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

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

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 184 posts

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

#21

Post by bdcravens »

balaselvam wrote: post #20

The emphasis on "downturn" concerns me. Aren't reputed firms like YC supposed to look at a 10+ year horizon? If this is true, it indicates that earlier investments were based on the market than the fundamentals of the founding team, market, and product.

> earlier investments were based on the market than the fundamentals of the founding team, market, and product

False dichotomy

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

#22

Post by bdcravens »

birdyrooster wrote: post #7

It's okay, there are other VC to fill the void.

And many other VCs are similarly pulling back

https://news.crunchbase.com/venture/a16z-slowing-investment-...

https://techcrunch.com/2022/04/13/vc-distributions-are-down-...

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

#23

Post by melony »

bdcravens wrote: post #21
balaselvam wrote: post #20

The emphasis on "downturn" concerns me. Aren't reputed firms like YC supposed to look at a 10+ year horizon? If this is true, it indicates that earlier investments were based on the market than the fundamentals of the founding team, market, and product.

> earlier investments were based on the market than the fundamentals of the founding team, market, and product False dichotomy

40% is a massive cut. If the heavy weighing of the market doesn't constitute a dichotomy, then nothing does.

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

#24

Post by fsckboy »

balaselvam wrote: post #20

The emphasis on "downturn" concerns me. Aren't reputed firms like YC supposed to look at a 10+ year horizon? If this is true, it indicates that earlier investments were based on the market than the fundamentals of the founding team, market, and product.

the 10 year horizon of a first mover who grows every one of the 10 years looks a lot better than the 10 year horizon of a first mover who is expected to do nothing the first couple years. And you can only invest money your investors give you, and they give you money out of their own funds that are depleted by the downturn, so while you may be right that this is the perfect time to make a 10 year investment, you can't take blood from a stone.

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

#28

Post by cheriot »

balaselvam wrote: post #20

The emphasis on "downturn" concerns me. Aren't reputed firms like YC supposed to look at a 10+ year horizon? If this is true, it indicates that earlier investments were based on the market than the fundamentals of the founding team, market, and product.

These startups will need to raise funding within the X months. The amount of money invested in series A rounds next year is not something YC controls.

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

#29

Post by tptacek »

melony wrote: post #23
bdcravens wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> earlier investments were based on the market than the fundamentals of the founding team, market, and product False dichotomy

40% is a massive cut. If the heavy weighing of the market doesn't constitute a dichotomy, then nothing does.

It's a massive cut after a sequence of massive, program-redefining increases in batch sizes. The current size is, as their representative says, still a lot bigger than batches were until recently.

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

#30

Post by [deleted] »

melony wrote: post #23
bdcravens wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> earlier investments were based on the market than the fundamentals of the founding team, market, and product False dichotomy

40% is a massive cut. If the heavy weighing of the market doesn't constitute a dichotomy, then nothing does.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN