Archive for the ‘Y Combinator’ Category

Y Combinator is sort of a Proprietary Investor-only Launch Conference

Y Combinator has started funding so many companies per round (60+) and getting so much investor attention that they’ve had to move their “Demo Day” event (where companies present to investors) into a larger building and make it an all-day event.

Y Combinator Demo Day Brings The Future To Computer History Museum

It got me thinking. I’ve never thought of Y Combinator as a species of conference, yet the parallels are fairly striking.

They accept applications from startups, coach them, and help them pitch investors on stage. The biggest difference between them and conferences is that they also invest and take equity. In addition they spend 3 months coaching the startups instead of the 3 days or 3 hours that a conference would.

They’re sort of like a very expansive and very intensive conference. They’re on the startup’s side during the entire process: they handle incorporation, introductions, product advice — pretty much any kind of help they can.

The goal of all of that work though is ultimately to turn those startups into something VCs will find worthy of investment when they present it to them on Demo Day.

Even the name, Demo Day, is necessarily similar to “DEMO Conference” which was the first major startup launch conference.

Just imagine if they charged every investor $3000-$5000 to attend (they wouldn’t mind). It might reduce YC’s costs to almost nothing.

I don’t think I’m belitting YC or its value by drawing this analogy. It’s far from perfect, and at some point analogies like this always break down — I was just surprised at how far this one goes.

People have always struggled to label YC. They’ve been called an incubator, VC firm, angel investor, and accelerator. They’re really a cross between all of those. I think you could add “conference” to the mix and would make for an even more accurate description.

 

Can the Hacker News crowd predict the success of YC companies?

A regular occurrence on HN is a new YC company launching and a bunch of people lambasting it as derivative/trivial/lame.

PG has often pointed out that the people judging these companies based on the intial launch are almost certainly not judging them very well.

It’s hard to disagree with that. Of course we don’t know what their World Domination Plans are, as he does. He saw their application, heard their pitch, and worked with them for months.

It got me wondering though. If the HN crowd can’t predict whether something is going to be a failure or not, could it at least predict the big successes? Are the comments indicative of anything?

I proceeded to do a little unscientific poking around, looking at HN’s reaction to the first significant post each company got. To make it simple I looked only at top-level comments and only ones with unambiguous sentiment.

 

The Big 3

Heroku

Heroku Lifts Ruby on Rails Development into the Cloud (YC Winter 08)

Believers: 12

Doubters: 1

Total comments: 36

Dropbox

My YC app: Dropbox – Throw away your USB drive

Beleivers: 23

Doubters: 5

Total comments: 72

Airbnb

Y Combinator’s Airbed&Breakfast Casts A Wider Net For Housing Rentals As AirBnB

Believers: 1

Doubters: 1

Total comments: 13

 

Other Companies

Hipmunk

Reddit CoFounder Dips Back Into YC With Travel Startup Hipmunk (YC S10)

Believers: 6

Doubters: 2

Total comments: 80

Rapportive

Rapportive – making excellent service scale

Believers: 9

Doubters: 2

Total comments: 53

Olark

Olark (YC S09) Is A Dead Simple Chat Widget For Site Owners

Believers: 5

Doubters: 2

Total comments: 18

Dead Companies

SplitterBug

Splitterbug (YC S11) private beta: track expenses with friends from your phone

Believers: 5

Doubters: 5

Total comments: 38

Notifio

Notifo (YC W10) Is A Simple Mobile Notifications Platform For Anything

Believers: 6

Doubters: 4

Total comments: 68

Snipd

Y Combinator’s Snipd Launches To The Public

Believers: 3

Doubters: 2

Total comments: 23

SocialBrowse

Socialbrowse: Y Combinator Startup is Twitter For Links

Believers: 11

Doubters: 3

Total comments: 49

TipJoy

TipJoy Launches (YC winter 08)

Believers: 10

Doubters: 2

Total comments: 54

Conclusion

You decide. I’m not confident about the methodology I used or the results.

I think it would be pretty interesting to do this kind of analysis in a more rigorous way. It would also be rather interesting to compare HN to TechCrunch, since they’re famously rather dickish on TC — but who knows, maybe they’re also more honest. I know I’m pretty much rooting for every single company that launches on HN, even if I have serious doubts about their chances.

