81–90 of 114 posts
You know what? I'm not really that upset. They made a good decision from their point of view. But we have 200+ beta users, lots of positive feedback, and have a good product.
We don't need YC to tell us that. So just keep on truckin. Get users, iterate, and make YC regret rejecting you :-)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you look at the wikipedia page for Sam Walton, the founding looks a little more nuanced: "Walton went on to open more Ben Franklin Stores with the help of his brother, father-in-law, and brother-in-law." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Walton
Sam Walton's autobiography mentions that his father-in-law provided the initial capital (that was about it), and his brother played an insignificant role (like buying things from suppliers). His brother, who was younger, was more of a helper while Walton built his first store (a Ben Franklin store that he later sold and started Walmart on his own based largely on his Ben Franklin stores).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I got an email from Paul Graham saying basically that being a single founder put me at a disadvantage, because two founders can talk each other out of bad ideas, but I appeared too stubborn. This applies equally for being talked out of good ideas. And if your idea is good to start with, then there would be no point in changing it until you've pursued it long enough to see where it leads. The thing to remember about…
Two parts that seem incorrect: 1) YC has one company with very high potential of a billion dollar exit in Dropbox. An IPO in a few years isn't out of the question either. They also have at least a half dozen that are likely to be as big or bigger than Viaweb: 2) Google took seed funding early and then raised VC. That is the model YC uses.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sam Walton's autobiography mentions that his father-in-law provided the initial capital (that was about it), and his brother played an insignificant role (like buying things from suppliers). His brother, who was younger, was more of a helper while Walton built his first store (a Ben Franklin store that he later sold and started Walmart on his own based largely on his Ben Franklin stores).
Perhaps I'm quibbling, but an autobiography that downplays the contributions of others? Quel surprise!
I really like the design of your site.
> I got an email from Paul Graham saying basically that being a single founder put me at a disadvantage, because two founders can talk each other out of bad ideas, but I appeared too stubborn. I’m not entirely sure what this means, as I was under the impression, from reading his essays, that Paul was against single founders because they might give up too easily, so a founder who sticks to his idea would be desirable.…
How could I appear other than stubborn?
If they had said, OK I think we understand your idea but your market doesn't seem big enough (or something to that effect), maybe things would have turned out differently than 11 minutes of what seemed to me like "we don't get it," when they probably did and didn't believe in it.
Well, in any case, I got some good feedback and I still appreciate the opportunity to discuss my company with them.
Hindsight may be 20-20, but I still have to fend off the regret for not redirecting the conversation.
As a word of advice to future single founders, they are going to aggressively push you the entire time. Be prepared to concede to them at some point even if they don't "get it." Otherwise, you will appear stubborn.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also: > I was under the impression, from reading his essays, that Paul was against single founders because they might give up too easily, so a founder who sticks to his idea would be desirable. My understanding of Paul's argument has been that most initial ideas are bad and that a successful startup requires changing course until your idea matches a marketable need. This suggests an important distinction between stub…
That mostly refers to startups that haven't yet launched and don't know if their idea will get any customers, as far as I understand. historious already has quite a few paying users, so I believe I'm right to be stubborn in thinking people want this enough to pay for it (because they have).
Djangy got an interview and then after several days, a rejection letter. We're too similar to Heroku. You know what? I'm not really that upset. They made a good decision from their point of view. But we have 200+ beta users, lots of positive feedback, and have a good product. We don't need YC to tell us that. So just keep on truckin. Get users, iterate, and make YC regret rejecting you :-)