A New Venture Animal
paulgraham.com
A New Venture Animal
1–10 of 64 posts
Re: A New Venture Animal
#2Really we're more of a small, furry steam catapult.
The man just has a way with words! :)
Re: A New Venture Animal
#3The shortest description of Y Combinator I can think of is a "Venture Expediter"
Re: A New Venture Animal
#4I propose "venture catapult" as a generic term for what YC does.
Re: A New Venture Animal
#5The shortest description of Y Combinator I can think of is a "Venture Expediter"
I don't think YC's goal is to get startups closer to VC, or even to expedite their journey anywhere.
The point is, YC is really smart money in real small amounts. If you need more money or don't need so much smarts behind it, you go elsewhere on the funding spectrum.
Re: A New Venture Animal
#6Very early stage startups are insanely risky.
I hear this almost as much as the "90% of startups fail" piece of wisdom, and I was a little surprised to see it in a PG essay. I'm not saying it's necessarily wrong, just that I don't totally understand it.
Risk is "the possibility of suffering harm or loss; danger." So what's risky about a startup? If you are paying for it yourself, maxing out credit cards, etc, then the startup is indeed likely to be harmful to you.
But, if you get YC funding, and are the under 30 crowd that PG refers to with low living expenses, then it's pretty unlikely that you're taking that approach. Instead, you're simply not saving any money for awhile. So there is opportunity cost lost, since surely most of the YC founders could make a nice chunk of change working for the man. But is this really the harm that's implied by the reference to risk? Especially when you factor in the experience you gain from a failed startup, it seems pretty questionable to say that serious harm will likely befall you. It's more like, less savings and a great experience will likely befall you.
So I wonder if the sentiment is just referring to the harm that may happen to the startup itself. As in, it's quite likely -- 90% likely! ;) -- that the startup you create will die. But isn't that kind of like saying it's risky to scratch off a lotto ticket that someone gives you? It's "risky" for the lotto ticket I suppose, but not really for you.
Re: A New Venture Animal
#7The shortest description of Y Combinator I can think of is a "Venture Expediter"
I don't think YC's goal is to get startups closer to VC, or even to expedite their journey anywhere. The point is, YC is really smart money in real small amounts. If you need more money or don't need so much smarts behind it, you go elsewhere on the funding spectrum.
I did not intend the term to reference venture as in venture capital, but a venture regarding a hazardous attempt. Perhaps "Startup Expediter" is less misleading to those who see the word venture not in its original sense, but as related to capital.
Re: A New Venture Animal
#8Very early stage startups are insanely risky. I hear this almost as much as the "90% of startups fail" piece of wisdom, and I was a little surprised to see it in a PG essay. I'm not saying it's necessarily wrong, just that I don't totally understand it. Risk is "the possibility of suffering harm or loss; danger." So what's risky about a startup? If you are paying for it yourself, maxing out credit cards, etc, then th…
I'll try to answer my own question. I think it's about riskiness from the point of view of investors. The thing is, I think the wisdom is oft repeated as risky for the founders (though perhaps not in this essay), which is what I'm objecting to.
Re: A New Venture Animal
#9I propose "venture catapult" as a generic term for what YC does.
startup trebuchet
Re: A New Venture Animal
#10Very early stage startups are insanely risky. I hear this almost as much as the "90% of startups fail" piece of wisdom, and I was a little surprised to see it in a PG essay. I'm not saying it's necessarily wrong, just that I don't totally understand it. Risk is "the possibility of suffering harm or loss; danger." So what's risky about a startup? If you are paying for it yourself, maxing out credit cards, etc, then th…
I'll try to answer my own question. I think it's about riskiness from the point of view of investors. The thing is, I think the wisdom is oft repeated as risky for the founders (though perhaps not in this essay), which is what I'm objecting to.
It's risky in the sense that you might fail, and not get paid (enough) for your efforts. I calculated my last startup to have paid me about $3/hour (not discounting the time factor) after all was said and done.