Hacker News Reader

Comment by MCRed | Hacker News Reader

One of the things that I've found so challenging about applying for accelerators is that it's difficult to find examples of companies that got in or that didn't get in, and what they did for their applications. Every time I have come across one, I've learned a bit - like "that didn't work" or "that was a great idea" - around how they apply, pitch themselves or their product, etc.

Anyone who was rejected want to share any of their application info, like team or product demo videos, or their website and a one line pitch? I know you might not want to for competitive reasons, and I understand.

But there's always things we can learn from each other, so if you want to share I'm sure I'm not the only one who would appreciate seeing what didn't work. :-)

View on HN

I'll share a bit. I'm a solo, international founder. I applied with a barely usable, very limited prototype, of a technically challenging project (involving A.I and machine learning). My video was viewed twice, and my demo was viewed, but no other action was taken within it. I was rejected.

I expected that, given that my prototype was pretty bad, and I have a lot going against me. It definitely lit a fire under me just to apply though - and the questions that the application asks, are things you really need to think about. I definitely don't regret applying. And the fact that my demo & video were viewed - makes me think that perhaps my idea is somewhat promising.

I plan on improving my product a lot and re-applying next batch. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12DAjoONx9E&t=35s

I don't think you stand much chance as a solo founder either. It's very rare.

It's too bad, I just found a stellar co-founder two days ago. :)

But that's okay, she's going to help out immensely, and it'll only strengthen our application in the Spring.

I was a "solo founder" type for awhile. If you're an engineer I think you can have your pick of co-founders.

My suggestion, after working on and for startups for a couple decades is that you should be the CEO, find business people to be co-founders, and hire a VP of engineering, or CTO.

It's almost a cliche that there are business guys "starting companies" who "just need an engineer"... but I think the best chances for success - on a high tech startup - are for the engineer to be the CEO, and eventually bring on a CTO.

One advantage of this- the CEO is focused on product while the business guys (COO, CMO, whatever) are out doing the legwork for raising money. I've seen too many companies flounder because the CEO was focused on raising money.

You can learn business, they can't learn engineering. (well, they can, but not to your level in the time available.)

I'm not going to get a co-founder just to get into YC.

You do need a co-founder though to build a startup. The value of having 1 person to bounce ideas off is incredible versus just yourself. The value of the second co-founder for bouncing ideas off is 50% less than for the first one, that's why one co-founder is optimal.

I bounce ideas with my friends - and I don't have to give them 50% of my business!

Newslines - The Wikipedia of News (a mix of Wikipedia, daily news and YouTube). Very experienced entrepreneurial team. Only direct competitor to Wikipedia. Applied as a project that allows greater diversity for content creators (unlike Wikipedia 80% of our contributors are women and minorities) Full product online and getting good traction. http://newslines.org/ Check our Paul Graham newsline: http://newslines.org/paul-graham/ Will try again next time. It's fun to make the application, really helps you think how to describe your business simply.

Here you go: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1s8udpwEe7TPz1xJLA3E1N9qb...

We are building a decentralized bank/crowdlending network on the blockchain.

neat idea. did you consider applying to PnP bitcoin accelerator? http://plugandplayaccelerator.com/programs/Bitcoin

We were accepted but decided it wasn't the best fit for us. I know most of the companies in their current batch and they're doing some cool stuff. It's great to see accelerators with a cryptocurrency/blockchain focus like PnP and boost.

So, people optimize the application process to get in. That decrease the SNR for Y Combinator, which mean they have to work hard to separate the posers from the real thing.

I wasn't thinking about gaming the system so much as... well... how to best bring clarity to the subject.

It's not just the quality of the idea, team and product, but the quality of the presentation -- and that's always a challenge when you're in the early stages and not necessarily fully certain about, say, the product's nature.

And by presentation I don't mean how slick it is, but how effective it is at conveying what you're trying to convey (which can be undermined by slickness.)

Anyway I was asking for the ones that failed, not the ones that were successful (as I assume they would want to keep things under wraps until demo day.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com