Live data from Hacker News

Y Combinator narrows current cohort size by 40%, citing downturn and funding

techcrunch.com

181–184 of 184 posts

Re: Y Combinator narrows current cohort size by 40%, citing downturn and funding

#181

Anyone remember who wrote that doomsday deck for portfolio founders in like 2008? I can’t believe it’s escaping me, it caused quite the stir at the time.

Sequoia https://www.slideshare.net/eldon/sequoia-capital-on-startups...

Adding to this thread the link to their new slides for 2022: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/22036831/adaptingtoen...

Not titled as doom-y this time round.

Re: Y Combinator narrows current cohort size by 40%, citing downturn and funding

#182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if unemployment rates triple, we're still not in an employer's market. Companies will lay off to survive, but there will be jobs for laid off to land in.

> Even if unemployment rates triple, we're still not in an employer's market Broadly, no. We had 0.6 unemployed per job opening in May [1]. So a ~70% increase in unemployment would have neutralised the market. We saw a 5% MoM reduction in job openings in June [2]; if that continued into July then the ratio is currently about 0.7. Still tight! But tightening, and with all signs pointing to a neutral market before Hall…

The JOLTS numbers you are using would indicate a neutral market at 6 unemployed per open job, not at 1 (5% unemployment is considered fully employed). I use these numbers regularly in estimating advertising costs and market demand in my business day to day (I own are recruiting tech company). The reason for optimism is simple: workers are aging out of the market, and young people are starting to work on average 4.9 years later in life - so the worker side is scarce and so scarce that the employer side can shrink with effectively little effect on employment, other than fluctuations in wages.

Today's report from DOL is unsurprising (unemployment went down in July).

Re: Y Combinator narrows current cohort size by 40%, citing downturn and funding

#183
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it’s still 125k for 7%, with an option for an additional 375k on an uncapped safe. Source: https://www.ycombinator.com/deal/

"You are technically correct, the best kind of correct."

But it’s not 500k for 7%, it’s 125k. This makes a massive difference in the implied valuation, it’s not just a technicality.

Re: Y Combinator narrows current cohort size by 40%, citing downturn and funding

#184
post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We actually thought about doing YC and demurred because (1) it wasn't a great deal and (2) because the batch size was so big, it wasn't a particularly good signal anymore. I've heard from other founders that they have so many startups no one gets much individual attention. That didn't stop us from launching on HN though :-P https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32266086

I do not understand why the mods flagged the sibling comment. It was on topic, directly related, and is a central issue for the given discussion. Ah, yes, it’s because I tangentially pointed out exactly how much power YC has, and that’s bad for business. Got it. I’ll keep my head down before one of the powerful people reading this decides I need to get my account permanently penalized again until I learn my lesson an…

Hey man, I've read your comments and just gotta say, there's definitely some pent-up emotion or something behind there. Whatever you're going through, I'm sorry, I feel for you, and I hope you come out the other side. I've been there.

FWIW, the reason we started Parsnip wasn't any of the ones you listed. I actually wrote about it here: https://parsnip.substack.com/p/why-we-started-parsnip

Post reply on HN