Live data from Hacker News

Y Combinator Failed Startups

failory.com

141–150 of 197 posts

Re: Y Combinator Failed Startups

#141
post #28

Worth noting that the proximate cause of death is often times largely uninformative as to why the startup actually failed. Most failed startups fit into the following timeline: was burning more money than it was making => failed at raising more money => did a round of layoffs / cost cuts to get economics under control => couldn't right the ship and shut down / did a fire sale or acquihire But, the above timeline does…

Looks like a universal pattern across different domains: an immediate cause of human death is usually different from the long-term cause of their health deterioration. Similarly, an immediate cause of crash is typically different from the root cause of the problem. But is there really such a thing as "a root cause"? I guess we can always look deeper.

Re: Y Combinator Failed Startups

#142

I don't get the last section, where you just name 4-5 small "failed" startups. For most of them, you don't even have any real insights! Why pick on them, for no reason? They didn't do anything unethical, and most didn't seem to even raise a Series A. You have no clue why they failed; you just speculate... and you don't just name the companies, you call out random founders by name. These people put themselves out ther…

The YC business model (because it's a business, not a charity) is upselling their abilities to investors, and the financial institutions backing those, such that they continue to put up tens of millions in series A, B, etc. rounds for companies that would otherwise struggle to raise money because their business models, tech stacks, and product market fit are questionable at best.

Part of that business model is that in case a company doesn't work out (i.e. almost always), these losses are absorbed such that the investor can spin the investment as a success to their clients (e.g. pension funds). YC is good at this to the extent that even these failures are quite lucrative for everyone involved. The message with this article is that complete failure and loss of investment is quite rare for them but of course it happens. It's basically a "don't worry, we know what we are doing" kind of message.

Any time you hear the words acquihire, what happens is a controlled shut down of a failed business. Mostly these are actually complete failures in terms of the buying company spending money on a company that then gets unceremoniously killed or absorbed into the main company at a loss and is never heard from again. Quite often this is the whole point: kill the company as cheaply as possible with as little loss of face for founders and investors as possible. Mostly, services are shut down or mismanaged, people start leaving almost right away, and most of the "money" is actually just investors swapping one set of shares for another and high-fiving each other. Somebody just lost but it's not them.

Why would companies volunteer to do that? Well for that, you just have to follow the money and basically you'll find that these companies are typically backed by the same groups of investors and financial institutions. It's a form of creative bookkeeping and investors consolidating their assets and risk such that they can continue to up-sell their abilities to manage other people's money (because it is rarely their own cash).

Startup funding is mostly a pyramid scheme with smart investors at the top basically making money from increasingly more gullible investors the further down that pyramid you go. Sometimes it accidentally produces a profitable company that actually makes it to an IPO worth many billions. These unicorns then promptly start acquiring their less lucky siblings so that those too can be spun as a great success. But even some of those unicorns are questionable. E.g. Uber is a great success. So is Wework. But are they profitable and will they ever be and does that even matter? YC is successful in the sense that their network of investors has access to a great number of such unicorns. This means most of the companies they investment in are relatively safe investments no matter how silly the company is.

Re: Y Combinator Failed Startups

#143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But, the above timeline doesn't teach you much about why the company really failed. I for one would like to see this table with the founders' average email response times. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19375483

That's actually pretty awesome. Of course, it's more of a symptom that is an emergent property than a root cause. Like saying every top tennis player uses $$$ rackets - so if I use $$$ rackets, I'll be a top tennis player. If people knew Sam Altman judged companies more positively by their response times which resulted in more funding, that's a metric just begging to be gamed without actually making the business bett…

As someone who is generally a "slow responder", I'll guess at the root cause. My guess is that being a slow email responder is correlated with (a) higher propensity to procrastinate, (b) general indecisiveness and (c) lower self-esteem, all of which are not hard to see why they would negatively impact business success. Of course, I could just be projecting, but when I am slow to respond to an email, it's usually because I want to overthink the response, or that something about writing the response is generally uncomfortable so I practice avoidant behavior (same thing feeds into procrastination). That root cause trait has proven very inhibitory for me achieving my goals.

Re: Y Combinator Failed Startups

#144
post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget this legendary post from the CEO https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8794956

Man that seems kinda sad. If someone is in a situation where they really don't have anything else to do on Christmas, ok. But hard to imagine they don't have some friends or family missing them...

