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

What I Learned Going Through YC as a 17 Year Old

tieshunroquerre.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 155 posts

Re: What I Learned Going Through YC as a 17 Year Old

#21

Post by roenxi »

alehul wrote: post #14
naringas wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> East Coast VCs are much more conservative, which is ultimately bad because it results in less moonshots succeeding. "East Coast VCs are much more conservative, which is actually better in a longer term because it results in more stable return rates (less failure)"

I should’ve only quoted the first part of the sentence as relevant to me, but: Better for whom? I agree it could result in better average returns for the firm, but it likely isn’t better for moving society forward as a whole.

Firms that do not make a solid profit margin are a really bad sign - it means that there is little value add by the firm.

If I buy $10 worth of paints (and equipment) then use that to create and sell you a painting for $10, that is society signalling that I really should find something better to do with my time. The raw materials are about as hard to produce as the care anyone has for my work. The value created by me doing the work was $0.

On the other hand, an artist who turns $10 worth of paint into a $100 painting has created enormous value - that artist should be the one who gets all the paint, and that is what the market will sort out. That artist is not wasting time, their art is high value add over the raw materials. The time they spent on art added $90 in value.

If firms tend to have solid profit margins, almost by magic society at large will get more actual value out of the same amount of resources. Nothing is good in excess, and there is plenty of intellectual room to quibble about where the threshold and preconditions need to be for the outcome to be 'good', but investors making a solid return is very healthy. It can move society as a whole forward.

Re: What I Learned Going Through YC as a 17 Year Old

#22

Post by petejames »

blocked_again wrote: post #18

> Silicon Valley doesn't care about your background This is BS. You have a much higher chance of rasing money for the same idea if you worked in FAANG than if you worked in Accenture. Same goes to someone who went to Harvard vs someone who went to University of Colorado.

I think you are right if trying to raise money at the idea stage but if you have built something people want, investors don't care about your background. Growth chart will get anyone funded.

Re: What I Learned Going Through YC as a 17 Year Old

#23

Post by blocked_again »

petejames wrote: post #22
blocked_again wrote: post #18

> Silicon Valley doesn't care about your background This is BS. You have a much higher chance of rasing money for the same idea if you worked in FAANG than if you worked in Accenture. Same goes to someone who went to Harvard vs someone who went to University of Colorado.

I think you are right if trying to raise money at the idea stage but if you have built something people want, investors don't care about your background. Growth chart will get anyone funded.

Growth chart will get anyone funded anywhere. Not only in silicon valley.

Re: What I Learned Going Through YC as a 17 Year Old

#24

Post by bsenftner »

blocked_again wrote: post #18

> Silicon Valley doesn't care about your background This is BS. You have a much higher chance of rasing money for the same idea if you worked in FAANG than if you worked in Accenture. Same goes to someone who went to Harvard vs someone who went to University of Colorado.

Silicon Valley cares about your age - young entrepreneurs get more attention than older. I think it is because the younger are more manipulable.

Re: What I Learned Going Through YC as a 17 Year Old

#25

Post by tester34 »

alehul wrote: post #14
naringas wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> East Coast VCs are much more conservative, which is ultimately bad because it results in less moonshots succeeding. "East Coast VCs are much more conservative, which is actually better in a longer term because it results in more stable return rates (less failure)"

I should’ve only quoted the first part of the sentence as relevant to me, but: Better for whom? I agree it could result in better average returns for the firm, but it likely isn’t better for moving society forward as a whole.

moving society foward is a strong statement

which startups in your opinion did that? you know, an actual innovation not another competitive service as a service

Re: What I Learned Going Through YC as a 17 Year Old

#26

Post by petejames »

lordnacho wrote: post #8

It may be true that you don't need to have worked in a white shoe firm to be respected in SV, but I'm pretty sure there's certain characteristics that are advantageous: - Got into a top university. Good grades are popular, unsurprisingly. A proxy for intelligence and hard work. - Speaks English. How many YC folks don't? I'm sure there are a lot of smart people in the world who just didn't grow up with English and so…

> Speaks English. How many YC folks don't?

