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

The boring truth about why groups don't get invited to interviews

ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 52 posts

Re: The boring truth about why groups don't get invited to interviews

#41

Post by aschobel »

pchristensen wrote: post #37
aschobel wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My prodding was more along the lines that since there was an order of magnitude more applicants this round and they only had a week to look over the applicants, was it nearly impossible to get in being a solo founder? I'm a bit annoyed with myself since I didn't apply to the previous rounds. I first read Hackers & Painters over two years ago, ah well!

I think that figure was based on evidence from the previous 6 (?) rounds. I would guess the 4x more likely for co-founders figure holds. pg usually won't throw out a number unless he really means it.

I would guess the 4x more likely for co-founders figure holds.

Right, my guess is also the same.

My question was so pg could chime in with data since YC has gotten much more popular.

Re: The boring truth about why groups don't get invited to interviews

#42

Post by uuilly »

If you really want to do a startup then get used to the rejection thing. Even if you get into YC you will probably have to get funding afterwards. To do so you'll need to make the case that you are building a company that will eventually be valued at ~$100 Million. It's very rare that you'll be able to do that on the first shot. Or even on the 5th shot. I know a company that got rejected 45 times before getting funded. And many more get rejected 10 times. So shake it off. It's not going to be the last time it happens. And some VC's / angels aren't as nice as PG. They will twist the knife after the fatal wound.

Re: The boring truth about why groups don't get invited to interviews

#43

Post by gustaf »

ntoshev wrote: post #8
pg wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no limit on the percentage of groups we interview that we can accept, but there is a limit on the number we can interview.

So this is the first scalability bottleneck you have hit?

applying programming-talk to startup interviewing...:)

Re: The boring truth about why groups don't get invited to interviews

#44

Post by davidw »

raghus wrote: post #38
pg wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wouldn't work in practice. There are no sharp lines between these categories, and we'd be misleading people, one way or the other, if we insisted on drawing them. It already bothers me that circumstances force us to draw a line between green and yellow, because we're probably discouraging some people who should instead be encouraged. It would be even worse if we tried to draw a line between yellow and red.

What might be useful are comments overall like "we received several applications for online invitation services but nothing seemed innovative or compelling enough to us" or "we received a handful of applications for doing x but, in our opinion, the mobile space is where we think that market is headed". I think you once mentioned that you get a ton of hotel/food review website ideas. You've also indicated that you thi…

PG seems like a nice guy and is doing something really cool with YC, but it's not his job to give people advice, beyond the people he picks for YC. Part of 'not giving people advice' probably includes statistics on what sorts of applications are 'hot' in a given time period, which might actually be fairly valuable information that they want to keep to themselves.

If you want advice on your app, post an 'Ask YC' thing here and usually, people will give you some pretty good feedback.

Re: The boring truth about why groups don't get invited to interviews

#45

Post by trey »

"Probably the reason people expect feedback about why they were rejected is that they implicitly think of this as like a grade in a class. But a test where only a fixed number of applicants can pass regardless of the average quality is not a grade in that sense."

Actually, I disagree with the premise of this statement. I don't want feedback on why I was rejected, I want feedback on my product. Yes, I can see that it is very nuanced and difficult for you to say which idea/product is better than another, and you have your own business reasons for making those decisions. I don't think anyone really expects you to disclose those reasons, and even if you did it would be completely subjective and would just lead to arguments. However, given that, you're only addressing why you don't comment on the relative strengths of the applications and not why you don't give feedback on any individual product/idea.

Re: The boring truth about why groups don't get invited to interviews

#46

Post by jfornear »

davidw wrote: post #44
raghus wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What might be useful are comments overall like "we received several applications for online invitation services but nothing seemed innovative or compelling enough to us" or "we received a handful of applications for doing x but, in our opinion, the mobile space is where we think that market is headed". I think you once mentioned that you get a ton of hotel/food review website ideas. You've also indicated that you thi…

PG seems like a nice guy and is doing something really cool with YC, but it's not his job to give people advice, beyond the people he picks for YC. Part of 'not giving people advice' probably includes statistics on what sorts of applications are 'hot' in a given time period, which might actually be fairly valuable information that they want to keep to themselves. If you want advice on your app, post an 'Ask YC' thing…

Wouldn't it be a bad move to do this if you are still in "stealth mode"? I have been thinking a lot about this especially after having not been accepted into YC. Half of me wants to know what people in the business think about my idea, and the other half wants to wait longer until closer to launch?

Re: The boring truth about why groups don't get invited to interviews

#47

Post by wheels »

jeroen wrote: post #14

This seems to answer the recent questions about movements and competition for YC. With 200-250 rejected applications that are "pretty good", there should be more than enough material for XCombinator (where X!=Y) to work with.

I'd like to suggest that we network a bit to see what can be pulled together. I just submitted a story with some of what I'd like to see happen:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=160398

Re: The boring truth about why groups don't get invited to interviews

#48

Post by adityakothadiya »

PG, I have one suggestion - for many people, YC funding amount is not as important as the advice and networking they will get there.

Can you think of a mechanism where the next 10 promising or so YC applicants who didn't get funding in this cycle atleast get other benefits in return of some equity for YC?

For e.g., YC members can advice those 10 startups for weekly or bi-weekly basis. Also, these startups may get chance to attend those weekly dinner meetings or so. Of-course, this would take YC's extra energy, but they will be rewarded with some reasonable amount of equity as well.

What says? Does this make sense?

Re: The boring truth about why groups don't get invited to interviews

#49

Post by pg »

adityakothadiya wrote: post #48

PG, I have one suggestion - for many people, YC funding amount is not as important as the advice and networking they will get there. Can you think of a mechanism where the next 10 promising or so YC applicants who didn't get funding in this cycle atleast get other benefits in return of some equity for YC? For e.g., YC members can advice those 10 startups for weekly or bi-weekly basis. Also, these startups may get cha…

The problem is, the "other benefits" are what's in short supply, not money.

Re: The boring truth about why groups don't get invited to interviews

#50

Post by ntoshev »

pg wrote: post #15
ntoshev wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So this is the first scalability bottleneck you have hit?

It's the current one. There have been others we hit and overcame. We used to review applications printed out on paper, for example; now we have software for it. We also have software for keeping track of all the startups, for communicating with them, and for generating all the documents for startups we fund. We'd have ground to a halt by now without these apps.

Any thoughts on how to overcome this one?

Perhaps try to achieve better ranking before interviews? You might do psychological profiles or tests to estimate technical ability.

Post reply on HN