 

Post comments on Hacker News

 

Y Combinator’s Secret Weapon: Meeting with companies that come “over the transom”

The Hubris of traditional Silicon Valley investors

The primary job of an investor is to find the best possible companies to invest in. Yet nearly all of them proudly ignore any company that hasn’t been referred by someone they know. You’ve heard it a million times:

“I get sooo many deals. I can only talk to the ones who are referred by someone I know.”

It’s completely illogical. It doesn’t follow that because you have one good source for companies that you wouldn’t want more good sources.

Their reply would be:

“I already have enough deals to look at.”

But do they have enough good deals to look at? If they’re ignoring a huge portion of potential deal flow how could they possibly?

The other common retort is:

“Anyone worth their salt will find a way to get a referral to me.”

Really? How would you know what you’re missing out on? Maybe they’ll just talk to more accessible people. Maybe they can’t find someone you know, but they can find someone another investor knows? Or maybe they’ll just get into Y Combinator and then you’ll pay a big premium to invest in them.

Y Combinator’s Secret Weapon

Y Combinator is by far the most successful and prominent investor in Silicon Valley now. Quite a few things make them different from traditional investors, but the one thing that makes them different from virtually every single investor, including many “accelerators”, is that they take applications for funding over the transom.

It’s not easy for them. They spend weeks and weeks sifting through thousands of applications to find the 5% that are worth talking to in person. Then they pay tens of thousands to fly those people out just to talk to them. They don’t really really care where they’re from, what schools they went to, or particularly: who they know.

Some of the very biggest YC successes have come in like this. Probably the majority of their best companies have. Even in cases where they had a referral it probably helped a lot to have a formalized application process. It forces companies to properly and fully pitch their idea.

Y Combinator’s formalized and meritocratic application process means the best companies rise to the top — not just the ones with the best referral, resume, or slickest elevator pitch.

Is it any wonder that Silicon Valley was so easily disrupted? A few good hackers took a close look at the problem and decided rightly to re-define it.

Opportunity for a new wave of Silicon Valley investors

Some smart VC is going to realize that one of the most important parts of YC is quite easily replicated and they’re going to make a killing doing it.

They’re going to put up a thorough application on the web like YC does, institute a rigorous process for evaluating them, and start treating that source of deals as their primary and best source of deal flow. They’ll start telling their referrals to “submit an application”.

And founders will hear about it. They’ll hear that there’s a VC who you can pitch without knowing his cousin’s friend who founded a company that failed 3 years ago. One who evaluates companies based on the fundamentals of the company and not whether other VCs are interested or not, or how slick you are.

It won’t be magic of course. The VC will still have to be smart enough to pick good companies and good at supporting them. They’ll have to offer competitive deal terms and have a great reputation.

Probably it will be some VC that’s new to the game. Someone with nothing to lose. Someone like what YC was like when they first started.

It’s the future

I think it’s inevitable that this will happen for all VCs. The world of handshakes and connections is great, but it creates an inefficient market. The ability to network and schmooze is not a requisite skill to building a great company. Certainly not in the early stages where it’s purely a game of finding product/market fit. Users don’t care who you know, where you went to school, or that you have Ron Conway on speed dial.

A lot of VCs are trying to use YC like a filter. The problem is that a lot of VCs are using YC as a filter. That means the top deals in every YC class are highly competitive. That’s why you’re hearing about inflated YC valuations.

There’s nothing inherently wrong with using YC like that, but if everyone is doing it you’re not going to have much of an advantage unless you’re offering overly-generous deal terms or one of a very few top firms.

Just like no technology company should outsource their technology no VC should be outsource their deal flow. Finding the best deals is the core of their entire business.

I predict that either all VCs will learn to accept and evaluate applications for funding over the transom or a select few will and they’ll outperform all but the very best schmooze-only VCs.

AngelList is already forcing their hand, and that levels the playing field even more for the best companies, but it’s more of a formalization of the “social proof”-based investing that VCs are currently relying on.

 

Have feedback? Comment on Hacker News >