It creates practical difficulties. Similar to when founders have accents so strong that people can't understand what they're saying: http://www.paulgraham.com/accents.html

Re: What I Learned Going Through YC as a 17 Year Old

#27

Post by lkozma »

roenxi wrote: post #21
alehul wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I should’ve only quoted the first part of the sentence as relevant to me, but: Better for whom? I agree it could result in better average returns for the firm, but it likely isn’t better for moving society forward as a whole.

Firms that do not make a solid profit margin are a really bad sign - it means that there is little value add by the firm. If I buy $10 worth of paints (and equipment) then use that to create and sell you a painting for $10, that is society signalling that I really should find something better to do with my time. The raw materials are about as hard to produce as the care anyone has for my work. The value created by me…

By that logic, take all the paint away from Van Gogh and give it all to Jeff Koons.

Re: What I Learned Going Through YC as a 17 Year Old

#28

Post by ghaff »

raverbashing wrote: post #19
alehul wrote: post #6

> East Coast VCs are much more conservative, which is ultimately bad because it results in less moonshots succeeding. This is really accurate, at least from my experience as someone of a similar age working on my first startup at the time. With cold outreach to VCs in NYC I had zero responses, and only two meetings with BigCos curious about us; they seemed easier to get the attention of. When I reached out to investo…

I can see a parallel with the "why Europe doesn't have as many big tech companies as the US" discussions. Now change the question to "How many companies does the East Coast have in comparison with the West Coast." Or even SV. (Even if most companies are actually established in Delaware) Ease of finance and management vision (which kinda related to the first point) seems to be the main drivers.

The caveat I'd make about that comparison is that the question a lot of people end up asking is "How many SV flavor of tech companies are on the East Coast vs. SV?" Ignoring, for example, biotech, defense contractors, finance, etc. The comparison isn't invalid but it's certainly biased towards tech=web-scale.

Re: What I Learned Going Through YC as a 17 Year Old

#29

Post by marcosdumay »

alehul wrote: post #14
naringas wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> East Coast VCs are much more conservative, which is ultimately bad because it results in less moonshots succeeding. "East Coast VCs are much more conservative, which is actually better in a longer term because it results in more stable return rates (less failure)"

I should’ve only quoted the first part of the sentence as relevant to me, but: Better for whom? I agree it could result in better average returns for the firm, but it likely isn’t better for moving society forward as a whole.

Hum... Better for investors and better for the founders.

Yep, it's maybe better for random strangers if both commit to a lot of work that may not pay out. (Or maybe not, isn't there something better for them to do?) But that's a really entitled point of view, isn't it? It's better for everybody that is actually on the line.

Re: What I Learned Going Through YC as a 17 Year Old

#30

Post by barry-cotter »

blocked_again wrote: post #23
petejames wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are right if trying to raise money at the idea stage but if you have built something people want, investors don't care about your background. Growth chart will get anyone funded.

Growth chart will get anyone funded anywhere. Not only in silicon valley.

Patio11, we need you! Tell us of the atrocious funding environment in Tokyo. Tptacek, tell us of how much more conservative the funding environment is in Chicago! Patrick Collision, pc, speak of why you live in the US, not Ireland!

A growth chart very much who not get you funded anywhere. Numbers that would have people writing cheques in Silicon Valley or even Boston would be lucky to get a loan, personally guaranteed from the founder, for a quarter of that amount in most of Europe. People raise in the Bakery w because it’s the best place to raise. This indie hacker, growth fund, Earnest Capital, lifestyle business to selling to PE funnel thing is distributing that and building a smoother thing between VC and small business but you cannot raise anywhere else like the Valley, except perhaps China. Even the Israelis go to the US to raise.

Post reply on HN