Keep in mind this business finds gig workers to clean houses. That is its mission and passion.

Re: Y Combinator Failed Startups

#145
post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Man that seems kinda sad. If someone is in a situation where they really don't have anything else to do on Christmas, ok. But hard to imagine they don't have some friends or family missing them...

Keep in mind this business finds gig workers to clean houses. That is its mission and passion.

Yeah I was a little bit surprised by all the passion talk.

Granted I could see being passionate about building a business but ... yeah, to an extent it was kinda weird to read in that way too.

Re: Y Combinator Failed Startups

#147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's actually pretty awesome. Of course, it's more of a symptom that is an emergent property than a root cause. Like saying every top tennis player uses $$$ rackets - so if I use $$$ rackets, I'll be a top tennis player. If people knew Sam Altman judged companies more positively by their response times which resulted in more funding, that's a metric just begging to be gamed without actually making the business bett…

As someone who is generally a "slow responder", I'll guess at the root cause. My guess is that being a slow email responder is correlated with (a) higher propensity to procrastinate, (b) general indecisiveness and (c) lower self-esteem, all of which are not hard to see why they would negatively impact business success. Of course, I could just be projecting, but when I am slow to respond to an email, it's usually beca…

Oh, that is 100% me. I have this anxiety related to external (non-co-workers) people. When I know it's a negative response email, it makes my heart and body tense up. I know it's purely an internal response, a personal perception/projection, giving imaginative power away, etc etc. I try to woo-sa (meditate) through it, but it's still very real for me.

Side note, for a throwaway account - you are impressively dedicated to it.

Re: Y Combinator Failed Startups

#148
post #28

Worth noting that the proximate cause of death is often times largely uninformative as to why the startup actually failed. Most failed startups fit into the following timeline: was burning more money than it was making => failed at raising more money => did a round of layoffs / cost cuts to get economics under control => couldn't right the ship and shut down / did a fire sale or acquihire But, the above timeline does…

One of the best talks I had was a two hour discussion of this very topic with John Walecka. John had invested in Freegate and we were discussing risks and why things failed. He helped me understand both the concept of 'stacking risk' (where the startup is taking on more unknowns than it should) and 'over burning' where a startup attempts to hire itself into shortening its schedule which not only fails but exhausts ne…

> Whenever I've watched over hiring from inside or outside it tends to end badly.

I can relate with this. I first saw this phenomenon play out twice within a large FAANG company where the leadership wanted to ship an immensely complex product fast by throwing people and so over hired. Both products failed miserably.

And the I saw a repeat of this at the entire company level. The extent of over hire was immense, fueled by cheap investor money and their push to grow-at-all-cost. The company is now just barely managing to survive, after a few rounds of layoffs and pivots.

Over hiring is a huge red flag from the long term success perspective. However, as an individual, if you get in early on in the cycle and play it well you will rise very fast in the org chart. I’ve seen a few do that consistently. Good for them I guess.

Re: Y Combinator Failed Startups

#149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After stealing HomeJoy's customer DB for another start-up, she is now a YC partner... Move fast and break things?

She railroaded our YC interview for having a similar model (albeit in a different vertical) simply because she failed, so naturally we would also fail. Aaron Harris, another failed entrepreneur turned YC partner, has routinely done the same I've heard. We're now 2 years later pushing $2M ARR profitably and about to raise our Series A. YC not taking 7% of our company was the best thing that ever happened to us. YCombi…

It's true if you have a capital-intensive business, I will ask some of the toughest questions. I do this to figure out where you are in your journey of learning, not to find reasons to not accept you. In fact, we all take super-extra precaution to not over-learn from our own failures.

And to be clear, I've invested in plenty of startups with similar models. But I understand your perception of how things went.

Re: Y Combinator Failed Startups

#150
post #17

How can you make a list of failed yc companies and not mention homejoy? $66m raised, bad operations, bas unit economics, lawsuits and an abrupt shutdown. All of that after being the calley darling for so long.

I used HomeJoy once, a student showed up and said "Wow your house looks pretty clean already, I'm not sure what I would even do". My apartment was tidy, but it wasn't clean (at least by my standards)

This actually highlights a big problem we had - aligning expectations of what "clean" meant between a customer and cleaner. Everyone has a different definition!
Post reply on HN