Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sincere Apologies to Paul Graham and the Y Combinator Team (from the Seattle Founder's Co-op)

crashdev.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 50 posts

Re: Sincere Apologies to Paul Graham and the Y Combinator Team (from the Seattle Founder's Co-op)

#11

Post by gruseom »

ecommercematt wrote: post #8
gruseom wrote: post #6

I've written many times [...] so I was caught by surprise Reading that, it occurred to me that one of the gotchas here is the statelessness of the web. "Statelessness" isn't quite what I mean. "Contextlessness" might be better. URLs are pointers that jump directly to content that mostly gets consumed atomically, without reference to anything else the author has said/done. Of course if readers want context they have a…

Do you have ideas on how to do that?

Nothing well-formed; I've hardly thought about it. By the way, I didn't mean "self-describing" in any technical sense (like the way Alan Kay might use the phrase - though that is super cool). What I mean is, if there's context that's essential to understanding what you're saying on page X, maybe you should include it in X, or at least a noticeable link to it. Even at the cost of some duplication.

For example, would it have changed your perception of the Founders Co-op application if it had, at the bottom, a link to a FAQ like "Isn't this just like YC" or even "How is this different from other early-stage funds"?

Re: Sincere Apologies to Paul Graham and the Y Combinator Team (from the Seattle Founder's Co-op)

#12

Post by pg »

lux wrote: post #4
huherto wrote: post #3

Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery.

Very true. I doubt PG and co were losing sleep over a copied application form ;) They're probably watching their competition with much interest. It's not like there's room for only one after all.

The only thing I really worry about is that competitors will use artificial deadlines to panic founders into taking offers from them before they've interviewed with us. 100% of the clones make decisions before we even do interviews, probably not by coincidence. Last year when they made offers to groups that had also been invited to interviews with us, they tried to pressure them into accepting before they'd heard from us. I assume they'll do that again. That makes me mad, I admit. It seems such a nasty thing to do to a group of young founders.

Re: Sincere Apologies to Paul Graham and the Y Combinator Team (from the Seattle Founder's Co-op)

#16

Post by nikiscevak »

pg wrote: post #12
lux wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very true. I doubt PG and co were losing sleep over a copied application form ;) They're probably watching their competition with much interest. It's not like there's room for only one after all.

The only thing I really worry about is that competitors will use artificial deadlines to panic founders into taking offers from them before they've interviewed with us. 100% of the clones make decisions before we even do interviews, probably not by coincidence. Last year when they made offers to groups that had also been invited to interviews with us, they tried to pressure them into accepting before they'd heard fro…

Paul, why do you call the firms clones? Aren't you a clone of a seed stage incubator? I absolutely love what you do but to say that there are clones in the investment world (where there is zero scale) is a weird way of looking at the world. You probably have enough money to fund every good idea in each intake but you certainly don't have the time to spread out across those ideas. So if you have inspired more capital to come into this stage then surely that is a good thing for founders?

If there is competition, then founders only win out in the end. If someone was 'pressured' into accepting before other options played out that should be a huge signal to the founder that the firm is less than desirable.

Re: Sincere Apologies to Paul Graham and the Y Combinator Team (from the Seattle Founder's Co-op)

#18

Post by pg »

nikiscevak wrote: post #16
pg wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only thing I really worry about is that competitors will use artificial deadlines to panic founders into taking offers from them before they've interviewed with us. 100% of the clones make decisions before we even do interviews, probably not by coincidence. Last year when they made offers to groups that had also been invited to interviews with us, they tried to pressure them into accepting before they'd heard fro…

Paul, why do you call the firms clones? Aren't you a clone of a seed stage incubator? I absolutely love what you do but to say that there are clones in the investment world (where there is zero scale) is a weird way of looking at the world. You probably have enough money to fund every good idea in each intake but you certainly don't have the time to spread out across those ideas. So if you have inspired more capital…

I was calling them clones because that's what other people were calling them.

They are, though. All we have in common with seed stage incubators is investing at the seed stage. What these guys have in common with us is a whole list of distinctive things: investing in multiple startups simultaneously, taking about 6%, using an application form instead of accepting business plans, making founders move to where we are, using a three month timeline, having weekly dinners, bringing in outside experts to speak to the founders as a group, having a Demo Day where they all present to investors. Often whole chunks of text on their sites are paraphrased from ours.

Re: Sincere Apologies to Paul Graham and the Y Combinator Team (from the Seattle Founder's Co-op)

#19

Post by attack_forgotpw »

nikiscevak wrote: post #16
pg wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only thing I really worry about is that competitors will use artificial deadlines to panic founders into taking offers from them before they've interviewed with us. 100% of the clones make decisions before we even do interviews, probably not by coincidence. Last year when they made offers to groups that had also been invited to interviews with us, they tried to pressure them into accepting before they'd heard fro…

Paul, why do you call the firms clones? Aren't you a clone of a seed stage incubator? I absolutely love what you do but to say that there are clones in the investment world (where there is zero scale) is a weird way of looking at the world. You probably have enough money to fund every good idea in each intake but you certainly don't have the time to spread out across those ideas. So if you have inspired more capital…

YC is a clone of Google's SOC project that occurred the prior summer. Taking on multiple projects simultaneously, providing about 5k, accepting applications, three month timeline, having frequent meetings between people and mentors, bringing in outside mentors, having a day at the end for people to present their accomplishments.

It is natural to be concerned about competitors, but everyone who is being abrasive to these other angels for copying a couple aspects is harming the angel investment community overall. YC is just a couple people with a couple MM, they can't fund everyone.

Bonus similarities: appealing to the young, first session occurred immediately after google's finished, setting up mailing list forum for those interested, primary announcement occurred on slashdot.

Re: Sincere Apologies to Paul Graham and the Y Combinator Team (from the Seattle Founder's Co-op)

#20

Post by brentr »

lux wrote: post #4
huherto wrote: post #3

Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery.

Very true. I doubt PG and co were losing sleep over a copied application form ;) They're probably watching their competition with much interest. It's not like there's room for only one after all.

At first I wanted to write a response to your comment claiming that the Seattle group is not a competitor. After thinking about what to write for a moment, I realized that debating whether or not they are a competitor is not as important as debating whether or not another program like YC is beneficial to the people on this site and this community as a whole.

I believe another program like YC is valuable. Paul has stated several times that there are good ideas and good teams that he simply could not invite to YC because there were more stellar groups he invited. It does not mean that those not invited by YC should not have the opportunity to be funded. The Seattle program is simply another route to the ultimate goal: a nice payday.

Post reply on HN