opaas

I appreciate your feedback and discussion.

I don't know of any VC's or Angels which won't except a business plan. I think they are more open than ever to finding new companies. I've never had a VC or Angel refuse to receive a business plan. I have contacted three on the phone and they all gave me their email addresses to send pitches/packages to. Have you actually sent VC's and Angels business plans and they've sent them back unopened or are you just assuming they would? Have you ever emailed VC or Angels and they replied to the email saying they will not read the email or are you just assuming that would be the case?

What you are calling an "public open application process" to me is simply freedom of speech. You can send a letter or email to anyone in this country, including VC's. By open, I would think the list of companies which apply to Y Combinator would be made public. As far as I know, and I may be wrong, that list is not made public. That signals something to me. It may not to you.

If you accept Y Combinator reason for providing absolutely not one single word of feedback as reasonable, that is fine. However, I think most people would agree that organizations which truly want to help, would provide some, even if minimal feedback pursuant to an application. Off the top of my head, Y Combinator is the only organization I can think of in my life which provided absolutely no feedback pursuant to an application. That also signals something to me.

Thank you for the feedback. As a developer, I usually look for a link that says something like "developer" "sdk" "api" or what not. We have a "developer" link on their, albeit small as the main purpose of the site is for consumer to discover and buy Open Apps. They thinking is that if there is a bunch of developer call outs on the home page, it might confuse consumers.

There is also an "About" link. Do you think the "developer"and "About" links should be more prominent?

I'm curious are you familiar with Platform as a Service (PaaS?)

Thanks again for your feedback.

You are correct. The link was wrong. Here is the correct link to Y Combinator not even wanting to read their own applications and pawning it off to others: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=908513

In an almost scripted turn of events. It appears Y Combinator doesn't even want to read the applications themselves anymore: http://apps.ycombinator.com/item?id=2346017

Does that indicate anything at all to you?

What do you mean by "open, public application process?" I don't see anything "open" about it. Last time I checked (last year) there was not even a list of applicants. I'm curious, how would an "open" process differ from a "closed, non-public process?"

Waste their time? They read applications so they can find the ones they think are going to make them a lot of money. It is a necessary step needed for them to make money. I'm not sure what your point is. You feel bad they have to read applications they themselves solicit in order for them to make money? Should someone else read them for them and they do nothing during the application process?

Getting their ideas vetted? Y Combinator gives zero feedback to applicants, leaving them in the dark as to why they were rejected. How does that help? Any vetting process I ever saw gave a "report" or at least some information as to why or why not a candidate was approved or not. Y Combinator does neither. As you said, they spend enormous amounts of time reading the applications (for their benefit) but zero time providing any feedback whatsoever for the applicants benefit. What does that tell you? Does that sound like an entity who is truly trying to help the developers? What do you take away or learn from that? What value does that have?

When you do something which takes time for a given audience, that is called "jumping through hoops." It is a figure of speech.

Yes, VC's ask a lot of questions. Even harder ones. They even want very long business plans. And more. The difference is VC's are going to give you MILLIONS of dollars if you jump through all their hoops. Not just a little more than what would pay your relocation and rent while you move to California. I trust you can see the difference.

Also, are you sure you read/reread my post? I clearly said in there "Yes the intros are a good perk, but if you truly have something, you will get there regardless." So I'm wondering why you bring up the intros as a perk beyond the money as I already pointed that out in my post.

OPaaS is "Open Platform as a Service." Just think "Platform as a Service" but open.

Yes, there are some good solid principles at Y Combinator. I agree. To apply in a way I think is thorough, takes at least 8 hours of work - a day's work. That's doing the videos and providing cogent responses to all the questions. Sure you can do it in 20 minutes if you want to rush through, but I don't do that.

Now a day's work is not a great amount. However, the problem is that it is a "special case" application that really can't be reused. Y Combinator wants you to tailor an in-depth presentation for them. That's fine. More power to them. However, it says something to me that in return they offer zero feedback. Zero.

I had a great "attitude" when I applied and jumped through all the hoops last year so I fail to see your point. Unless you are saying the Y Combinator folks are psychic? If that were the case, they would pick winners every time, yes? But seriously, I wouldn't call it an "attitude." I would call it an informed opinion - your opinion may differ.

Please reread my post in context to the post I was replying to. That should help you understand. Also, it is not about rejection. As I mentioned, in my original post, most successful people fail, on average 6 times first, let alone simply get rejected by a potential investor before they have their big success. Rejection is part of the road the road to success. Also, if you took away from my post that I am giving up, I probably could have been clearer. I am not giving up. I am not even giving up on investors. I am just staying clear of "micro-investors." Simply put, the time spent to present yourself the way micro investors want you to is simply not worth it in my opinion. If you are a programmer, the "special case" is not worth it :) The time is better spent working on the product/service/company. It is just a business decision.

I respect your opinion. However, I would say I WAS disillusioned - but no longer.

I had a great "attitude" when I applied and jumped through all the hoops last year so I fail to see your point. Unless you are saying the Y Combinator folks are psychic? If that were the case, they would pick winners every time, yes? But seriously, I wouldn't call it an "attitude." I would call it an informed opinion - your opinion may differ.

>You may or may not be rightfully disillusioned, but > regardless your attitude is in the gutter. I respect your opinion. However, I would say I WAS disillusioned - but no longer.