BootCycle participants are likely to go on to get funding from Seedcamp or Y Combinator. Y Combinator is more appealing for all participants except for the ones that have family commitments in the UK.
not sure if this is right. Everyone I know who went thru seedcamp said the #1 benefit was the connections [which you'd get via YC] and #2 benefit was so far from #1 it wasn't worth mentioning.
I think seedcamp is more interested in later businesses - maybe about 3 months post launch. When they have traction and the proposition is more refined. My understanding of YC is that they love to get down and dirty in refining that proposition. Hence YC being more risky, hence the more deals.
Seems to me Seedcamp provides connections by surrounding teams with as many as possible. YC on the other hand seems to more carefully find the most useful connections for each individual startup so as not to create too many distractions for the teams. That said, being based in Silicon Valley has the effect of naturally surrounding teams with as many connections as possible.
I think Seedcamp's apparent interest in later stage business is not so much by design. It happens because of the way it is funded and the way funding decisions are made. They choose more mature looking startups because the funding committee collectively perceives them to be more likely to succeed.
1. Seedcamp seems more business oriented than YCombinator. Hackers and good code are appreciated but not as much as paying customers :) You tell me if this is a good thing or not.
2. Raising money is indeed harder in Europe. No doubt about it. But for European startups Seedcamp is still the safest bet as Seedcamp folks are more than connected with US VCs and angels.
I love Seedcamp and our company (uberVU) owes them so much. There are clearly some things they can improve but so far its by far the best experience any European startup can have.
The difference to me stands out as committee vs opinionated.
With YC a small handful of people give you advice and nudge you in the correct direction. Seedcamp has dozens. One participant boasted to me that they had met 100 mentors in a week.
I much prefer opinionated software over committee software. I imaging the same is true for startups. Surely 100 mentors will give you 100 conflicting pieces of advice. No matter how smart those mentors are (and everyone I know who is involved in SC is smart) they can't help you out if you are confused, disoriented and overwhelmed.