robertandy

Dude c'mon it is not giving up at all. It's more like realizing your own place in the world. Make it good!

According to some, investor class has already undergone some major disruption. And that's forcing them to think of better ways to not screw up. But what we're obviously going to see next is only more blood on the dance floor.

Sit back. Enjoy your work.

Summary:

> Should everyone apply to First Round through the OpenApp?

> No. The best way to reach us is still through a referral.

Outcome: Zilch.

> YC doesn't have some sort of moral objection to solo founders.

I disagree with you here. Sure, rest of the bay area sucks even more, but YC (being the frontier) can't get away from its terrible karma here first.

And that spot could have gone to someone with a bigger/better idea but sadder application, huh? Makes sense.

There can be umpteen number of reasons for rejection. As long as the process is opaque, people can only speculate.

Time to move on, focus on what's critical for you to succeed.

Somehow for a product of rocketry class, a video of its CEO talking about just photo selfies and video streaming/other solved problems seems downright lame.

Talk about the capabilities of the rocket instead! The rocket looks cool though.

Notable ones that come to my mind are eBay, Balasmiq, Khan Academy, Amazon but there are definitely more stories out there.

> usually fail because they are bad at convincing anyone of anything.

Without any data on usually vs. unusually a debate is lost anyway! FWIS there are enough stories of successes from solo-founders to contradict your theory - flat on its face.

> can't even convince one more person to join you

... is not the same thing as don't want another person in the founding team. I still do not see how that 10 year old logic of a co-founder must-have is going to hold good in the coming next 10 years. I may individually fail but times for startups have changed, haven't they?

Also it is still a bad deal for most entrepreneurs (especially those who are outside) to let YC become the fulcrum of startup destiny - for it has almost become a monopoly and a monopsony as I'd mentioned earlier. It doesn't matter whether YC likes it or not.

Disagree!

The entire process is rigged against solo-founders and you CANNOT deny that fact. Even your own last sentence in the end contradicts you.

> why don't you get a cofounder.

Dude what about this: I don't want to marry. I do not want to own a house. I do not want a co-founder.

Here is a great sum of your post in one line:

“If you’re absent during my struggle, don’t expect to be present during my success.” - Will Smith

In my view the way YC has been openly crushing morale of solo-founders for years is simply pathetic. Is it a crime to be a solo-founder? Despite equal number of successful startups from solo-ists, they continue to snub the potential and rather host even those who would easily rip-off ideas and interface from others.

Given that they are almost a monopoly and monopsony "middleman" of all things startups and nearly control other movements (media/VCs/other stakeholders) I see this as a dangerous precedent for startups in general.

Last thing we want is an Amazon-like agent that controls our destiny.